Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: aldo_14 on February 26, 2004, 02:22:18 pm
-
http://www.cnn.com/2004/EDUCATION/02/25/swimsuit.magazine.ap/index.html
****ing insane, if you ask me..... i mean, suspension?
-
ok, 3 days suspension for a soft-porn rag?
jesus, that's a bit overdone, IMO.
-
Originally posted by kasperl
ok, 3 days suspension for a soft-porn rag?
jesus, that's a bit overdone, IMO.
Not even soft-porn, either. 'tis no worse than what i'd imagine you get on the telly..... unless US telly has really cracked down since Bush took over.
-
I wouldnt even go so far as to call it soft porn...
Some people are just whiny assholes. Simple as that. They actively look for things to ***** about. As long as they are in positions of power, stupid **** like this will always happen.
-
i just realised how stupid this was when i remembered the traditional senior year stunt from a few years ago. they hired 2 strippers, one male, one female. the bottom pieces stayed on, but no-one got suspended or anything. i only remember a rumour about a little complaint about the fact the chick's top went off.
now, this is Holland, and a school for 11-18 year olds, but still, it does show a bit about tolerance.
-
Swimsuits, softporn?
Cool, I should go to the beach more often, that's a giant orgy there ;7
-
[moves to Holland]
You've got to remember that the US has basically been battling with theocracy since the very onset, and that bureaucrats operate entirely on the lizard-brain fear instinct, banning anything that anybody might blame them for instantly and not worrying about any other consequences.
-
Originally posted by Stryke 9
[moves to Holland]
You've got to remember that the US has basically been battling with theocracy since the very onset, and that bureaucrats operate entirely on the lizard-brain fear instinct, banning anything that anybody might blame them for instantly and not worrying about any other consequences.
Your country is a ****ed place in some respects and it saddens me that it is spreading worldwide.
-
It saddens a lot of us, too.
-
Originally posted by mikhael
It saddens a lot of us, too.
I don't doubt it, it's just that the minority seem to have a louder voice.
-
That's because the minorities are always whining, while the content majority keep quiet.
-
The superintendant was 'shocked' by a swimsuit mag? Seems like he was probably more offended and corrupted by seeing it than the kiddiewinks :)
Is Ohio particularly conservative, merkins?
-
It's a bit extreme. But, I bet that kid will think twice before picking up a porn rag.
The whole thing is similar to "Zero Tolerance" rules some school systems have. Children aren't even allow an asprin for a headache, and if they are caught with an asprin they get suspended. Yes, it's outrageous, but if you study it you can see the logic in it, perverted though it may be.
-
Originally posted by diamondgeezer
The superintendant was 'shocked' by a swimsuit mag? Seems like he was probably more offended and corrupted by seeing it than the kiddiewinks :)
Is Ohio particularly conservative, merkins?
Its a bible belt state.
-
Well that explains a few things, Zero
Originally posted by Liberator
Yes, it's outrageous, but if you study it you can see the logic in it, perverted though it may be.
I do hope he doesn't grow up thinking sex an the naked human body is somehow dirty or wrong...
-
The kid's more likely to pick up a porm mag now, simply to spite the school. not to mention it;ll have really perked up his curiosity.
-
Well I'm not sure about spiting the school, but I'd put money on him wanting to try and find out just what he wasn't meant to be looking at. Kids are nosy buggers. If something is banned, they demand to know why. Being told it's inappropriate or immoral will just prevent further use of 'why?'.
Out of curiosity, I wonder what this school teaches regarding sex education. My middle school was run entirely by Christian teachers (presumably so they wouldn't [theorectially] feel inclined to fiddle with the kids) and we recieved a grand total of one afternoon's sex ed. The teachers looked distinctly unhappy about it and rushed through the proceedings, IIRC. I must have been, ooh... the same age as this chap. Small world.
-
Ohio's just north of the bible belt, i live there. Its actually a fairly moderate state and its a contest to see which party controls it during an election year. It was rather close in 2000 IIRC
-
Slightly off topic but did anyone see a show on Channel 4 (UK) a few months back about the attitudes of kids to porn.
They had this on interview with a kid around 15-16 years old who was talking about how he watched movies all the time and they mostly were good for teaching you what sex was all about but that there could be problems.
Apparently the first time he was with a girl who was in the mood he and her got naked. Then not knowing what to do he suggested anal sex cause that's what they always do in the movies.
At which point she put her clothes back on and left :lol: He did seem rather gutted about that :)
-
I don't know wether to laugh or be disturbed by that
-
It's probably for the best that anybody who needs TV to tell them about how to have sex doesn't breed, anyway.
Sex ed's been all but eliminated in most of the public schools, apparently. Bush's say-nothing-but-tell-them-to-abstain-anyway **** all the way to straight nothing, the horror stories just keep coming in.
-
WTF?! When I was like 12, me and my school-chums used to sit at the back of the English class and 'read the articles' in Real Wives.
The only thing the teacher ever said was "Pay attention!".
-
thats the schools policy. they could ban/allow hardcore pr0n if they wanted to. it could go either way. this school chose its standards. its not censorship or else that magazine would have never been avalable in the first place. its the school saying, "hey we dont want softpr0n in our schools.", which it has ever right to do. No prinicple in there right mind would let a noticed playboy(or the like) stay in school. They, omg, disiplined the kid, big deal.
Hey look on the news guys.
Theres evidence that the colombine shootings could have been prevented if the father stepped up and told the kids to stop their actions. By the looks of it, the school is laying down the law to the kids, so to speak.
-
Originally posted by Drew
thats the schools policy. they could ban/allow hardcore pr0n if they wanted to. it could go either way. this school chose its standards. its not censorship or else that magazine would have never been avalable in the first place. its the school saying, "hey we dont want softpr0n in our schools.", which it has ever right to do. No prinicple in there right mind would let a noticed playboy(or the like) stay in school. They, omg, disiplined the kid, big deal.
Hey look on the news guys.
Theres evidence that the colombine shootings could have been prevented if the father stepped up and told the kids to stop their actions. By the looks of it, the school is laying down the law to the kids, so to speak.
Firstly, it wasn;t playboy. It wasn't even page 3 of the Sun. The content was basically the same as you would see on and advert for suntan lotion or something.
Secondly, the job of education is not to censor or decide moral standards. That's the job of the parents. It's a short step from this to saying that '1984' is banned.
Thirdly, the punishment was totally disproportionate to the 'crime'. 3 days suspension for bringing in a magazine? At the age of 12? Hell, i bet there's no-one on this forum ('cept maybe CP) who wouldn't have done the same thing. Not only that, the school compeltely ignored the parents response.
Finally,. this is completely unrelated to columbine. there is no prarallel or relationship atall, bar the fact that both involve a school. to suggest a connection is downright idiotic. In fact, the example you cited blames parental neglect, rather than school neglect - which also serves to show the boundaries of responsibility.
-
Meh, I have a few teachers that would read it along with me.
-
actualy it's a prety big step, a kid bringing a book of immages of atractive females in very little tightly fitting clothes and shall we say extreemly agreeable positions, is, and I hope you will agree with me, nothing like a litterary work of the magnatude of 1984. it is a thing made for one thing (to make money yhrough exploiting men's stupid fsination with) sex. now it may not be the school's right to choose right and wrong but they sould be helping the parents who's job it is to make these desisions, and it's a fair bet to assume that most parents wouldn't want there children to be dragging around a porno mag at school, so if a school finds a kid doing so it's enierly corect for them to assume that the parents wouldn't approve (simply becase that is by far the majority reaction). furthermore, it is at the very least a distraction, the children are not going to be learning anything if there sitting in the back of the class looking at a porno mag. and finaly you have to take into consideration the other children who are being exposed to material that there parent could reasonably be assumed to not want them exposed to, sure there going to be getting exposed to it, and much worse, but the schools are not there to act as a porno distribution center, thats what the internet is for.now that being said, a 3 day suspention is a bit on the harsh side, but I don't think it falls outside the grounds of what the principal had available, and I doubt the kid is realy suffering
-
Well, another key factor was that he's in the 6th grade, which partially justifies it I think, but nothing past taking the magaznie away.
-
well if I were the principal, that's probly what I would have done, that and calling his mom, but I don't think this was such a horable 'cencorship'
-
I think the punishment was a little too extreme. Certainly it should be taken away, maybe his parents called. Maybe make him write lines or whatever their local form of nonserious punishment is.
EDIT: But it doesn't say anything about his previous rule breaking record. He could have a pretty bad record, and maybe this one just pushed him over the edge?
-
...that was just lame. People in charge are forcing their views on others once again... That Sports Illustrated wasn't porn, It's women in bathing suits. He could see that at any decent beach or in most TV/Movies/magazines. Hell, the advertisements in the Daily News are more explicit than that. :doubt:
Prudes. They suck.
-
Bob.. I agree with you for the most part.. I think...
But could you please use capitalization and possibly paragraph breaks? A post that long is very hard to read without it.
-
*echoes Thorn*
If I were the principal, I probably would have told the parents about it first. However, we also have to realise that the punishment is just as much for the sake of the student's peers - if they think something like that is perfectly acceptable (in the context, I think it's a little out of line) and goes unpunished, that will just cause more of the same problems.
It's one thing to say he's forcing their views on others, but you know, that kid is probably easily able to transfer to another school if he wants. This principal ought to be able to run the school as he sees fit, otherwise the parents are forcing their views on him just as much. I don't think anyone is forced to go to these schools - there are plenty of them around in that area.
-
Originally posted by Bobboau
actualy it's a prety big step, a kid bringing a book of immages of atractive females in [blablabla] it falls outside the grounds of what the principal had available, and I doubt the kid is realy suffering
You're right: we should help them understand that being attracted to beautiful women is stupid and wrong. :doubt:
Wasn't school supposed to prepare you to being an adult? But I forgot that's America, puritanism and all.
The only viable punition was that:
You take the mag, and throw it away. Now the kid won't bring one back again, coz he doesn't want his mags to be thrown away. Basic education thing. Too daaaaaaaaaaaaarn complicated I guess, tho.
-
Originally posted by Nico
You're right: we should help them understand that being attracted to beautiful women is stupid and wrong. :doubt:
Wasn't school supposed to prepare you to being an adult? But I forgot that's America, puritanism and all.
The only viable punition was that:
You take the mag, and throw it away. Now the kid won't bring one back again, coz he doesn't want his mags to be thrown away. Basic education thing. Too daaaaaaaaaaaaarn complicated I guess, tho.
You got there just before I was about to say it. Confiscation of the magazine and maybe a letter to the parents is as far as this should have gone.