Short shorts too school

@maxdancona,

Then we are somewhat agreed, at least on the final recourse. I don't believe that community standards is the right bar, but if a court said otherwise I would defer. I think that if the Hamtramck, Michigan school system (which has a majority of Muslims and a majority-Muslim city council) decided that their community standard was for all girls to wear hijabs in school, the courts would step in pretty fast to protect the rights of the minority.

Quote:

Before you decide that there should be some national standards, think about this. Right now Betsy DeVos is secretary of Education and Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan run the House. Be careful what you wish for.

I'm not advocating for a national system, I'm advocating for the rights of students and the freedom of the minority from absurd (slight or dramatic) restrictions in the name of "community standards". Education should be about education, not a lever for those in power to force others to conform.

1 Reply

@engineer,

Quote:

I'm advocating for the rights of students and the freedom of the minority from absurd (slight or dramatic) restrictions in the name of "community standards". Education should be about education, not a lever for those in power to force others to conform.

This is so wonderfully subjective! People who want to teach creation science would agree with this quote. So would people who support racial segregation.

You and Ted Cruz both agree that we need to fight for "student rights" and "freedom". You both value "education" and are wary of "those in power forcing other to conform". The problem, of course, is that someone has to take these high-sounding generalities and turn them into actual policies in a real community with unique needs. The subjective views of the people making these decisions make all the difference; you and Ted Cruz would end up supporting very different policies.

In a democracy, the power you give to national progressives is also available to people with different perspectives. So be careful what you wish for.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

This is so wonderfully subjective! People who want to teach creation science would agree with this quote. So would people who support racial segregation.

You and Ted Cruz both agree that we need to fight for "student rights" and "freedom". You both value "education" and are wary of "those in power forcing other to conform".

I think you have it exactly backwards on all three statements.

It is not subjective at all. Rules restricting the rights of citizens must serve a real need and must be as minimally invasive as possible. That is a legal standard against which any school board lawyer and advise and with which any court can rule. What is completely subjective is a "community standard." That can mean whatever the latest school board majority wants it to mean.

People who want to teach creationism would argue that community standards or religious freedom allow them to trump the first amendment restriction on the government promotion of religion and the school administrators have special authority to do that, have the ability to take over the teaching of religion from parents.

Those promoting segregation argue the same - community standards allow them to restrict the rights of the students to equal education, to enforce a rule not for educational value but because the community demands it, again implementing a rule not because there is educational value but because of public perceptions.

1 Reply

@engineer,

I think you are falling into the "My Opinions are not Subjective" trap.

I am pretty sure that neither of us are lawyers. I suspect that you are reading legal analysis from one political side. There are people who aren't in your political side who win some of the court cases. To only look at one side of the story is a mistake.

I am not denying the progressive side of the political aisle has some some of the cases on student rights... they have. I am simply saying that the picture is a lot more complex and less one-sided than you imply.

As a non-lawyer who is reading educated analyses from more than one political ideology it seems to me that there is the question of whether the student is expressing a message (in which the First Amendment applies). In Morse v. Frederick (i.e. the amusing "Bong hits for Jesus" cases) the court ruled against the student because his action was not political. Of course, whether "speech" is political or not is a subjective judgment.

In U.S. v. O’Brien, there is no consideration of educational outcome... but the standard is "legitimate government interest" for a school dress code. The "O'Brien" test seems to be important legally.

Your analysis seems to be very one sided. It is clear that there have been several important cases that haven't gone your way, and some of the cases that went your way were 5-4 decisions.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Quote:

I think you are falling into the "My Opinions are not Subjective" trap.

I think my position is pretty clear and would be fairly easy to apply in various conditions, especially when compared to something as subjective as "community standards". We have courts to help with complexity, but I feel that in many cases "complexity" is really just a smoke screen for the powerful to keep "undesirable" behavior under control. That said, I think at this point I am just repeating myself. I don't have anything new to add.

1 Reply

@flappingums,

Quote:

then finger tip length

When?

Are they bactrian this semester or dromedary?

0 Replies

@engineer,

I agree with you about settling these issues in courts (as I made clear earlier).

Your narrative is requires a subjective judgement about intent, as if you can read the minds of the administrators. It is a pretty common story template, the "powerful" conspiring to oppress the weak. But, are you really asserting that school administrators are consciously conspiring to hurt students? I don't think this is fair.

School administrators, whether they share your political positions or not, have the task of running a school, keeping discipline and providing an environment for learning and they need to do this while being accountable to their local community. Different administrators in different communities with different needs come up with different policies to run the school in the best way they can.

I taught Physics in a high school, I am not sure if you understand what a building with 1000 adolescents is like. A part of adolescence, for both boys and girls, is pushing limits with the expressing sexuality. Every school deals with this, and every school makes rules specifically to define appropriate behavior. This part of what school administrations do.

The very liberal high school School that my kids attended had a rule against "bare midriff". This is Cambridge MA, a very liberal community... and yet the "powerful" (as you say) still elected to clearly state standards for dressing.

I don't think your narrative is fair.

0 Replies

@flappingums,

I really don't know what the dress codes of the middle schools and high schools are today. I do remember the dress codes of the late 1970s to the mid 1980s. During this time period, I remember neither boys nor girls were allowed to wear shorts of any kind. Also, girls who wore skirts, had to be long enough to cover their knees. I also remember that tank tops were not permitted by anyone. Maybe the dress codes have changed since then. I don't know.

0 Replies

In the late 1970s through the mid 1980s we did wear shorts in P.E. classes, but only in P.E. classes. Not during the rest of the school day.

0 Replies

When I started at Alleyn's School in 1963 at the age of 11, we had to wear shorts. The official uniform for the Lower School, (ages 11-13) was a grey "knicker suit", or else a blazer and grey shorts. Long grey socks and polished black shoes. No hands in pockets, although at least one boy in the picture below seems to be violating that. The teacher is called John Rice. Most Alleyn Old Boys of the period will remember him. The Headmaster of the Lower School, Mr DHB ("Butch") Pritchard told my mother they might make an exception if a boy was a little "portly". Then, the dress code was rather quaint, having been last updated in the 1950s at the time of the Teddy Boys - no "winklepicker" shoes, "drainpipe" trousers, or jackets with vents. They went co-ed in the 1970s.

https://images2.imgbox.com/37/5a/vSEWennm_o.jpg

Here is the current Upper School dress code:

Quote:

DRESS CODE
Both girls and boys shall dress in smart, professional clothes, which
are not ostentatious in style, pattern or colour, and that would be
considered suitable for a formal job interview.
They shall comprise:
 A formal suit – matching or co-ordinating jacket with formally-cut
trousers (boys and girls) or matching or coordinating jacket with a skirt
(girls).
 Waistcoats (with a plain coloured back) may accompany the suit.
 Jackets are to be worn at all times unless permission is given to
remove them.
 A formal shirt with a tie - House, Upper School, Colours or one of your
own choice (boys).
 A formal shirt / blouse that is collared and appropriately cut or a plain,
fitted top (girls).
 A plain, V-neck lightweight jumper or cardigan can be worn under the
jacket, but not as an alternative to a jacket (boys’ ties must be visible).
 Girls may wear a business-style dress with a jacket.
 Smart, plain, substantial leather shoes in a conventional style with a flat or
low heel less than 2 inches (flimsy, ballet-style pumps, ‘Ugg’ boots, trainers
or stilettos are not acceptable).
 Outerwear must be of a sober colour (denim jackets or hoodies are not
acceptable).
Additional Guidelines
Boys:
 Boys are to be clean-shaven and well-groomed at all times.
 Shirts should be tucked in and ties should be properly tightened.
Girls:
 Clothing must be appropriate and not revealing. There must be no bare
shoulders, bare midriffs or plunging necklines. Skirts/trousers must not be
skin tight and skirts/dresses must cover at least 80% of the thighs.
 If worn, tights/socks should be plain coloured.

0 Replies

Interesting article on the Oregon Model which strives to balance educational needs with equality.

0 Replies

Short shorts too school

Quick Links

My Account

able2know