Skip to main content

High school girl forced to wear "shame suit"

Recently, at Oakleaf High School in Florida, Miranda Larkin, who was new to the area, attempted to make a good first impression on her peers by dressing up and wearing a skirt. Unfortunately for her, the school viewed her as dressing down, said the skirt was too short, and she'd need to change into the school's "dress code violation outfit." This outfit consisted of a neon yellow t-shirt with the words "DRESS CODE VIOLATION" being displayed in all caps, as well as bright red shorts, where those same words were also displayed.

Miranda's mother, Dianna Larkin, has referred to the outfit as the "suit of shame," and plans on filing a complaint under FERPA (the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act), because she feels the school crossed the line with their actions.

She told ABC News, "I really do believe in punishing my kids if they do something wrong, but this is not about punishing kids. This is about humiliation."

She's right, and the school's actions on the matter are ridiculous for at least two reasons. First off, it's quite ironic that a school would demand that a teenage girl change out of her all too "distracting" skirt and into a neon-colored outfit with the message "DRESS CODE VIOLATION" being displayed in all caps. Which is the more distracting outfit again? Secondly, does the school really think that whether a girl wears a skirt or not, she's not going to distract teenage boys' attention? Weren't they teenagers once? Heck, while women may not mind getting looks from guys, what's the main reason most of them dress up? It's not to impress guys. It doesn't matter whether a woman wears a short skirt or a hoodie and pajama bottoms, if a group of guys finds her physically attractive, they're going to ooh, ah, and make some perverted comments which may land them in the hospital if the woman hears them. This girl was likely just trying to dress up and look good, in hopes that it would spark conversations with fellow females and lead to making new friends. It's a shame the school felt the need to embarrass her. The least they could have done is to have talked to her about matters privately and either asked that she not wear the outfit again or send her home to change, as opposed to making her wear an even more distracting (as well as humiliating) outfit. The school should be ashamed of themselves, be forced to wear an even more humiliating outfit than the one they forced Miranda Larkin to wear, and apologize to women everywhere for attempting to give credence to the notion that women "kind of ask for it" when they wear certain outfits. How about we spend more time teaching men to respect women as opposed to making women feel shameful for trying to look and feel attractive?

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/09/08/3564184/high-schooler-shame-suit-dress-code/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...