Principal's panty peep petrifies parents
The ClubHouse: Archives: Principal's panty peep petrifies parents
Hippyt | Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 09:07 pm     I'm betting Xxlt doesn't have any children. Maybe if he had a daughter he would have a problem with this. I can't imagine a parent who wouldn't. And this certainly has nothing to do with the controversy surrounding the 'Girl's gone Wild' videos. This was a school dance. That woman should lose her job. |
Guinevere | Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 10:31 pm     I totally agree with you, Karuuna. The fact that they're teenagers and the fact that they went to a dance does not mean they should be subject to public humiliation. If anything, my heart goes out to them more. When you're an adult, you are more capable of making decisions and standing up for yourself and saying no. A lot of teenagers are taught to respect authority figures, and so probably didn't feel they could tell the vp where to go. And so were subjected to gross public violation. I would bet some of those girls will remember this 20 years from now, and still be embarrassed. I have things that happened when I was in school (15 years ago) that still pain me today, when I think of them. |
Honey51 | Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 06:47 am     I think that the public humiliation these kids experienced was totally unjustified. It was totally out of line and disrespectful to all. The assistant principal assumed that all the girls were inappropriately dressed. I have troubling thoughts on the value of an educator like Ms. Wilson. She seems to be a control freak. Kids need to be allowed to make mistakes and suffer the consequences for them. The kids could have been let in, then if their actions caused an inappropriate display, they could have been ejected from the dance. This would have allowed choices to be made by each girl. |
Xxlt | Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 10:13 am     i have more of a problem with my daughter showing off her arse to other 16 year old 'gentlemen' at a dance than i have with a vp checking undies at the door of a dance. fortunately my daughter was taught at an early age that her body is her body. her father does not appreciate her making an 'arse' outta herself in public, she does wear thong umderwear and knows when and where it is appropriate. The point is WHY the vp was checking panties at the door. apparently the behaviour of a 16-17-18 year old woman showing her bottom half off at a dance with her peers is not a problem with a great deal of the public. after all, we can trust 16-17-18 year old children to make the right choice all the time. yes, the inspection was done in a errant manner, there other were options. in case someone missed the point, i have no problem with panty checks done in an appropiate manner. I DO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH MY DAUGHTER SHOWING HER WARES TO HER PEERS AT A DANCE. THAT BEHAVIOUR IS UNACCEPTABLE! SHE HAS EVERY RIGHT TO WEAR THONG UNDERWEAR BUT SHE HAS THE BURDEN OF BEHAVING LIKE A LADY. AS A PARENT I HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF RAISING MY CHILDREN TO RESPECT THEMSELVES AND THE PEOPLE AROUND THEM. again, the theme seems to be that it's OK for a young woman to flip her dress up in front of her peers at a dance but it's not ok for them to flip it up outside, being asked or not being asked the end game is the same...young women are exposing themselves.......WHY NOT?????? it's not humiliating to lift a skirt while the music blares and the rapper sings, I LIKE BIG BUTTS.....take away the music and it's a crime. the girls gone wild reference was made to show that the gals are not that far removed,chronologically, than a 16-17-18 year olds. the more i think of it the more i'd like to be 17 years old again so i could go to a dance with your daughters. since parents these days have no problem with their daughters wearing thongs and flipping their skirts up at a dance they'd have no problem with me ogling their heinies. Instead i'll have to volunteer for more PTA functions and make sure my name is at the top of the list for the dances. the parents should not be suing the school for what happened, they should sue each other for MAKING the school take such drastic (and dumb) measures. apparently, there were problems at previous dance with 'exposure' at previous functions, and complaints about the students behaviour were lodged. had my daughter come to me and said she was checked for underwear i would have sat her down got her side of the story and then made some inquiries, after finding out the reason that she was checked for underwear, I'd explain that the reason rests with her peers, for acting like a bunch of mindless twits......unfortunately sometimes the good people suffer for the sins of the trashy ones. She could take that one up with the 'ladies' who flash their arse, and then with the parents who DID NOT INSTILL any sort of manners, couth or sense of modesty into their kids. parents are to quick to abstain from being repsonsible for their kids actions and behaviour. instead of complaining about a kids civil rights we should teach them to be civil, well behaved and respectful-instead of teaching them that the courts will solve everything. in another case four boys borrowed a school camera, took pictures of a female co-ed stripping.......they passed around the photos, were suspended and are now suing the school district. why were they suspended?????? they can go see a thong at a dance but they can't take picture of a nude friend????? |
Rabbit | Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 10:37 am     <<after finding out the reason that she was checked for underwear, I'd explain that the reason rests with her peers, for acting like a bunch of mindless twits>> So you would tell your daughter that because of the actions of some individuals that she may or may not know but whose behavior she certainly has no control over, that it is okay that she is publicly humiliated for something she has not done. Will she buy this? |
Whoami | Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 11:10 am     I agree with you Rabbit. I don't see how the actions of a few girls from last year (who may not even be at the school now), justifies punishing ALL the girls this year and humiliating them in public. There was no dress code, or public announcement warning the students what would be expected at the dance. They should have just announced what behavior would be unacceptable, and that any perpetrators would be ejected from the dance. How much harder could that have been to do compared to doing a public panty check? |
Xxlt | Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 11:16 am     no because i'm not selling anything. why the problem with what i tell my kids? my kids know what inappropriate behaviour is and that they have to answer to what they do, who they hang with and what comes with the territory, where did i say that it's OK that she was publically humilitated???? I AM TRYING TO EXPLAIN WHY SHE WAS TREATED IN SUCH A MANNER, AGAIN, THE REASON THAT SHE WAS TREATED THIS WAY IS BECAUSE OF THE ACTIONS OF HER PEERS. once more time....... i think that the check should have been handled with more sensitivity. (i read the line again to make sure i wrote it correctly....is there hidden meanings in what i post??????) my kids know that they will be caught in the flotsam and jetsam of an incident because of someone else's behaviour. they know that they have no control over certain circumstances in their sphere of life, they know that there are times that they will be subjected to the line 'tough sh!t' at least once in their lives. my kids aren't mollycoddled into believing that everything that happens to them is someone elses fault. critical thinking comes into play and that they have to THINK A BIT before they jump to conclusions, they also have been encouraged to think of WHY things happened as opposed to reacting like lemmings. of course, my kids aren't the best in the world and my kids have been embarrassed and my kids have lied to me before.....but i try to make them see what the wrongs of the world are and how to go about avoiding them and correcting them as they see fit. i have been caught up in the "aftershocks" of someone else's behaviour and it did not kill me. again please tell me where i said "that it is okay that she is publicly humiliated for something she has not done. " i don't seem to remember that. |
Xxlt | Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 11:21 am     i seem to have heard in an interview last night on cable that there was a warning given to students before the dance.......the interviewee was a student at the school. |
Grooch | Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 11:26 am     If the school was so concerned about people seeing the girls' underwear, wouldn't it have been better to have a code for how long their dress or skirt is? |
Alaskagal | Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 11:30 am     I don't think anyone agrees with how it was handled but I do think that we have to step back and look at why it was done. SOME (and I emphasize SOME) parents theses days expect schools to teach their kids everything from reading and writing to morals and values, but when the schools try to do that they are the first to react. I am sure I did some crazy things in my days too, but I knew that I would be held responsible for those actions, today we get to blame someone else for them and maybe even sue and make a buck or two. I think we should be angry about what happened, and I think we should be angry at this Wilson lady for what she did, but I think we need to look deeper than that. Why did she feel it was necessary. What is going on with our kids these days. We need to wake up soon or things are going to happen to these kids that are beyond our worst fears. |
Demeter | Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 12:43 pm     I wonder how many people would want to look into the "deeper issues" if this was a work function (party) and the boss decided the women must be subjected to a "panty check" before entering the room? They would be outraged and would justifyibly have a "sexual harassment" suit on their hands. Here we are speaking about children. No past behaviors of other children justifies such an action. It's like blaming the victim of a rape case. I am amazed that there is even any debate. |
Xxlt | Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 01:00 pm     we are speaking of children. not adults at work. rules and laws just so happen to be based on the past behaviours of people in general. otherwise the world would be filled with people and NO RULES. understand, a rule or law comes about because of what happened previously, like the lines at an airport because of 9/11, or the laws reagarding murder. something came up before that was UNACCEPTABLE to the public at large. lawmakers, police, teachers, lawyers DO NOT arbitrarily dream up a law and go out an enforce it...the rules come about because of an unfortunate incident previous to the law being enacted. it's far easier to be reactive than proactive. being proactive, in this case, requires parents to see what their kids are doing. jewel of the day..... some of the mothers stated that their daughters 'did not wear thongs' and 'they must have borrowed them from their friends' before going to the dance. i won't even drink out of one of my family's soda can, let alone borrow someone's thong..... go figure. |
Dahli | Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 01:24 pm     Xxlt "AS A PARENT I HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF RAISING MY CHILDREN TO RESPECT THEMSELVES AND THE PEOPLE AROUND THEM" I'll second that, my daughter knew this from a very early age - why is this concept so foreign to so many parents...? Everyone is so freaked about the result instead of looking at the cause. Prevention people!!! |
Llkoolaid | Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 02:31 pm     Why does anyone think that it is their business what kind of underwear anyone has on and what does wearing a thong have to do with having respect for yourself or others? The teachers actions were abusive and she should be dealt with quickly along the police officer who stood by and anyone else that co-operated in this violation. If this happened to my daughters I would see Miss Rita in court, I would be up for assault charges, she would be in casts and bandages. |
Guinevere | Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 02:35 pm     You prevent girls from potentially exposing themselves by...exposing them?! Sorry, I don't see the logic there. Let's take the worst-case scenario (and I haven't heard any evidence that the worst-case scenario is at all true): say at previous dances, girls were wearing short skirts with thongs and deliberately exposing themselves. The solution would have been to eject said girls from dance, and announce that at future dances, girls who indulged in the specified unacceptable behavior would be ejected immediately (and possibly banned). If this theoretical ass-exposing was so pervasive that there weren't enough adults to monitor it, well, then, you've got a bigger problem, and perhaps you just shouldn't be holding dances until you have the problem under control. I haven't even heard that there WAS such a problem that I describe at this school or their dances. But even if there was, to take a "guilty until proven innocent" approach, and to cause the same thing you are supposedly trying to prevent (girls being exposed) is indefensible. |
Xxlt | Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 03:48 pm     let's see..... "I DO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH MY DAUGHTER SHOWING HER WARES TO HER PEERS AT A DANCE. THAT BEHAVIOUR IS UNACCEPTABLE! SHE HAS EVERY RIGHT TO WEAR THONG UNDERWEAR BUT SHE HAS THE BURDEN OF BEHAVING LIKE A LADY. AS A PARENT I HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF RAISING MY CHILDREN TO RESPECT THEMSELVES AND THE PEOPLE AROUND THEM." that's what thongs and respect have in common. beat the crap outta people, what a novel way to solve a problem. ------------ no you prevent the girls from being bothered because the have exposed themselves. had a girl, who has every right to wear thong underwear, exposes herself and then is bothered, molested, raped etc. by a member of her peers at the dance, the effect would have been the same..people with pitchforks, torches and shovels at the gates, demanding blood......the school was trying to protect themselves from that scenario. yes you cannot be everywhere at once and WE CANNOT implicitly trust ANY kid to behave in a rational manner. again, i said that the panty check could have been done in a more sensitive manner. the reason there was a panty check wasn't just thought up as a form of harrassment one day...... i have never advocated the public "humiliation" of ANYONE.....the check at the door was (poorly) done to head off any potential problems..... Had the ladies been brought up in a more structured enviroment there would be no concern to the school staff that there was any flashing going on. another funny point to the story is that there supposedly was a 'panty ban' at this dance and the students STILL showed up in the banned underwear. that makes sense, to toss the gals who expose themselves at a dance, then make the announcement that any behaviour in the future will be dealt with.....wait until there is an incident...... let me try this one more time THE INSPECTION WAS NOT DONE IN A MANNER CONDUCIVE TO THE SETTING. THERE WAS A REASON FOR THE STAFF TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT THE WAY THE LADIES WERE DRESSED. THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN EXPOSED AT THE FRONT DOOR. better yet eff everything, cancel all future dances and then there will be no problems....again, the suing parents, the immature children, and the improper school system can rest easy...... instead of being pissed off at the few knuckleheads who blew it for the majority everyone can take it on the chin for it. it's too bad that everyone has to suffer for the actions of the few, but the few are never held responsible...they sulk off into the treeline and never admit their actions are the cause of all the drama..... guilty until proven innocent????? yes, the VP made a tactical mistake but we no longer look for an apology or repentence, we look for a financial massage, ruin to someone's career and the taste of raw meat on our palate. i am guilty of leaping without the look, but i try to take things in context and re-read any points i choose to debate..... dahli, aretha franklin said it best r-e-s-p-e-c-t........ |
Karuuna | Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 04:04 pm     Oh, I see. Blame the victim, eh? A girl wears a thong and gets raped, so its her fault for wearing the thong? Preventing her from wearing a thong therefore prevents being molested??? yup, we're back in those caveman days... How about just eliminating the boys from the dance? That way no molestation would occur. (please engage sarcasm detector). XXLT, you have some unusual ideas about rape, being female in our culture, rights of individuals, and where the blame lies for molestation. I hope you'll take the time to actually listen to what the women here have to say. You might learn something if you're willing to listen with care, attention and a little more compassion. |
Demeter | Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 04:23 pm     xxlt--Respect? Are you kidding? Where was the respect shown for these girls? It should have been done in a more sensitive manner? NO...it should not have been done AT ALL. Whether or not "some" girls had acted out in the past, has nothing to do with this "Adult's" behavior. This isn't just about the girls being humilated. They were grossly violated. For many girls of that age, such an action would be traumatic...no different than someone fondling them. The adults should have known better. To be debating such a given is beyond bizarre. |
Xxlt | Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 04:55 pm     no the thoughts on molestation and rape are not unusual..... i ended that thought with "we cannot trust any kid" PERIOD...... both parties are to take responsibility in that case..... apparently you didn't read and comprehend...by your comment i see that you find no problem with a lady exposing themselves in a mixed crowd at the dance....i was not talking about adults, parties or anything like that...... it's too bad that young men cannot control themselves in that situation, whereas an adult may have the self control, a young man does not. THIS IS COMICAL...... I DID NOT SAY THAT IT WAS HER FAULT FOR GETTING RAPED FOR WEARING A THONG. if she engages in some stupid, immature and questionable behavior at a function, then she has to assume RESPONSIBILITY, not blame.... why not leave the girls out of it and the men can bond, put the gym to a better use, like basket ball, volleyball, or dodgeball. that way we can be assured that some ill mannered women won't show up to cause a scene. Oh you women and your never ending quest to be cute (sarcasm detected, Scottie, give me all you've got!) besides since we are in the 'caveman' days you gals can stay at home and mind the homefires (more sarcasm captain!!!)and have babies (get your boots the sarcasm is knee deep here!) you cannot possibly know what and how i feel about rape, females in the your culture and the rights of individuals, you cannot possibly know how i listen, care and pay attention or how compassionate i am. (recently a close personal friend called me for advice because she was going out on date. i told her to drive her own car, not to drink too much and not invite her date back to her home, later she called me back to say she went back to her place with the gent and passed out, she doesn't remember what happened that night and she's not returned my calls for the last two months. i'm such a b@st@rd!!!!!!!!) go back and let me know where i said that a young lady is to BLAME for being raped/molested for wearing a thong. i don't do heiroglyphics or speak in tongues......just tell me where you saw that statement..... you said, Blame the victim, eh? A girl wears a thong and gets raped, so its her fault for wearing the thong? Preventing her from wearing a thong therefore prevents being molested??? qualify that statement and i'll be the first to apologize! happy hunting! |
Xxlt | Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 05:08 pm     demeter, where was the respect for the no thong rule???? as i said before, every rule has a history... and it sucks that the people that follow have to abide by the 'RULE'......... my understanding of technical law is that "grossly violated " is a rape charge. fondling is also a sex charge.... you know it's almost time to hit the beach here in Cal and go see all the young teenagers in thongs.......how humiliating. |
Grooch | Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 05:45 pm     Burkas! Get your Burkas, here! 3 for $10! |
Squaredsc | Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 05:54 pm     the ends do not justify the means in the school issue. |
Karuuna | Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 05:58 pm     xxlt - you wrote: <<no you prevent the girls from being bothered because the have exposed themselves.>> So you're saying the way to prevent the girls from being bothered (molested) was to keep the girls from exposing themselves. Now, what about English do you not understand? Sigh. It absolutely does not matter what a woman does or does not wear - rape and/or molestation is a crime and the only one who bears responsibility for it is the perpetrator. Let's start blaming folks for wearing Rolexes, after all, if they didn't wear them, they wouldn't get robbed. The heck with the thief, it's the watch-owners fault for exposing their watch in public. This idea that no kid can be trusted is also ludricous to me. If they can't be trusted, let's just lock them all up. Sarcasm intended. I'm with Grooch - let's give them the respect of ultimate protection. Get out those burkas. Now disengaging sarcasm software, and excusing myself from this thread. |
Llkoolaid | Friday, May 03, 2002 - 04:50 am     Xxlt, the beating someone up thing was sarcasm too, just trying to make a point about how angry I would be. This is a stupid arguement, sorry but I am outta here, but glad to talk to you all on another thread and another topic. |
Ocean_Islands | Friday, May 03, 2002 - 01:53 pm     I think the principal should be sentenced to two weeks in a thong and community service in the White House. |
Nashbag | Friday, May 03, 2002 - 02:11 pm     LOL Ocean thanks for a little comic relief |
Sia | Friday, May 03, 2002 - 04:39 pm     Please, folks, let's not dissect one another's posts! Let's all agree that we're outraged and get back to the issue at hand. "Why can't we all just get along?" --Rodney King |
Twiggyish | Friday, May 03, 2002 - 05:24 pm     I think we're getting along. We do get into heated debates once in awhile. It reflects our differing views. This is mild compared to our discussions in other areas on this board. |
Squaredsc | Friday, May 03, 2002 - 06:26 pm     sia unfortunately, the dissection of one another's posts is the nature of the debate, and a way for us not to be mis-interpretated(sp). i know this first hand 'cause my posts always get dissected, but i can handle it. i wouldn't take the time to post my viewpoint if i didn't expect someone to either agree or disagree. it is obvious that this is a heated topic, but like twiggy said it is mild by comparison. unfortunately i don't think that we can sway xxlt's opinion in this issue. And LL, you are right this is a stupid argument and really shouldn't be debated anylonger. I'm Out. |
Xxlt | Wednesday, May 15, 2002 - 05:05 pm     just back from vacation and it looks like i don't have to apologize....i don't mind eating crow once in while, it's not bad with a plum glaze and a nice merlot. The nice part about having discussions is you can agree to disagree and if you follow the 'arguement'you don't have to 'sway' or try and change an opinion of anyone. i also take into consideration a person mispelling a word or leaving out letters. I'll say thanks to the folks who took the time to write a rebuttal and the folks that took the time to read the whole sentence, as opposed to reacting to a 'byte on the a$$' oh, by the way, karuuna, comparing rape to rolexes is a stretch. I'm scratching my head at that line......if you know that a rolex will get you robbed you don't shoot your cuffs at every opportunity, conversely, a women with respect for herself and those around her will not flash her a$$ in public. THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE. basically, my point was it sucks to follow the rules, it sucks to be punished for someone else's stupidity, and that parents have fallen down in their responsiblity to teach their kids RESPONSIBILITY, RESPECT, and the RULES. Parents refuse to 'see' what their kids are up too. why cry when someone else takes on THEIR responsibility? |
Twiggyish | Wednesday, May 15, 2002 - 08:12 pm     I wonder what happened in this case? We haven't heard anything new. |
Karuuna | Wednesday, June 19, 2002 - 03:53 pm     Here's the resolution, from AOL News Service: Calif. Woman Demoted for Thong Check .c The Associated Press SAN DIEGO (AP) - A female assistant principal was demoted for lifting girls' skirts to make sure they weren't wearing thongs to a high school dance. Rita Wilson's thong check April 26 in front of male students and adults had enraged parents, one of whom threatened to sue. The Rancho Bernardo High School administrator, who has tenure, will be reassigned to a teaching position, the school board decided Monday. ``I'm very disappointed and deeply saddened,'' Wilson, 47, said as she wiped away tears and hugged supporters. An investigation by the school district concluded Wilson ``went far beyond the grounds of propriety'' with the underwear inspection. Students said Wilson lifted girls' skirts before they entered the dance, and told those wearing thongs to go home and change. Wilson said she was concerned the combination of revealing clothing and suggestive dancing could lead to sexual assaults. |
Wcv63 | Wednesday, June 19, 2002 - 04:18 pm     "I'm sorry, you want me to show you WHAT? No can do Ms. Wilson." My daughter will be taught that she doesn't have to show anybody her underwear, ever. I guess she would have been turned away at the door for refusing to comply with the ass. principal's demands but that is less of an insult than what the other girls had to endure. |
|