this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)

Asklemmy

42609 readers
679 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 33 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

My high school had a rule about the "difficulty" of books you could read. You weren't supposed to read too high "above your grade". I assumed this rule was something with the school library and their Accelerated Reader program.

Nope! Tried to give me ISS because I was reading "Screwjack", which I brought from home. It wasn't even in class! I was a fucking junior. A high school junior should be able to handle Hunter S. Thompson.

According to them it was "college level" and therefore I shouldn't be reading it. My father raised absolute hell in that office. Don't think they tried enforcing that rule again.

They also tried bitching about girls tops until a group of very pissed off redneck fathers had questions about how they were touching the students to measure the width.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

They also tried removed

This! This right here! This comment was edited by the mods or a censor bot! I fucking told you guys they were doing it!

I raised hell under a different name for a politically motivated mod changing my comments to agree with them, so I copied all the original comments into a word document and would edit them back to the original after the mod kept changing it, and they banned that username. This is some bullshit, and it needs to fucking stop.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 11 months ago

You ever read a 1-star review on Amazon from someone who was clearly too stupid to know how to use the product? Like someone complaining that a USB-C charger doesn't work because it doesn't plug into their iphone?

That's you. That's the type of person you are.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

It's not enforced by my schools, but when I was little, speaking local languages at school was forbidden. It's getting better now, but at that time, only the official language was allowed.

Another rule was boys weren't allowed to wear longer hairs. If the hairline was below the ears, they would be asked to cut it shorter. From time to time, boys from my class were forced to cut their hair during classes with the company of a teacher.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

In 5th grade they defined every kid that can speak another language as ESL (English as a second language) even if you spoke English perfectly. Then they put all of the ESL kids in a different class on the opposite side of the school. The result was that the school became de facto racially segregated with all Asian and Latino kids on one side and all white kids on the other. It’s not like it served a purpose anyway since none of the teachers could speak anything other than English.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

I wonder if segregation was the intention.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

"Zero tolerance" policy on fighting. Any "active" participation resulted in automatic suspension. That part sounds fine, but active participation included things like holding up your hands in self defense or trying to push the person sitting on your chest while punching you in the face off of you.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I ran afoul of this.

Someone came up and suckerpunched the absolute fuck out of me from behind, Was someone who I never even interacted with, commented towards, or even thought about. I still think, to this day, he just wanted to look like a bad ass by hitting the biggest kid in the grade.

Because they used a crutch to get around due to a gimpy leg, and because I was over a foot taller, I was deemed the aggressor.. and no amount of witnesses saying otherwise would convince the principle of my innocence. and because the office was so convinced of it, no one in my family believed me either, so no one fought against it. I had to complete a program for "violent" teens before I was allowed to return to school.. a program that was little more than slave labor in the hottest not-summer-break months, where I got accused of being a (gay slur) because only (Gay slur)'s drink their drinks the way I did, apparently. Was a super happy fun time learning experience.

I totally don't still carry the rage and bitterness about it to this day at all. Nope. not at all.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I really don't understand why schools have this rule (at least in many places in the US). Are they trying to teach you to not practice self defense and just let it happen? Doesn't sound like a great thing to teach.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It’s easy for the administrators. No investigation, no attempt to understand what happened.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago

Since the late 90s, school admins have become increasingly β€œpolice state light”; multiple vice principals with walkie-talkies, metal detectors, 3 hour after school detention, saturday detention, in-school suspension (you go sit in a room in silence for literally the entire school day), and zero tolerance. Imagine getting punched in the face and THEN being expelled for it. And I’m not even talking about β€œrough inner-city schools” or whatever; this shit happened in the Berkshires.

Of course, all their security theatre commands a budget increase and attempts to instill a sense of fear of the state into students.

We’re worried about school board meetings being taken over now but the administrations went full right wing fascist 30 years ago.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Looking at it from the other side, it's actually rare that an innocent kid is beat up without context.

Usually there's 2 kids that have a beef and have been egging each other on for days. Eventually one kid says something and the other kid snaps and makes the first move but the second kid was just as guilty.

If you only look at "who started it" the second kid gets off scot free, while the first kid gets punished. Not really fair.

"Zero tolerance " attempts to fix this by recognizing that both kids likely played a part.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You are delusional to the highest degree. Kids in school don't fight even, it's one-sided 99% of the time.

The reason for this (and the rule) is bullying. Bullies fight bullied, and everyone gets suspended because "they were fighting". Since you announced in advance that was the policy, this enables you to conveniently ignore the bullying that has taken place, and instead act as if all bullying-related fights (read: all fights pretty much) are simple fights that do not require any more attention because the issue has been dealth with with punishment.

In turn, this means that a bully who already has a bad rap and generally doesn't care about grades or standing with school admin because both are already at rock bottom can target any one kid and make their admin standing rock bottom because it will appear as if that kid is fighting all the time and constantly suspended.

There's no "other side". The kid who initiated violence is the one in the wrong, even if the other one has been egging him on. "Oh but what if the egging on is one sided and the kid can't take it anymore?" That is a symptom of your bullying reporting being garbage, not of the natural order of kids. If that kid is taking it out violently it means they've tried every other avenue including telling an adult and nothing has changed.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I'm not saying it's right, just that's their rationale. I literally discussed this with a middle school principal a few days ago and that was what she said.

Regardless of what you think about the policy, the fact is that your kids will have to abide by it.

Fact: if your kid is being bullied, they need to communicate to a person of authority. Answering a bully with violence is the wrong choice 99% of the time. They are usually bigger than you and have backup.

Also usually it doesn't progress to a fight the very first time, usually it takes weeks, and during this time you would have many opportunities to tell a teacher or something.

Again, not advocating that this is right, but that's their rationale.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

Bullying is a one directional situation. It's straight physical and mental abuse. And saying zero tolerance is right because it's two way or the bullied kid can tell an adult is akin to saying a woman could just leave the man beating her.

It's naive. It's harmful. And it's ineffective.

Your middle school principal you discussed with this is only a single administrator. I'm sure different schools have had various rationale for implementing the policy and any anecdotal response doesn't speak to the entirety of school administrators.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

And what I'm saying is that the school administrator has a vested interest in "removing bullying" by making all bullying-related in incidents be actually something else.

I agree that violence is never the answer, but maybe next time instead of talking to someone who wants to not have to deal with bullying, talk to the students who are being bullied. I guarantee you that every single one of them has tried to alert an adult and the reaction was either "well he's not doing anything too bad so I can't do anything" or "he's been put in detention temporarily and I am the only one aware that it was related to bullying".

Every single instance of kids fighting in schools can be fixed by having actual support systems in place against bullying. Figure out who the bullies are, and remove them from the bullied's life. Treat bullying as we treat parental abuse currently, it should be unacceptable that a treacher knew what was happening and did nothing, yet it happens daily.

Fact: currently, if a kid is being is being bullied, they need to learn how to end a fight.

What exactly is a person of authority going to do of you go to them? If they are going to actually do anything, is that thing going to stop it? I guarantee it won't. Their rational might be this, but as it stands either you are blissfully unaware of the reality of bulling or you are aware and simply do not care.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Back when I was in high school (in public school), chess caught on in a big way. Chess. It was the weirdest thing. It was a public school in a small farming town, and pre-Nerd Renaissance, so picture a stereotypical 80s or 90s school where jocks were top of the food chain--and then picture those same jocks in their letter jackets rushing to the library on their free periods to take turns playing chess. They set up tournaments and kept track of win/loss ratios and talked about chess strategies in the hallways.

So obviously something had to be done...I guess? The school started making rules and posting them around the school: one game per student per day. One game at a time in the lounge. No chess in classrooms or in the library! The chess board must be returned to the lounge supervisor between games, then signed out by the next person wanting to play--not just passed willy-nilly from one student to another! No outside chess boards allowed!

That pretty much strangled the chess fad. The jocks went back to stuffing nerds in lockers and sneaking out to smoke behind the school, and the chess boards returned to the shelf by the lounge supervisor, where they collected dust.

Problem...solved? The whole thing was pretty surreal.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago

Wh.... Why wouldn't they encourage this?

I mean, I know, but how dumb can they be?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago

If you're having fun and are aware of it, that's a sin.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

My school strictly prohibits vehicle use, and considers all violations a strong offense that is on a three-strikes out rule.

Yes, it includes e-scooters and swan boats.

Yes, it includes whether you are in uniform or not.

Yes, it includes whether you are in school or not.

Yes, even if you are licensed.

Yes, it is enforceable anywhere.

The rule is obnoxiously blanket.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

wdym in school or not. How can they regulate what you do in your own time. surely that must be illegal

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

It is illegal but so far nobody wants to raise an issue with it because it's a school that has a lot of govt officials, diplomats, expats, and businessmen sending their kids there. No one wants to risk stinking their own reputation by raising an issue.

As for "how", apparently if someone accidentally snaps a picture of those kids riding things they shouldn't be, anytime, and a school disciplinary officer sees it, anywhere, he can give out the warning. Has done so a few times actually.

The rationale of the rule is that vehicle operation is something not befitting the image of a student, especially a student at this (supposedly) prestigious school.

Suffice to say the damn rule made me apprehensive of riding in a friend's car for a while, and of the idea of getting my own license when I became of age.

When I decided to ask the school about the apprppriateness and legality of the rule (as an alumnus), they said "we are disappointed in you. You were a great student. We did not expect you to become someone who tries to force us to change our ways of life." That said, unless you grow up to become a nationalist or a right-winger, you are a disappointment to them, so maybe even without this vehicle use thing I'm still a disppointment to them anyway.

This story sounds absurd but yes it is supposed to be this absurd.

I still pass by this school many times as it's on my way to work. I wish I could tell those kids and new parents who might not be aware of "the system" something they should know ...

[–] [email protected] -3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The dumbest rule that fortunately was only "tried" to be enforced was no gun racks in the student vehicles in the parking lot. This is was a rural area where for almost a hundred years people would have guns in the gun-racks in their trucks mostly. But with fire arm thefts etc it was pretty rare to actually have a gun loaded or unloaded in the gun-rack. Generally you'd just have the gun in the rack if you were hunting, or patrolling your ranch or whatever.

Then Columbine happened and suddenly gun-racks and leather trench coats, aka dusters, another extremely common piece of clothing in a rural ranching town were priority number one by reactionary's. Hundreds of otherwise lawful students were suspended, ticketed, arrested etc and finally after several months I assume someone had a "are we the baddies?" moment, and coupled with hundreds of lawsuits, the school system got a new superintendent and suddenly gun racks and dusters were back to being treated as the mundane items they are.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

But with fire arm thefts etc it was pretty rare to actually have a gun loaded or unloaded in the gun-rack.

So what you're saying is, people did - rarely - leave guns unattended in a car? Students no less?And that is legal? Murica gets more absurd every time I read about it.

Under no circumstances in the wrold would I leave my unsecured guns in a car.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I mean generally I agree with you, but much like you have your phone with you constantly, you will sometimes leave it somewhere you normally wouldn't accidentally. So if you've had the gun in your truck all day, you may just leave it in the rack once in a while. As for "students" yea, it would be pretty weird to grow up in that area and not be very familiar with firearms. It would be like being amazed and surprised that most students had been driving since they were 14, or were riding horses at 8. It's pretty mundane.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

No I won't leave my gun "accidentally" anywhere. Handling a gun means "accidentally" is not part of your vocabulary.

I'm a gun owner myself, so I'm not the pearl clutching type but this is genuinely unthinkable to me. Absurd and a little scary, to be honest.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 11 months ago

You sound like the bad guy in the original story. Just totally out of touch such that it is "unthinkable" that a bunch of students wouldn't ascribe greater reverence to objects that at the end of the day are just mundane tools.

load more comments
view more: next β€Ί