Utah school forces student to change out of kilt

[thescot]

I'm going to be very unpopular here, but the principal should have been supported. Everyone, including society loses here.

I know all about kilts being expressions of all kinds of stuff, and they should not be confused with cross-dressing, but there's a more important issue here: schools no longer teach in the US; they are primarily means of indoctrinating kids in PC behavior and free baby sitting services.

This is one more instance of the PC Police further dimishing the already diminished authority of the school administrator. No wonder our schools can't teach and our kids can't read or do a little math! Instead of using this as an instance to correct the principal's ignorance and working out a solution, the principal is forced to "apologize"--which now means exactly nothing other than a "you win" for the kid--and the kid learns that all he has to do is whine to his mother if he doesn't like the rules.

And mom learns that all she has to do is whine to the board if she does't like the rules. Her baby is, no doubt, perfect, without flaw, and should never be corrected.

And principal learns that if he (or is it a she?) should avoid discipline because he/she won't get any backing from the board if a parent whines. So from now on, stay in your office,fill out paperwork, and don't get into any discipline until there's a killing.

And meanwhile, Johnny can't read, Alice can't do a little simple algebra, let alone trig or calculus, and we're all happy in our PC tax payer funded nanny world.

If you think I exagerate, try talking to a public school teacher, and then ask yourself why a great percentage of public school teachers send their own kids to private schools! I don't think this is about kilts at all; it's about schools being systematically destroyed.

That kid would not have been permanently damaged by changing his clothes and learning that sometimes we have to go by the dictates of the "boss," whether we like it or not, whether it's fair or not, and whether it even makes sense. (Ever had a job with a knucklehead for a boss? Ask Riverkilt et al about it. I rest my case on that one.)

Now he can wear his kilt, be a hero to the other spoiled brats for "sticking it to the man," and know that from now on, whatever he doesn't like his mother will fix.

I am through venting now. I will retire to the corner to await the slings and arrows of outraged fellow kilters, but I have read over these ranting, and I stand by them.

[sathor]

I'm going to be very unpopular here, but the principal should have been supported. Everyone, including society loses here.

I would reluctantly agree, HOWEVER it was not a matter of wearing something in conflict with the rules, rather the principal told him to change because it looked like cross dressing. If my son ever were to be told he can't wear his pentagram in school and I find that they are not stopping people wearing crosses, you bet your *** that the admin will see fury from me. Likewise, if the school rules dictate no jewelry, and it is enforced strictly, then I would have no grounds to complain.

The kid didn't break any rules, he wasn't sticking it to the man. He stood up for himself. He didn't break the dress code, and the principal made a very inappropriate comment.

[GreenDragon]

"hand-sewn over 40 hours by his mother"

GREAT!!

I just saw that detail, too. That's LOVE right there!

[thescot]

I would reluctantly agree, HOWEVER it was not a matter of wearing something in conflict with the rules, rather the principal told him to change because it looked like cross dressing. If my son ever were to be told he can't wear his pentagram in school and I find that they are not stopping people wearing crosses, you bet your *** that the admin will see fury from me. Likewise, if the school rules dictate no jewelry, and it is enforced strictly, then I would have no grounds to complain.

The kid didn't break any rules, he wasn't sticking it to the man. He stood up for himself. He didn't break the dress code, and the principal made a very inappropriate comment.

Duly noted. That's the difference between English Common Law and Napoleonic Code: in the former, certain things are decided and have the force of "law" or "rules," in the latter, everythng must be codified.

To extend the argumet, there is almost certainly no specific rule probiting motorcycles in the hallway, but I think there'd be no objection to the principal requiring that they not be ridden there. (I know that's a bit extreme, but I was in a hurry and couldn't think of anything. )

I do imagine that there are rules about following directions etc. And, it's not simply a question of following rules. It appears that he wasn't punished, he was instructed not to wear the kilt any more. I don't like that instruction or the reasoning, but it's not damaging or punitive, and it's not really that big a deal. It is a big deal when a minor thing ccuts the legs out from under the school's ability to maintain discipline, and, believe me, it does exactly that! Now everyone knows what to do about anything you don't like: complain to the board.

When my own step son got sent home for wearing a kilt, we had him change clothes, explained that things don't always go our way nor is it always fair, and then moved on, so I am at least walking the talk!

I still maintain what I said before: there were lessons learned by lots of folks, and none of them were beneficial to the real purpose of a school: readin', writin', and 'rithmetic-ing.

This is probably another good reason to require uniforms at school. I'll bet ole Shortbred Jock doesn't run into this stuff at his school.

And again, what a cool site where we can all discuss stuff like this in an intelligent manner. ith:

[Roderick]

I'm going to be very unpopular here, but the principal should have been supported ...

Mr. Killman, I'd be inclined to agree if not for the fact that the "rule" broken here seems to me to be an arbitrary one. When parents try to have exceptions made for their kids, or when students themselves seek exceptions from rules that are sensible and a benefit to their learning, then it is important to support the authority (and as an anarchist, I have a hell of a time saying that) and the judgment of the administration. In this situation, however, I have to respectfully disagree with you. This strikes me as the action of an administrator who didn't think through the situation at hand, and thoughtlessness smacks to me of poor leadership.

[Roderick]

... This is probably another good reason to require uniforms at school ...

I'm always amazed by just how many of the students, usually younger ones, at my school who think that uniforms might be a good thing. It's startling!

I'd support the idea, too, but then I might have to give up my jeans and t-shirts for a shirt with a collar and a tie.

[Shanntarra]

I had to deal with a student once who didn't like the ID's that all students had to wear. It allowed for proper student tracking, and managing of student finacial affairs (Ir lunch money on the card so it couldn't be stole) Kids would scan into classes, and out. That way we accurate counts and would know who was on campus when. If you didn't have a badge you went to the office to be checked in. It was a safety issue. The student who raised the stink came to school with a bar code magic markered to his forehead. Basically the school told him, give us an accurate debate on the issue with out a demonstration and we will consider it. The kid nor his parents couldn't give any rationel other than "I don't want to wear it." The badge's stayed. The student was given the choice of moving to a new school or accepting the issue until he could produce an accurate argument.
He stayed at the school and complained about "The man". However when a debate student put together a proposal of a way to make it less evasive for the students but more profitable for the school the teachers were more than happy to aquiecess.
The original kid found another issue to argue about and contiuned to be a general nusaince while in HS.

My hubby's work allows him to wear his kilt if he chooses too as long as it is safe to do so. (IE don't want machinery or other stuff hurting him) The company across the street were letting people in sari's, Kaftan's, turbans and other "ethnic" garb to be worn. However when someone wanted to wear their kilt on 'jean's friday'. Everyone balked at the idea. He simply cited the dress code which specifically states that "Ethnic dress, as long as it does not show gentalial or breasts is acceptable in the work enviroment, provided it is not a saftey hazzard". If they wanted to let the other ethnic clothing be worn they needed to allow the kilt. They agreed. He could wear it should he chose to. It was more along the lines that if he wanted to he could, not that he would.

Was this young man looking for a fight, who knows. Did the adminstrator over react? maybe, maybe not. Is it right for parents to squak over things? depends on the issue. I personally got in the middle of one because the school would not recognize a school sanctioned award at graduation, until it would brought to the attention of local media. (I had perfect attendence all through JR & HS. School handbook states that an award is given at graduation if you do this. They didn't recognize the award. They never had a student actually care about attending school.) After my mother's upheavel the school started keeping a better eye on those students who actually do what they are told to do. They started rewarding the good behavior instead giving all the attention to the kids who skip class everyday. Something good came of this. Let's home something good comes of this kid's experience.

[Rex_Tremende]

I'm going to be very unpopular here, but the principal should have been supported. Everyone, including society loses here.

I appreciate your reasoning, and being the selective libertarian that I think I am, I too abhor a nanny society, and agree that it's a shame that public education doesn't seem to be what it used to be (though I'm not sure that can be blamed on the balky PC parents any more than it can be blamed on the uninvolved ones).

However I think the principal's error was in his supposed justification - that it might be perceived as cross-dressing (and what if it was?). Most schools have policies that prohibit clothing that would detract from an atmosphere conducive to sound education. If the principal had observed that chaos was ensuing on sight of the kilt, he might have said, "Son, the school is not ready for your kilt. Help me out here, and go home and change," he might have won an ally. But instead he projected his own biases and fears about cross-dressing onto everyone else and decreed "they" might be upset. That's dysfunction.

We don't know that the principal was cowed into apologizing. We only know that he apparently did. Perhaps he did so because after additional input he realized that there was more than one way to address the situation and his might not have been the best.

Regards,
Rex.

[Dan R Porter]

I see both sides. But the boss is not always right. The "boss" should be challenged. I would rather see my child in a formal atire such as a kilt, rather then a dirty holey teeshirt and jeans hanging off his bottom. Good on him.

[bricelythgoe]

I think there seems to be a little overreacting here. I agree with some of your points thescot. However, since I am in the school district where this happened and I live right by the school, and I know the people, I might have a unique perspective. It was just a stupid mistake on the part of the principal. He was not forced to apologize, he did it on his own. He realized his mistake and learned from it. I hope you all have read the original article that was posted in the Standard Examiner. It gives you a much better idea of what this was about. This is about learning. It was about teaching others that it is NORMAL for someone to wear a kilt. I have also been in contact with the person that wrote the article. She has received a lot of feedback and is going to do a follow up story soon.

A lot of people went on about how public education does not do this, or how it messes up that. I agree. It seems to have gotten away from the original intent of the article. Again, it was a silly mistake (all of us have done something just as silly). That is what I think. Don't read to much into it.