|
Post by Deleted on Mar 25, 2010 8:42:48 GMT
This overlaps with the dress code thread now. Insisting that women throw lipstick and mascara all around their face and wear a figure enhancing satin gown also communicates a message - a rather sinister one? Yes indeed - but they don't go around announcing to the authorities that this is what they intend to do, and that is what makes this case different. I've asked before what was to stop her taking a famale (heterosxual) friend to the prom and don't think I got an answer. She was probably sensible to state her intention in advance; it would have been highly embarrassing to both of them if they were challenged during the event. But there was no need to mention the tux at that stage; that is what made me think that perhaps her request was more about making a statement than clearing the air. Softly, softly catchee monkey....
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Mar 25, 2010 9:21:51 GMT
|
|
|
Post by trubble on Mar 25, 2010 10:06:05 GMT
Great news.
|
|
|
Post by trubble on Mar 25, 2010 10:26:54 GMT
This overlaps with the dress code thread now. Insisting that women throw lipstick and mascara all around their face and wear a figure enhancing satin gown also communicates a message - a rather sinister one? Yes indeed - but they don't go around announcing to the authorities that this is what they intend to do, and that is what makes this case different. I've asked before what was to stop her taking a famale (heterosxual) friend to the prom and don't think I got an answer. She was probably sensible to state her intention in advance; it would have been highly embarrassing to both of them if they were challenged during the event. But there was no need to mention the tux at that stage; that is what made me think that perhaps her request was more about making a statement than clearing the air. Softly, softly catchee monkey.... I often think that way, about lots of issues - it's good advice generally - but sometimes there are situations where it's no good. This case has spread around the world and cleared up a hitherto ambiguous rule. I think she has done the right thing by refusing to tiptoe around the subjective sensitivities of strangers. It seems there's a list of purely subjective rules that, by the law of averages, excludes/discriminates against at least one student per year. So she chose to challenge them. That's the normal thing for an honest law-abiding sort of person to do, isn't it? Doesn't it even seem the right thing to do? Perhaps an obligation? The thought that she'd have to go to her own school prom incognito and just cross her fingers that she didn't get challenged is quite distasteful. Someone, somewhere along the line, would have to make a stand for that situation ever to change.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 25, 2010 10:46:07 GMT
Agreed, and I wasn't suggesting she did; as I said, it would have been wise to clear it first. I'm not sure how she approached the school over this; there are ways and ways of doing it, that's all.
|
|
|
Post by june on Apr 6, 2010 19:39:51 GMT
Constance McMillen, the brave young woman who made national headlines when she fought her Mississippi school district over the decision to cancel prom because she wanted to bring her girlfriend as her date, lost the court battle to have her prom reinstated, but was promised a parent-sponsored event for she and her classmates. We've learned however, that on the night of the alleged dance, the planners sent Constance, her date, and seven other students to a fake venue while the rest of the students celebrated at the real location. We are honestly speechless. How could anyone, especially the parents of other high school students, be capable of such cruelty to a teenage girl? And on such a unified front? We reported yesterday that Constance McMillen, the brave young woman from Mississippi who just wanted to bring her girlfriend to prom, was sent to a fake dance by parents while the rest of her class celebrated at a secret location the same night. Constance has spoken out about the hateful display of bigotry, and we once again are humbled by her grace and perserverence! "They had two proms and I was only invited to one of them. The one that I went to had seven people there, and everyone went to the other one I wasn’t invited to. It hurts my feelings." Perhaps even more disgusting, however, is that the organizers not only segregated Constance, but sent two differently-abled students to the fake prom, as well! Unbelievable. We hope that everyone responsible are all very proud of themselves, singling out and taking advantage of kids with learning disabilities. We're sure that there's a whole lot of karma coming right back at them soon. Constance, however, is a true class act and focused on the positive so her classmates could have a nice night! "They had the time of their lives. That's the one good thing that come out of this, [these kids] didn't have to worry about people making fun of them [at their prom]." perezhilton.com/tag/constance_mcmillen/#ixzz0kLo6Savi
|
|
|
Post by jean on Apr 6, 2010 20:38:25 GMT
That's truly appalling!
I hadn't thought it could get any worse. What is wrong with these people?
|
|
|
Post by jade on Apr 8, 2010 7:20:15 GMT
That is bloody appalling
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2010 7:35:59 GMT
There's a slightly different version HEREwhich suggests that the "real" prom may have been the one Constance attended (without her original date) and that it was the parents of the other pupils who decided to hold a rival event and not invite her....the outcome is a little unclear and I'm not sure which story pre-dates the other. That doesn't make it better; if anything, considerably worse!
|
|