Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So his parents is going to start a petition every time he breaks a rule?
That is something of a leap. They do something one or two times, for what they feel is good reasons, and you immediately assume they are just going to have a tantrum every time their child breaks a rule. That's crass. Schools SHOULD be a place where such rules are subject to the feedback of the parents. If enough parents feel a rule in a school is a bad one, then of course they should work together to have it changed.
I agree that if the rule was in place then the child should not be breaking it. I respect laws and rules. But I also agree the rule is a bad one and should be re-examined. Unless a childs dress or appearance is actually causing a real interruption to the workings of the school and its agenda to educate... or is in some way risking the well being mentally or physically of others... then there is no reason I know of to have rules in relation to it.
Make up does not have a sex. It is merely a compound used to modify the appearance of the wearer. It is sexless, and also there is no reason to declare it is only "for" one sex and not the other. There is no more basis for declaring it should only be for females than there is for declaring beer should only be for males.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stargazzer
He is obviously reaching out for help with the very strong statement, whatever it was.
Bull. He was just expressing himself. As most kids do in one way or another. Be it piercings, clothing, music, language or any other number of the plethora of ways children find to express themselves individually or as part of a group. If every such expression were to be viewed as a "cry for help" as it is in the fantasy world in your head it would be a very sick world indeed.
Disruptive - meaning clothes that have words that would be considered inflammatory, racist, or offensive. If a kid came to school with a White Supremacist t-shirt that said "Death to all ****", then that would disruptive.
Eyeliner on a boy or girl is NOT disruptive. and I knew a boy that had to wear eyeliner because HIS eyelashes were burned off in a home fire. Was he being disruptive?
the only people who "made" it disruptive were the administration of this school. The other kids didn't mind.
Disruptive - 8th grade kids staring and gigging, paying attention to him and not the class.
Disruptive - When the teacher has to take time to address a kid wearing makeup causing others to pay attention to the kid, and not the teacher.
How do you know the other kids didn't mind? Were you there? The bottom line, the teachers and staff had to devote attention to this kid instead of all the other students, and yes, that's disruptive.
Disruptive - 8th grade kids staring and gigging, paying attention to him and not the class.
Disruptive - When the teacher has to take time to address a kid wearing makeup causing others to pay attention to the kid, and not the teacher.
How do you know the other kids didn't mind? Were you there? The bottom line, the teachers and staff had to devote attention to this kid instead of all the other students, and yes, that's disruptive.
It was the last day of school, where it's to be expected that kids goof off.
Poor kid. He doesn't have a chance in hell at being raised into a man by two lesbians.
This is complete and utter horse poop. My sister and her partner raised her partner's son together for 16 years. He's a grown man now who is very successful, well-adjusted and, as it happens, completely heterosexual.
I see a big problem here for the school. Rules should be applied equally to all students. If girls are allowed to wear makeup, they can't have a different set of rules for the boys.
Example one: Should girls be allowed to play shirts and skins basketball at lunch break or after school?
Example two: Should all kids be allowed to wear hats because the one kid with cancer and no hair does?
Save me the moronic equality talk. These kid is the epitome of intolerance, he cannot tolerate the rules that everyone else has to follow so he turns a public environment into a place that is all about him and his rules.
Here is what I advise, if you want to have a daily drag-show and learn Algebra in pink panties, then try this novel idea - homeschooling.
Example one: Should girls be allowed to play shirts and skins basketball at lunch break or after school?
Example two: Should all kids be allowed to wear hats because the one kid with cancer and no hair does?
Save me the moronic equality talk. These kid is the epitome of intolerance, he cannot tolerate the rules that everyone else has to follow so he turns a public environment into a place that is all about him and his rules.
Here is what I advise, if you want to have a daily drag-show and learn Algebra in pink panties, then try this novel idea - homeschooling.
This same argument was used over and over in the 60's concerning long hair on boys.
Save me the moronic equality talk. These kid is the epitome of intolerance
Again: I heartily agree that if the rule was there the kid should not be breaking it.
However there is simply nothing wrong with challenging the status quo and suggesting rules should be changed. This strange concept that once a rule is set it has to remain set and unquestioned for all time is truly alien to me.
Unless some actually good arguments can be produced to support having a rule against males wearing make up then why have such a rule at all? Why not change it?
Yet so far in a very long thread the only "argument" I am hearing is that make up is "for" women only. In essence the people making the argument are supporting the argument by simply restating the argument.
Again: I heartily agree that if the rule was there the kid should not be breaking it.
However there is simply nothing wrong with challenging the status quo and suggesting rules should be changed. This strange concept that once a rule is set it has to remain set and unquestioned for all time is truly alien to me.
Unless some actually good arguments can be produced to support having a rule against males wearing make up then why have such a rule at all? Why not change it?
Yet so far in a very long thread the only "argument" I am hearing is that make up is "for" women only. In essence the people making the argument are supporting the argument by simply restating the argument.
The thing is, there was no rule prohibiting a boy from wearing makeup.
This same argument was used over and over in the 60's concerning long hair on boys.
Respond yes or no:
Example one: Should girls be allowed to play shirts and skins basketball at lunch break or after school?
Example two: Should all kids be allowed to wear hats because the one kid with cancer and no hair does?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
