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.
• 
You’ll note, Rich, that I came into this debate with one point of view but am coming away from it with another. Funny how that works sometimes, eh? 😉
That’s the joy of honest friendly debate. If you come in with an open mind, secure in the knowledge you will not be roasted for having a different opinion, you may find information you hadn’t thought of before and change you opinion without fear of being considered weak or being accused “flip-flopping.” And even if you don’t change your opinion, you find your thoughts crystallized and you hone your ability to state them clearly and succinctly.
I didn’t change my mind, but I found myself having to sharpen and focus my ability to state it. Even the whole sidebar on nude vs. semi-nude served that purpose.
Posted by: Micha at October 29, 2006 09:36 AM
It is unfair to say that the girls were lying based on no evidence.
Micha, that is a gross mischaracterization of what I said (although given what a rational guy you are, I also know it was inadvertant). I was merely pointing out that we only have the girl’s word that she was wearing a tank-top. I didn’t say she was lying, but merely pointed out that the possibility exists.
Posted by: Micha at October 29, 2006 09:36 AM
And the pictures provide enough proof that the costumes were not transparent enough to reveal their bodies, but enough to reveal the color and shape of one bra (no flash was used, or there would be no shadows covering parts of their bodies).
No, they don’t prove that at all. A photograph taken from a moderate distance (I can’t tell how far away the photographer was — cameras are good at zooming these days, but I’d guess he/she wasn’t more than 10 or 20 feet away) is not the same as looking at something up close with the naked eye in indoor lighting. Thus I continue to maintain the photographs prove nothing more nor less than this: that you cannot rule out the possibility that the leotards were inappropriately sheer.
Posted by: Micha at October 29, 2006 09:36 AM
Both the principal and the girls reacted to extremely in a silly situation.
I disagree. The principal felt the girls’ costumes were inappropriate and sent them home to change into something he deemed more appropriate. That’s a very targeted and measured response. Yeah, I know, they received a negative mark on their attendance records. Trust me, when it comes time to apply for a career-maker of a position, ain’t no one gonna be worried about their high school attendance record. They’ll live.
Doesn’t wash. If someone massacres the family next door in some crazed, random killing spree, that’s going to affect me a heck of a lot more than if a pusher takes out a narcotics officer on the other side of town. Subjectively, if not objectively. Try and convince me that [hypothetical case suggested by real ones] some drugged up maniacs breaking into my 88-year-old mother’s domicile and beat, rape and kill her don’t deserve to be put down like the mad dogs they are, just as much so as someone who kills a traffic cop or a random passer-by. And the best of luck to you.
Oh look, I’m right there with you. Let’s be honest-if, God forbid, anything were to happen to any member of my family it means a hëll of a lot more to me than 100,000 Chinese people dying in an earthquake (Yes, I know, I just gave somebody the opportunity to claim “Mulligan hates Asians!”. hey, it’s almost his birthday.)
And I’ll bet you’d agree that if the horrible scenario you mention were to happen a peaceful death like lethal injection is several oders of magnitude too kind for the scum. They should let you kill him in the cruelest way possible. Hëll, I’ll help you break up the glass rods and take photos as you shove them in.
But while I emotioally want that to be the case, rationally I don’t want to live in the kind of world where that’s how it works.
The life of a cop is worth no more tha that of you, me, or your grandmother. (and personally I’d have a minimum of life without parol for all 3). But the effect of scoiety as a whole, which is far larger than our circle of loved ones is greater if cops become, as in Iraq, sitting ducks. In such a world your grandmother is far more likely to have atrocities done upon her. So it seems to me to be a reasonable effort to try to prevent such a thing.
Thanks for the discussion though, it’s good to have a disagreement worthy of reply.
See kids, school is indeed educational. You learn all sorts of useful things, such as the fact that unlawful searches laws apparently don’t apply while you’re in schools. Isn’t that a useful lesson to learn about society?
Well, if it were illegal I think someone would have sued by now. The lockers are school property, thus the school can do with them as they wish. (at least, I think that’s how it works. Anyone know for sure?)
That one I’m all in favour of. Parents need to call the kid in an emergency can call the office and leave a message. Cell phones are used to cheat all over and have no place in school.
yeah but it’s such a lost cause. Almost every kid has one, even the poor ones. And when you take them be prepared to have an Angry Parent come to the school and raise holy hëll, sometimes to the point of violence. Our administration just gave up on it and given the amount of time wasted and lack of any support from the community I don’t blame them. But when some turd takes a picture of a girl in the shower and posts it around the school watch the lawsuits. THEN we will actually be able to confiscate them as a matter of law, but it will probably take something like that for it to happen.
(In fairness to the parents, it is not always easy to get through to classes, Our phone system is linked to our computer system and there are times when both go down. I would say that in an emergency it is ALWAYS possible to get somebody–even the principal has a, yeah, cell phone. But what constitutes an “emergency” varies from parent to parent.)
Mulligan!!! How could you have turned on me like this??? You BÃSTÃRÐ!!!!!!
Well, the groundswell of support for He Who Is Shrouded is just so overwhelming that I thought I might as well jump on the bandwagon. Sorry chum!
Okay, I’m done poking the troll with a stick.
Oh, but it was so funny! I mean, you’re roguishly handsome, you have a vast fortune, women want you, men want to be you, you won a Nobel Prize last year, and your deoderant is strong enough for a man but made for a woman. had me almost spray coffee on the keyboard.
Your analysis was sober and even handed. meh, where’s the fun in that? Couldn’t you have thrown in something like “So, in conclusion, PAD is saying that the Roadrunner is the Anti-christ.”?
“Well, if it were illegal I think someone would have sued by now. The lockers are school property, thus the school can do with them as they wish. (at least, I think that’s how it works. Anyone know for sure?)”
For Virginia, that’s about 100% the case. The lockers are school property and not the students’ property. The schools don’t want drugs or guns on their property so they can give the police the ok on going into the lockers.
Several schools around here won’t even let you use your own lock. The lockers have combo locks that can also all be opened with the same master key. There is a slot to put a key lock on it, but that’s for the school’s use if they want to lock down the locker for some reason. If a student uses the slot and adds their own key lock, the school cuts it off and the student is out the money for the lock. If the same student does it again, they can get zinged for it by the school.
Several schools around here won’t even let you use your own lock. The lockers have combo locks that can also all be opened with the same master key. There is a slot to put a key lock on it, but that’s for the school’s use if they want to lock down the locker for some reason. If a student uses the slot and adds their own key lock, the school cuts it off and the student is out the money for the lock. If the same student does it again, they can get zinged for it by the school.
That’s pretty much the case everywhere, I think. Here, the lockers have built in combination locks with no place to secure a padlock if you wanted to use one. The office keeps all the combinations on file.
The problem at our school isn’t kids wanting to keep their lockers locked, it’s that some try to jimmy them so they DON’T lock. They use them as drop off points for drugs and other contraband.
The problem at our school isn’t kids wanting to keep their lockers locked, it’s that some try to jimmy them so they DON’T lock. They use them as drop off points for drugs and other contraband.
We’ve had some kids here who use pens to exchange money–they roll a $100 bill so small that it can fit in.
Of course, it’s easy to lose a pen. Legend has it that some teachers have gotten an unexpected supplement by checking dropped pens.
More evidence that drug use really DOES make you stupid…
Hey Craig! Wanna crack at him?
Umm. I haven’t even bothered to follow the posts involving him.
Wow. I woke up this morning with no clue as to what was really going on in the world or what has really happened in the last fifty some years of history. Then I started to read the last twelve hours of posts and really started to think about the wisdom I have been missing in my arrogance and ignorance.
And, my god, the conspiracy is of epic proportions!!!!
Lets look at the facts that we, the lowly and unworthy, have been blessed to be graced with. If there is no such thing as a Nazi then there is no such thing as genocide. But it has been proven that some of us are, so it seems, Nazi sympathizers and you can only be a sympathizer if there really are Nazis. But, if the elimination of Nazis means there can be no genocides, then it stands to reason that all genocides must be committed by Nazis. Q.E.D.
Now, this is the scary bit. I mean, this is the really scary bit. That little bit of information that we were blessed to be enlightened with has pulled the veil from my eyes and staggered the foundations of my beliefs and my trust of authority. We lost WWII and we’ve been lied to ever since!!!!
Darfur, Rwanda, Cambodia, Zimbabwe, Burma, Chad, Sudan, the Ethiopian Anuak, the Middle East and others. All examples of genocides. But… but… but… You can’t have genocides without Nazis!!! That means that the Nazis did all this and that they’re everywhere!!!
That can only mean that we’ve been lied to all these years. Our TV, movies, books, history…. Everything we “know” has been whitewashed to conceal the Nazi victory and keep us in the dark. We’ve been tricked into complacency and inaction by parlor tricks and propaganda. The evil is running unchecked throughout the world!!!
But, now… Now we have been blessed with a prophet whose greatest gift is to see arguments of logic in ways that we mere mortals can only imagine being able to comprehend. And he has led us to the truth with his mighty vision.
“If there’s no such thing as a nazi, that must mean there’s no such thing as genocide.”
The foundation of the lie is crumbling my brothers! We have been led to the truth!! We can now stand up and fight the power!!! Now we can fight to take back our world and make the world safe for democracy!!!!
Long live the revolution. This is the voice of Radio Free America. And lets give out a special thanks to the new Great Prophet M.*
*The Great Prophet M would like it noted that the first official “secret” meeting of the revolution will be held in his basement on November 1, 2006 at precisely 10:00 am. Kool-Aid will then be served promptly at 10:25 am.
Yeah, after rereading it, I confess that even I now think that that was an overly silly post.
Still, it’s no sillier then Great Prophet M’s actual posts where he’s trying to be serious.
🙂
“Of course, it’s easy to lose a pen. Legend has it that some teachers have gotten an unexpected supplement by checking dropped pens.”
Oh, it’s don’t lose your PEN!!! Ðámņ I’m a fool. I’ve been misunderstanding the bank warnings all these years. No wonder I can’t keep any real money in savings.
Posted by: Craig J. Ries at October 29, 2006 12:20 PM
Umm. I haven’t even bothered to follow the posts involving him.
You are a wise man.
Jerry C, yeah, your post was overly silly. That’s because you omitted one key fact, so horrifying that I almost dare not utter it for fear of my own life:
Bill Mulligan is the architect of the entire conspiracy. Even the stuff that happened before he was born. He’s that good.
Now I must go into hiding, before Mulligan, the master of the great Nazi/Illuminati/United Auto Workers conspiracy, sends his cybernetic monkey space-alien assassins to eliminate me.
See, the Nazi/Illuminati/United Auto Workers Axis of Evil exists to pave the way for the return of the Cybernetic Monkey Space-Gods, who at one time ruled the earth and will do so again.
Rex Hondo said:
“As to the principal’s stated reasons for sending the girls home, perhaps he’s just not comfortable when confronted with the press, especially when said press seems bound and determined, instead of just reporting the story, to make him into some sort of hand-wringing, mustachio-twirling villain.”
Simple solution — the principal should shave off his mustache.
Rich Lane said that he was done unless somebody dragged him back into the argument.
Right. Just like I told the Local Comics Shop that I was no longer buying Loveless because the latest issue was drawn so poorly.
I was just looking for an excuse to drop the book, as I didn’t find it satisfying enough to continue purchasing.
Just as, I suspect, Rich was just looking for an excuse to get back into the argument. 🙂
As far as I can tell, I haven’t been dragged back in. I haven’t added any additional information, nor have I engaged in any more debate, so I’m not quite sure what you mean. I never said I was taking a vow of silence or that I was walking away from the thread. In all honesty, I’m not a big fan of “take my marbles and go home” dramatic exits.
If I gave that impression, I apologize.
Posted by: Rich Lane at October 29, 2006 02:52 PM
I apologize.
Really? Why?
Seriously, you needn’t apologize. Even if you did say “I’m not coming back” and then you did, you wouldn’t be hurting anybody.
Really? Why?
Seriously, you needn’t apologize. Even if you did say “I’m not coming back” and then you did, you wouldn’t be hurting anybody.
Because apologizing doesn’t hurt me either. 🙂
Seriously, I can see it appearing that I intended to walk away completely when I just got tired of saying the same thing over and over. I was apologizing for leaving the wrong impression because otherwise it may weaken my arguments in the future if I simply come across as melodramatic. That was not my intent.
Bill Mulligan is the architect of the entire conspiracy. Even the stuff that happened before he was born. He’s that good.
Ðámņ you, Myers!
Now I must go into hiding, before Mulligan, the master of the great Nazi/Illuminati/United Auto Workers conspiracy, sends his cybernetic monkey space-alien assassins to eliminate me.
Oh you WISH! My cybernetic monkey space-alien assassins would be all to merciful!!! What I have prepared for you will be such torture as to make even Prometheus weep! The heavens themselves will shudder at the sounds of your agonies!
In other words, it will really hurt.
I just don’t understand why the fuss over the headmaster’s actions. Then again as I said days ago, I wouldn’t let them leave the house dressed like that in the first place.
It is unfair to say that the girls were lying based on no evidence.
Micha, that is a gross mischaracterization of what I said (although given what a rational guy you are, I also know it was inadvertant). I was merely pointing out that we only have the girl’s word that she was wearing a tank-top. I didn’t say she was lying, but merely pointed out that the possibility exists.
Actually, I think that one may have been mostly, if not entirely directed at me. I apologise if i gave the impression that I was flat out declaring perfidy on the part of the girls. There may have been a perfectly innocent reason she removed the tank top from between the bra and leotard before the photo shoot. We’ll probably never know.
The disappearing and reappearing tank top, along with other questionable statements may not be enough to condemn them as liars, but are certainly enough to raise questions as to the veracity of their claims.
Oh, and for those of you eagerly awaiting my mind’s-eye scarring mental image of the day. I’ve also been pondering the possibilities of a Silver Surfer costume consisting of little more than a thong and silver body paint.
-Rex Hondo-
But look on the bright side, guys! We have a nice, shiny new thread to point to whenever the next guy tries to accuse us of being a bunch of knee-jerk, lockstep PAD-zombies. 😉
-Rex Hondo-
> And I’ll bet you’d agree that if the horrible scenario you mention were to happen a peaceful death like lethal injection is several oders of magnitude too kind for the scum.
State of mind I might be in by then? Possibly. But I’d just be happy they’d be gone for good and no longer any even potential threat to society.
As for students not being allowed their own locks and all that sort of thing, it may be common in schools now but, if so, it’s just another sign of how far down society has gone, because it didn’t used to be. Then again, there was no perceived need for it back then, either. A time to worry.
> And I’ll bet you’d agree that if the horrible scenario you mention were to happen a peaceful death like lethal injection is several oders of magnitude too kind for the scum.
State of mind I might be in by then? Possibly. But I’d just be happy they’d be gone for good and no longer any even potential threat to society.
As for students not being allowed their own locks and all that sort of thing, it may be common in schools now but, if so, it’s just another sign of how far down society has gone, because it didn’t used to be. Then again, there was no perceived need for it back then, either. A time to worry.
> And I’ll bet you’d agree that if the horrible scenario you mention were to happen a peaceful death like lethal injection is several oders of magnitude too kind for the scum.
State of mind I might be in by then? Possibly. But I’d just be happy they’d be gone for good and no longer any even potential threat to society.
As for students not being allowed their own locks and all that sort of thing, it may be common in schools now but, if so, it’s just another sign of how far down society has gone, because it didn’t used to be. Then again, there was no perceived need for it back then, either. A time to worry.
As for students not being allowed their own locks and all that sort of thing, it may be common in schools now but, if so, it’s just another sign of how far down society has gone, because it didn’t used to be. Then again, there was no perceived need for it back then, either. A time to worry.
I don’t think I’d disagree with you on that. At least my school doesn’t have metal detectors yet.
I’ve also been pondering the possibilities of a Silver Surfer costume consisting of little more than a thong and silver body paint.,
I hope it’s warm where you are, or you’re going to follow that up with the Amazing Pneumonia Man.
Peter,
After my post Sunday 7:26 pm, I made an attempt to post a little before 9 pm and discovered you were screening the thread. Your tech support should be able to confirm this. I don’t know what’s going on, but can I still at least make my point that cop-killing is a form of hate crime?
No, there are no firemen-killer laws. You submitted and withdrew your justification for cop-killer laws in the same post.
This leaves that cop-killing is a form of hate crime. The excuse has yet to be made for withholding the same protection where the same vulnerability exists.
Fianlly, it all makes sense! What are laws before they’re laws?? Bills. What do you have to pay every month or your life is in financial ruin? Bills. These companies don’t casre, they just have to keep tithing to Mulligan! Which leads me to my next point, a Mulligan! Which refers to a do-over in the game of golf, which is the preferred game of executives everywhere, they who have the power over our very exsistence! By calling out Mulligan’s name, a person can take absolute control of the game quietly, in much the same way Bill obviously did with the world. He also hands out titles, like Rex with the Amazing Pneumonia Man! (BTW, Rex, do you just sit somewhere and think of things to mess with people’s heads?)
Rich, your school doesn’t have metal detectors yet? I thought they were pretty much standard issue nowadays, but then, I work in TV, so everyone knows my head is odd.
Three questions I’ve got about the original topic. (Don’t know that anyone’ll have the answers around here, these are just things to think about.) First off, where I come from,
kids have to be signed out by their parents, they can’t just leave, even if they are seniors. So, that being the case, if this school has a similar procedure, obviously the girls’ parents would have had to be there, so why didn’t the prinicpal jus tell the girls’ parents to bring something so he wouldn’t object to the costumes? And, second question, ready, good, if the principal’s reasoning had been perhaps explained better would the reaction be a bit different? Taken as it’s been reported, his arguement boils down to little more than “Because I said so.” Too many people are too willing to just blindly follow whoever is in charge without question. Authority needs to be questioned and people need to feel free to question it. They also need to understand that just because they can question it, sometimes authority is right. Anyway, third question if anybody’s still awake. Would there have been the same reaction if it was three boys dressed as the good Captain? Or, say, as three members of the Swedish Bikini Team? (If there were, maybe they’d have a place for you, Rex.)
Rich, your school doesn’t have metal detectors yet? I thought they were pretty much standard issue nowadays, but then, I work in TV, so everyone knows my head is odd.
Not yet, at least. We have our share of problems, to be sure. Just input “Titusville, PA” and “crystal meth” into Google and you will find my home town is the meth capital of the United States (not hyperbole–we’ve been called that by several higher ups in law enforcement). But meth, alcohol and other illicit drugs wouldn’t be caught by metal detectors, and thus far we don’t have the types of problems that they *would* catch (i.e., guns, knives, etc.).
I’m at a different computer that I hadn’t changed to “Rich Lane” yet, so I just wanted to verify the above *is* from me.
I used to be a teacher. I think the worst I encountered was the time another teacher got in trouble for mentioning that Jesus was a Jew!
Fortunately, I taught science, so I only got in trouble for failing to teach “creationism,” “intelligent design,” or “religion,” whichever you care to call it.
“After my post Sunday 7:26 pm, I made an attempt to post a little before 9 pm and discovered you were screening the thread. Your tech support should be able to confirm this.”
I’m not screening anything. Wouldn’t know how to even if I wanted to. Frankly, I stopped reading this thread because I’d made all the points I felt worth making and thought it had gone completely off the rails. Other boards will shut down such threads, but I tend to let such things run their course. Only reason I’m replying to this is because you sent me an e-mail about it.
“I don’t know what’s going on, but can I still at least make my point that cop-killing is a form of hate crime?”
You can make whatever point you want, but cop killing is only “a form” of hate crime if you define “a form” as being not really remotely it, but you want to apply the term to it.
Definition of hate crime I picked up off google: “Crime of aggravated assault, arson, burglary, criminal homicide, motor vehicle theft, robbery, sex offenses, and/or crime involving bodily injury in which the victim was intentionally selected because of the victims’ actual or perceived race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, ethnicity, or disability.”
Keep in mind, I have NO problem with extra penalties for assaulting or killing a cop. They’re on the front line of attempting to keep the more vile elements of society reined in. Anything that exists to deter the bad guys or make them think twice about attacking cops, I support.
But if you kill a cop, you go down for killing a cop. If you’re a black perp and you shoot a white cop because you hate white guys, that shouldn’t factor in, and same for a white perp capping a black cop. Sentencing should factor into the action itself, not the reasons for the action beyond the establishing of motive for legal purposes.
See, that’s why the concept of “hate crimes” is, to me, kind of silly. The argument could be made that killing someone because of the clothes he wears (which is, let’s face it, what cop killing is) is just as vile and arbitrary as killing someone for the color of his skin. And that’s a very valid point. So let’s add clothing to hate crimes. But…what about hair, or lack thereof? Let’s say that a perp has no trouble with black men, but he hates black men with shaved heads, and so he shoots Taye Diggs. “Your honor, honest, it wasn’t that he’s black, it’s the shaved head, that’s what put me over.” So do we refuse to charge him with a hate crime on that basis?
I should emphasize that the only thing I was pointing out when I brought up the notion was that, once you start punishing people for thoughts, you’ve opened up a huge can of worms. And that punishing the girls because of the thoughts other people might have about them was inherently ridiculous. Considering the endless discussion this has led to since then, I have to think my original point is pretty much borne out.
PAD
For whatever it’s worth, I showed the photo to my six-year-old son (and major Captain Underpants fan), devoid of any context. It was simply a “look at what these girls dressed up as” interaction.
His reply? “Hey, they don’t have black polka-dots on their capes!” There’s a budding fanboy… 😉
Oh, and count me as a “The principal was being a Poopyhead” supporter. What’s the point of letting the kids dress as superheroes for “Fun Week” if they can’t have fun? It’s not as if the school couldn’t have supported other, wardrobe-safe “fun” activities instead.
–R.J.
, “and count me as a “The principal was being a Poopyhead” supporter. What’s the point of letting the kids dress as superheroes for “Fun Week” if they can’t have fun? It’s not as if the school couldn’t have supported other, wardrobe-safe “fun” activities instead.”
I feel very sorry for the Headmaster of that School. The headmaster is the “Unpire”. Not only do three of his students, who wouldn’t “accept the umpire’s ruling”, show disrespect for his position and authority, they run to the media and whip up a storm in a tea cup, and try to further undercut his position. None of us were there on the day, none of us are aware of any boundaries re costuming that may have been spelled out prior to the day – I don’t believe for a minute that there weren’t. I can only go by the photos – these girls look as if they were trying to push to see what they could get away with. When they were called on it, they kicked up a stink because they couldn’t get their own way. Setting and imposing boundaries are not hate crines and thought police. Children need boundaries.
Would those cybernetic monkey space-alien assassins be wearing bras or tank tops?
“I just don’t understand why the fuss over the headmaster’s actions. Then again as I said days ago, I wouldn’t let them leave the house dressed like that in the first place.I just don’t understand why the fuss over the headmaster’s actions. Then again as I said days ago, I wouldn’t let them leave the house dressed like that in the first place.”
It would seem the girls’ parents didn’t have a problem with the costume. It also seems that Peter, as a parent, doesn’t have a problem with it. Part of the question is whether the principal, as an administrator, should be as sensitive as the parents who wouldn’t let their girls come dressed like that or the ones who do?
—————-
I have not followed the media involving this story, but it seems to me that most of the questions concerning the veracity of the pictures, the tank top, and the clarity of the principal’s statements came from the discussions here. Did the principal revise his statement, or claim that the girls’ claims concerning their dress are not true? Did the girls’ claim that the photos misrepresent their costume, or that the principal claims something that is not factualy true? If not, I don’t see much point for these speculations, since the basic issue — the principal felt the costume resembled nudity to much, the girls didn’t — is sufficient. I also was afraid that suggesting the girls were not telling the truth was used in order to make them — as a side in this dispute — look bad without actual proof.
————
I think the fact that the punishment for the costumes was so insignificant (as pointed by Bill), suggests that they did not challenge the principal’s decision because they were trying to avoid the punishment.
—————-
Both the cop kililng laws and the hate crimes laws are based on the assumption that the significance of the crime goes beyond the boundries of regular murder.
Also, it should be pointed out that the thoughts of a criminal make a difference between degrees of murder.
I’m not sure about this issue myself, but I understand the reasoning of both sides of the issue.
“I feel very sorry for the Headmaster of that School. The headmaster is the “Unpire”. Not only do three of his students, who wouldn’t “accept the umpire’s ruling”, show disrespect for his position and authority, they run to the media and whip up a storm in a tea cup, and try to further undercut his position.”
I find that comment interesting for two reasons. First, you’re 100% willing to believe the absolute best of the principal and the absolute worst of the students, up to and including the assumption that they contacted the news media. How do you know they did? How do you know that any other pupil in the school didn’t do it? Or one of the kids’ parents? How do you know that the school newspaper didn’t tip off Newsday? How do you know that perhaps the reporter was already there covering Superhero day and lucked into more of a story than she was originally expecting?
You don’t.
Although, considering the ungodly amount of time that has been spent discussing the visibility of their bras, rather than referring to it as a tempest in a tea cup, a more appropriate comparison might be making mountains out of mole hills.
Second, let’s say they did take it upon themselves to call the newspapers. They would have been undercutting nothing. They put their views and position out there, and the principal was fully able to respond in the context of the news coverage.
PAD
How do you know that perhaps the reporter was already there covering Superhero day and lucked into more of a story than she was originally expecting?
You don’t.
They are underage, and this has to do with discipline. They could not go public with the kids’ names or their pictures without parental permission.
So in other words, they may not have contacted the press, but the story wouldn’t and couldn’t run without the parents’ say so. At least not under any laws in the U.S. that I’m aware of.
I find that comment interesting for two reasons. First, you’re 100% willing to believe the absolute best of the principal and the absolute worst of the students,
Actually, I think many people have said things akin to,
Posted by: rrlane at October 26, 2006 02:00 PM
The girls probably won’t attempting to do anything subversive. I will grant you that. But it just isn’t worth the future hassle that would probably come.
And
Posted by: Rich Lane at October 28, 2006 09:02 AM
Does that make him a Solomon of wisdom? Nope, but it sure as hëll give him the benefit of the doubt when all the internet arm chair quarterbacks come out spouting the right way to do his job.
Most of the other posters who haven’t automatically sided with the girls seem to echo these thoughts, so I really don’t know where that notion of “absolute best” and “worst” is coming from.
I think that we will have to agree to disagree re this topic. We obviously hold different opinions regarding headmasters’ roles,m obligations, rights and resposibilities, students and appropriate behaviour. Perhaps this is a cultural difference.
I think that we will have to agree to disagree re this topic.
Don’t go there…
“Second, let’s say they did take it upon themselves to call the newspapers. They would have been undercutting nothing. They put their views and position out there, and the principal was fully able to respond in the context of the news coverage.
PAD”
On second thoughts – they ‘re holding the headmaster up as an object of ridicule, this can reduce his ability to do his job. If these and other students believe the headmaster to be an object of ridicule and fair game, how can he effectively run the school?
“I find that comment interesting for two reasons. First, you’re 100% willing to believe the absolute best of the principal and the absolute worst of the students, up to and including the assumption that they contacted the news media.”
This from the guy who started this thread by willing to believe the absolute worst of the principal and the absolute best of the girls and started calling the guy cutesy, clever names to further denigrate the man from the get go.
Glass houses, man.
“Rich Lane at October 30, 2006 04:47 PM”
?
Posted by: Peter David at October 30, 2006 04:21 PM
First, you’re 100% willing to believe the absolute best of the principal and the absolute worst of the students, up to and including the assumption that they contacted the news media.
Just as you’re equally willing to believe the absolute best of the students and the absolute worst of the principal.
Posted by: Micha at October 30, 2006 04:02 PM
I also was afraid that suggesting the girls were not telling the truth was used in order to make them — as a side in this dispute — look bad without actual proof.
Micha, I wasn’t trying to cast aspersions on the girls’ veracity. My point was merely this: just because someone — anyone — says “such-and-such is true” doesn’t make it so. That’s why witnesses are cross-examined in courts and why good journalists (an increasingly endangered species) attempt to corroborate their stories.
Or, to put it more simply: we weren’t there. Principal Restivo was. Period.
As I said in an earlier post, authority figures are becoming increasingly paralyzed by those who would question their every decision under the presumption that those in charge are wrong until proven otherwise. This is just as pernicious as giving the collective too much power over the individual.
It is equally pernicious to exaggerate the effects of limit-setting by authority figures. These girls were sent home to change clothes! I don’t recall them being assigned to some kind of indoctrination camp where they were brainwashed into agreeing never to do anything like that anywhere in the world ever again. And as far as being given a negative mark on their attendance records — *yawn*. They’ll live.
Trust me, I know all about the way schools discourage creativity. When I was in high school, I wrote a play and decided I wanted to produce and direct it. I did so, successfully. But I also encountered resistance, interference and censorship from the administration, the drama club advisor, and even my own mother! (Trust me, that last one is a sore spot.) I also experienced a real lack of support from most of the rest of the school. It was the first time in the school’s history that a student wrote, produced, and directed an original play at the school, yet the vast majority of the faculty and administration didn’t give a crap. I had to do my own promotion. I had to scream at the top of my lungs to get a budget even though the drama club advisor approved the production and promised me funds. The list goes on and on.
I still managed to get enough people to attend that the show broke even. And to this day I have the satisfaction of knowing that at the age of 17 I did something at my school that had never been done before — or since.
Yeah, there’s a point to this. Schools don’t do much to encourage individuality. Never have. I doubt they ever will. But that doesn’t mean they’re capable of killing it, either. My school certainly didn’t kill mine, despite having tried.
As an aside, want to know who gave me the idea to write a play? You did, Peter, at a comic-book convention in Rochester sometime around ’85 or ’86.
Posted by: Megan at October 30, 2006 04:58 PM
?
Posted by: Peter David at October 27, 2006 05:22 PM
“No new information is being added now, nor are there any new insights. Time to agree to disagree and leave it at that.”
Good thing it’s your blog and you get to make that determination…
PAD
“as a tempest in a tea cup, a more appropriate comparison might be making mountains out of mole hills.”
How about a tempest in a “B” cup? 🙂
Rich, I’m not really following you from your last post. Whether or not the reporter was already there, or whether parental permission was gotten, what does this have to do with discipline? Now, the principal’s actions could be seen as having to do with discipline, but from all his reported statements, all he was worried about was the appearance of nudity and what someone might think. Someone ELSE, not these three girls. Are these valid things for a principal to worry about? Heck, yeah. But, as a principal, someone with the master’s degree you spoke of and at least 10 years of teaching, a person would think someone like that could communicate more effectively. For one thing, it’d be a heck of an example to the students. Some people would say with the reporter in his face, he blurted out the first thing that came to mind. (I wouldn’t be one of them, since I know how reporters always look for sound bytes.) Again, someone with the training and experience that you ascribe to him should know by this point to always have a reasoned response ready. If you don’t have one, take a moment(which far too few people do) weigh your position then respond. (Somewhere, there’s a pot looking for me, saying “Are you still black, kettle?” but I usually choose to let my video speak for me.) But I’m sure that enough people in Long Island(and now all of us) have become familiar with this story that someone somewhere would want to know what his stand is. Don’t be surprised if you see some article with his explanation somewhere.
Rich, I’m not really following you from your last post. Whether or not the reporter was already there, or whether parental permission was gotten, what does this have to do with discipline? Now, the principal’s actions could be seen as having to do with discipline, but from all his reported statements, all he was worried about was the appearance of nudity and what someone might think. Someone ELSE, not these three girls. Are these valid things for a principal to worry about? Heck, yeah. But, as a principal, someone with the master’s degree you spoke of and at least 10 years of teaching, a person would think someone like that could communicate more effectively. For one thing, it’d be a heck of an example to the students. Some people would say with the reporter in his face, he blurted out the first thing that came to mind. (I wouldn’t be one of them, since I know how reporters always look for sound bytes.) Again, someone with the training and experience that you ascribe to him should know by this point to always have a reasoned response ready. If you don’t have one, take a moment(which far too few people do) weigh your position then respond. (Somewhere, there’s a pot looking for me, saying “Are you still black, kettle?” but I usually choose to let my video speak for me.) But I’m sure that enough people in Long Island(and now all of us) have become familiar with this story that someone somewhere would want to know what his stand is. Don’t be surprised if you see some article with his explanation somewhere.
Okay, here’s a new wrinkle. Just looked for the article I said I wouldn’t be surprised about, went wcbstv.com(funny to go there without looking for work!) and the last line of the article said that he wouldn’t have any visible underwear in his school. So, if they had just worn white shorts would they have been okay? My head hurts. I’ve just been thinking way too much about underpants. And not in THAT way, Rex. I have nightmares about the Silver Surfer tongiht and I ain’t going to be happy.
Whether or not the reporter was already there, or whether parental permission was gotten, what does this have to do with discipline?
The students were sent home by the principal. Whether or not you or I want to call that a punishment is irrelevant; it is a disciplinary action. As such, the principal (assuming laws there are similar to the laws in every other state I have personal knowledge of) is precluded from discussing the incident without parental permission. If I said to you right now “I had to hold [student name] after class for talking during a test” and that student’s parents found out about, I would be in dire jeopardy of losing my job. Thus we know that the principal almost certainly didn’t initiate the contact with the newspaper, and had he been asked any questions by the newspaper, without the parents’ permission, all he could say was the equivalent of “no comment.”
Again, someone with the training and experience that you ascribe to him should know by this point to always have a reasoned response ready.
I don’t really see where one necessitates the other. I know of many teachers who are excellent in the classroom who blanch at the thought speaking in front of other adults. Why would he have a statement prepared? This is a non-issue, a routine matter of discipline. If I had held a kid after class today, and found a reporter in my classroom when I came back from lunch who wanted to grill me on it, I doubt would be very eloquent.
Also, (and I am NOT disparaging news reporters as a group here)I have known many instances of reporters taking things out of context and/or simply getting things wrong (The one I love is Roger Ebert, in his review of the movie Spawn, showing his complete knowledge of all things comic books by saying “That’s what comic book writers call the “origination story,”). Maybe the reporter is 100% correct. Maybe he wasn’t.
Don’t be surprised if you see some article with his explanation somewhere.
I wouldn’t doubt it.