Lady boys and high heels

[doughper]

no hearing protection; tsk

ear plugs

 

[Sativied]

That sets an awfully dangerous precedent, does it not? With how a large population of the first world seems intent on removing women's rights, how long until girls/women must wear dresses that cover their ankles, or more extreme - cover their faces? Can't show any legs or it might disturb the class... If we leave it up to teachers/schools, it's almost guaranteed that it will happen. This is one of those cases where it's better to allow them to wear it, but have the school openly discuss it with the students. We shouldn't call that toxic behaviour from a kid in grade seven, just being immature which is expected at that age.

“Teachers should allow offensive texts on clothing else we’ll end up with teachers forcing girls to cover their faces“ is reductio ad absurdum and doesn’t need further refutation. Regardless, dress codes based on gender and race based stereoptypes are already against federal law.

The toxic behavior is of course from the parents not the kid and doesn’t mean it shouldn‘t be called out for what it effectively is, nor tolerated. Shouldn’t be a trigger “discuss” it either, that topic should be educated by default. How about the kids in that school who don’t identify with the christian genders, just have to suck it up when confronted with what you label immature behavior? The school/teachers not interfering in such matters doesn’t sound like a safe environment I’d even consider sending my imaginary kids.

How about “there are only white people”? (see what I did there )

 

[CANON_Grow]

“Teachers should allow offensive texts on clothing else we’ll end up with teachers forcing girls to cover their faces“ is reductio ad absurdum and doesn’t need further refutation. Regardless, dress codes based on gender and race based stereoptypes are already against federal law.

The toxic behavior is of course from the parents not the kid and doesn’t mean it shouldn‘t be called out for what it effectively is, nor tolerated. Shouldn’t be a trigger “discuss” it either, that topic should be educated by default. How about the kids in that school who don’t identify with the christian genders, just have to suck it up when confronted with what you label immature behavior? The school/teachers not interfering in such matters doesn’t sound like a safe environment I’d even consider sending my imaginary kids.

How about “there are only white people”? (see what I did there )

Like I said, extreme example. Should teachers be allowed to decide what books are offensive and decide which to ban on their own? What about other reading materials, say newspapers? If the school forced a student to change a shirt saying they support womens rights, or gay rights, or BLM, etc; because it could disrupt the class - is something you would support?

EDIT: For sure there is an issue with the parents, but do you think what the school did is going to guide that child to act in a more respectful manner to the community, or push that child to have the hard-done-by's like the parents?

 

[Sativied]

Like I said, extreme example. Should teachers be allowed to decide what books are offensive and decide which to ban on their own? What about other reading materials, say newspapers? If the school forced a student to change a shirt saying they support womens rights, or gay rights, or BLM, etc; because it could disrupt the class - is something you would support?

Extreme seemed to apply to the measure but regardless, using different examples doesn’t make it less of a poor argument, now bordering straw person fallacy. Assuming you support speed limits, does that mean you also support laws forcing you to walk at least 10mph on pink heels? I find it strange you equate the text to supporting womens rights, as if the latter means toxic behavior should also be allowed. As if intolerance towards hate and division also requires intolerance towards love and inclusion. Why, cause it’s fair to both sides? Scrap that question mark.

 

[CANON_Grow]

Extreme seemed to apply to the measure but regardless, using different examples doesn’t make it less of a poor argument, now bordering straw person fallacy. Assuming you support speed limits, does that mean you also support laws forcing you to walk at least 10mph on pink heels? I find it strange you equate the text to supporting womens rights, as if the latter means toxic behavior should also be allowed. As if intolerance towards hate and division also requires intolerance towards love and inclusion. Why, cause it’s fair to both sides? Scrap that question mark.

My issue is that the school is deciding what is acceptable and what is not, regardless of the law. Like you stated, there are laws against hate speech, racism, etc; but you're suggesting the schools/teachers should be able to create their own rules regardless of the law. If the shirt read that they "Love both females and males equally", does that break the rules? Do the rules change depending which county they are in?

I'm in no way supporting the kid wearing that shirt, or what was on the shirt. The most frustrating part when dealing with these issues is being painted a bigot, and that forces people to start siding with those that rage against the "woke" mob.

 

[cannabineer]

My issue is that the school is deciding what is acceptable and what is not, regardless of the law. Like you stated, there are laws against hate speech, racism, etc; but you're suggesting the schools/teachers should be able to create their own rules regardless of the law. If the shirt read that they "Love both females and males equally", does that break the rules? Do the rules change depending which county they are in?

I'm in no way supporting the kid wearing that shirt, or what was on the shirt. The most frustrating part when dealing with these issues is being painted a bigot, and that forces people to start siding with those that rage against the "woke" mob.

I think it is a matter of degree. It seems that that shirt is not enough to trigger the dress code. I’m going by this example, which seems to be even more direct, on the assumption that the basic problem with the shirt we discussed earlier is a faith-based troll of the no-religion policy. That policy cannot justly be driven to the point of minutia.

A Rusk High School student is taking a stand for religious beliefs with a t-shirt

Rusk ISD administrators recently asked a teacher to remove a religious poster from their classroom after a student took offense and then sent a picture of that poster to the Freedom from Religion Foundation. Now a Rusk High School senior and his t-shirt are taking a stand for his beliefs.

www.ktre.com

But then there is this, much milder but a teacher wore it.

Teacher asked to change out of 'Just Pray' T-shirt because it broke dress code

Chris Burrell, a third-grade teacher at Pearl Haskew Elementary School in Mobile, was sent home from school on Apr. 23rd for wearing a t-shirt that read “Just Pray.”

www.yahoo.com

It makes me very unsure where the line is to be drawn. These cases pit the First Amendment against … the First Amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 

[CANON_Grow]

I think it is a matter of degree. It seems that that shirt is not enough to trigger the dress code. I’m going by this example, which seems to be even more direct, on the assumption that the basic problem with the shirt we discussed earlier is a faith-based troll of the no-religion policy. That policy cannot justly be driven to the point of minutia.

A Rusk High School student is taking a stand for religious beliefs with a t-shirt

Rusk ISD administrators recently asked a teacher to remove a religious poster from their classroom after a student took offense and then sent a picture of that poster to the Freedom from Religion Foundation. Now a Rusk High School senior and his t-shirt are taking a stand for his beliefs.

www.ktre.com

But then there is this, much milder but a teacher wore it.

Teacher asked to change out of 'Just Pray' T-shirt because it broke dress code

Chris Burrell, a third-grade teacher at Pearl Haskew Elementary School in Mobile, was sent home from school on Apr. 23rd for wearing a t-shirt that read “Just Pray.”

www.yahoo.com

It makes me very unsure where the line is to be drawn. These cases pit the First Amendment against … the First Amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

It would have been a really good example that the school and teachers could have used to explain the difference between the letter of the law vs the spirit of the law - to use when unsure where that line is. How the world works is confusing to many, especially young children. According to what was written, it sounds like that child is being raised to disregard the spirit of the law and will only learn to fight harder rather than reflecting on what is stated (and not stated) on the shirt, and how it could affect other people. Instead of learning about empathy and deciding to not wear a stupid shirt, he learned about callousness and I'm sure Jordan Peterson gains a new fan. Cut off one's nose to spite one's face.

 

[CunningCanuk]

Apply the leaf blower-badminton theory. People are free to use a leaf blower but if someone would use one to disturb a badminton match it would justify action against the blower. I think the shirt, and far worse, shouldn’t be forbidden in general, but it’s up to the teacher/school to determine if it disturbs the class. The actual action should be based on the intent. In this case the intent is obvious, it’s toxic behavior, which teachers shouldn’t tolerate.

I don’t see how wearing a t shirt like this could be seen as anything other than divisive intent.

 

[CunningCanuk]

That sets an awfully dangerous precedent, does it not? With how a large population of the first world seems intent on removing women's rights, how long until girls/women must wear dresses that cover their ankles, or more extreme - cover their faces? Can't show any legs or it might disturb the class... If we leave it up to teachers/schools, it's almost guaranteed that it will happen. This is one of those cases where it's better to allow them to wear it, but have the school openly discuss it with the students. We shouldn't call that toxic behaviour from a kid in grade seven, just being immature which is expected at that age.

Free speech should not give you the right to promote hate. Being immature? How many 12 year olds do you know who purchase their own clothing?

 

[cannabineer]

It would have been a really good example that the school and teachers could have used to explain the difference between the letter of the law vs the spirit of the law - to use when unsure where that line is. How the world works is confusing to many, especially young children. According to what was written, it sounds like that child is being raised to disregard the spirit of the law and will only learn to fight harder rather than reflecting on what is stated (and not stated) on the shirt, and how it could affect other people. Instead of learning about empathy and deciding to not wear a stupid shirt, he learned about callousness and I'm sure Jordan Peterson gains a new fan. Cut off one's nose to spite one's face.

I think what you suggest is a really good idea, but it runs into the problem of local politics. Plymouth is a red county, and a teacher who engages in such offensively freethinking curriculum might get the axe from an unfriendly school board. Lotta hardbitten Calvinists up that way.

 

[Sativied]

I don’t see how wearing a t shirt like this could be seen as anything other than divisive.

By adults, using their own children to promote hate, in classrooms. If that causes a teacher to take reasonable action I’m not worried that will lead to fascist teachers dictating what to read/wear or not.

Just a few weeks ago I posted in this thread the whole anti-trans vibe is stuff I only recognize from decades ago. That post didn’t age well. As with almost everything the crazier conservatives on social media echo, it‘s borrowed by weirdos here too. Long story short, these to some seemingly harmless actions lead to transgenders getting beat up in the streets, which just needs to happen a few times for all of them to feel unsafe. Can’t have that shit anymore in 21st century.

I mentioned the “there are only white people” example as an attempt to show the ridiculousness of using a reductio ad absurdum but in hindsight, I honestly don’t see the difference. The fact people choose to change their gender to X in a passport doesn’t mean they choose that identity as if it’s fashion.

In Russia there are no gay people. According to Putin that is. In places where it’s not just tolerated but accepted the percentage is of course much higher. Conservatives and homophobes long used that to suggest it’s contagious, I think it’s freedom to be who yourself. The number of kids who want to transition is increasing in NL, where we use an approach praised internationally (by more liberal folk), delay puberty to buy time and start young (so they go through school as themselves) to prevent psychological problems. School is the last place where they should be repressed by someone else’s backward parents and the first place where tolerance is the most important lesson.

 

[buckaclark]

Sacrifices have to be made by all parties when 1 teacher has to Teach 24 spoiled self righteous teens.Wear a shirt with nothing on it to school,so the two attentive respectful children left in the class can get the education they deserve.Take your protest to the street After school.

 

[CANON_Grow]

I think what you suggest is a really good idea, but it runs into the problem of local politics. Plymouth is a red county, and a teacher who engages in such offensively freethinking curriculum might get the axe from an unfriendly school board. Lotta hardbitten Calvinists up that way.

So I think we agree, the shirt the kid wore was detestable and belongs in the garbage, but it's best that local politics can't create rules in schools that conflict with the law.

Preventing Harassment and Protecting Free Speech in School
Some opponents of safe schools policies argue that anti-harassment policies restrict students' free speech. This piece explains how it's possible to adopt policies that adequately address harassment and protect free speech.

"There is no better way to prevent student harassment than to educate students about why slurs and other harassing behavior are harmful."

Preventing Harassment and Protecting Free Speech in School | American Civil Liberties Union

Some opponents of safe schools policies argue that anti-harassment policies restrict students' free speech. This piece explains how it's possible to adopt policies that adequately address harassment and protect free speech. School anti-harassment policies can effectively curtail harassment...

www.aclu.org

 

[DIY-HP-LED]

SOCK ALERT
Let's see, the usual scumbag sock shows up every weekend when @sunni is off, shits all over the threads and makes a mess for her to clean up. Don't respond to the troll, respond to this post instead. Someone has a sore asshole and it must be pretty raw. New member straight to politics with two posts. Responding, liking or disliking just makes it harder for the mods to clean up when they wipe them away.

 

[Lucky Luke]

 

[PopAndSonGrows]

Straight to politics I haven’t mentioned that meatball that runs Florida yet or what he did to a bunch of fucked up teenagers no ccw required so that means when you get pulled over with the state legal pot you bought your getting 20 years federal whether or not your smoking it I know it’s hard for old dementia patients to spell suckm but try and then do it there that is political and for u young ones watch the fuck out there not u friends just trying to bolster results

Literally WHAT???!?

 

[DIY-HP-LED]

So I think we agree, the shirt the kid wore was detestable and belongs in the garbage, but it's best that local politics can't create rules in schools that conflict with the law.

Preventing Harassment and Protecting Free Speech in School
Some opponents of safe schools policies argue that anti-harassment policies restrict students' free speech. This piece explains how it's possible to adopt policies that adequately address harassment and protect free speech.

"There is no better way to prevent student harassment than to educate students about why slurs and other harassing behavior are harmful."

Preventing Harassment and Protecting Free Speech in School | American Civil Liberties Union

Some opponents of safe schools policies argue that anti-harassment policies restrict students' free speech. This piece explains how it's possible to adopt policies that adequately address harassment and protect free speech. School anti-harassment policies can effectively curtail harassment...

www.aclu.org

All slogans, like all speech is not equal and neither is journalism in that it can't report both sides equally, if one side is a lie and engages in treason against the constitution. Messages can be prosocial and inclusive or antisocial and promote hatred, violence and division, or they can speak truth or lies and that should be the criteria. Blanket one size fits all solutions are not always appropriate, but who determines what is appropriate, since school boards are often full of religious zealots, racists and fascists. Some are even full of gun nuts who don't have the slightest interest in protecting children and instead promote policies that endanger them.

 

[CaliRootz88]

What you “identify” as or what your sexuality is doesn’t matter. We are all humans. Regardless of race, sex, pronouns, religion just be a kind person to yourself and others. That’s all that matters.

 

[Fogdog]

It is still incorrect and reads as bigoted.

That's a padawan warrior sock. Reported.

 

[CANON_Grow]

All slogans, like all speech is not equal and neither is journalism in that it can't report both sides equally, if one side is a lie and engages in treason against the constitution. Messages can be prosocial and inclusive or antisocial and promote hatred, violence and division, or they can speak truth or lies and that should be the criteria. Blanket one size fits all solutions are not always appropriate, but who determines what is appropriate, since school boards are often full of religious zealots, racists and fascists. Some are even full of gun nuts who don't have the slightest interest in protecting children and instead promote policies that endanger them.

Public messaging that promotes hatred and/or violence is certainly illegal in Canada (section 319 of the Canadian criminal code), but is less clear when the line is crossed in the US. As far as who determines what is appropriate, my first instinct is that it should not override The Charter of Rights and Freedoms in Canada, or The Constitution in the US; but I can envision scenarios where allowing a local governing body to enact restrictions if public safety would be jeopardized otherwise. I don't think there is a perfect answer.