A dress code that has been circulating at the Universidad Argentina de la Empresa (UADE) since 2022 has been disseminated again among students in recent days, through an internal email and the virtual campus, with the arrival of summer. The regulation, which prohibits wearing skirts, shorts, caps and even soccer jerseys, unleashed a new wave of indignation among students. The information, shared by the students themselves in X, revived the debate about personal freedom, machismo and the role of a private institution in regulating the appearance of its students.
Publications on networks reflect the discontent of many students. For example, “@indirectsluismi” mentioned that colleagues are organizing groups to file formal complaints, indicating active resistance, and “@maguimasante” noted that the restrictions seem to disproportionately focus on women, reporting cases of gender bias. On the other hand, “@Martiiinnc”, identifying himself as a student, defends the code, arguing that those who do not agree can opt for other institutions. And one of the most recent tweets emphasizes that the rules have always existed, with posters in classrooms specifying permitted clothing.
An outstanding contribution came from the lawyer and journalist Natalia Volosin, who offered free legal assistance to UADE students prevented from entering for wearing caps, miniskirts or muscular shirts, criticizing the code for reinforcing gender stereotypes and limiting freedom. In response to arguments that compared the rules with work uniforms, Volosin responded: “1) work uniforms fulfill functions of safety, hygiene, etc. 2) coexistence regulates behavior, not clothing. 3) it is one thing to suggest and another to force. 4) there are many students questioning these rules.” His position amplifies the demand for equity and questions the mandatory nature of the standards.
With the viralization of this controversial dress code, the discussion about personal freedom and limits within the university environment is resumed again. Among students, some defend the measure as a way to maintain a certain formality within the academic field, while others consider it an outdated imposition that limits individual expression. The absence of clear communication from the university and the lack of direct dialogue with the students only deepened the discomfort, leaving social networks as the main stage of the discussion.
