Pure Parents

Question:

>Pleeeeeeeaaaaaase, most of us had a potty mouth phase and we grow out of it >(with notably exceptions…hehe)

Might you be referring to Steverino? LOL Josie

Response:

> You are right Jonda.  If the worst language your son is using at 14 is > ‘prick’ then consider yourself pretty lucky.  Kids use foul language coz its > taboo and reinforcing the taboo by the school gets them attention. > Pleeeeeeeaaaaaase, most of us had a potty mouth phase and we grow out of it > (with notably exceptions…hehe) and disrupting two students normal learning > day over something so asinine is ridiculous. > Welcome to ZTP, what a wonderful world it is.

Oh absolutely. It’s always wonderful in my classroom, because people don’t say the seven dirty words (fick, shit, pussy, cock, cunt, cocksucker, and motherfucker, iirc) because those are automatic removal from the room. By using foul language, those students disrupted the learning day for 28 others.  If the teacher did nothing, other students would think that language is acceptable in a classroom.  It is not. — Jack Tarkaan                                      Kalamazoo, Michigan — NO UNSOLICITED E-MAIL AT THIS ADDRESS – Respect privacy – NO SPAM!!!!

Response:

writes: > How exactly did I bail him out? >If you think the policy is a joke, then it would stand to reason that >your next logical step would be to march indignantly into the >principal’s office, tell him that you pay his salary, and demand that >your son’s suspension be lifted.  If that’s not the case, then you have >my respect, for what it’s worth.

not much. Mark Probert A vote for Pat Buchanan is a vote for America’s First Fuhrer!

Response:

You are right Jonda.  If the worst language your son is using at 14 is ‘prick’ then consider yourself pretty lucky.  Kids use foul language coz its taboo and reinforcing the taboo by the school gets them attention. Pleeeeeeeaaaaaase, most of us had a potty mouth phase and we grow out of it (with notably exceptions…hehe) and disrupting two students normal learning day over something so asinine is ridiculous. Welcome to ZTP, what a wonderful world it is. Sarah Mom to Kalen (8) and Victoria (5 months) – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Hi, I’ve never posted to this board before. But had something to add to this > discussion. My son (age 14) was suspended today for sexual harrassment. He > had called his best friend a prick and a teacher heard. They are still best > friends, > infact they were sitting in the principles office laughing about it when I was > called > in. So how can they even call this sexual harrassment?? It doesn’t make sense to > me. I personally think they are taking a serious thing and turning it into a joke > by > calling anything and everything sexual harrassment. > Jonda

Response:

> How exactly did I bail him out?

If you think the policy is a joke, then it would stand to reason that your next logical step would be to march indignantly into the principal’s office, tell him that you pay his salary, and demand that your son’s suspension be lifted.  If that’s not the case, then you have my respect, for what it’s worth. — Jack Tarkaan                                      Kalamazoo, Michigan — NO UNSOLICITED E-MAIL AT THIS ADDRESS – Respect privacy – NO SPAM!!!!

Response:

Name calling and sexual harassment are two very different things. He called his friend a prick…he didn’t grab his friends prick. You should accept the suspension on grounds that your son should not be using that language in school and talk to your principle on what defines sexual harassment. Good Luck Katie – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> How exactly did I bail him out? >If you think the policy is a joke, then it would stand to reason that >your next logical step would be to march indignantly into the >principal’s office, tell him that you pay his salary, and demand that >your son’s suspension be lifted.  If that’s not the case, then you have >my respect, for what it’s worth. >– Jack Tarkaan                                      Kalamazoo, Michigan >– NO UNSOLICITED E-MAIL AT THIS ADDRESS – Respect privacy – NO SPAM!!!!

Response:

Hi, I’ve never posted to this board before. But had something to add to this discussion. My son (age 14) was suspended today for sexual harrassment. He had called his best friend a prick and a teacher heard. They are still best friends, infact they were sitting in the principles office laughing about it when I was called in. So how can they even call this sexual harrassment?? It doesn’t make sense to me. I personally think they are taking a serious thing and turning it into a joke by calling anything and everything sexual harrassment. Jonda

Response:

> Hi, I’ve never posted to this board before. But had something to add to this > discussion. My son (age 14) was suspended today for sexual harrassment. He > had called his best friend a prick and a teacher heard.

If I were your principal, I would suspend your son on general principles.  You can’t say that sort of thing in school.  Stop making excuses for your son and maybe he’d learn something from this besides "if I ever get suspended mom will just bail me out!" — Jack Tarkaan                                      Kalamazoo, Michigan — NO UNSOLICITED E-MAIL AT THIS ADDRESS – Respect privacy – NO SPAM!!!!

Response:

How exactly did I bail him out? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Hi, I’ve never posted to this board before. But had something to add to this > discussion. My son (age 14) was suspended today for sexual harrassment. He > had called his best friend a prick and a teacher heard. > If I were your principal, I would suspend your son on general > principles.  You can’t say that sort of thing in school.  Stop making > excuses for your son and maybe he’d learn something from this besides > "if I ever get suspended mom will just bail me out!" > — Jack Tarkaan                                      Kalamazoo, Michigan > — NO UNSOLICITED E-MAIL AT THIS ADDRESS – Respect privacy – NO SPAM!!!!

Response:

>A little bit off the sexual harassment >subject a girl was kicked from school for the rest of the year here in >Kansas for writing a poem.  The poem was about going after someone whom >killed a dog.  Ok so they are banning poetry, any sort of art (because what >may look ok to one may be offensive to someone else), banning freedom of >speech of any kind.

Despite my agreement with the issues Sarah posted about, I don’t want to see schools become prisons either.  But with regard to "free speech", there is such a thing as *responsibility* in free speech and that is what should be taught. Was she writing about harming someone? Was the dog killed in malice?  Was she venting about something that couldn’t be helped and blaming someone?  Lots to consider. Kendra ~*~ "The Business man should be protected from the unscrupulous consumer"

Response:

> The Scottsdale School District (In my not so progressive City of Phoenix)is > considering a new sexual harrassment policy to apply to all their students. > Included with the ‘common sence’ policies such as ‘bad touch’, ‘unwanted > advances’, and ‘threats’, they have also included the following: > No Teasing > No Touching > No Comments that could be construed sexual in nature > No Joking the could be construed sexual in nature > No written materials that could be construed sexual in nature.

If they had a clue, they might have written a policy that said "sexist in nature" rather than "sexual in nature" since, as the Supreme Court has stated, "We have never held that workplace harassment, even harassment between men and women, is automatically discrimination because of sex merely because the words used have sexual content or connotations." See http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/96-568.ZO.html In other words, sexual content is not the sexual harassment talisman. Yale Law Professor Vicki Schultz has also tried to clarify this distinction. Her thoughts are summarized here: http://www.thenation.com/issue/980525/0525schu.htm > I agree that no one should have to deal or tolerate Harassment which is > defined as 1.To irritate or torment persistently. >  2.To wear out; exhaust.  3.To impede and exhaust (an enemy) by repeated > attacks or raids. (which to me means someone who is repeatedly and > unendingly not getting the picture that they are unwanted).

Which means Mentos commercials should be illegal? Relying on a dictionary to figure out sexual harassment is hopeless. > But what about dating, shyly telling someone you like them, telling someone > you like their outfit, hair or even the way they walk??  How do you cover > the stumbles and falls of approaching someone you like, but they end up not > liking you? These new policies would place consequences on all these > behaviors. > (For a giggle, we also have our state legislature considering an amendment > to a Bill that would ban erections at bars….LMAO ((IOW – our governing > body is sexually underpaid if you know what I mean…)) ) > Is there a way to set a ‘reasonable’ policy?

Not the way the law is currently constructed in two distinct levels. The standard of reasonableness will protect the school district in court. But the school district wants to stay *out* of court in the first place. So it will create a margin of safety for itself by withholding the reasonableness buffer and not extending it to the students. I recommend the book Sexual Harassment: A Debate, by Linda LeMoncheck and Mane Hajdin to anyone interested in the topic.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->A little bit off the sexual harassment >subject a girl was kicked from school for the rest of the year here in >Kansas for writing a poem.  The poem was about going after someone whom >killed a dog.  Ok so they are banning poetry, any sort of art (because what >may look ok to one may be offensive to someone else), banning freedom of >speech of any kind. >Despite my agreement with the issues Sarah posted about, I don’t want to see >schools become prisons either.  But with regard to "free speech", there is such >a thing as *responsibility* in free speech and that is what should be taught. >Was she writing about harming someone? Was the dog killed in malice?  Was she >venting about something that couldn’t be helped and blaming someone?  Lots to >consider.

I saw this story.  The poem was about killing or hurting the person who hurt her dog, but their was no real dog and no real person involved.  The girl was experimenting with a specific style of confrontational poetry.  She was an honor student who was well-known in her school and was not a violent child.   The problem was that she did not tell anyone about what she was doing, but simply came into the school and tacked the poem on a door or bulletin board where she had displayed other poems before, I think. Dorothy >"The Business man should be protected from the unscrupulous consumer"

There is no sound, no cry in all the world that can be heard unless someone listens .. source unknown

Response:

>A little bit off the sexual harassment >subject a girl was kicked from school for the rest of the year here in >Kansas for writing a poem.  The poem was about going after someone whom >killed a dog.

Just curious here……but what did they find objectional about the poem? Josie

Response:

>I can hardly think of any >reason at all they would have to respect authority.  Because authority most >certainly does not respect them.

Based on rules that ask that they act like decent human beings? There is a difference in seeing flaws with their set up and going looking for problems. Confront the issue at the next school board meeting and see what they have to say about it.  Don’t just create all the possibilities in your mind first. Kendra ~*~ "The Business man should be protected from the unscrupulous consumer"

Response:

>By all means, I can see that you have some valid points.  HOWEVER, the >question I am asking is just how far is school and government going to go >with monitoring our children?  Can you not see that that militant vigilance >will breed militants at best and dissidents at worst?

By setting standards of ettiquite and basic respect issues, no.  But I’m not there to see how they enforce their rules. > >No Teasing > This makes perfect sense to me.  Teasing can easily be  harasement >especially > if it is sexual in nature and on going.  Kids don’t have the right to >tease > another in an attempt to ‘find themselves’. >But I gave you the Webster’s definition of ‘harassment’.  Now I leave you to >define teasing.  What hurts one person’s feelings does not necessarily even >phase another….especially children.

Is it only an issue if a student brings it up? If one person isn’t bothered by a certain type of teasing then it likely wouldn’t make it to a teacher or principal.  If someone is bothered, and it’s obvious to a teacher, or he/she brings it up then it should be addressed.  The line may be fine, but it’s not *that* fine. > >No Touching > If you had them clarify this, I doubt hand holding would fall under it. >But > you should check.  If the school allows touching then where is the line? >And I quote "…..intentional touching of an intimate nature is expressly >prohibited.".  You tell me if that includes holding hands.  Define intimate >nature.  Does a fundamental Mormon have a differing opinion from a New Age >Hippie, eg?

"Hand holding" is not "intimate" in my opinion.  But this is one area where you should find out the *School’s* definition instead of wondering and creating hypothetical senarios. Hands on the butt is intimate, again in mo. A kiss, plain and simple, will not hurt anything imo but making out in the hallway when they should be getting to class is another thing.  Again, these are things you should have clarified by the school. > >No Comments that could be construed sexual in nature > "I like how you walk" is not the line a normal teenager is likely to use. > Society has disintegrated to a point where marriage is now a game show >based on > greed for the almighty buck.  A few lessons in ettiquite, class and good >verbal > manners certainly wouldn’t hurt a thing. >Certainly would not hurt but is it up to the schools to become ettiquette >schools as well?  Where will the time for learning the important things like >the three RRR’s come from?

This is where I see things quite differently.  IMO, if the rules don’t allow for the distractions being mentioned then there will be more time for the 3 R’s.   Ettiquite and basic respect *should* be taught at home first.  It is the parent’s responsibiltiy.  But the school has a responsibility as well.  Just like going to work, an employer has the responsibility to see that employees are not being harassed because not everyone has been or will be taught basic respect.  Unfortunately this is a fact that will plague all generations. > >No Joking the could be construed sexual in nature > I don’t see how anyone could find something wrong with that. >I find anything that prohibits a good laugh to be extremely anal, but that >is just me.

Even at the expense of another person? Are you blond?  Want to hear the latest dumb blond jokes? Are you black?  Want to hear a joke with the N word in it? Are you Jewish?  Want to listen to a joke denigrating Jews? Are you Christian, Catholic, Mormon, JW, Wiccan, etc, etc?  Want to hear a joke that denigrades your religion? As a female do you want to hear a joke that denigrades women? (as an example) As a blond, lets say, you might be able to laugh at all the dumb blond jokes.  But if someone else is insecure in any way, why should they be subjected to it?  Especially in school where it could, and usually does, affect their learning? > >No written materials that could be construed sexual in nature. > Shouldn’t kids be consentrating on their education?  They have after >school to > read Playboy. >See previous post.  Find the classic books that you were required to read in >school that has no mention of relations with the opposite sex.  Besides, >"Barney takes the bus", I highly doubt you’ll find it.  Hell, even Anne of >Green Gables had a romance, did she not?

This is yet another area where you should be asking the school to clarify their position on this.  To be honest, I can’t think of anything I read in school that was sexually suggestive beyond the basic man/woman fall in love.  There is a difference between Romeo and Juliet and something like the Hymn to Demeter. Individual works should be decided upon based on the age of the children, etc. I personally want to know what my children are reading in school.  For instance, if a teacher in high school assigns anything by Camille Paglia, which is highly unlikely, but this is someone whom I would  have a problem with a teenager reading.   – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> >Is there a way to set a ‘reasonable’ policy? > I think the above is very reasonable. > >I think we have taken SH as an issue way way too far out of its original > >context from its roots of no longer wanting our jobs to hinge on sexual > >favors. > It was more than that.  Yes, obtaining a job shouldn’t be based entirely >on sex > and I say "entirely" because I think a guy suing for a job at Hooters is a > joke.  A woman suing for a job she can’t physically do is a joke.  Sexual > harassement WITHIN the work place is the main problem today. >I think the opposite is true.  From my experience, especially men, are so >paranoid now about SH issues that it puts a great strain on the workplace >and undermines teamwork and cohesion.  By all means, there are some places >where actual harassment goes on, but I highly doubt to the extent that is so >greatly publized by groups such as NOW.

Most of the publicity towards NOW is from their opposition and not entirely true.  NOW holds no authority over any one or any group.  One can ignore NOW or pay attention to it. >My father is 67 years old and retired last year.  In his last year of being >a sales recruiter (40 years on the job), he had a complaint filed on him >because a woman said he was looking at her breasts during an interview.  Not >only would my father never ever do this –he himself cut the interview short >because she was completely under-qualified. She settled with the company for >135K when absolutely nothing happened. Corporations today have a SH fund and >will settle out of court immediatly if someone says anything. >Maybe you should consider how fast a person can make a buck these days by >crying wolf and maybe consider how much damage that is causing the image of >women in the workplace.

As someone who owns two businesses and has had numerous employees in the past I can assure you that this subject has been considered to death.   Yes, there are those out there, men and women, who abuse the system and cry wolf for the money.  But the numbers are pretty much in line with those who commit insurance and welfare fraud.  Nearly everyone is willing to sue for any reason if they think they can make something from it and to hell with the innocent bystanders. I do have a problem with this. My husband and I had a restaurant.  One of the waitresses was about 18 and had a crush on my husband.  One day in the walk-in cooler she brushed by him in a way that caused her breast to brush his hand.  This was only one incident.  We sold the business very soon after this began but it scared me to think of what she could have done if we were to let her go.   After graduation, I worked for a motel as a desk clerk.  The manager was constantly putting his hands on me.   I hated having to go into work.  I had to keep the job until I found another. I’ve been on both sides.   I see it pretty clear. >  No one, man or > woman, should be subjected to sexual comments, actions, etc on the job. >THAT > is what sexual harassement issues should be about. >Our schools need to deal with the issue as well. >Is there a reason why parents cannot handle this at home?  Do schools need >to be responsible to teach the masses when only a few do not benefit from >good parenting? >Just some additional food for thought.

Parent’s should.  The question should be why is the issue coming up at school? Kendra ~*~ "The Business man should be protected from the unscrupulous consumer"

Response:

OMG you are so very right.  I am afraid for my kids when they reach high school years.  My kids are 9,5,4,2.  I am afraid that they will end up having to wear straight jackets and tape over their mouths because if they say or touch any one they will either be banned from school or taken to court.  Our society has gone NUTS!!!  A little bit off the sexual harassment subject a girl was kicked from school for the rest of the year here in Kansas for writing a poem.  The poem was about going after someone whom killed a dog.  Ok so they are banning poetry, any sort of art (because what may look ok to one may be offensive to someone else), banning freedom of speech of any kind.  Well just my 2 cents.  Shana

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> The Scottsdale School District (In my not so progressive City of Phoenix)is > considering a new sexual harrassment policy to apply to all their students. > Included with the ‘common sence’ policies such as ‘bad touch’, ‘unwanted > advances’, and ‘threats’, they have also included the following: > No Teasing > No Touching > No Comments that could be construed sexual in nature > No Joking the could be construed sexual in nature > No written materials that could be construed sexual in nature. > Help me here folks but lets recap the average teenager.  Unsure, Insecure, > Hormonal and trying to figure out who he/she is.  If high school can’t be a > proving and testing ground for the kind of people you like to have a > relationship with, then where are they suppose to find out these extremely > important life lessons? > I agree that no one should have to deal or tolerate Harassment which is > defined as 1.To irritate or torment persistently. >  2.To wear out; exhaust.  3.To impede and exhaust (an enemy) by repeated > attacks or raids. (which to me means someone who is repeatedly and > unendingly not getting the picture that they are unwanted). > But what about dating, shyly telling someone you like them, telling someone > you like their outfit, hair or even the way they walk??  How do you cover > the stumbles and falls of approaching someone you like, but they end up not > liking you? These new policies would place consequences on all these > behaviors. > (For a giggle, we also have our state legislature considering an amendment > to a Bill that would ban erections at bars….LMAO ((IOW – our governing > body is sexually underpaid if you know what I mean…)) ) > Is there a way to set a ‘reasonable’ policy? > I think we have taken SH as an issue way way too far out of its original > context from its roots of no longer wanting our jobs to hinge on sexual > favors. > Sarah

Response:

By all means, I can see that you have some valid points.  HOWEVER, the question I am asking is just how far is school and government going to go with monitoring our children?  Can you not see that that militant vigilance will breed militants at best and dissidents at worst? >No Teasing > This makes perfect sense to me.  Teasing can easily be  harasement especially > if it is sexual in nature and on going.  Kids don’t have the right to tease > another in an attempt to ‘find themselves’.

But I gave you the Webster’s definition of ‘harassment’.  Now I leave you to define teasing.  What hurts one person’s feelings does not necessarily even phase another….especially children. >No Touching > If you had them clarify this, I doubt hand holding would fall under it. But > you should check.  If the school allows touching then where is the line?

And I quote "…..intentional touching of an intimate nature is expressly prohibited.".  You tell me if that includes holding hands.  Define intimate nature.  Does a fundamental Mormon have a differing opinion from a New Age Hippie, eg? >No Comments that could be construed sexual in nature > "I like how you walk" is not the line a normal teenager is likely to use. > Society has disintegrated to a point where marriage is now a game show based on > greed for the almighty buck.  A few lessons in ettiquite, class and good verbal > manners certainly wouldn’t hurt a thing.

Certainly would not hurt but is it up to the schools to become ettiquette schools as well?  Where will the time for learning the important things like the three RRR’s come from? >No Joking the could be construed sexual in nature > I don’t see how anyone could find something wrong with that.

I find anything that prohibits a good laugh to be extremely anal, but that is just me. >No written materials that could be construed sexual in nature. > Shouldn’t kids be consentrating on their education?  They have after school to > read Playboy.

See previous post.  Find the classic books that you were required to read in school that has no mention of relations with the opposite sex.  Besides, "Barney takes the bus", I highly doubt you’ll find it.  Hell, even Anne of Green Gables had a romance, did she not? >Is there a way to set a ‘reasonable’ policy? > I think the above is very reasonable. >I think we have taken SH as an issue way way too far out of its original >context from its roots of no longer wanting our jobs to hinge on sexual >favors. > It was more than that.  Yes, obtaining a job shouldn’t be based entirely on sex > and I say "entirely" because I think a guy suing for a job at Hooters is a > joke.  A woman suing for a job she can’t physically do is a joke.  Sexual > harassement WITHIN the work place is the main problem today.

I think the opposite is true.  From my experience, especially men, are so paranoid now about SH issues that it puts a great strain on the workplace and undermines teamwork and cohesion.  By all means, there are some places where actual harassment goes on, but I highly doubt to the extent that is so greatly publized by groups such as NOW. My father is 67 years old and retired last year.  In his last year of being a sales recruiter (40 years on the job), he had a complaint filed on him because a woman said he was looking at her breasts during an interview.  Not only would my father never ever do this –he himself cut the interview short because she was completely under-qualified. She settled with the company for 135K when absolutely nothing happened. Corporations today have a SH fund and will settle out of court immediatly if someone says anything. Maybe you should consider how fast a person can make a buck these days by crying wolf and maybe consider how much damage that is causing the image of women in the workplace.   No one, man or > woman, should be subjected to sexual comments, actions, etc on the job. THAT > is what sexual harassement issues should be about. >Our schools need to deal with the issue as well.

Is there a reason why parents cannot handle this at home?  Do schools need to be responsible to teach the masses when only a few do not benefit from good parenting? Just some additional food for thought. Sarah

Response:

See and this is where the insanity of Zero Tolerance Policies lie.  This proposal does not allow for warnings or other such communication efforts. The first time an issue is reported, a note is sent home and a mark is put on their record – any repeat of the offence earns suspension and expulsion. This policy is also asking our already burdened teachers and admin’s to police even further the behavior of the children, not to mention that it leave serious (and I mean serious) subjects open for interpretation. Such as the reading material.  In my high school, books like The Scarlet Letter, Catcher in the Rye, The Pearl, East of Eden and other classics all had some mention of a body part or a comment on the aftermath of a sexual situation. I really fear for this next generation to be quite honest and believe me, after being treated so horribly during growing up, I can hardly think of any reason at all they would have to respect authority.  Because authority most certainly does not respect them. Sarah

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> We lived for a while in a school district that had a similar, although > much wordier, version of what your are discussing with one difference: > Harrassment was construed as a REPEATED offense. Repeated teasing of a > sexual nature, repeated innuendos, repeated unwanted touching. This > allowed for feedback. Person A did something. Person B filed a > complaint, Person A was warned that Person B felt harrassed. If nothing > more happened, then the situation was dropped. If Person A continued the > behavior or something similar, penalties were pursued. The assumption > was that Person A had to have the opportunity to learn that their > behavior was offensive. They weren’t expected to automatically know that > what they were doing was considered sexual harrassment. However, once > they were informed that their behavior was construed as offensive, they > were expected to modify the behavior. Makes sense to me. School is a > place to learn behavior as well as information. > The Scottsdale School District (In my not so progressive City of Phoenix)is > considering a new sexual harrassment policy to apply to all their students. > Included with the ‘common sence’ policies such as ‘bad touch’, ‘unwanted > advances’, and ‘threats’, they have also included the following: > No Teasing > No Touching > No Comments that could be construed sexual in nature > No Joking the could be construed sexual in nature > No written materials that could be construed sexual in nature. > Help me here folks but lets recap the average teenager.  Unsure, Insecure, > Hormonal and trying to figure out who he/she is.  If high school can’t be a > proving and testing ground for the kind of people you like to have a > relationship with, then where are they suppose to find out these extremely > important life lessons? > I agree that no one should have to deal or tolerate Harassment which is > defined as 1.To irritate or torment persistently. >  2.To wear out; exhaust.  3.To impede and exhaust (an enemy) by repeated > attacks or raids. (which to me means someone who is repeatedly and > unendingly not getting the picture that they are unwanted). > But what about dating, shyly telling someone you like them, telling someone > you like their outfit, hair or even the way they walk??  How do you cover > the stumbles and falls of approaching someone you like, but they end up not > liking you? These new policies would place consequences on all these > behaviors. > (For a giggle, we also have our state legislature considering an amendment > to a Bill that would ban erections at bars….LMAO ((IOW – our governing > body is sexually underpaid if you know what I mean…)) ) > Is there a way to set a ‘reasonable’ policy? > I think we have taken SH as an issue way way too far out of its original > context from its roots of no longer wanting our jobs to hinge on sexual > favors. > Sarah

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – >The Scottsdale School District (In my not so progressive City of Phoenix)is >considering a new sexual harrassment policy to apply to all their students. >Included with the ‘common sence’ policies such as ‘bad touch’, ‘unwanted >advances’, and ‘threats’, they have also included the following: >No Teasing >No Touching >No Comments that could be construed sexual in nature >No Joking the could be construed sexual in nature >No written materials that could be construed sexual in nature. >Help me here folks but lets recap the average teenager.  Unsure, Insecure, >Hormonal and trying to figure out who he/she is.  If high school can’t be a >proving and testing ground for the kind of people you like to have a >relationship with, then where are they suppose to find out these extremely >important life lessons? >I agree that no one should have to deal or tolerate Harassment which is >defined as 1.To irritate or torment persistently. > 2.To wear out; exhaust.  3.To impede and exhaust (an enemy) by repeated >attacks or raids. (which to me means someone who is repeatedly and >unendingly not getting the picture that they are unwanted). >But what about dating, shyly telling someone you like them, telling someone >you like their outfit, hair or even the way they walk??  How do you cover >the stumbles and falls of approaching someone you like, but they end up not >liking you? These new policies would place consequences on all these >behaviors.

How do you see that?   >No Teasing

This makes perfect sense to me.  Teasing can easily be  harasement especially if it is sexual in nature and on going.  Kids don’t have the right to tease another in an attempt to ‘find themselves’. >No Touching

If you had them clarify this, I doubt hand holding would fall under it.  But you should check.  If the school allows touching then where is the line?   >No Comments that could be construed sexual in nature

"I like how you walk" is not the line a normal teenager is likely to use. Society has disintegrated to a point where marriage is now a game show based on greed for the almighty buck.  A few lessons in ettiquite, class and good verbal manners certainly wouldn’t hurt a thing. >No Joking the could be construed sexual in nature

I don’t see how anyone could find something wrong with that. >No written materials that could be construed sexual in nature.

Shouldn’t kids be consentrating on their education?  They have after school to read Playboy. >Is there a way to set a ‘reasonable’ policy?

I think the above is very reasonable. >I think we have taken SH as an issue way way too far out of its original >context from its roots of no longer wanting our jobs to hinge on sexual >favors.

It was more than that.  Yes, obtaining a job shouldn’t be based entirely on sex and I say "entirely" because I think a guy suing for a job at Hooters is a joke.  A woman suing for a job she can’t physically do is a joke.  Sexual harassement WITHIN the work place is the main problem today.  No one, man or woman, should be subjected to sexual comments, actions, etc on the job.  THAT is what sexual harassement issues should be about.  Our schools need to deal with the issue as well. Kendra ~*~ "The Business man should be protected from the unscrupulous consumer"

Response:

We lived for a while in a school district that had a similar, although much wordier, version of what your are discussing with one difference: Harrassment was construed as a REPEATED offense. Repeated teasing of a sexual nature, repeated innuendos, repeated unwanted touching. This allowed for feedback. Person A did something. Person B filed a complaint, Person A was warned that Person B felt harrassed. If nothing more happened, then the situation was dropped. If Person A continued the behavior or something similar, penalties were pursued. The assumption was that Person A had to have the opportunity to learn that their behavior was offensive. They weren’t expected to automatically know that what they were doing was considered sexual harrassment. However, once they were informed that their behavior was construed as offensive, they were expected to modify the behavior. Makes sense to me. School is a place to learn behavior as well as information. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > The Scottsdale School District (In my not so progressive City of Phoenix)is > considering a new sexual harrassment policy to apply to all their students. > Included with the ‘common sence’ policies such as ‘bad touch’, ‘unwanted > advances’, and ‘threats’, they have also included the following: > No Teasing > No Touching > No Comments that could be construed sexual in nature > No Joking the could be construed sexual in nature > No written materials that could be construed sexual in nature. > Help me here folks but lets recap the average teenager.  Unsure, Insecure, > Hormonal and trying to figure out who he/she is.  If high school can’t be a > proving and testing ground for the kind of people you like to have a > relationship with, then where are they suppose to find out these extremely > important life lessons? > I agree that no one should have to deal or tolerate Harassment which is > defined as 1.To irritate or torment persistently. >  2.To wear out; exhaust.  3.To impede and exhaust (an enemy) by repeated > attacks or raids. (which to me means someone who is repeatedly and > unendingly not getting the picture that they are unwanted). > But what about dating, shyly telling someone you like them, telling someone > you like their outfit, hair or even the way they walk??  How do you cover > the stumbles and falls of approaching someone you like, but they end up not > liking you? These new policies would place consequences on all these > behaviors. > (For a giggle, we also have our state legislature considering an amendment > to a Bill that would ban erections at bars….LMAO ((IOW – our governing > body is sexually underpaid if you know what I mean…)) ) > Is there a way to set a ‘reasonable’ policy? > I think we have taken SH as an issue way way too far out of its original > context from its roots of no longer wanting our jobs to hinge on sexual > favors. > Sarah

Response:

The Scottsdale School District (In my not so progressive City of Phoenix)is considering a new sexual harrassment policy to apply to all their students. Included with the ‘common sence’ policies such as ‘bad touch’, ‘unwanted advances’, and ‘threats’, they have also included the following: No Teasing No Touching No Comments that could be construed sexual in nature No Joking the could be construed sexual in nature No written materials that could be construed sexual in nature. Help me here folks but lets recap the average teenager.  Unsure, Insecure, Hormonal and trying to figure out who he/she is.  If high school can’t be a proving and testing ground for the kind of people you like to have a relationship with, then where are they suppose to find out these extremely important life lessons? I agree that no one should have to deal or tolerate Harassment which is defined as 1.To irritate or torment persistently.  2.To wear out; exhaust.  3.To impede and exhaust (an enemy) by repeated attacks or raids. (which to me means someone who is repeatedly and unendingly not getting the picture that they are unwanted). But what about dating, shyly telling someone you like them, telling someone you like their outfit, hair or even the way they walk??  How do you cover the stumbles and falls of approaching someone you like, but they end up not liking you? These new policies would place consequences on all these behaviors. (For a giggle, we also have our state legislature considering an amendment to a Bill that would ban erections at bars….LMAO ((IOW – our governing body is sexually underpaid if you know what I mean…)) ) Is there a way to set a ‘reasonable’ policy? I think we have taken SH as an issue way way too far out of its original context from its roots of no longer wanting our jobs to hinge on sexual favors. Sarah

Response: