Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Bring Christmas to a child in need!
An 'urgency': Sensing threats to institutions of society, church leaders make declaration 
Click to Print
Include Comments
When bad ideology trumps good ideas
The Appleton, Wisconsin, Post-Crescent headline said this: “Turnout huge for controversial Christian event .”
What was the event? The “Secret Keeper Girl Bod Squad Tour,” which encourages girls in grades three through six to (gasp!) dress modestly. Why was it controversial? Because the program is sponsored by a (gasp!) Christian author, and a foundation with ties to the local school district contributed $500 to put it on.
This, of course, raised the hackles of Americans United for Separation of Church and State and another Christophobic junta with a rising profile, the Freedom from Religion Foundation. After Americans United sent the usual threatening form letter to Kimberly School District officials, organizers moved the Bod Squad event to a nearby church. Can’t have little girls tutored on public property in such subversive right-wingery as (gasp!) dressing modestly, now can we?
“If the district understood what it was getting involved with, then it shows a disturbing inability by authorities of the Kimberly Area School District to separate their personal religious views from their professional obligation to run a secular school district,” Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-president of Freedom from Religion Foundation, opined in a letter to the district. The Positive Youth Development Foundation, not the school district, paid for the event, school superintendent Mel Lightner told the Post-Crescent.
The president of the foundation, Dan Lenz, is also president of the Kimberly School Board, proving, of course, that Hillary was right: There is a Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy!
“It is all about a mobilized group of people who just want to raise funds and give it back to the community to help the positive development of children in our community,” Lightner said. Since 1998, the Positive Youth Development Foundation has awarded more than $100,000 for programs that promote youth and family development or work toward prevention of at-risk behaviors. The nonprofit organization generates money through fundraisers. “Frankly, we have funded things at parochial schools and have never thought to make a distinction between a faith-based thing or anything else,” Lightner said. “We’ve funded Girl Scouts and Boy Scouts, which have a distinct message, too. The foundation board thinks if it’s good for kids, we’ll do it.”
This tempest in a Wisconsin teapot highlights the fevered Christophobia of groups like Americans United and FRF: Their leaders move to stamp out healthy, sane programs for kids when those programs are religion-based, while keeping mum about multimillion-dollar tax-vampires like Planned Parenthood, which have all-access passes to public schools and sponsor programs like this one. (Go ahead and click around in that last link. I couldn’t find a page suitable to link to.)
And they call us “ideologues.”
back to top38 Comments to “When bad ideology trumps good ideas”
I’m wondering if content matters anymore, since as I read this article I have no idea what this meeting involved other than dressing modestly. It seems the adults were more interested in fighting a political point rather than helping young girls.
One of my family members is an ardent feminist, former fund raiser for Emily’s List. I love her, though we frequently disagree. But one of the most frustrating things about discussing events with her is we’re on such different levels. I’ll talk about what I think is important for a young girl’s heart and she immediately launches into an argument about the political implications. And she suspects everyone of having political designs when most of the time we’re just trying to find a way to help kids.
I’ve just assumed it was her all these years, but now I wonder if people who see things through political lenses often misjudge the motives of folks like me, who rarely think of the political implications. I’m just trying to help. And she often suspects me–or at least she used to. After 20 years she now gives me the benefit of the doubt if I object loudly enough.
In the long run, I think this may end up being a wonderful coup for the church–bringing in mothers and daughters in a positive event. Perhaps it will result in more families visiting the church and if so, that would be good. As long as politics stays away.
Report comment to moderator
Hey Lynn, I see a mention in your post of a Christian author, but no such mention in the article. Was this put on by Dannah Gresh, by chance? (I’ve edited several of her books, including the best-selling And the Bride Wore White and a book for girls on modesty that is entitled Secret Keeper, as this event was.)
Report comment to moderator
Michelle – My feminist SIL tends to hear things through a stereotype she has of Christians. I often thinks she doesn’t hear what I’m really saying, but hears what she thinks I’d say.
I used to live in Wisconsin. I finished high school in Little Chute, & worked (& later lived by myself) in Kimberly.
At that time, 25 to 30 years ago, over 90% of the people in that area were Catholic & conservative. I wonder how the citizens feel about this whole thing.
Report comment to moderator
PC is the civil religion of US government and law. The Bible says something about this
” Matthew 10:16 (New International Version)
16 I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.”
Instead of just complaining about this PCness, maybe we should follow this advice while fighting it at the same time. Satan is called a snake. Avoid the “snakes’s trap.”
Report comment to moderator
Was the event held during school or after school? If it was after school, then the protests are totally unfair and unwarranted. If it was held during school hours, I can understand why some people would object to it, but I don’t think it should be prohibited, as long as attendance was voluntary.
Report comment to moderator
“Christophobic junta” Them’s fightin’ words, Lynn!
Report comment to moderator
Attempting to look at the big picture:
1. The first thing that crossed my mind was the Taliban and how they force women to dress modestly. The whole “modesty” push in America, which is almost exclusively coming from the conservative Christian community, strikes many of us as being in the same vein. While not mandatory yet, it could very easily turn into that if left unchecked.
2. The focus on outward appearance (apparel) is misplaced. Would it not be more effective in the long run to teach both genders (not just girls) things like respect for themselves and each other, how the media manipulates them (especially women), how fashion companies/business wants to sell them things that will make them appear “cool”, etc.?
3. This is another small skirmish in the proverbial “culture war”, which most people are tired of. Each side has their grievances, which they trumpet loudly to try and build support for their cause. Perhaps if the SKGBST had approached AU and FRF and asked how they could put on an event together that taught the things I mentioned in #2, the dispute could have been avoided.
4. Our public schools (and the country) are no longer of one religious faith or point of view. If one wishes to operate in the public sphere, one must make their appeal as wide as possible and take care to not offer offense. At one time, Christians (primarily conservative ones) were the predominant group, which gave them an edge in everything from distributing Bibles in school, the kind of music that was sung, how people dressed, to what views were presented in class and assemblies. Now that is no longer the case. Stories like this show the continuing conflict over how to accommodate a wide variety of views and beliefs.
5. I hate to tell conservative Christians this, but they’re going to have to figure out how to operate in a diverse country. I know it’s difficult when you were used to being the only kid on the block. Instead of crying about how unfair things are, figure out a way to present your message in a way that people will want to welcome you into the public schools.
I know it’s fun to blast one’s opponents (AU, FRF, and the ACLU), but what does it really accomplish? One can go to Dailykos and find them blasting their opponents. Each side keeps ratcheting up the rhetoric trying to outdo each other. Most people are tired of it. They just want to live their lives and take care of their families. They aren’t into anyone’s agenda, religious, secular, or anything else.
Report comment to moderator
I don’t get the controversy. The Secret Keeper Girl Bod Squad Tour is not affiliated with a church, it is not necessarily Christian. They have no statement of faith that I could find. Lots of people would support what they are doing, some Christians may not. This is not evangilization, nothing to do with God, Jesus, or the Bible.
The only connection is that a Christian author is associated with it. I think our separation people are getting a bit trigger happy. Is it guilt by association?
Anlir – please show me the religious connection to this organization that would cause a problem. You are against their message, so you label it religious. Interesting.
Report comment to moderator
“Christophobic junta”? I think there ought to be a copy of Orwell’s Politics and the English Language posted on the wall at WMB headquarters.
I fail to see the controversy, and since I highly question Lynn’s objectivity (and after “Christophobic junta” who wouldn’t), I wonder if she isn’t leaving something out or misrepresenting the issue secularists have with this.
Anlir, I think your concerns are misplaced. Just because the Taliban decrees burkas in the name of modesty does not make any call for modesty inappropriate. But even if you think Christian standards of modesty are too strict, the religious right entirely lacks the political power to impose a discriminatory dress code. Doesn’t even come close.
You ask if it wouldn’t be more effective to teach boys and girls respect for each other. I imagine this mother-daughter event does just that. And it probably connects that respect to dressing in a way that doesn’t allow others to disrespect you as nothing but a sexual object. In fact, it seems like this group is a private organization devoted to doing exactly what you recommend in your point #2.
The questions this raises are these:
1) whether a private group ought to be allowed to use the public school building for their event
2) whether the head of the school board may donate private funds to a religious organization
Easy. Yes and Yes.
Then, does #1 change if the private group has a religious affiliation; does #2 change if the recipient religious organization is currently asking permission to use the public school building for their event?
More difficult. I’d say “No, the private group granted access to the public building should not be discriminated against on the basis of religion” and “Maybe. Depends on whether the man is in any way using his official position to show favoritism to a group he supports.”
Report comment to moderator
OK, I was wrong – apparently it does include teaching from the Bible. It does seem to be explicitly Christian. Sorry, Anlir.
Report comment to moderator
Anlir – Have you visited a local high school or junior high lately? There is certainly a place for a movement to more modest clothing in the schools. It needed even be religiously motivated – mere minimal standards of good taste would be sufficient to inspire a secularitst to wish to joi in.
As to learning how to function in a multi-cultural society, the Christians are doing precisely that (you didn’t see any rioting or beheadings there, or any fatwas – simply a group attempting to convey a contrarian message, the whole American marketplace of ideas concept).
Report comment to moderator
“I wonder if she isn’t leaving something out or misrepresenting the issue secularists have with this.”
What? NEVER! Our girl Lynn is a warrior against spin; she’s never asked a loaded question or told a half truth in her…Ha he he he…Yes I know! I just can’t do that one with a straight face!!!
“OK, I was wrong – apparently it does include teaching from the Bible. It does seem to be explicitly Christian. Sorry, Anlir.”
And there you have what Lynn was (gasp!) leaving out and misrepresenting.
Maybe we would all be less “Christophobic” if they weren’t such sneaky little cheats. Because apparently they are out to recruit our children!
Thank g-d we have groups like Freedom from Religion protecting our kids!
Report comment to moderator
Anlir writes, “The focus on outward appearance (apparel) is misplaced. Would it not be more effective in the long run to teach both genders (not just girls) things like respect for themselves and each other, how the media manipulates them (especially women), how fashion companies/business wants to sell them things that will make them appear “cool”, etc.?
I included the first sentence for a little context. When I read everything else in this paragraph, my first thought was, “This is exactly what the group is doing!”
Part of teaching kids to respect themselves and others involves not showing parts of their bodies simply to get attention, especially from the other sex.
The media has told girls for years that less clothing/more visible skin is empowering. It’s a hollow untruth, and girls are beginning to see there’s power in withholding something of themselves from everyone they meet.
Report comment to moderator
This program is pointed to girls ages 8 to 12, I suspect Anlir hasn’t been shopping for this age group lately.
I think Anlir’s #2 is what they were trying to do. As a mother, it’s next to impossible to find modest clothes for girls to wear, even this young. Which is why my daughter spent most of her time in jeans and sweatshirts–everything else was too lurid, unless I made it and then she wouldn’t wear it.
(Maybe I should define modest? Shirts covering abdomen, straps other than spaghetti, skirts mid-way down the thigh–not just covering the panties, plain shirts without nasty comments or suggestions scribbled on them. A dress that doesn’t emphasize the clevage, room to move while wearing the clothing, anything that doesn’t need to be constantly adjusted.)
Shoes, too, are ridiculous. My daughter wore tennis shoes for years because everything in her size–even when she was 8 and 9 years old and that included dress sandals–had high heels. Absolutely inappropriate and down right dangerous! When I asked the shoe store manager why he didn’t have Mary Janes or even flats, he shrugged and told me to call their corporate offices. “This is what they send me.”
Fortunately, flats are in style now.
Report comment to moderator
Still, if the program does have a religious spin, as it apparently does, then that does expose the district to at least the appearance of sanctioning one form of religion over against others. Indeed, since the sponsoring foundation has its offices in the school district offices, that would give a pause, wouldn’t it?
Rather than all this Freedom from Religion malarkey, let me suggest that the more fundamental issue is that of hospitality. In taking religious sides, the school district begins to create an environment in which some beliefs are prized more than others, where some students are more equal than others. It’s a matter of hospitality, of welcoming the outsider and the stranger (taking it here, the community is broadly conservative and religious).
The issue is important, simply for the girls’ sake. This seems something better addressed with PTAs and even (gasp!) school dress codes. That’s what we have at the school where I volunteer.
Report comment to moderator
Harris writes, “This seems something better addressed with PTAs and even (gasp!) school dress codes. That’s what we have at the school where I volunteer.
That addresses the issue from the top down. Yes, parents need to be involved, but it’s the kids’ attitudes and self-images the group is addressing here.
I’ve seen plenty of kids whose mothers sent them out dressed decently who changed in the bathroom at school.
Frankly, after having taught both public and private schools that struggled with dress-code compliance (which wastes huge amounts of instructional time), I wouldn’t care if this group were Christian, Jewish, secular, or Martian.
Report comment to moderator
JJF writes: I highly question Lynn’s objectivity (and after “Christophobic junta” who wouldn’t), I wonder if she isn’t leaving something out or misrepresenting the issue secularists have with this.
I think it’s pretty clear that my original post was an opinion piece. Plus, if you’ve been around this site long enough, you’ll know that I’ve never claimed to be objective here.
As to leaving something out, I haven’t — at least not intentionally. And I will be happy to consider (and opine upon) any additional details that emerge
Report comment to moderator
Maybe it’s just me, but I just don’t get all in a tizzy over how people dress. That’s not to say that I don’t think people dress inappropriately, because they do. I don’t like to see a 10 year-old girl dressed like a slut or a 10 year-old boy dressed like a thug. But there are a couple of things I try to keep in mind:
1. Every generation of young people has their “cool” look which universally offends the adults in charge. Has it ever been otherwise?
2. My preference in clothing and what I think is appropriate is just that – a preference. I’m so glad we live in a free country where a person can decide what they will wear. Do some people abuse that? Yep! But that’s one of the costs of freedom.
3. I try my best not to make an assessment of a person by what they are wearing. We had an 18 year-old girl working at our company who’s dress was simply atrocious. People judged her by what she wore. I found her to be just the most wonderful person. She’s young and she’s still finding her way. Soon enough she’ll have to conform. I think young people are judged much too harshly by adults.
4. Certainly parents have the right to set limits on what their kids wear. If your kid is going to school and changing into inappropriate clothes is it not your responsibility as the parent to deal with their defiance of your rules? The bottom line is that it’s the parent’s responsibility to instill the values that they want their kids to have. If they want to do it through their church, more power to them. But when one enters the public arena where there are people with a wide range of views and beliefs, then you are entering difficult territory.
5. Every now and then I see pictures of how I looked back in high school and I think “How could I have been so stupid to wear that?”. I swear my parents took the pictures for revenge
. They saved those pictures just so they could pull them out at just the right time to embarrass me.
6. When did conservative Christians decide that it was the public school’s responsibility to teach modesty to their kids? Who’s definition of “modesty” do we use? Muslim? Christian? Orthodox Judaism? Mennonite?
Finally, I don’t deny that it’s extremely difficult to swim against the culture, especially if one thinks it’s headed in the wrong direction. It’s hard when everyone else is letting their kids dress like an 8 year-old Paris Hilton. But it’s always been hard to be a parent and raise your kids right.
Report comment to moderator
I remember working on a program about modesty where the host pointed out that historically, until recently, human dignity has been associated with more clothes. Royalty, nobility and religious wore more while peasant and slaves wore less. When did that changed?
Report comment to moderator
Your lying again, Lynn. And that’s not an attack it’s the truth.
Your post states that the opposition rooted from its mere association with a Christian author, when in fact it is a proselytizing event that bills, “You’ll never have so much fun digging into God’s word,” (http://www.eventbrite.com/event/69936181) and includes “Biblical teaching about the media” (”Bod Squad Tour models modesty, fashion for girls,” http://www.postcrescent.com).
While you might feel comfortable passing all of this off as okay because it’s an OpEd, you certainly hurt your own ethos when your work is on-face misleading.
I mean, what gall AUSCS must have. Imagine a first amendment group having a problem with (gasp!) Biblical teaching in public school! And after all of those court cases establishing its blatant unconstitutionality!
I think you need to put the gasps away and admit that they did right here and moving this event out of the school and to a local church was the right and frankly constitutional thing to be done.
I like this one: “‘This looked so egregious we started to work on it with the first parental complaint,’ Lynn said. ‘The courts are very clear. A public school cannot sponsor or promote or pay for a clearly religious event, and the Secret Keeper Girl event is entirely religious. It’s all about the promotion of Christianity, and it simply can’t be done with the resources and promotion of a public school.’”-AP
You people seem to forget that first amendment groups take these actions because people complain. There are people in these communities that find this objectionable, want their rights protected, and their governments to be right actors!
Report comment to moderator
PS.- Lynn in that Quote is Barry Lynn, ED of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, not our Lynn Vincent (I’m not sure how obvious that is).
Report comment to moderator
Anlir:
I agree with your post 19. I would like to add that the Bible passages that refer to modesty have a lot more to do with ostentation than sexual suggestiveness.
Guys need to understand that they are responsible for their reaction. God gives us self control. We are expected to use it. Muslim men are helpless, we are not.
One more point – there is a time when it is OK and even advisable to dress in a sexually suggestive manner (for your spouse under appropriate circumstances). I think it is important to make the other side of the coin clear to young people. There is more Biblical justification for alluring your spouse with how you dress than for covering up.
Report comment to moderator
It is good that the authorities, along with the ever-viligent ACLU and FFR, are on top of this situation.
It could have been pretty bad; many children could have been easily corrupted and led into wearing so-called ‘modest’ clothes. Yep. It was undoubtably a close call.
IMAGINE the sheer horror of a school where all the females do NOT look and dress like street-walking whores. And also imagine this – actually considering letting such tender young children even hear a DIFFERENT viewpoint from the ever-yammering media and culture on how they might consider presenting and – get this – respecting themselves and their own bodies! Whew! Pretty crazy and dangerous, huh?
And, of course, as pointed out by our fearless leftward Chief-Inspectors here on the blog, this whole thing is just another ploy by the Christian Taliban here in America to subvert the youth and recruit them to do such subversive things as working in a soup kitchen feeding the homeless. Such a thing is more horrific in the mind of the leftist (that is if done under a Christian banner) then participating in a suicide-bomb attack on a school if under the banner of any other ideology.
Why, if not checked right now, the next thing that will probably be taught – openly and brazenly, in public schools, no less – are truly hideous Christian-type-virtue thingies like ‘respect’ and ‘honor’! Can you even fathom the depravity of such a possibility???
So all good little citizens of the Great Coming Global Plantation fully understand and appreciate that these sorts of things MUST simply be stopped – before they are even started, preferably.
Report comment to moderator
“I’m so glad we live in a free country where a person can decide what they will wear. Do some people abuse that? Yep! But that’s one of the costs of freedom.”
I’m chuckling. Anlir, you reminded me about the story my very uptight father in law likes to tell. Back in the 60s he went to see Janice Joplin in concert. He wore his Brooks Brothers suit with a white shirt and tie. I suspect he made some people very paranoid
If this program of modesty dress (not to be confused with Modesty Press, which probably has no dress code) uses the Bible in its presentation, it has no place in a public school. Simple. Moving it to the church was the right thing to do.
Report comment to moderator
Let me play devil’s advocate with the separation crowd here: what if (and I’m not familiar with the program in question, so just roll with me) the Bible were used, but not as the only religious text, or as an example of modesty in historical world literature? Would it still violate the establishment clause?
Report comment to moderator
Secret Keeper Girl Bod Squad Tour follow up link to my post 11 – hope this works in new format
Report comment to moderator
Rob,
From my perspective, “separation” is neither the correct terminology nor focus. Rather, the point is to be “inclusive” enough so that whether one is Christian, Muslim, agnostic (or anything else), the program will work in the context of a public setting. When it comes to an event in a public school (with a captive audience), I think we have to be as inclusive as possible, including the use of a religious text.
If for example, the Bible were used as one among several texts or documents for a program, there is likely to be a greater willingness to allow it. However, if a program is perceived to be primarily sectarian in nature there is going to be resistance.
If a public school is going to give funding, access, and/or their endorsement, I think they have an obligation to scrutinize the programs to make sure they are as inclusive as possible.
I think the First Amendment Foundation has some well thought out ideas on the issue of public schools and religion. I don’t agree with everything they say, but they are a good resource.
I know I’ll take some derision for this, but I think the ACLU in particular is vastly misunderstood by conservative Christians. If one reads carefully their positions and briefs, one understands that they are not as anti-religious as they’re made out to be. In fact, they have taken up the cause of religious exercise/freedom (even the cause of conservative Christians) many times.
Have they made some bone-headed decisions over the years? Definitely. In a time of heated political rhetoric, where taking things out of context has become Standard Operating Procedure, most people don’t take the time to look beyond the headlines. How many of us take the time to read the actual briefs that are filed in a court case, or to read the judicial decisions?
Now, I know it’s great fun for Worldmag to run what I call “red meat” stories for the faithful. Alas, I guess my role is to lift the lid on the grill and see what’s really cookin’.
Report comment to moderator
Robhays – By proper legal analysis, it should not be found to be a problem in that event.
The Anti-Christians (Christaphobes?) would still scream about it and the ACLU (Anti Christian Lawyers Union) would still sue.
Report comment to moderator
Anlir,
Welcome back! You’re one of my favorite posters of the “loyal opposition” and it’s good to hear from you again.
Most of your points, as usual, do a great job of making us (conservative Christians) look at the other side. So I was surprised to read your of-the-wall point #1:
1. The first thing that crossed my mind was the Taliban and how they force women to dress modestly. The whole “modesty” push in America, which is almost exclusively coming from the conservative Christian community, strikes many of us as being in the same vein. While not mandatory yet, it could very easily turn into that if left unchecked.
One can’t necessarily control what is the first thing to cross one’s mind, so I won’t fault you for that. But…
1. Do you really think that the whole “modesty” push in America is coming almost exclusively from the Christian community? As the father of a teen girl I’ve run into a lot of people who I don’t know to be Christians but who I do know to share my concern about dress and modesty.
2. Pretending for a moment that it is a “Christian issue”, do you really think Christians asking for their convictions to be heard are in the same vein as Taliban-style forced modesty? That’s a huge stretch. As you pointed out several times, we’re not in the majority. Exactly how are we going to “easily turn into that if left unchecked”?
Report comment to moderator
Cameron [17]:
I appreciate your experience on this.
Still, don’t we usually push the decision making to the parents? Does even a well-attended pep rally really substitute for the guidance that parents can provide? As the father of a now-grown daughter, I deeply appreciate the emphasis on modesty (e.g. there were clothes we refused to buy), and in that context it does seem that “modesty” or the older “chaste” is a matter of the heart. It is a kind of discipline, a practice if you will; fundamentally (now putting on my liberal hat) it is also a matter of power, self control, and especially self-possession.
Report comment to moderator
Hi Kevin,
Thanks for the welcome back.
In regards to your questions:
1. Certainly it’s not just conservative Christians who are concerned about “modesty”. Since a majority of the worldmag community is of that persuasion, I was addressing their concerns and also the writer’s (Lynn), who I’m fairly certain is one. Also, I think it would be fair to say that it is primarily (though not exclusively) conservative Christians who are leading the “modesty” movement. Neither of these statements should be taken as a slight in any way.
2. I certainly do not think that Christians wanting their voice to be heard is in the same vein as a Taliban-style forced modesty. My main concern is with the strain of conservative Christianity that is fundamentalist in nature and which seeks conformity by all of us to their social views. While I agree they don’t have the numbers to enforce their views, I’m also aware that it only takes a few dedicated diehards in an apathetic society to effect change. I guess we all have our “slippery slopes”. Mine happens to be in areas like this.
Forgive me for my hyperbole if you will. I’m aware that my words will push some buttons around here at times. I do my best to restrain myself. But sometimes it’s just fun to do it
I figure since I’m vastly outnumbered and put up with it from the conservative side on a regular basis, I should get a few licks in every now and then. I really do strive to do it without being malicious or mean, but I’ll admit my temper does get the best of me from time to time. Believe me, I’m my worst critic when it comes to my writing.
In regards to your point about Christians asking for their convictions to be heard, by all means, I do think they should be heard. The trick is to speak in a language that doesn’t alienate and find common ground with people who don’t necessarily agree with them on every jot and tittle. I think most Americans are of a relatively moderate-conservative nature. If one wishes to be taken seriously and thoughtfully one must not be perceived as moralizing or preachy. People don’t like that. My biggest beef is that conservative Christians have learned how to yell (both figuratively and sometimes literally) with the best of them. The problem is, people are tired of all the yelling (no matter which group is doing it).
Finally, one more point: being “heard” does not mean you will prevail. As I pointed out previously, conservative Christians (and Christians in general) kind of ruled the roost for awhile in a lot of areas. But America has become much more diverse. It’s difficult to find out that you’re no longer in charge or in the majority any more. It leads to anger and resentment, which I see a lot of. The trick is to learn to operate in a diverse culture. As someone who has been in the minority all of my life, I know what it’s like to have to operate at a disadvantage. It’s not always fun, but it is doable.
Report comment to moderator
I would agree completely. I said before that parents need to be involved–generally they are the ones paying for the clothes. I never talked about substituting one for another.
However, the hearts and minds (sorry!) of the girls are the ultimate goal here. If it’s a matter of self-control and self-possession, as you say, and I agree, how can that happen without talking to the girls?
Report comment to moderator
Anlir saves me the trouble of typing since I echo his opinion. However, as a school teacher let me add a few things.
1. School is a busy place and yet one more assembly takes away from classroom time. No matter what the message, schools should turn away any private organization unless it coincides with the goals of the school.
2. Dress codes are difficult to enforce and are generally a waste of time. Most male teachers refuse to enforce it. Secondly it turns many middle school girls into jailhouse lawyers. Parents also complain if their standards differ.
3. Fashions change and are changing. Many kids prefer an other look; skater, goth, emo, etc. There are clothes available which offer an entirely different message, and most girls prefer these. For others the immodest few, its what they prefer and without parental coercion, schools are better off to back off.
Report comment to moderator
Thanks for the response, Anlir. That adds helpful perspective to your comments. I absolutely agree about the yelling (the word “shrillness” often comes to mind), which is why I usually enjoy reading your calm well-stated arguments. [:-)]
Report comment to moderator
Well, my first attempt at a smiley has failed.
(:-))
Report comment to moderator
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!