Should this photo be allowed in a yearbook?

You're not here for me. Apparently, you're just here to sling **** around in someone's thread. My comment was à propos of the topic of the thread. Yours was just a cheap shot. It's all you've got.

Sure I am.




I am not here to sling **** around at all. I have, in fact, been much more civil than you. But I still like you, so no need for me to return any insults you seem to feel necessary to offer.




How was mine a cheap shot??? Why, if your comment was apropos of the topic of this thread, was mine not apropos also? They were two sides of the same coin.

You used to be much more logical, Set.

Problems?



Oh, I've got much more than that.

Well, they got their wish. They were on the Today show this morning.

Daughter claims these photos should be allowed because they reflect her interest in becoming "a model" just as other student's photos reflect their interest in sports or their pets, and momma claims she at first didn't like the idea of the photos, but then decided to encourage her child to, "Spread her wings and fly." Thank goodness she didn't encourage her to spread her legs for the next photo shoot.

The kids from the yearbook staff claim that this school has had award winning yearbooks in the past and these photos are just not in keeping with the standard they are trying to maintain. I had the sense that they were more than mildly annoyed by the girl's attempts to try to exploit their yearbook the way she has. They've spent a lot of time working on it and they are sincerely concerned about what it reflects about their efforts and their school.

The school principal told the girl that she can submit one more photo, but to consider her choice carefully because, if that one is not acceptable to the yearbook editors, she won't have her photo in the yearbook.

Well, if she wants her photo in the yearbook, she'd better wise up and submit one that's more appropriate. I think she's gotten all the mileage possible out of this publicity stunt and it's time to knock it off.

You more civil ? ! ? ! ?

Ah, the comedy at this site is priceless.

Here ya go, clickity-click!

Oh I do not know there always a chance that the ACLU might get into the act and suing the school or filing for an injunction to block any year book printing until the matter is settle, like in three years or so.......

Then there is the playboy legal foundation that might wish to fund some legal actions on her behalf.

She might ride this very far as public taxpayers funded schools can and had been block in the past from being too arbitrary in their actions.

At the very least she could get on a few more talk shows over the issue.

http://abovethelaw.com/2012/01/sexy-teen-fights-for-first-amendment-freedoms-over-slutty-yearbook-photo/

Adam Goldstein, attorney advocate for the Student Press Law Center, said Spies’ allegations against the school’s administration may be valid.

According to Colorado Revised Statutes Section 22-1-120, “students of the public schools shall have the right to exercise freedom of speech and of the press” and that “no expression contained in a student publication, whether or not such publication is school-sponsored, shall be subject to prior restraint.”

Goldstein said, “Hopefully, it would come as no surprise that dress codes don’t trump state law.”

http://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights/aclu-sues-mississippi-school-excluding-teenager-wearing-tuxedo-yearbook


ACLU Sues Mississippi School For Excluding Teenager Wearing Tuxedo From Yearbook
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (212) 549-2666; [email protected]

JACKSON, MS – The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Mississippi today filed a lawsuit against a Mississippi high school that excluded a female student's name and senior portrait from the yearbook rather than publish a photo of her in a tuxedo. The lawsuit charges that Ceara Sturgis was unfairly discriminated against by the Wesson Attendance Center based on her sex and unfair gender stereotypes.

"I went to school with my classmates my whole life, and it hurts that I'm not included in my senior yearbook as part of my graduating class," Ceara said. "I never thought that my school would punish me just for being who I am."

Ceara was an honor student and a member of several sports teams at Wesson, where she attended school from kindergarten through her senior year. At home and at school, she dresses in clothing that is traditionally associated with boys, and had previously not encountered any problems from her peers or teachers. When she had her formal senior portrait taken, she opted to wear a tuxedo, rather than a drape that gives the appearance of wearing a dress or a blouse. Because of her attire, the school refused to publish her photo and name as part of the senior year class.

The lawsuit charges Ceara's rights were violated under Title IX, which prohibits discrimination based on sex and sex stereotypes, and the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of equal protection.

"Inclusion in the senior yearbook is a rite of passage for students, and it is shameful that Ceara was denied that chance," said Christine P. Sun, senior counsel with the ACLU Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Project. "It's unfair and unlawful to force students to conform to outdated notions about what boys and girls should look like without any regard to who they actually are as people."

Ceara tried posing with the drape, but felt extremely uncomfortable and had her mother request that she wear the tuxedo instead. The photographer permitted Ceara to do so. It was only after the portrait was taken that the principal informed Ceara that he would not allow the photo to be published. Despite efforts to resolve the issue by Ceara's mother and the ACLU, Ceara received her yearbook without her portrait, or even her name, included in the senior class portrait section.

"This should never have been an issue. Title IX and the Constitution prohibit school officials from forcing students to conform to gender stereotypes. Ceara should not have been expected to compromise her everyday appearance and identity for her senior portrait," said Bear Atwood, interim Legal Director for the ACLU of Mississippi. "The school's actions are discriminatory, unlawful and mean-spirited."

Attorneys on the case include Sun of the ACLU, Atwood of the ACLU of Mississippi and Norman C. Simon, Joshua Glick, Jason Moff and Lee Strock of Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP.

The ACLU's complaint can be read here: www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights/sturgis-v-copiah-county-school-district-complaint

I 'm pretty confident
that MY high school yearbook looked a lot better
for the fact that my picture was not in it -- not even near it.





David

Hey, Buddy,

I wrote:



To which you responded:



Absolutely!

It's all here in black and white. All anyone has to do is to read each post...and see who has been more civil.

That lawsuit is not relevant to this case.

This photos of the girl we are discussing were not rejected by anyone in the school administration, they were rejected by the student editorial board of the yearbook as being inappropriate for inclusion as a senior portrait. Students can make such a decision. There is no basis for a civil rights lawsuit in this case because the school district was not involved in the editorial decision the students made.

And the types of photos the girl submitted did not show her in the type of attire that she would normally wear to school or a school function, nor was the girl claiming that. And she does have the option of putting one of the photos in the back of the yearbook as a paid ad, but she doesn't feel she should have to pay for it. If the photo is in fact part of her modeling portfolio, which is really the way that she characterizes it, she should be willing to pay for it as an ad to promote herself. They are not refusing to have the photo in any part of the yearbook, but simply in the senior portrait section. And they are allowing her to submit a third photo, so they are giving her options.

There is no basis for a lawsuit in this case, and the girl mentioned that in the interview on the Today show, so they have probably already spoken to a lawyer about that. This case is not a civil rights violation by the school district, it is a publicity stunt on the part of the student and her mother to help the girl get a start on a "modeling" career. And they have gotten a lot of publicity and notice, which they seem to be enjoying, so it's hard to see where they have been harmed in any way.

Nonsense that you do not think that the administration is not in control of this matter including it was the Principal who gave her a chance to submit another picture.

Second the whole set up is in control of the school system no matter what part they had decided to delegate to students.

I do not think your position will fly in the courts at all.

Second they are allowing her to buy a place in the year book and that is not going to aid their position at all in my opinion.

No, the administration was not involved in the decision made by the student yearbook editorial board--and everyone actually involved in this matter agrees on that.

The principal simply let her know the student editorial board was giving her the option of submitting a third photo and told her that would be it. So, if the student board rejects that third photo, she will not have a senior portrait photo in the yearbook, because that's what the student editors have decided. The principal was apparently just making sure the girl understood her situation. They didn't interview the principal for the Today interview, this was how the girl reported it, and she clearly did not say that the principal was involved in any decision.

Not the way you think it is. In high school, I was an editor of both my yearbook and school newspaper. The faculty adviser checked over the material before it went to the printer, and while they might question and check-over things we did include, to make sure we weren't libeling anyone, they never challenged what we chose to exclude, and we really did have editorial control in that regard.

The girl has no intention of bringing a lawsuit and she acknowledged she does not have grounds for such a suit. And the Today show, which has a legal consultant as one of it's regular reporters, did not report the situation as a possible civil rights violation or potential lawsuit, but simply as a bruhaha at this high school which had attracted some national publicity.

And the girl and her mother seemed quite happy to be basking in the spotlight of that publicity, and it would be hard to prove they were being harmed by it, as would be necessary in a civil action. The girl wants to be noticed as a potential model--by the student board not accepting her photo, and by her making a big deal of it, she's gotten far more people to see her photos than if the editorial board had just quietly accepted the first one. If this was a set-up, the set-up was done by the girl and her mother, and it worked.

But, of course, as usual, you think you know more than anyone actually involved in the situation, and, as usual, you think you are always right.

If I were the girl in this situation, I would submit a still photo of myself and my mother sitting on that couch on the Today show set being interviewed by Matt Lauer.

That photo would likely be acceptable to the yearbook staff, the girl was appropriately dressed, and it would certainly be a remembrance of a highlight of her senior year, which would make it a perfect senior portrait.

I LOVE that idea!

heck no !!! it looks like a plagirl centerfold,I think they made the right choice

Really? Playboy has acquired a certain modesty since the last time I looked in, then.

Wha? Playgirl is now Lesbian-oriented?

that's weird - playgirl usually has pictures of naked men - not sexy dressed (albeit a little revealing) girls.

If you've got a recent copy of that, I need to know the corporate address from inside the cover. They still owe me $150 for the last 'spread' I modeled for.

No no no no no.
You don't understand.
PLAgirl.
It's the magazine for the female members of the People's Liberation Army.
They got some wild and crazy comrades.