About a week ago, in an effort to curb shoplifting and robbery, a number of stores in Harlem began displaying signs prohibiting anyone in a hoodie or ski mask from entering. The postings dubiously claimed that anyone dressed in such a manner would be “trespassing.” But critics claim the signs are discriminatory, bumbling attempts to profile a particular class of young men in a city where, frankly, it’s pretty cold this time of year—unless you work on Wall Street, hoodies are practically de rigueur.
While most of the businesses have since taken the controversial signs down, companies have long tried to control the “tone” of their stores with restrictive terms of service. From jacket requirements at fancy restaurants to the classic “no shoes, no shirt” placards, the dress code has always been a particularly sneaky way of keeping out supposed undesirables. But without context, the signs proclaiming these fashion protocols, coded as they are, can often seem wrongheaded or arbitrary. These are some of the most familiar and weirdest of these signs, ranging from coyly prejudiced to just plain bizarre.
Problematic homework question
A student’s brilliant homework answer outsmarted her teacher's ridiculously sexist question
From an early age, children absorb societal norms—including gender stereotypes. But one sharp 8-year-old from Birmingham, England, challenged a sexist homework question designed to reinforce outdated ideas.
An English teacher created a word puzzle with clues containing “UR.” One prompt read “Hospital Lady,” expecting students to answer “nurse.”
While most did, Yasmine wrote “surgeon”—a perfectly valid answer. Her father, Robert Sutcliffe, shared the incident on X (formerly Twitter), revealing the teacher had scribbled “or nurse” beside Yasmine’s response, revealing the biased expectation.
For Yasmine, the answer was obvious: both her parents are surgeons. Her perspective proves how representation shapes ambition. If children only see women as nurses, they internalize limits. But when they witness diversity—like female surgeons—they envision broader possibilities.
As Rebecca Brand noted in The Guardian: “Their developing minds are that little bit more unquestioning about what they see and hear on their screens. What message are we giving those impressionable minds about women? And how might we be cutting the ambitions of little girls short before they've even had the chance to develop properly?”
X users praised Yasmine while critiquing the question. Such subtle conditioning reinforces stereotypes early. Research confirms this: a study found children as young as four associate jobs with gender, with girls choosing “feminine” roles (e.g., nursing) and boys opting for “masculine” ones (e.g., engineering).
Even preschoolers avoided careers misaligned with their gender, proving sexist conditioning begins startlingly young.
- YouTube www.youtube.com
The problem spans globally. Data from 50 countries reveals that by age 15, girls disproportionately abandon math and science, while boys avoid caregiving fields like teaching and nursing. This segregation perpetuates stereotypes—women are underrepresented in STEM, and men in caregiving roles—creating a cycle that limits both genders.
- YouTube www.youtube.com
This article originally appeared last year.