Fake Proms for Lesbians and Special Ed

Off Topic
41

[quote]Enders Drift wrote:
I imagine it going down something like this:

Girl goes to administration to fill out the paper saying who her outside date is. Administration sees its a girl, laughs at her and says no this is for couples, one guy and one girl. So she refutes it by saying she’ll be the guy and wear a tux. School says no you can’t come.

(Sorry but girls are allowed to wear tuxedos if they so choose. There is nothing in any school policy against that any more than they can wear jeans. Hell a girl in a tuxedo would probably be classier than half these hoochies wearing nylon skirts to the prom)

Girl files suit against the school for discrimination so the school cancels the prom.

The parents as a result outraged the girl would suit organize their own private party, can call it a prom but could just as easily call it a private party.

At this point everything would be … decent. I could personally care less if she wants to bring a girl as her date but if the school said no its not the end of the world.

What gets me is that why after the school cancelled the prom did they reorganize it for only her and some special needs students on the exact same day as the parent’s party.

Both sides are denying shit as best I can tell. The school dropped it, if the parents don’t want her at the private party they could’ve just said it. The fact the Principal organized this other prom is highly questionable, especially when if a prom only has 5 people it would’ve been cancelled for budget purposes. The fact the Principal was allowed to pay teachers, get a salary herself, and rent out a country club for the sole purpose of keeping the lesbian out of the private party is highly questionable.[/quote]

That scenario doesn’t seem as reasonable to me.

If a kid was going to take a porn star and went around bragging about it and talking about how the dress was going to make her the center of attention and it got to the point the administration thought it was going to be a disruption, it seems reasonable to step in and tell him he can’t bring a porn star. is that sexual discrimination too?

42

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]iamthewolf wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]iamthewolf wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]iamthewolf wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Rational Gaze wrote:
You really are an awful human being.[/quote]

I think the word you were looking for is rational. Figured you would have known that one.[/quote]

there’s nothing rational about a knee jerk reaction when someone cries discrimination.[/quote]

Fixed that for you.[/quote]

you’re being fairly cavalier about this. from what i’ve read she was flat out denied admittance to a public school function, by the administration, based soley on sexual preference.

[/quote]

So how did the administration become aware of her sexual orientation and desire to wear a tux?

If the girl made it a point to proclaim these decisions, it seems more than reasonable to ban her from the event because she intends to disrupt it.

If the administration sought out this information and upon finding it told her she couldn’t come, then I agree they are in the wrong.

The first scenario seems more reasonable to me, I could be wrong. But rationally looking at it, that’s what I see.[/quote]

if the prom guests had to be cleared by the school administration, as i suspect they were, then it wouldn’t be hard to figure out a same-sex couple.

also, even if she “proclaimed” she was bringing another girl and wanted to wear a tux, so what? how is that disruptive to the event? did they think she was going to grab the mic during the prom and begin yelling about gay rights? i doubt it. so even if she did make it a point to tell people she was gay and wearing a tux how is this any more disruptive than some popular guy making sure everyone knows he’s bringing a cheerleader to prom and is going to wear a white tux? [/quote]

So could a guy wear a prom gown? would that be disruptive?[/quote]
yes he could, and no it wouldn’t be.

how is the clothing choice of one person going to disrupt the entire prom? also, a woman wearing a tux would be even less disruptive than a guy in a dress.

43

[quote]iamthewolf wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]iamthewolf wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]iamthewolf wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]iamthewolf wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Rational Gaze wrote:
You really are an awful human being.[/quote]

I think the word you were looking for is rational. Figured you would have known that one.[/quote]

there’s nothing rational about a knee jerk reaction when someone cries discrimination.[/quote]

Fixed that for you.[/quote]

you’re being fairly cavalier about this. from what i’ve read she was flat out denied admittance to a public school function, by the administration, based soley on sexual preference.

[/quote]

So how did the administration become aware of her sexual orientation and desire to wear a tux?

If the girl made it a point to proclaim these decisions, it seems more than reasonable to ban her from the event because she intends to disrupt it.

If the administration sought out this information and upon finding it told her she couldn’t come, then I agree they are in the wrong.

The first scenario seems more reasonable to me, I could be wrong. But rationally looking at it, that’s what I see.[/quote]

if the prom guests had to be cleared by the school administration, as i suspect they were, then it wouldn’t be hard to figure out a same-sex couple.

also, even if she “proclaimed” she was bringing another girl and wanted to wear a tux, so what? how is that disruptive to the event? did they think she was going to grab the mic during the prom and begin yelling about gay rights? i doubt it. so even if she did make it a point to tell people she was gay and wearing a tux how is this any more disruptive than some popular guy making sure everyone knows he’s bringing a cheerleader to prom and is going to wear a white tux? [/quote]

So could a guy wear a prom gown? would that be disruptive?[/quote]
yes he could, and no it wouldn’t be.

how is the clothing choice of one person going to disrupt the entire prom? also, a woman wearing a tux would be even less disruptive than a guy in a dress.[/quote]

If you ban cross dressing it has to go both ways or its sexist right?

Guys at my school weren’t allowed to wear dresses/skirts/ or even kilts. Am I a victim of sexism? Should I have sued?

And yes, I think it would be disruptive. I also think there is reasonable chance the girl intended to make a scene.

44

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
If a kid was going to take a porn star and went around bragging about it and talking about how the dress was going to make her the center of attention and it got to the point the administration thought it was going to be a disruption, it seems reasonable to step in and tell him he can’t bring a porn star. is that sexual discrimination too?[/quote]

no, it’s not sexual discrimination because it’s not based on the porn star’s gender or orientation. would a reasonable person view a porn star as a disruption? maybe, but it would still be pretty tough to prove it before an incident occurred (plenty of girls boast promiscuous clothing at school dances). would a reasonable person view a lesbien couple, dressed in traditional prom atire, as a disruption? that’s a much harder sell because at that point the only thing that sets them apart from the rest of the students is the fact that they’re gay.

45

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Enders Drift wrote:
I imagine it going down something like this:

Girl goes to administration to fill out the paper saying who her outside date is. Administration sees its a girl, laughs at her and says no this is for couples, one guy and one girl. So she refutes it by saying she’ll be the guy and wear a tux. School says no you can’t come.

(Sorry but girls are allowed to wear tuxedos if they so choose. There is nothing in any school policy against that any more than they can wear jeans. Hell a girl in a tuxedo would probably be classier than half these hoochies wearing nylon skirts to the prom)

Girl files suit against the school for discrimination so the school cancels the prom.

The parents as a result outraged the girl would suit organize their own private party, can call it a prom but could just as easily call it a private party.

At this point everything would be … decent. I could personally care less if she wants to bring a girl as her date but if the school said no its not the end of the world.

What gets me is that why after the school cancelled the prom did they reorganize it for only her and some special needs students on the exact same day as the parent’s party.

Both sides are denying shit as best I can tell. The school dropped it, if the parents don’t want her at the private party they could’ve just said it. The fact the Principal organized this other prom is highly questionable, especially when if a prom only has 5 people it would’ve been cancelled for budget purposes. The fact the Principal was allowed to pay teachers, get a salary herself, and rent out a country club for the sole purpose of keeping the lesbian out of the private party is highly questionable.[/quote]

That scenario doesn’t seem as reasonable to me.

If a kid was going to take a porn star and went around bragging about it and talking about how the dress was going to make her the center of attention and it got to the point the administration thought it was going to be a disruption, it seems reasonable to step in and tell him he can’t bring a porn star. is that sexual discrimination too?[/quote]

Sexual discrimination? No. But if the Porn Star did attend and was wearing inappropriate clothing she wouldn’t be allowed in. Proms usually have someone by the door and enforce dress codes. If she went in and then changed she would also be asked to leave. If they just said a porn star can’t attend then you would have a suit on your hands and I would be even more in favor of that one than this one. Porn stars need love to.

46

Here’s it in a nutshell:
http://www.itawambaahs.com/

Nowhere in school policy does it distinguish between guys attire and girls attire. Therefore the girl should’ve had no problem wearing a tuxedo.

But I still could really care less about the discrimination and more about the misuse of school funds.

47

No sympathy for the fat lez.

48

[quote]ADvanced TS wrote:
No sympathy for the fat lez.[/quote]

ROFL, Munsoned for life

49

From everything I’ve read the private event had nothing to do with the school. If the country club “prom” was the open prom organized by the school, then Constance got what she sued for. You can’t force the other kids to attend.

Now if the school helped plan, organize, create the secret “prom” then it’s another matter entirely.

50

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
If you ban cross dressing it has to go both ways or its sexist right?

Guys at my school weren’t allowed to wear dresses/skirts/ or even kilts. Am I a victim of sexism? Should I have sued?

And yes, I think it would be disruptive. I also think there is reasonable chance the girl intended to make a scene.[/quote]
yes it does have to go both ways which is why (as far as i know) it’s perfectly legal to a man to cross dress.

if you went to a public school then, i feel, that you were. the problem with schools is that they deal with minors and for some reason people think that they lack basic civil liberties. this is why a lot of public schools can get away with enforcing rather strict dress codes.

and again i must disagree that it would be disruptive. there is nothing in any of the articles i read that implied that she wanted to do anything but go to prom. let her go. if she causes a reasonable disruption then kick her out. and no, people looking at her funny for being gay or wearing a tux is not a reasonable disruption.

51

[quote]Enders Drift wrote:
Not to mention the giant slap in the face that must’ve been to the girl. I mean EVERYONE knew about the real prom except her. Does she have no friends? How did a conspiracy of that magnitude really take place so smoothly. The teachers, the faculty, the parents, the peers all knew! Everyone knew except her! That’s amazing in itself.[/quote]

She has been ostracized first because shes gay, and second because all the kids blame her for administrations decision to cancel prom.

52

[quote]Himora22 wrote:

[quote]ADvanced TS wrote:
No sympathy for the fat lez.[/quote]

ROFL, Munsoned for life[/quote]

She’s what you’d call a born loser.

A reeeeeaaaaaaaallllll Munson.

53

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]iamthewolf wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]iamthewolf wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]iamthewolf wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Rational Gaze wrote:
You really are an awful human being.[/quote]

I think the word you were looking for is rational. Figured you would have known that one.[/quote]

Gay guys are too fashion forward to do such a thing. But I’d be fine with it. There was a (skinny, hairy, horribly ugly) guy at my college whose (fat horribly ugly) girlfriend apparently forced him to wear a dress. Sure it was gross to see his hairy ankles but it didn’t hurt anyone else.
there’s nothing rational about a knee jerk reaction when someone cries discrimination.[/quote]

Fixed that for you.[/quote]

you’re being fairly cavalier about this. from what i’ve read she was flat out denied admittance to a public school function, by the administration, based soley on sexual preference.

[/quote]

So how did the administration become aware of her sexual orientation and desire to wear a tux?

If the girl made it a point to proclaim these decisions, it seems more than reasonable to ban her from the event because she intends to disrupt it.

If the administration sought out this information and upon finding it told her she couldn’t come, then I agree they are in the wrong.

The first scenario seems more reasonable to me, I could be wrong. But rationally looking at it, that’s what I see.[/quote]

if the prom guests had to be cleared by the school administration, as i suspect they were, then it wouldn’t be hard to figure out a same-sex couple.

also, even if she “proclaimed” she was bringing another girl and wanted to wear a tux, so what? how is that disruptive to the event? did they think she was going to grab the mic during the prom and begin yelling about gay rights? i doubt it. so even if she did make it a point to tell people she was gay and wearing a tux how is this any more disruptive than some popular guy making sure everyone knows he’s bringing a cheerleader to prom and is going to wear a white tux? [/quote]

So could a guy wear a prom gown? would that be disruptive?[/quote]

54

[quote]Rational Gaze wrote:
You really are an awful human being.[/quote]

Gee, Thanks. Most ppl just call me a dick.

55

[quote]Eli B wrote:
iamthewolf wrote:
Gay guys are too fashion forward to do such a thing. But I’d be fine with it. There was a (skinny, hairy, horribly ugly) guy at my college whose (fat horribly ugly) girlfriend apparently forced him to wear a dress. Sure it was gross to see his hairy ankles but it didn’t hurt anyone else.[/quote]
cute. dipshit.

but “i’m” right in that most gay guys would never do that. it’s only the closeted, popular kids (much like yourself i would assume) that really are gay but don’t have the balls to come out because they might lose some friends, that would do that.

56

[quote]iamthewolf wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
If you ban cross dressing it has to go both ways or its sexist right?

Guys at my school weren’t allowed to wear dresses/skirts/ or even kilts. Am I a victim of sexism? Should I have sued?

And yes, I think it would be disruptive. I also think there is reasonable chance the girl intended to make a scene.[/quote]
yes it does have to go both ways which is why (as far as i know) it’s perfectly legal to a man to cross dress.

if you went to a public school then, i feel, that you were. the problem with schools is that they deal with minors and for some reason people think that they lack basic civil liberties. this is why a lot of public schools can get away with enforcing rather strict dress codes.

and again i must disagree that it would be disruptive. there is nothing in any of the articles i read that implied that she wanted to do anything but go to prom. let her go. if she causes a reasonable disruption then kick her out. and no, people looking at her funny for being gay or wearing a tux is not a reasonable disruption.[/quote]

Students in a public school do no have the same rights (like it or not). They are not entitled to the same free speech rights, they do not have the same search and seizure rights, they do not have the right to bare arms, the school can ban alcohol despite the 21st amendment, they do not have a right to practice a religion on the grounds, and on and on and on. The bill of rights doesn’t apply to public schools the same way. They have the right to assign a dress code on the same criteria.

And kilt/dress/skirt wearing was banned BECAUSE it was disruptive. Teachers complained of the guys being a distraction in class (talking, rumors, not paying attention) and they were right to do it.

57

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]iamthewolf wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
If you ban cross dressing it has to go both ways or its sexist right?

Guys at my school weren’t allowed to wear dresses/skirts/ or even kilts. Am I a victim of sexism? Should I have sued?

And yes, I think it would be disruptive. I also think there is reasonable chance the girl intended to make a scene.[/quote]
yes it does have to go both ways which is why (as far as i know) it’s perfectly legal to a man to cross dress.

if you went to a public school then, i feel, that you were. the problem with schools is that they deal with minors and for some reason people think that they lack basic civil liberties. this is why a lot of public schools can get away with enforcing rather strict dress codes.

and again i must disagree that it would be disruptive. there is nothing in any of the articles i read that implied that she wanted to do anything but go to prom. let her go. if she causes a reasonable disruption then kick her out. and no, people looking at her funny for being gay or wearing a tux is not a reasonable disruption.[/quote]

Students in a public school do no have the same rights (like it or not). They are not entitled to the same free speech rights, they do not have the same search and seizure rights, they do not have the right to bare arms, the school can ban alcohol despite the 21st amendment, they do not have a right to practice a religion on the grounds, and on and on and on. The bill of rights doesn’t apply to public schools the same way. They have the right to assign a dress code on the same criteria.

And kilt/dress/skirt wearing was banned BECAUSE it was disruptive. Teachers complained of the guys being a distraction in class (talking, rumors, not paying attention) and they were right to do it.[/quote]
first, a minor carrying a gun or drinking alcohol on school grounds is not even in the same ballpark as a girl wearing a tux. those activities are illeagal. a girl wearing pants is not.

second, someone posted a link to the school’s dress code. nowhere in it did i read anything that would prevent a girl from wearing “men’s clothes” to the prom.

third, even if i was to agree that a kilt was disruptive then we better ban girls from wearing skirts too. i don’t know about you, but i’m more easily distracted by a girl if she’s wearing a skirt as opposed to pants. that sounds too disruptive to me.

58

[quote]iamthewolf wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]iamthewolf wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
If you ban cross dressing it has to go both ways or its sexist right?

Guys at my school weren’t allowed to wear dresses/skirts/ or even kilts. Am I a victim of sexism? Should I have sued?

And yes, I think it would be disruptive. I also think there is reasonable chance the girl intended to make a scene.[/quote]
yes it does have to go both ways which is why (as far as i know) it’s perfectly legal to a man to cross dress.

if you went to a public school then, i feel, that you were. the problem with schools is that they deal with minors and for some reason people think that they lack basic civil liberties. this is why a lot of public schools can get away with enforcing rather strict dress codes.

and again i must disagree that it would be disruptive. there is nothing in any of the articles i read that implied that she wanted to do anything but go to prom. let her go. if she causes a reasonable disruption then kick her out. and no, people looking at her funny for being gay or wearing a tux is not a reasonable disruption.[/quote]

Students in a public school do no have the same rights (like it or not). They are not entitled to the same free speech rights, they do not have the same search and seizure rights, they do not have the right to bare arms, the school can ban alcohol despite the 21st amendment, they do not have a right to practice a religion on the grounds, and on and on and on. The bill of rights doesn’t apply to public schools the same way. They have the right to assign a dress code on the same criteria.

And kilt/dress/skirt wearing was banned BECAUSE it was disruptive. Teachers complained of the guys being a distraction in class (talking, rumors, not paying attention) and they were right to do it.[/quote]
first, a minor carrying a gun or drinking alcohol on school grounds is not even in the same ballpark as a girl wearing a tux. those activities are illeagal. a girl wearing pants is not.

second, someone posted a link to the school’s dress code. nowhere in it did i read anything that would prevent a girl from wearing “men’s clothes” to the prom.

third, even if i was to agree that a kilt was disruptive then we better ban girls from wearing skirts too. i don’t know about you, but i’m more easily distracted by a girl if she’s wearing a skirt as opposed to pants. that sounds too disruptive to me.[/quote]

Not all highschoolers are minors. students are banned from guns and alcohol even if they are of age. You didn’t comment on all the other ones I listed either.

Girls wearing skirts weren’t banned because, pragmatically, they were never a problem. Hell I was forced to change out of a hooters “more than mouthful” shirt because a teacher didn’t like it. I think I deserve 30k. (I responded by buying a bunch of hooters “delightfully tacky” shirts and wearing nothing but them for a time)

59

[quote]iamthewolf wrote:

[quote]Eli B wrote:
iamthewolf wrote:
Gay guys are too fashion forward to do such a thing. But I’d be fine with it. There was a (skinny, hairy, horribly ugly) guy at my college whose (fat horribly ugly) girlfriend apparently forced him to wear a dress. Sure it was gross to see his hairy ankles but it didn’t hurt anyone else.[/quote]
cute. dipshit.

but “i’m” right in that most gay guys would never do that. it’s only the closeted, popular kids (much like yourself i would assume) that really are gay but don’t have the balls to come out because they might lose some friends, that would do that.
[/quote]

I don’t understand what happened here. Quoting function error. While I do despise you and wish you would die, I would never put words in your mouth.

jk about the death thing lolz!

60

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]iamthewolf wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]iamthewolf wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
If you ban cross dressing it has to go both ways or its sexist right?

Guys at my school weren’t allowed to wear dresses/skirts/ or even kilts. Am I a victim of sexism? Should I have sued?

And yes, I think it would be disruptive. I also think there is reasonable chance the girl intended to make a scene.[/quote]
yes it does have to go both ways which is why (as far as i know) it’s perfectly legal to a man to cross dress.

if you went to a public school then, i feel, that you were. the problem with schools is that they deal with minors and for some reason people think that they lack basic civil liberties. this is why a lot of public schools can get away with enforcing rather strict dress codes.

and again i must disagree that it would be disruptive. there is nothing in any of the articles i read that implied that she wanted to do anything but go to prom. let her go. if she causes a reasonable disruption then kick her out. and no, people looking at her funny for being gay or wearing a tux is not a reasonable disruption.[/quote]

Students in a public school do no have the same rights (like it or not). They are not entitled to the same free speech rights, they do not have the same search and seizure rights, they do not have the right to bare arms, the school can ban alcohol despite the 21st amendment, they do not have a right to practice a religion on the grounds, and on and on and on. The bill of rights doesn’t apply to public schools the same way. They have the right to assign a dress code on the same criteria.

And kilt/dress/skirt wearing was banned BECAUSE it was disruptive. Teachers complained of the guys being a distraction in class (talking, rumors, not paying attention) and they were right to do it.[/quote]
first, a minor carrying a gun or drinking alcohol on school grounds is not even in the same ballpark as a girl wearing a tux. those activities are illeagal. a girl wearing pants is not.

second, someone posted a link to the school’s dress code. nowhere in it did i read anything that would prevent a girl from wearing “men’s clothes” to the prom.

third, even if i was to agree that a kilt was disruptive then we better ban girls from wearing skirts too. i don’t know about you, but i’m more easily distracted by a girl if she’s wearing a skirt as opposed to pants. that sounds too disruptive to me.[/quote]

Not all highschoolers are minors. students are banned from guns and alcohol even if they are of age. You didn’t comment on all the other ones I listed either.

Girls wearing skirts weren’t banned because, pragmatically, they were never a problem. Hell I was forced to change out of a hooters “more than mouthful” shirt because a teacher didn’t like it. I think I deserve 30k. (I responded by buying a bunch of hooters “delightfully tacky” shirts and wearing nothing but them for a time)[/quote]

ok, they should have the same free speach rights afforded to others. they should also be allowed to practice any part of they’re religion that is not disruptive (wearing a yamaka, praying quietly to themselves, etc.). no, they can’t carry firearms or consume alcohol because most are minors. and even the ones that are of age can’t because the school is a public building and those activites are illegal in public buildings. the search and seizure rights would should also be on par with what is customary at other public buildings and not based on their age.

also, to be clear, i’m not suggestion we ban skirts. i was trying to harken back to your point of if we ban one group from doing it we have to ban everyone from doing it. my point has always been that there was no rule barring her from wearing a tux.

since this thread has degraded into just you and i arguing back and forth i say we just call a truce. it doesn’t look like we’re going to convice one another of anything. this is why i avoid the PWI forums (i know this is in GAL but it’s PWI subject matter).