|
On November 12 2010 03:39 FishForThought wrote:
... it would be discrimination if they refuse to let her join the formal because of her sexual orientation but it is not discrimination to forbid her to bring guest of the same sex. The formal is hosted by the school, they have all rights to create rules and guidelines for the event. If the event specified that all guests must be males, then there is no discrimination involved.
People need to stop getting all defensive and insecure about these things; sooner or later people will cry sexist for not being able to get into an all female/male school because he or she is not that gender, or cry free speech violation for not being able to enter a restaurant nude.
Not in the US. They can't create those rules. Try replacing your word "Males" with "white." Can't discriminate based on the 14th amendment, which includes both race and sex.
|
On November 12 2010 03:55 n0xi3 wrote:
This story makes me want to shutdown that school. They are clearly not under the right organization if they are running a girls only school and not being able to handle gay students. This seems to me as a very poor attempt to deal with the matter.
If it was a black male and they gave those same excuses, the issue would be more prominent. But in this case the difference between a lesbian girl and black male are not too different.
I hope something is done about this.
They just don't cater to homosexuals. Why should homosexual get special treatment? Because they are in the minority? O.o
|
On November 12 2010 04:00 Alou wrote:This is bigotry obviously, but isn't it technically allowed if the school is private? Don't they have a right to format their own events to the rules they choose? I'm not asking to defend the school in some way because I think what they are doing is wrong, but can't they still not allow her to go with her same sex partner? I just don't have the knowledge on how private schools are operated. Sucks to be her.  Hope senior year goes better for her.
It's a good question at the heart of this issue. Do I have a right to open a restaurant and hang a sign that says "No Gays" or any other group that I'm (hypothetically!) bigoted against? It's my right to decide who I want to let into my private business isn't it?
I think not, and I won't sugercoat my answer. Bigotry, or any ideology that actively seeks to restrain the freedoms and happiness of others without the merit of logical purpose or scientific rationale, must be eliminated in all forms. Your personal freedom to be a bigot stops when it begins to negatively affect other people in any way.
And the argument that I'm a bigot against bigoted people is just a circular bunch of nonsense.
|
On November 12 2010 04:10 FishForThought wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2010 03:55 n0xi3 wrote:
This story makes me want to shutdown that school. They are clearly not under the right organization if they are running a girls only school and not being able to handle gay students. This seems to me as a very poor attempt to deal with the matter.
If it was a black male and they gave those same excuses, the issue would be more prominent. But in this case the difference between a lesbian girl and black male are not too different.
I hope something is done about this. They just don't cater to homosexuals. Why should homosexual get special treatment? Because they are in the minority? O.o
My white segregationist school just doesn't cater to niggers. Why should niggers get special treatment? Because they are in the minority?
User was banned for this post
|
lol an all girl school , what do they expect?
|
I actually do agree with the school's decision, but I don't think they carried it out in the right way.
The purpose of this formal is primarily focused towards intimacy or sexuality - it's to familiarize students in an all-girls school with people of the opposite gender. One very important social aspect students of same sex schools lack is interaction with the other gender. Without this social aspect, they don't get very far in life due to them being less comfortable around the other gender. This hinders them from doing any job that requires social interaction, which is most jobs. One of the primary reasons why parents send their children to same sex schools is so that they don't engage in intimacy. Therefore the purpose of this formal was not to get students to engage in intimacy, but to familiarize the students with the opposite gender.
People mistakenly jumped to the conclusion that not allowing same sex couples to participate in the formal meant that they were discriminating against homosexuals. Society has been shifted so anti-homophobia and anti-racism that any suggestion of someone's race or sexual orientation is seen as discrimination. I can say something like "Steve is that black guy over there" and then people will call me racist. These girls will have a difficult time integrating themselves into society after they graduate, and it's all because their parents could not see that a formal is more than just a sexual event.
|
This is ludicrous. "If they were allowed to bring females, then they all would." Uhh... No... At my Junior/Senior prom I could have brought a male as my date but I didn't. I brought a hot little blonde thing from school.
Sense. This school makes none.
|
On November 12 2010 04:13 Flying Duck wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2010 04:10 FishForThought wrote:On November 12 2010 03:55 n0xi3 wrote:
This story makes me want to shutdown that school. They are clearly not under the right organization if they are running a girls only school and not being able to handle gay students. This seems to me as a very poor attempt to deal with the matter.
If it was a black male and they gave those same excuses, the issue would be more prominent. But in this case the difference between a lesbian girl and black male are not too different.
I hope something is done about this. They just don't cater to homosexuals. Why should homosexual get special treatment? Because they are in the minority? O.o My white segregationist school just doesn't cater to *******. Why should ********* get special treatment? Because they are in the minority?
Honestly, I think everyone understands your point. No one wants to see that word written though.
|
they shouldnt get special treatment, but they shouldnt get worse treament. Plus whoever said you cant know if ur gay at 15 i think you can.
|
On November 12 2010 04:13 Flying Duck wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2010 04:10 FishForThought wrote:On November 12 2010 03:55 n0xi3 wrote:
This story makes me want to shutdown that school. They are clearly not under the right organization if they are running a girls only school and not being able to handle gay students. This seems to me as a very poor attempt to deal with the matter.
If it was a black male and they gave those same excuses, the issue would be more prominent. But in this case the difference between a lesbian girl and black male are not too different.
I hope something is done about this. They just don't cater to homosexuals. Why should homosexual get special treatment? Because they are in the minority? O.o My white segregationist school just doesn't cater to niggers. Why should niggers get special treatment? Because they are in the minority?
Typically I would say this is ban worthy. But you make a point.
|
On November 12 2010 04:10 FishForThought wrote:
They just don't cater to homosexuals. Why should homosexual get special treatment? Because they are in the minority? O.o
Wait, how is it special treatment?
|
On November 12 2010 04:10 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2010 03:39 FishForThought wrote:
... it would be discrimination if they refuse to let her join the formal because of her sexual orientation but it is not discrimination to forbid her to bring guest of the same sex. The formal is hosted by the school, they have all rights to create rules and guidelines for the event. If the event specified that all guests must be males, then there is no discrimination involved.
People need to stop getting all defensive and insecure about these things; sooner or later people will cry sexist for not being able to get into an all female/male school because he or she is not that gender, or cry free speech violation for not being able to enter a restaurant nude. Not in the US. They can't create those rules. Try replacing your word "Males" with "white." Can't discriminate based on the 14th amendment, which includes both race and sex.
Which part of the 14th amendment states that?
According to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Equal_Protection_Clause
It only mention black and white equality but nothing about male/female equality unless I missed an entire section on it.
|
On November 12 2010 04:15 Chairman Ray wrote:
I actually do agree with the school's decision, but I don't think they carried it out in the right way.
The purpose of this formal is primarily focused towards intimacy or sexuality - it's to familiarize students in an all-girls school with people of the opposite gender. One very important social aspect students of same sex schools lack is interaction with the other gender. Without this social aspect, they don't get very far in life due to them being less comfortable around the other gender. This hinders them from doing any job that requires social interaction, which is most jobs. One of the primary reasons why parents send their children to same sex schools is so that they don't engage in intimacy. Therefore the purpose of this formal was not to get students to engage in intimacy, but to familiarize the students with the opposite gender.
People mistakenly jumped to the conclusion that not allowing same sex couples to participate in the formal meant that they were discriminating against homosexuals. Society has been shifted so anti-homophobia and anti-racism that any suggestion of someone's race or sexual orientation is seen as discrimination. I can say something like "Steve is that black guy over there" and then people will call me racist. These girls will have a difficult time integrating themselves into society after they graduate, and it's all because their parents could not see that a formal is more than just a sexual event.
I couldn't disagree more. Essentially what it sounds like you're saying is that the school is telling the girl, "wait, you might not be a lesbian, we've subjected you to an environment of only girls for so long you might have been misguided. You probably don't truly like other girls, and you should at least give being intimate with guys a shot." Bullshit, school shouldn't have any say whatsoever with who their students can be intimate with. Especially since plenty of people bring friends, not dates.
People who are anti-social probably just wouldn't even attend the dance.
|
On November 12 2010 04:10 FishForThought wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2010 03:55 n0xi3 wrote:
This story makes me want to shutdown that school. They are clearly not under the right organization if they are running a girls only school and not being able to handle gay students. This seems to me as a very poor attempt to deal with the matter.
If it was a black male and they gave those same excuses, the issue would be more prominent. But in this case the difference between a lesbian girl and black male are not too different.
I hope something is done about this. They just don't cater to homosexuals. Why should homosexual get special treatment? Because they are in the minority? O.o
No. This does not qualify as logic. Try again.
Fuck this school and fuck bigoted conservatives and arghfagldjfgakjhhha
|
On November 12 2010 04:15 Chairman Ray wrote:
I actually do agree with the school's decision, but I don't think they carried it out in the right way.
The purpose of this formal is primarily focused towards intimacy or sexuality - it's to familiarize students in an all-girls school with people of the opposite gender. One very important social aspect students of same sex schools lack is interaction with the other gender. Without this social aspect, they don't get very far in life due to them being less comfortable around the other gender. This hinders them from doing any job that requires social interaction, which is most jobs. One of the primary reasons why parents send their children to same sex schools is so that they don't engage in intimacy. Therefore the purpose of this formal was not to get students to engage in intimacy, but to familiarize the students with the opposite gender.
People mistakenly jumped to the conclusion that not allowing same sex couples to participate in the formal meant that they were discriminating against homosexuals. Society has been shifted so anti-homophobia and anti-racism that any suggestion of someone's race or sexual orientation is seen as discrimination. I can say something like "Steve is that black guy over there" and then people will call me racist. These girls will have a difficult time integrating themselves into society after they graduate, and it's all because their parents could not see that a formal is more than just a sexual event.
Seeeeeee, now this is how to make a rational argument!!! While I may disagree with your interpretation of the story, I'm incredibly happy that you found a way to rationalize in such a way that makes sense and isn't ignorant/troll-like.
TBH however, I'm unsure that you can come to the conclusion that the purpose of the dance was to actually familiarize the girls with the opposite gender...OR...if this was simply a scapegoat response the school used. It seems implausible that the motive was "familiarity" rather than "intimacy" based on any school dances that I remember (and I went to an all-guys school).
But thank you for being a rational person.
-PEACE
|
theyre both pretty hot
User was warned for this post
Edit: my bad, i was trying to be funny and posted before thinking
|
On November 12 2010 04:18 FishForThought wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2010 04:10 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 12 2010 03:39 FishForThought wrote:
... it would be discrimination if they refuse to let her join the formal because of her sexual orientation but it is not discrimination to forbid her to bring guest of the same sex. The formal is hosted by the school, they have all rights to create rules and guidelines for the event. If the event specified that all guests must be males, then there is no discrimination involved.
People need to stop getting all defensive and insecure about these things; sooner or later people will cry sexist for not being able to get into an all female/male school because he or she is not that gender, or cry free speech violation for not being able to enter a restaurant nude. Not in the US. They can't create those rules. Try replacing your word "Males" with "white." Can't discriminate based on the 14th amendment, which includes both race and sex. Which part of the 14th amendment states that? According to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Equal_Protection_ClauseIt only mention black and white equality but nothing about male/female equality unless I missed an entire section on it.
I'll make sure to look it up in a bit. This will be embarrassing if I've misunderstood the amendment for god knows how many years.
|
oh wtf i hate hearing things like this. we should just stop this kind of discrimination.
|
You are probably thinking of this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_IX
which basically prohibits discrimination based on sex or gender in schools which receive fed monies. Lots of states just have laws adding on to this that forbid discrimination of any kind, regardless of who is funding who
|
On November 12 2010 04:17 Krigwin wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2010 04:10 FishForThought wrote:
They just don't cater to homosexuals. Why should homosexual get special treatment? Because they are in the minority? O.o Wait, how is it special treatment?
The special treatment obviously refer to the school wanting all students to bring male guests but require to make an exception for anyone who have a different sexual orientation.
Although, didn't actually happen in the article but it is what some people on the forum wants or opted for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
