TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- That's an odd shape for a phallus...
Pages (5): « 1 2 3 4 [5]

what was the principal doing on their myspace page in the first place...

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter ...phallus-shaped lollipop...

Fixed!

I can't decide which is more stupid: that a fucking school is so self-obsessed it has to censor its students Myspace pages to preserve its own image, or that the parents seriously think not being allowed to play for the school team is an unjust punishment worth financial compensation.

Conclusion: this whole story is fucking stupid from top to bottom.

In American public schools, sports rule. All that academic stuff is a secondary concern at best. :-)

yup. and i would imagine that the parents were probably really hoping for a sports (or whatever extra cirricular activities they were associated with) scholarship for their little slut princesses and now that's out the door lol

quote:

Originally posted by Slylee i just don't see what the problem is about a school wanting students who play on sports teams and REPRESENT said school (outside of school mind you, when they go on away game trips) to abide by a code of conduct whether they are in school or out of school. most extra cirricular activities at schools have A LOT of activiites outside of the school and school hours. to me, it's no different than girl scouts or something like that. if you want to be a part of it and be chosen to represent that group/school/company, act like a mature respectable teenager. if you don't, you're off the team. this shit happens all the time. guys getting kicked off the football team because they were caught drinking at parties or even got in trouble w/ the law outside of school. the school has a right to pick who gets to represent them and who doesn't. sucking dick shaped lollipops with dollar bills hanging out of your underwear on myspace is more like representing the local strip club. they didn't kick the girls out of school for good, they just can't play sports and had to publicly apologize to their coaches for letting them down (which is exactly what they did). what's so hard to understand about that? lol

I think there's a pretty significant difference between a private organization, which has no obligation to include anyone to begin with, choosing not to exclude people for arbitrary reasons and a public school, the services of which the girls are entitled to under state law, choosing to exclude them for an arbitrary reason.

In like vein, it is one thing for the state, after fulfilling the requirements of due process, to suspend or limit students' participation at school on the basis of violations of the state's criminal law and for a low-level bureaucrat, acting entirely on his own, to limit students' participation at school on the basis of nothing more than his bare declaration that their conduct "reflects discredit" upon the school.

Even if I were to think that, in this particular case, these girls deserved to be subject to some sort of sanction for their conduct, it does not at all follow that it is appropriate for their school principal to be playing the role of judge, jury, and executioner on the basis of nothing more than his own personal interpretation of a standard so vague and subjective as to place no practical limit on his discretion.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter I think there's a pretty significant difference between a private organization, which has no obligation to include anyone to begin with, choosing not to exclude people for arbitrary reasons and a public school, the services of which the girls are entitled to under state law, choosing to exclude them for an arbitrary reason. In like vein, it is one thing for the state, after fulfilling the requirements of due process, to suspend or limit students' participation at school on the basis of violations of the state's criminal law and for a low-level bureaucrat, acting entirely on his own, to limit students' participation at school on the basis of nothing more than his bare declaration that their conduct "reflects discredit" upon the school. Even if I were to think that, in this particular case, these girls deserved to be subject to some sort of sanction for their conduct, it does not at all follow that it is appropriate for their school principal to be playing the role of judge, jury, and executioner on the basis of nothing more than his own personal interpretation of a standard so vague and subjective as to place no practical limit on his discretion.

i see. and what message do you think this whole situation is going to send to the girls? to the other kids at that school? what will it accomplish? and will it be positive?

Doing things the wrong way to send the right messege=not good.

which party are you suggesting is doing things the wrong way to send the right message?

quote:

Originally posted by Slylee which party are you suggesting is doing things the wrong way to send the right message?

Censorship. Especially in an ad hoc way, with no clear outlines of what is acceptable conduct.

At the end of the day, you don't know why they took the pictures. It might have been a tongue-in-cheek spoof of misogynist objectification of women, a satirical comment on the modern image of womanhood.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Censorship. Especially in an ad hoc way, with no clear outlines of what is acceptable conduct. At the end of the day, you don't know why they took the pictures. It might have been a tongue-in-cheek spoof of misogynist objectification of women, a satirical comment on the modern image of womanhood.

i'm sorry, i didn't realize i was fucking talking to you.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Censorship. Especially in an ad hoc way, with no clear outlines of what is acceptable conduct. At the end of the day, you don't know why they took the pictures. It might have been a tongue-in-cheek spoof of misogynist objectification of women, a satirical comment on the modern image of womanhood.

LMAO! Alright, I somewhat agree with your first point, but the 2nd part is just ridiculous. Common, you really think 15 year old girls were thinking beyond how they wanted to be "teh sex" online and get attention from boys? Let's be realistic.

quote:

Originally posted by Slylee i'm sorry, i didn't realize i was fucking talking to you.

Apology accepted. Next time, remember you're on a public message board.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Apology accepted. Next time, remember you're on a public message board.

what?

*woosh*

quote:

Originally posted by Ania_xox What the fuck is wrong with girls like this? My sister gave her boyfriend so much shit when she saw that some of the girls in his commerce group had posted videos of themselves on facebook having a pillow fight in their underwear. Who has time to do stuff like this? How do they justify what they are doing while they are doing it? "OMG how fun would it be to kiss a dildo on webcam? I think this will make my day better! lets pin dollar bills on ourselves to up the anty" it just screams daddy issues and "i wasn't loved as a child" and "the only way I know how to get male attention is to try to sexually excite him because I lack brains and the ability to keep up in an intelligent conversation" no wonder guys act like sexist dicks there are so many deluded broads out there whom I would love to kick in the face

This is possibly the single best post I've ever read on TA, or indeed any forums. I fully agree with you. Good point & well made.

quote:

Originally posted by Theresa LMAO! Alright, I somewhat agree with your first point, but the 2nd part is just ridiculous. Common, you really think 15 year old girls were thinking beyond how they wanted to be "teh sex" online and get attention from boys? Let's be realistic.

Okay, the second point was somewhat facetious, but still. I've known teenagers who have Myspace/Facebook photos where they're mocked up as emos or other stereotypes, so replacing "emo" with "slut" isn't impossible. Besides, they claimed they were doing it because it was "humorous" - a joke - and I didn't read anything in the OP article that they were 15, just high school students.

The main point is that if you force students to self-censor all their activities because they don't know what's over-stepping the line, then you're obviously getting it wrong. The principal might decide strong language is discrediting the school's image, and any student reported back to him for saying "fuck" in their own free time might be kicked off a team.

HUH?

quote:

Originally posted by Slylee i see. and what message do you think this whole situation is going to send to the girls? to the other kids at that school? what will it accomplish? and will it be positive?

Irrelevant. The school has no business sending any messages, good or bad, about how to behave correctly outside of school hours.

If I send my kids to a public school. I expect them to set some basic rules of behaviour within school hours and to educate my kids in math, science, english, sport etc. Not to force their ideas of moral behaviour down their throats... that's my job.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles

quote:

Originally posted by Slylee i'm sorry, i didn't realize i was fucking talking to you.

Seriously.....seriously.....FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU-
You're easily the most blonde person we have ever had on this forum. Ever. Easily

quote:

Originally posted by Fledz Seriously.....seriously.....FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU- You're easily the most blonde person we have ever had on this forum. Ever. Easily

is my own post some huge joke that i missed out on?

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.