No, this is NOT a joke:
Long Beach High School has an annual “Superhero Day” for its seniors. According to Newsday, while other students came dressed as Superman and Wonder Woman, three girls–Ashley Imhof, Eliana Levin, and Chelsea Horowitz–came attired as kid’s book superhero Captain Underpants. There was nothing remotely indecent about the ensembles: They were covered head to toe in flesh-colored tights (not see-through), sporting white jockey shorts on the outside. But the head of the school, who will henceforth be referred to as Principal Poopypants, insisted they change because they had “the appearance” of being naked.
What the hëll was he TALKING about? They were wearing capes, so seen from the back, they wouldn’t appear topless. Seen from the front, they would only appear naked if the biology teachers at Long Beach failed to teach the kids that girls have breasts. Nevertheless, the mere suggestion was enough to make Principal Poopypants issue an ultimatum that the clever teens cover up. Having no clothes to change into, the girls had to go home.
The Principal (real name Nicholas Restivo) stated he didn’t know the character, “not that it mattered.” Talk about having your underpants in a bunch. Someone should send Principal Poopypants a collection of the series.
PAD
Here is the photo that was taken by Ðìçk Yarwood for Newsday for the article.
• 
Craig, don’t be disingenuous, and don’t hide behind semantics.
And don’t take it upon yourself to be this site’s resident psychic, because the only thing it’s going to do is make you look like an ášš.
PAD refers to the principal, who I’m sure millions of people agree with, as “Principal Poopypants”.
I say Jerry’s comments are comedy. Yet, I’m belittling people?
Here’s a thought: quit letting your personal views of my past comments color your views of my current comments, because there’s nothing different between what PAD and I said. Nothing at all.
Whether you want to admit it or not, you are clearly feeling angry and hostile right now.
You know, I was laughing. The whole way until you started belitting ME.
The only angry and hostility I’m feeling now is thanks to you. Congratulations. I hope it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside, Bill, because I think it makes you pathetic.
To quote PAD, “talk about having your underpants in a bunch,” Bill.
Posted by: rrlane at October 26, 2006 03:01 PM
Should police not worry about someone running a stop sign simply because there were no other cars around and there was no chance of a collision at THAT moment?
No, of course not. Because the consequences of running a “Stop” sign can potentially be fatal. But that’s my point: can you point to even the potential for an equivalent tangible harm to be caused by those outfits? Or the potential for any tangible harm, for that matter?
People take posting around here to seriously… now there’s a shocker.
Or do I need to also point out the sarcasm in that comment?
can you point to even the potential for an equivalent tangible harm to be caused by those outfits? Or the potential for any tangible harm, for that matter?
Nope, I can’t. And they weren’t arrested, ticketed, or fined either, so the response was measured to fit the offense.
Craig, you’ve belittled me on these boards, and also friends of mine, like Bill Mulligan. I’ve nevertheless tried to give you the benefit of the doubt time and again. I’ve tried to give you credit for having intelligence (because I believe you are intelligent). I’ve tried to overlook your hot-headedness because goodness knows I can be hot-headed, as everyone here has seen on multiple occasions.
But for God’s sake, Craig, you are acting outraged because I’ve given you back a small fraction of what you’ve given me and others here. Given how combative you are, I would’ve thought you’d have thicker skin.
I’m honestly sorry I upset you, whether you choose to believe that or not. But I find it hard to fathom why you feel so comfortable dishing out to others what you can’t take yourself.
Posted by: rrlane at October 26, 2006 03:11 PM
Nope, I can’t. And they weren’t arrested, ticketed, or fined either, so the response was measured to fit the offense.
I can’t fault your logic. It’s a good point. While I still disagree that the girls’ attire should be considered an offense, asking them to go home and change isn’t exactly a harsh response.
I still disagree that the girls’ attire should be considered an offense
I’ll grant you that. I use it simply for lack of a better term.
But for God’s sake, Craig, you are acting outraged because I’ve given you back a small fraction of what you’ve given me and others here.
That’s your argument? That two wrongs make a right? No wonder you think you can read minds.
I’ve misread peoples comments from time to time, but I would never intentionally return the favor as you have done just because it’s supposedly deserved.
That’s not comedy, that’s just sad. And it’s sad to think you place yourself on such a high pedestal to judge the rest of us in such a manner, especially when your judgments are outright wrong.
Maybe you haven’t gotten rid of your trollish ways, as you think you have. Try thinking about that for awhile before you respond to my posts again.
Perhaps you are right, Craig. It seems as though over the last several weeks I have been increasingly drawn into conflicts here. Perhaps I am the problem.
I think I’ll take some time off from posting here. That should give you and anyone else I may have offended some time to cool off. It will also give me some time to examine my own behavior and determine what, if anything, I should do differently should I choose to return.
Who’s idea was of doing the Hero day anyway? If that was the principal idea, he should know that heroes use tights uniforms and use the underwear over their pants. 😉
If he didn’t know, he shouldn’t take the risk of creating a day for people to use that. Again, maybe because I’m brazilian, I didn’t see anything offensive in the girls uniform. In my humble opinion, there’s a limit of how controlled a school environment should be. I remember seeing something that happened in the US. Because the kid was breaking things, obviously trying to get attention (I’m sure she had problems at home) someone had the briliant idea of cuffing her to calm her down. She was what? Ten years old? That, anyone can agree with me is appealing. That’s an example of overreacting.
That’s what happened with this situation. The Principal got scared with that… He probably imagined parents calling him on the phone, law suits being prepared and he reacted like anyone who wants to keep his job. Because, at the end, that’s what he was doing. In my opinion, when you put hundred of teenagers together, there’s a good chance someone will overreact. That happens in any country. But… Look at that picture. How that can be wrong? The only ones looking ridiculous are the girls…
Funny that a foreigner like get involved on something like that. But, let’s face it: “Principal Poppypants” its pretty funny.
This is my first posting, so I apologize if it isn’t up to standards:
All of you are talking about the top half. As far as I could see the underwear covered a lot less than a pair of Daisy Dukes, and those are against the dress code of every school I know (with or without tights). I graduated in 95′ from a school with a really loose dress code and I got “rulered” on my short length, and sent home because they were too short and by no means as short as Daisy Dukes.
Also, at all schools I know of (NJ, VA, Ga, Al), wearing lycra pants is against dress code because they don’t adequately cover the “rear end”. The are treated as tights and therefore must have a dress, or pants covering them.
I’m all for dressing up as a hero, but with everything available to them, they could have done it without getting sent home. My bet is that they KNEW it would get them sent home. The kids at my first high school loved “pushing the line” to see how far they could go before getting sent home.
All in all, it comes down to the dress code, and what that school finds appropriate. I had a rude awakening when I moved from NJ to Va for my senior year in high school. The codes were the same, but the way the schools interpreted them was completely different. In NJ a confederate flag would get you sent home, and in Va my high heel boots were not accepted. (I still have yet to learn the way people abbreviate states, my husband writes VA, I write Va.) Each community is different and what is acceptable varies from one to another (like the posts here).
“Plus my wife could walk by at the wrong time and kill me.”
And yes, I would have 🙂
This is my first posting, so I apologize if it isn’t up to standards:
All of you are talking about the top half. As far as I could see the underwear covered a lot less than a pair of Daisy Dukes, and those are against the dress code of every school I know (with or without tights). I graduated in 95′ from a school with a really loose dress code and I got “rulered” on my short length, and sent home because they were too short and by no means as short as Daisy Dukes.
Also, at all schools I know of (NJ, VA, Ga, Al), wearing lycra pants is against dress code because they don’t adequately cover the “rear end”. The are treated as tights and therefore must have a dress, or pants covering them.
I’m all for dressing up as a hero, but with everything available to them, they could have done it without getting sent home. My bet is that they KNEW it would get them sent home. The kids at my first high school loved “pushing the line” to see how far they could go before getting sent home.
All in all, it comes down to the dress code, and what that school finds appropriate. I had a rude awakening when I moved from NJ to Va for my senior year in high school. The codes were the same, but the way the schools interpreted them was completely different. In NJ a confederate flag would get you sent home, and in Va my high heel boots were not accepted. (I still have yet to learn the way people abbreviate states, my husband writes VA, I write Va.) Each community is different and what is acceptable varies from one to another (like the posts here).
“Plus my wife could walk by at the wrong time and kill me.”
And yes, I would have 🙂
Between this and the art teacher whose contract wasn’t renewed because she took her kids to an art museum where there were nude statues,
Well, since you brought it up, it’s time to bring everyone up to date and shoot down that story once and for all.
It turns out that the teacher in question had been let go from a neighboring school district as well (McKinney). Once her record from that school district was made public (under a request from the Dallas Morning News under Public Records Act), it was found that the same complaints Frisco had been making about her classroom performance (not related to the Art Museum) had been cause for her to “resign” from McKinney. McKinney had covered it up, though, under an agreement with the teacher to go quietly.
As of this past Monday, she settled with the Frisco district. Basically, it’s what Frisco had already done before she went on her national media “I was screwed” tour. She got pay through the end of the year, and won’t be renewed.
I think the old record showed her up for what she was – an opportunist who tried to get some money from the school district on trumped up charges.
ArizonaTeach,let me tell you, you used to be able to see through all KINDS of girls’ shirts when I was in high school. (Actually, my ex-girlfriend and I had a whole big discussion as to whether or not she should get some of those shirts.) The field hockey team’s uniforms were famous for it. For the kid whose shoes got muddy? Tell his parents to teach him NOT TO WALK IN THE MUD. Same thing with the aspirin. If a kid is old enough, they’ll know whether or not they can take aspirin. My son’s five, and he knows. The problems you’ve pointed out aren’t problems with administrators, they’re with sue-happy parents and judges that are just too happy to slam it to the schools.
Kelly, first off, you’ve got my sympathy. I got stuck in Denver a few years ago in the same situation. Then the fire alarms went off and nobody could find the fire stairs. But these women you’re seeing where you can see the outlines of more than one bra? How many are they wearing>
We don’t let students wear coats during the school day, and they cover up MORE than the suits.
You’re kidding us, right?
So, if a student were to find a classroom to be too cold for their comfort level, they’re not afforded the perfectly logical, reasonable and sensible alternative of wearing a coat?
I suppose there’s an alternative: dress for the coldest classroom they have, then begin to disrobe in the warmer classrooms.
********************
I don’t know where “up in arms” is coming from. They were asked to change their clothes. They didn’t have a change of clothes, so they were sent home. They weren’t punished as far as I can tell, so “up in arms” seems a tad hyperbolic.
Suspension – “being sent home” – is no longer considered a punishment?
Principal Poopypants is right. The costumes look just like what they are…costumes. I can’t help but think that a Wonder Woman outfit would be far more racy and revealing than what those kids are wearing.
Jennifer, first off, hi, how ya doing? Anyway, while the underwear might be less than a pair of Daisy Dukes, the tights were underneath them, so everything was still covered. I could still see where the rule you talked about might be tired to be used, but technically, there still wasn’t anything uncovered. And the capes in the back kinda cover the back, in the habit of capes everywhere.
It will also give me some time to examine my own behavior and determine what, if anything, I should do differently should I choose to return.
Text is a medium where it can be hard to ‘read’ what people say, which is where emoticons and things like throwing in a “(sarcasm)” really come in handy. It’s easy to misinterpret and make assumptions. And so, I think that tends to make conflict easier: we are not only NOT speaking face to face, but it’s easier to screw up what somebody else is saying.
I think, in this case, it was more the fact that iirc the whole ‘mind reading’ has come up before. I can’t read your mind, you can’t read mine; we don’t really know each other, and that’s really all there is to it.
So, it was by no means an attempt to chase you off, Bill. God knows there are forums where people can set me off, but this site *usually* isn’t one of them, regardless of how my posts come across. 🙂
ME:We don’t let students wear coats during the school day, and they cover up MORE than the suits.
Nytwyng: You’re kidding us, right?
So, if a student were to find a classroom to be too cold for their comfort level, they’re not afforded the perfectly logical, reasonable and sensible alternative of wearing a coat?
Well, they could wear a long sleeve shirt. That’s what I do, and I’m generally quite comfortable.
We don’t allow coats because a) it’s unhealthy. Kids sweat and stink because (contrary to the schools in your area apparently) our schools don’t have frost on the desks, nor can kids see their breath in the classrooms, and b) coats afford students the ability to carry contraband in all the pockets. Hëll, I’d ban hoodies if I could because of the crap kids hide in there.
Students are in school to learn. It’s not a freakin’ fashion show.
“Jennifer, first off, hi, how ya doing? Anyway, while the underwear might be less than a pair of Daisy Dukes, the tights were underneath them, so everything was still covered. I could still see where the rule you talked about might be tired to be used, but technically, there still wasn’t anything uncovered. And the capes in the back kinda cover the back, in the habit of capes everywhere.”
Technically speaking, professionally applied body paint covers all the “naughty bits” just as effectively as tights. But I guarantee you that body paint isn’t going to cover the “no shirt, no service” policy of any restuarant.
Having the tights cover them is only part of the issue. What good does it do to cover the bits if you can still see them? The thread’s avoided getting too crude, so I’ll do my best to keep it that way, but those undies over the tights are just too tight. You can see too much. I’m far from a prude, but I also think people’s privates should be kept private, especially in school.
Sean Sculion said:
“ArizonaTeach,let me tell you, you used to be able to see through all KINDS of girls’ shirts when I was in high school. (Actually, my ex-girlfriend and I had a whole big discussion as to whether or not she should get some of those shirts.) The field hockey team’s uniforms were famous for it.”
Well, all I can tell you is that in my school and district, it’s not allowed, and I’m surprised if it’s not against the rules at most schools. But, even that’s irrelevant to the school we’re talking about. What is relevant he principal for that particular school did say that any visible underwear was against the rules…so even if we’re ignoring the see-through tops, we really can’t ignore the whole underpants thing!
“For the kid whose shoes got muddy? Tell his parents to teach him NOT TO WALK IN THE MUD. Same thing with the aspirin. If a kid is old enough, they’ll know whether or not they can take aspirin. My son’s five, and he knows. The problems you’ve pointed out aren’t problems with administrators, they’re with sue-happy parents and judges that are just too happy to slam it to the schools.”
If only it were that easy, but the fact is you’re right, parents are just happy to sue, and schools simply don’t have the ability or funds to fight. Not too long ago, we hired a woman in a wheelchair as a computer lab assistant. Problem was, in her chair, the kids couldn’t see where she was to get help or even if she was in the room (which caused its own problems when kids started acting up). The administration offered to put a pole or flag on her chair when she was on duty, so kids would know where she was. She quit citing harrassing humiliation, and the district insurance company forced a settlement, because they felt it would be cheaper than an EEO lawsuit, which of course raised the rates for the school.
Part of the job of a principal is to make dámņ sure that everything follows the very letter of the law. EVERYTHING. It has to, or the school has a giant target on it. That’s why there are so many permission slips, affidavits, forms and papers to sign…I have to make my AP kids sign an anti-plaigarism form, because my first year I didn’t, and since it wasn’t in my classroom policies I couldn’t do anything about it (yes, the parents threatened to sue if I didn’t let little precious graduate). We live in a country that forces food companies to put “don’t eat this” on the silicate packages in my beef jerky, and “don’t fall off” on dámņ ladders. I wish people were smart enough to not do stupid things, but all it takes is one lawsuit, one child injured, one hurt feeling (I got the whole Huckleberry Finn is racist lawsuit threat thrown at me several years ago by a grandmother — not even the parent — of a black student) and not only are entire careers over, but hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars, are lost. In a school, you ALWAYS ERR ON THE SIDE OF CAUTION. Always.
rrlane–must be nice where you live, because the high school I went to, a few of the classes were so cold that even the TEACHERS were wearing coats. And your contraband line also rings hollow to me, because if taken to extreme, the arguement could be applied to pockets in pants as well. I could be wrong, I may have missed something becuase I’m typing and trying to take care of my little guy, got his tonsils and adenoids out this morning, not happy, but I don’t think anyone else brought up a fashion show. And if it’s cold enough for coats to be needed, generally in my experience at least, people aren’t likely to sweat.
Bobb, body paint isn’t clothing. Tights are. And trust me, hang out in the Goth scene occasionally, and you’ll find places where body paint IS sufficient. But to go with your second point, if body parts are covered, then, unless the clothing is translucent or you’re dealing with Sue Richards, you CAN’T see them.
Suspension – “being sent home” – is no longer considered a punishment?
Being sent home is not the same as suspension. The way I read it, it was the same as we would do (and have done) for students who violate dress code here. If they have a change of clothes at the school (from gym class or whatever) that are acceptable, they don’t leave the building. If they don’t have anything to wear, then they go home, change, and come back.
Honestly, there are really more important things in the world to get indignant about.
I wouldn’t let my 13 (nearly 14) year old daughter out the door dressed like that. She wears a studio tracksuit over her dancewear to her dance classes.
“Students are in school to learn. It’s not a freakin’ fashion show.”
We don’t have this problem so much – schools here, bith State and Independent, insist on school uniforms. I hated it as a student, very happy with it as a parent.
rrlane–must be nice where you live, because the high school I went to, a few of the classes were so cold that even the TEACHERS were wearing coats.
Which is why I can only speak for my school and from my own experience. Please note my qualification in my previous post that I don’t know what schools were like in your neck of the woods. If there is a situation in another school that is different than here (the place I was talking about in the first instance), then different rules are sure to apply.
And your contraband line also rings hollow to me, because if taken to extreme, the arguement could be applied to pockets in pants as well.
If taken to the extreme, I would agree with you. I’m trying to avoid the extremes here. If everyone would do the same it would be so much easier to find a happy medium, don’t you think?
Sure, you could carry a stick of gum, an Ipod or a cell phone in pants pockets. Could you carry a can of spray paint? A pint of vodka? A pistol? You can in a coat. I know, because we’ve pulled kids for carrying some of them in their coats. Not the gun thankfully.
Yet.
So it can ring hollow to you if you choose. I’m sorry to hear it, but I live it.
I don’t think anyone else brought up a fashion show.
So there’s a practical reason to dress like Captain Underpants that I’m missing?
Geez, I go away to mow the lawn (last time this year 🙂 ) and Bill contemplates a sabbatical while my wife drops by and threatens my life.
I must never mow the lawn again!!!!! ;p
Bill, you’re fine. I’m sure must of us would say that you’re not being overly combative or trollish in the least. I thought, at worst, that some of your posts showed a bit of the standard onset of the winter blahs. Hits lots of people this time of year. Hits me for a few weeks every year. Hëll, a month ago I would have had a bit more fun with Mikey in the last thread then I did. Winter blahs kick in and I’m not in the mood to play as many of his games with him as I sometimes would.
“Dude, my girlfriend owns a handgun and is trained in its use.”
Yeah, so what? She has a handgun. I have at my disposal:
A bullet proof vest
Four shotguns
Five rifles
Four semi-automatic handguns
Three revolvers
Seven swords
Dozens of knives
OC Spray
An ASP Baton
Several nightsticks
Riot gear
The occasional TAZER
What does my wife have? Only the most dangerous weapon a woman can have.
CAST IRON POTS AND PANS AND A WILLINGNESS TO USE THEM.
You, me, your girlfriend and Craig combined and backed by anything less then Godzilla wouldn’t stand a chance.
“Bobb, body paint isn’t clothing. Tights are.”
Yeah, and in my old HS you had girls get sent home to change for doing the MTV fashion fad of skin tight tights and short shorts.
frankly, with the tights on yhe two girls on the “outside” of the group look more like Ken than Barbie. Nothing remotely sexual about it.
I’me with you Pete – Princpal P is a bit uptight.
frankly, with the tights on yhe two girls on the “outside” of the group look more like Ken than Barbie. Nothing remotely sexual about it.
I’me with you Pete – Princpal P is a bit uptight.
Some good points have come up against my original reaction to this article. Upon reflection, I can see that yeah, some people might be uncomfortable with the girls dressed like that. My thing is this. If there were any girls at this school who were dressed in Wonder Woman outfits or the like with bare legs and low cut/form-fitting tops, I would expect them to be sent home too then because that’s just as provocative to some as other girls wearing flesh-colored suits. If they weren’t sent home, then this seems too arbitrary to me about what is believed to be distracting and what isn’t. Girls are distracting to boys, period. It was only a few years ago I was in high school and frankly if a girl was pretty it didn’t matter how conservative she was dressed, you’d look at her. 😛
Were I the principal and honestly believed these girls were too sexually overt, I would have the gym teacher give them some spare shirts to wear OVER the flesh-colored tops and let them continue to go to class. Or if the gym doesn’t possess extra shirts and jersies, then take ten minutes to go to the nearest K-Mart, buy one of those “three plain t-shirts for 5 bucks” packages, and give those to the girls to wear over their tops. Sending them home for the day seems too much like singling them out and ruining their day for what could’ve been really just a bad but harmless judgment call made by three teenagers. Don’t let them go completely buck wild, but rememner that Super-Hero Day should, by definition, be fun.
Just my two cents.
This was too funny, but sad at the same time.
But I’m almost positive if they had shown up dressed as Wonder Woman, it wouldn’t have been an issue.
If they were sent home for the entire day, then I will agree that that was an over reaction. There is nothing in the article that states that that is what happened, though (if I somehow missed it in the article, I cheerfully rescind my arguments). If there was a cleavage showing, French-cut Wonder Woman costume that was NOT sent home, then the principal was hypocritical. But again, there is nothing in the article that says that that was the case, so that’s really besides the point.
As for the notion of letting them use old gym clothes, the article might have then read “Young girls force to wear unsanitary clothing in local high school.” The new shirts idea would work once, but then they would be “dirty” shirts too, requiring the school to buy new ones each time a student needed to be covered up.
Again, I know because we’ve gone through this here, and those suggestions (which I honestly consider good solutions from a practical point of view) were rejected precisely for the reasons I state. Blame our litigious society as others have already mentioned here.
I’m almost positive if they had shown up dressed as Wonder Woman, it wouldn’t have been an issue.
I cannot speak for that school, so you may be right, but there’s an equal chance you’re wrong. In my school there have been numerous girls sent home to change out of cleavage exposing shirts.
And lest anyone start saying that the girls are singled out, we’ve also sent boys home to change out of pants that are hanging down around their groins.
Craig J. Ries: I didn’t feel “chased off.” But I have been involved in at least three major conflicts here in recent weeks. If I was the problem, then my absence seemed like a logical solution.
But things between you and I cooled off rapidly. Bygones, then?
Jerry C: Got your e-mail. Thanks, man. Truly. But I wasn’t gonna take a “sabbatical.” I mean, c’mon, it’s just a blog! It’s not like I was talking about quitting my job, leaving my girlfriend, and joining a commune!
By the way, Jerry C, I wouldn’t underestimate my girlfriend if I were you. She can kick some serious ášš. And what makes you think she’d team up with us against your wife? I think it would be more likely that she’d team up with your wife against us. And give you and I a serious hurtin’.
Finally, to everyone: I’ve changed my mind about the costumes. I used the link Jerry C provided to see the pictures, and you could see the girls’ bras and panties through those tights. Those things were waaayyyy too sheer. I can’t fault the principal for asking the girls to go home and change. Organizational dress codes are part of the real world.
PAD, normally, I agree with you, but this time, I gotta side with the Principal.
In the right lighting, these girls are wearing underwear, bras, glorified pantyhose, and nothing else. It’s like letting them go around all day in bikinis. Not to mention that those body suits look terribly easy to damage and distracting for anyone around them… Yeah, he made the right call.
There are ways to tweak, poke, and prod at the system, but this was going a bit too far.
While in real life closer inspection of the subject improves your chances of seeing a bra, in the case of these images closer inspections only gives you large smudges of pixelated colors. Try zooming in on the files with an image-reader.
The story cites a student saying the costumes weren’t see-through, and the principal “described the costume as ‘tight-fitting, flesh-colored leotards and leggings.'” A group of girls at the end of their childhood want to dress up as Captain Underpants, and you, Jerry, have to tell us you see something sexually provacative in what are in large part a bunch of colored smudges. Seems kind of creepy to me.
Well, they’re not as clear on a couple of the girls, but the bra on the skinny one is quite visible.
Also, does it seem a bit wrong to anybody else to take take the principal to task for not being familiar with every bit of pop culture fluff that comes down the pike? Particularly being the administrator of a high school, and the character in question is from a series of children’s books?
-Rex Hondo-
The character in question is a school principal. (That’s likely to be what all the brouhaha is really about.)
Seriously, Rex…I can understand why PAD mentioned they weren’t see-through the first time he posted that, since he hadn’t seen all the pictures, and the picture he put up doesn’t show it. But the full range of photos at Newsday clearly show how see-through the outfit, at least on the first girl, is.
And I agree with you on your second point, too. I didn’t know what the hëll a Wiggle was until my brother had a kid, for example, and if someone had expected me to know what Captain Feathersword was, and then mocked me because I didn’t know, he would be way out of line. I’m a high school teacher, and the only reason I know anything about Captain Underpants is that he’s got ads in some of the comics I read! Which makes me wonder about the target audience of what I read, I suppose….!
“Mike at October 26, 2006 11:28 PM”
I still can’t understand why their mothers let them leave the house dressed like that.
Hmm. I went to a strict all-male Catholic high school with a strict dress code, so I have very little experience with how much flexibility students get with dress codes.
This reminds me of the flap a few years ago, when Britney Spears did her pseudo-strip tease at the MTV Video Music Awards to “reveal” a skin-colored bodysuit. It didn’t reveal anything “unacceptable” by television standards (especially those on MTV), but people seemed shocked because she, well, seemed nude. This is the same situation: These girls weren’t naked, but they sorta looked naked. (I shudder to think about the reaction of anyone whos aw these girls from a distance.)
I think the school handled it perfectly, by sending the students home without enforcing any further punishment. This may have been pushing the limits of what’s appropriate, but it’s hard to punish someone for sorta looking sorta nekkid.
I’m not taking any side to the discussion, I’d just like to point out (matter of factually) that I’m pretty sure these girls’ normal school attire is more flattering (read: inappropriately appealing) than their costumes.
Seriously, there is just something gross looking about those costumes.
Posted by El Hombre Malo
When I was a kid, my highschool used to celebrate a “verbena” (sort of a night fair) with a costume contest included. They ended up issuing a veto to prevent any boy dressing as a girl/woman. Seems a kid did that so succesfuly and genuine-like he got even to flirt with a teacher, or so the legend say.
Peter – you wanna give us a summary of the story of DC’s reps’ problems with “Catwoman” at some con that i remember from a “But I Digress…” some years ago?
Posted by El Hombre Malo
When I was a kid, my highschool used to celebrate a “verbena” (sort of a night fair) with a costume contest included. They ended up issuing a veto to prevent any boy dressing as a girl/woman. Seems a kid did that so succesfuly and genuine-like he got even to flirt with a teacher, or so the legend say.
Peter – you wanna give us a summary of the story of DC’s reps’ problems with “Catwoman” at some con that i remember from a “But I Digress…” some years ago?
Posted by El Hombre Malo
When I was a kid, my highschool used to celebrate a “verbena” (sort of a night fair) with a costume contest included. They ended up issuing a veto to prevent any boy dressing as a girl/woman. Seems a kid did that so succesfuly and genuine-like he got even to flirt with a teacher, or so the legend say.
Peter – you wanna give us a summary of the story of DC’s reps’ problems with “Catwoman” at some con that i remember from a “But I Digress…” some years ago?
I can understand doing a double-take at first, but at second glance, you see they’re wearing opaque bodystockings, and they do not look nude, nor can I see any bras on them. Where anyone gets the idea that the outfits are see-through, I don’t know.
ArizonaTeach: the fact that you can see the bra through the outfit is pretty inappropriate..
Craig J. Ries: Then girls should be banned from wearing white shirts then? Because that’s what you’re going based on your opinion of this outfit.
Luigi Novi: White fabric varies in thickness and texture, and is not all of it is necessarily transparent.
Craig J. Ries: Tell me you’ve never seen a girl walking around in a white shirt and never seen the bra underneath. Go ahead, I dare you to even try.
Luigi Novi: Whether one has “ever” seen such a thing wasn’t the issue. The issue that not all white shirts are transparent. You asked, in response to ArizonaTeach’s comment that transparent clothing was inappropriate, whether wearing white shirts should be banned. Not all white shirts are transparent. No one said that none of them are.
Bill Myers: Look at it this way: would you ban people from seeing the girls’ swim team? They show a lot more in those one-piece bathing suits.
Luigi Novi: I’ve never seen a school swimsuit that looked like that. The ones I’ve seen are opaque, and generally a bright color like red.
Jerry C: Bill, http://www.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/ny-lidres1026-pg,0,5767405.photogallery?coll=ny-main-bigpix&index=3
Luigi Novi: I saw that photo before, but I looked a second time, and only now did I see Ashley Imhof’s bra, and only looking really hard. Maybe you’re right about different lighting conditions, so maybe hers was too transparent. The others do not look transparents, and in the first photo, Eliana Levin’s outfit looks more brown than the others. I wonder if Imhof’s bra was mostly visible to others, because as Peter pointed out, Restiva complained not about any transparency, but the “appearance of nudity”.
Bill, stick around. Examine yourself if you must, but you’re not one who should worry about his behavior here.
The outfits were not see-through.
The girls were interviewed on the news last night. They were wearing leotards, and beneath that, tank tops. So basically they were sporting two layers of clothing. The principal made it quite clear: The girls were singled out, not for any actual nudity or inappropriate display of undergarments. They were singled out for *perception* of nudity which–considering the micro-miniskirts and belly-baring outfits girls ARE allowed to wear on a DAILY basis, is completely ridiculous.
Furthermore, they were informed that if they did not cover up, they would receive a week’s suspension. The alternative was to leave…for which they received a cut, which is a mark on their attendance record. Get that? The principal put them in a situation where perceived, not actual, indecency compelled them to leave school for which they were then penalized. All on a day in which many seniors were also wearing leotards or tight fitting clothes.
Guaranteed that you’ve seen the last of superhero day at Long Beach HS.
PAD
Oh, grife!
>”Students are in school to learn. It’s not a freakin’ fashion show.”
We had one in high school. Girls dressed in male fashions and guys in female ones. I know. I wore a ballgown down the improvised ‘runway’. It was a one-day thing, all in fun, and no one got their knickers in a knot.
Too, this was in the days of increasingly short (read: practically non-existent micro-mini) skirts and where flashes of underwear were not all that rare. Not to mention that glimpses of bras under clothing wasn’t really a problem, not considering how many girls did without back then. Remember ‘pencil tests’?
Yet, I don’t recall an epidemic of traumatized kids needing therapy, or skyrocketing rape rates or teenage pregnancies going through the roof (no worse than figures I’d seen bandied about in the past twenty years.) We certainly didn’t need metal detectors or ‘lockdowns’ in schools back then.
Maybe kids are more delicate/stupider nowadays?
Jeeze, I missed all this–our zombie movie had a premiere tonight in Raleigh.
My first reaction is, as always, that the principal is a jerk. Mt second is that, well, maybe, I can sort of see where he’s coming from. Depending on how see through the costumes were, you could make a case.
One problem is that High School kids are the original slippery slope. If you allow something questionable there will be some kid who will take it to the next level (and a parent who will threaten a lawsuit because you’re “picking” on their kid.). Now at some point you, the adult, must step in and say “Here’s the line, don’t cross it.”
The cold weather here (i.e. anything under 80 freaking degrees…Southerners!) has helped put a damper on the dress code violations but you’d be amazed/appalled at what some girls show up in. And it can cause a disruption, hëll, it doesn’t take much to get a crowd going with these kids. I could cause a riot just by tossing a quarter in their midst. Having 3 girls who, at first glance, look naked, could certainly cause a stir. But I probably would have let it slide.
I want to give the guy props for having a Superhero day period. Too bad this will probably put the kibosh on it.
Bill Myers, yeah, you’ve been involved in some discord but it seems to me that a lot of it comes from attempts to be fair and balanced, always a dangerous tactic as an election approaches! I think Craig overreacted but he also cooled things down later on (so props to you, Craig). The only reason I’d ever want to hear of you taking time off from here would be to work like a hermit on your comics projects and/or take your young lady on a cruise to Bermuda.
(And if anyone lives near Sanford North Carolina and wants to witness the spectacle of a teacher being mercilessly razzed by his students, go see The Forever Dead Friday and Saturday at midnight in the Springlane Movie Theatre. I may need to move to Bermuda myself when this is over.)
PAD: The outfits were not see-through.
Well, the pictures don’t really bear that out, Peter.
PAD:They were singled out for *perception* of nudity
Not disputing that. Kids with marijuana leaves on their shirts are told to change because of the *perception* of drug use for the same reasons. A kid brandishing a toy gun in school will have it confiscated because of the *perception* as well.
which–considering the micro-miniskirts and belly-baring outfits girls ARE allowed to wear on a DAILY basis, is completely ridiculous.
You know for a FACT micro-minis and belly shirts are allowed at this particular school? They aren’t at my school. If they are indeed allowed at that school, then you are correct in citing hypocrisy.
Furthermore, they were informed that if they did not cover up, they would receive a week’s suspension.
Standard practice for insubordination. And if they didn’t do what they were told, that’s what they would be guilty of.
The alternative was to leave…for which they received a cut, which is a mark on their attendance record. Get that?
Actually, I don’t. What’s a cut? We don’t have anything like that here. We have tardies and skips and legal and illegal absences. A tardy doesn’t amount to much until a student gets several and then the get assigned detention. A skip is an illegal absence from a class. The very most I think he could do is give them an excused (legal) absence. In which case, the only thing that it effects is none of them will get a perfect attendance award at the end of the year.
Yeah, he dropped the hammer on them. I’m getting Cool Hand Luke flashbacks. 🙂
The principal put them in a situation where perceived, not actual, indecency compelled them to leave school for which they were then penalized. All on a day in which many seniors were also wearing leotards or tight fitting clothes.
Again, if a kid is wearing a T-shirt with a guy blazing up a joint displayed on it, he’s not being sent home for wearing a T-shirt. He’s being sent home for what the T-shirt represents.
Guaranteed that you’ve seen the last of superhero day at Long Beach HS.
More than likely you are correct, but it’s not because of the incident, but rather because of the heat brought on from those who will condemn an administrator for simply doing his job.
If there is any fault to be found with this principal it may be (and again, I don’t know. Neither do most people reading this, I would imagine) in that the rules on what was acceptable and what wasn’t weren’t clearly delineated prior to the event.
But then again maybe they were. I won’t make a snap judgment about man’s personality and his ability do his job based on one flimsy hyperbolic article. That would be just silly, wouldn’t it?