Wear a dress, get suspended from school

[Kim]

A boy comes to school wearing a dress. They took measures to prevent a potential shitstorm. Were they the right ones? No, probably not. But does this reflect poorly on the people who made the decision? No, it doesn't.

When "trying to prevent a shitstorm" equals setting a precendent that boys can't wear dresses it does reflect poorly.

[Fifthfiend]

Also: 90% of dress codes are excercises in dumbfuck authoritarianism.

Like, really, he'd been suspended for wearing a hat? Really? That's what you suspend someone over. Gosh.

[Pip Boy]

Usually the mentality behind things like this isn't that the act itself is bad, but the fact that you insist on continuing to do it in blatant defiance to the grown-up people overlord. Because everyone knows that adults are always smarter than children all the time, and even when you're 17-18 years old you're still a child by virtue of being in high school.

[Fenris]

I'm wondering if the kid didn't cause a scene? I very sincerely doubt it was a case of him walking in the door and then immediately getting suspended forevars due to wearing a dress.

I mean stupid stuff happens for stupid reasons, but we don't need to immediately assume that the stupidest possible justification is the one the school ran with.

[Fifthfiend]

Originally Posted by Pip Boy

Usually the mentality behind things like this isn't that the act itself is bad, but the fact that you insist on continuing to do it in blatant defiance to the grown-up people overlord. Because everyone knows that adults are always smarter than children all the time, and even when you're 17-18 years old you're still a child by virtue of being in high school.

See I don't get this, because it's not defiance unless the act itself is bad.

Like you don't hear a lot about students getting suspended for DEFIANTLY wearing neatly pressed slacks, dress shirts, and neckties, do you? I am pretty sure I would have heard of it if that were a thing that had happened somewhere.

Originally Posted by Fenris

I'm wondering if the kid didn't cause a scene? I very sincerely doubt it was a case of him walking in the door and then immediately getting suspended forevars due to wearing a dress.

I mean stupid stuff happens for stupid reasons, but we don't need to immediately assume that the stupidest possible justification is the one the school ran with.

I don't really see a reason to assume bad behavior that isn't indicated anywhere in the story, though.

If the student had caused a scene, presumably they would have suspended him for that, and not just the dress wearing.

At that, if he did cause the scene, and they gave him the suspension for dress wearing, then that's still a poor decision on their part, since they're still punishing people for wearing dresses, and not scene-causing.

[Fenris]

Originally Posted by Pip Boy

even when you're 17-18 years old you're still a child by virtue of being in high school.

Yep.

18 isn't the magic "off-switch" for growing up but it's a pretty close estimate in my personal experience.

Originally Posted by Fifthfiend

I don't really see a reason to assume bad behavior that isn't indicated anywhere in the story, though.

If the student had caused a scene, presumably they would have suspended him for that, and not just the dress wearing.

At that, if he did cause the scene, and they gave him the suspension for dress wearing, then that's still a poor decision on their part, since they're still punishing people for wearing dresses, and not scene-causing.

The article doesn't link the wearing of the dress to the suspension-it only states that one occurred before the other.

I mean, I put on a pair of dress shoes today, and then I tripped down the stairs. Clearly, if I hadn't been wearing the shoes, I would not have tripped, right???

[Fifthfiend]

Like obviously if this student got up on top of a lunch table and started shouting YEAH THATS RIGHT I AM IN A DRESS, AM I TOO REEEEEEAL FOR YOU, MAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN and then like, peeing in people's fruit cups, then you know, he would deserve a suspension, but inasmuch as it's not mentioned anywhere in this story of news we are reading, I don't see a reason to imagine that it happened.

[Kim]

Originally Posted by Fenris

I'm wondering if the kid didn't cause a scene? I very sincerely doubt it was a case of him walking in the door and then immediately getting suspended forevars due to wearing a dress.

I mean stupid stuff happens for stupid reasons, but we don't need to immediately assume that the stupidest possible justification is the one the school ran with.

What Fifth said. You're assuming the kid is at fault and giving the school the benefit of the doubt with no evidence to justify it other than you don't think they'd do something that stupid, which ignores the basic fact that most of America, and as a result the vast majority of schools are transphobic and all that bigoted shit.

The article doesn't link the wearing of the dress to the suspension-it only states that one occurred before the other.

I mean, I put on a pair of dress shoes today, and then I tripped down the stairs. Clearly, if I hadn't been wearing the shoes, I would not have tripped, right???

OH COME ON

[Bells]

Originally Posted by Pip Boy

Usually the mentality behind things like this isn't that the act itself is bad, but the fact that you insist on continuing to do it in blatant defiance to the grown-up people overlord. Because everyone knows that adults are always smarter than children all the time, and even when you're 17-18 years old you're still a child by virtue of being in high school.

Just to point out, that, saying that the Majority of Adults are smarter and with better judgement and common sense than the majority of 15 year old kids... it's not absurd at all.

In the video i posted his mom gives a perfectly fine example when she says that they could've simply send him home to change his clothes, that they didn't have to suspend him. That seens reasonable to me. But then again, it's not the first time this happens so he could probably see that punishment was in the cards for him.

Still, even though Dress codes can be quite anal and unnecessary, i focus more on the "in school" part than in the "Wearing a dress" part of the "wearing a dress in school" sentence.

Again, schools don't want to be liable. If -anything- bad happened to this kid because of his behavior, the school would be fully responsible. Regardless of previous warnings.

[Fenris]

@Non:

news is mispresented all the goddamn time come on you know this

Seriously you can take any event and make it look like what you want it to by omitting or emphasizing certain details.

I'm not saying that the school didn't suspend him because of the dress. I'm just saying that it's not the only possible conclusion to come to from the article.

THIS JUST IN: Child's mother steers child to cross-dress, society is crumbling