Reason.com

Print|Email

New at Reason

February 17, 2007

In the artifact from our March issue , Ron Bailey looks at one high school's zero-tolerance war on medieval swords.

← Radicals For Capitalism: A Home on… | Main | The Rack n' Roll Billiards Case… →

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment or disable your ability to comment for any reason at any time.

|2.17.07 @ 9:40AM|

"Just how a photo of a teenaged boy dressed in chain mail with a broadsword slung over his shoulder constitutes "a threat to our educational environment" apparently needs no explanation."

Could it be the administration secretly thought it might offend Muslims? After all, this is they type of garb the Crusaders wore into battle. Hmmm, just a thought . . .

|2.17.07 @ 11:00AM|

So, a 250 year old image is no threat, but a 550 year old image is. God!! What about the pictures of cavemen in the textbooks? Oh, that's right, the world is only 6,000 years old and started out civilized with Adam, so we don't want the pictures of cavement anyway! :(

Brett|2.17.07 @ 11:02AM|

That principal's mother was a hamster and her father smelled of elderberries.

Brett|2.17.07 @ 11:03AM|

Make that "his father...".

Grotius|2.17.07 @ 11:25AM|

Link on the story: http://www.splc.org/newsflash.asp?id=1430&year=

The Wine Commonsewer|2.17.07 @ 11:36AM|

Didn't we already do this once?

I am frankly baffled that the ACLU would choose such an idiotic cause to hang its hat on.

Do I think the school administrators are dopes? Yes.

But here's the thing, it's a school yearbook, somebody has to make decisions about the content. Apparently it is not okay for the person in charge to make a stupid decision about content based on a certain standard.

So whose standard shall it be?

Joe's? Mine? Bailey's?

I can hear it now. oh, but THAT picture (insert whatever your clever imagination can come up with here) is clearly over the line.

By whose standards?

|2.17.07 @ 11:39AM|

Make schools private and the parents can choose what curriculum to send their kids to, and it is no buisness of the ACLU

The Wine Commonsewer|2.17.07 @ 11:48AM|

Kwais, thank you for a breath of fresh air.

That is the obvious answer, particularly in view of the fact that this is reputed to be a libertarian website.

One more reason to abolish public schools. Amen, brother, Amen.

Jennifer|2.17.07 @ 12:10PM|

I am frankly baffled that the ACLU would choose such an idiotic cause to hang its hat on.

The idiots who made this decision get their authority from the government and their paychecks from the taxpayers. Sounds like a legitimate ACLU cause to me. Not the most important cause, granted, but legitimate all the same.

|2.17.07 @ 12:21PM|

How amusing. Even as I write this, my younger son is pondering what sort of medieval weapon he wants to construct for his 6th grade class assignment. Then again, his (Episcopal) school's nickname is the Crusaders. (I do have to wonder what my fellow Dallasites would think of a Muslim school that took the nickname Jihadists or, for that matter, how the Latino community here would react to, say, the North Central High School Conquistadors, but I suppose that's a bit OT.)

|2.17.07 @ 1:20PM|

One of the schools that my HS competed against in sports was the Shenandoah Raiders. Their mascot was a Union soldier. He carried a sword to all functions. Oddly enough, no one felt this was particularly dangerous.

Nick

|2.17.07 @ 1:45PM|

You don't get it.

They're worried about encouraging any more drive-by swordings.

|2.17.07 @ 1:47PM|

But here's the thing, it's a school yearbook, somebody has to make decisions about the content.

Not a bad point, as far as it goes, there TWC.

Apparently it is not okay for the person in charge to make a stupid decision about content based on a certain standard.

No...it's not o.k. Which is why we're holding it up for ridicule.

If nothing else, making mock of bureaucratic capriciousness should always be encouraged. It might not change the situation...but don't take away the iconcalsts God-given right to vent spleen and hurl invective at the folly of small-minded, petty wankers.

So whose standard shall it be?

The 'standard' in this case appears to be an arbitrary one. Given that acceptance of a 'standard' is an individual one and often highly subjective, it's not too much to ask that a public servant's decree abide by some logical sense. When it fails to do that and good people are needlessly encumbered, it deserves merciless ridicule.

The lack of sense is often behind most applications of zero-tolerance policies.

If you want to spend you weekend pissed, check out www.ztnightmares.com.

Stuart Coleman|2.17.07 @ 1:59PM|

I'm reasonably sure the school agreed to publish the photo after it became a big stink. I didn't follow it too closely, but I did graduate from that school two years ago, so the story more or less followed me.

And yes, Littlefield is an idiot, you can trust me on that one.

Dennis|2.17.07 @ 2:24PM|

What struck me about this whole thing was that the school was actually doing this kid a tremendous favor by not publishing this photo. I mean, I shudder when I consider my now-adult classmates seeing the photo of me in my yearbook wearing cuffed khaki pants, docksiders and TUBE SOCKS for a debate, sitting next to my partner who is wearing a perfectly respectable suit. A photo of me in chain mail would send into hiding and name-change territory...

(But I guess this kid should be allowed to make an ass of himself if he wants, just like we all were...)

|2.17.07 @ 5:20PM|

What if a Muslim student decides to dress up as a "Jihadist" from the "other side", (from approximately the same time period.) Inciting terrorism, then you play the "freedom of religion" card. Ahh! the possibilities are endless!! Let Hannity, O'Reilly and the ACLU fight that one out. Sounds like fun!

Prince Harry got slammed for dressing up as a Nazi for a costume party, now he's off to Iraq to win his spurs back. Seriously, I wish him well, and pray for his safety.

|2.17.07 @ 5:34PM|

Even better, what if the Muslim dressed like the Crusader, and this kid like the Moor?

|2.17.07 @ 8:10PM|

I joined the army reserves at 17 and went to basic between my junor and senior year of highschool. They put a picture of me in the yearbook in uniform with my rifle. Of course we had a "no weapons" policy, but I guess someone applied common sense.

|2.17.07 @ 8:50PM|

The school is clearly looking out for its students, they obviously don't want him to grow up to be a sword wielding 39 year old living with his mother.

|2.17.07 @ 10:29PM|

All I could think of when I saw the picture was that, since his head is covered in chain mail, this is the only kid at that school who won't look at his yearbook pic in ten years and think "Jesus, did I ever really wear my hear like THAT!!????!!"

Then again, I graduated in 1981, the era of Super Inflated Hair, so maybe I'm not entirely objective. And yes, I did have really big, poufy hair, made all the bigger by being red.

|2.18.07 @ 4:09AM|

I am a little surprised they didn't make any noise over the ale cup (mug?) hanging from is belt. I guess the 5' sword distracts the viewer too much.

|2.18.07 @ 5:39AM|

Why not go into the school library and find a history book. Turn to the section on WWII and find a picture of the nuclear bombs that were dropped on Japan.

Call the police (Boston police if possible) and report that there are nuclear weapons in the school. Then sit back and enjoy the stupidity.
(As a parent I guess I could then sue the school for endangering my daughter by having "a threat to our educational environment" in the library.)

This may all sound stupid but it's how the Zero Tolerance mindset seems to work. A picture of a sword or gun is the same as having a sword or a gun.

|2.18.07 @ 12:29PM|

This may all sound stupid but it's how the Zero Tolerance mindset seems to work. A picture of a sword or gun is the same as having a sword or a gun.

I can't wait for the story where we hear about the high school valedictorian who is suspended and jailed for innocently turning in a picture of a butter knife she found in her car.

The Wine Commonsewer|2.18.07 @ 1:08PM|

The 'standard' in this case appears to be an arbitrary one. Given that acceptance of a 'standard' is an individual one and often highly subjective, it's not too much to ask that a public servant's decree abide by some logical sense....

Yes, whose logical sense? My sister's?

Every logical standard set will be arbitrary. So, you either invest the management with the authority to set standards or you allow all comers. I personally don't care if someone has a photo taken in chainmail and a sword. But there are many photos I can imagine that I would find objectionable if they were included in my kid's yearbook.

Oh, but that's different you say? No it isn't, not under the first amendment anyway.

The Wine Commonsewer|2.18.07 @ 1:09PM|

Jennifer, anything that beats up school administrators is good thing, but it seems like the ACLU might have a better use for their time.

The Wine Commonsewer|2.18.07 @ 1:13PM|

Mad, I'm very familiar with zero tolerance policies and their abject stupidity. Mrs TWC once wrote a piece about a girl who collapsed and died because she couldn't get to her inhaler that was locked up in the school nurse's office.

The Wine Commonsewer|2.18.07 @ 1:25PM|

Today's public school inmates have more on-campus freedom of expression than any HS kid had forty years ago when all high schools had dress codes, yet, somehow, that isn't enough. It's completely unreasonable to tell a dork he can't have his picture in the yearbook wearing chainmail.

The fact that the state forces attendance at government erected prison camps, er, schools escapes the attention of the ACLU, who, like this kid in chainmail, mistake the freedom to make an ass out of oneself in the high school yearbook, for actual freedom of choice, which, for all intents doesn't exist at all.

|2.18.07 @ 1:46PM|

WC:

The ACLU is very picky when it comes to issues.

Their first motive is to go for causes which will likely be resolved out of court, for which they can collect a few bucks and brag about their victory all over the legacy media. This one is stupid enough to be made to order for them.

Next, it has to be one which they agree with. They aren't interested in the stupidity of the whole issue, they are focused in on the First Amendment aspect -- that's what they hang their hats on in most cases.

Then, it has to be carried in the news. They don't do anything that won't get them in the papers or on the Six O'Clock Follies, portrayed as David against the Government Goliath.

If you detect an air of contempt for the ACLU, you're right. We need an organization like that, but what we got was the ACLU.

This is the same "civil rights" organization which signed off on the Democrats' internment of 110,000 people whose sole crime was having "one drop of Japanese blood!"

Worse, when a handful of attorneys DID take the cause of the Nikkei, the national ACLU condemned them (causing a rift between the San Francisco and National offices that lasted for decades).

Jennifer|2.18.07 @ 2:33PM|

Today's public school inmates have more on-campus freedom of expression than any HS kid had forty years ago when all high schools had dress codes

And when a valedictorian is expelled and labeled a drug abuser for having aspirin in her purse, I'm sure that cheers her right the fuck up.

The Wine Commonsewer|2.18.07 @ 6:08PM|

Having an aspirin in your purse isn't freedom of expression. Now if she wanted to be photographed for the yearbook holding a bottle of Anacin and they denied her, well, then I could see your point.

Actually, I agree with you. It's kind of a Catch 22 when the school nurse will refer you for a hush hush abortion but you're kicked out permanently for holding aspirins.

The Wine Commonsewer|2.18.07 @ 6:08PM|

J Golden, well said.

Jennifer|2.18.07 @ 6:37PM|

TWC, I'm not saying that an aspirin is freedom of expression; I was responding more to your "harrumph damn kids don't realize how good they have it" tone. Perhaps I misread that.

But if we're limiting ourselves to comparing freedom of expression, which kid was more likely to be expelled for drawing a picture of a soldier holding a gun: a member of the class of 1960 or the class of 2010?

The Wine Commonsewer|2.18.07 @ 8:11PM|

Jennifer,

Fundamentally, I doubt that we disagree very much on this.

When I use the term inmates , I'm not denigrating the students, I am making reference to the larger issue of forced attendance--mandatory schooling, something that approaches involuntary servitude, with jail time for the most egregious of parental offenders.

It seems as though everyone is so caught up in the freedom to make an idiot of yourself in the yearbook that this point is overlooked.

And what if your 1960 student is gay? Or black and lives in Montgomery?

|2.18.07 @ 9:36PM|

Every logical standard set will be arbitrary. So, you either invest the management with the authority to set standards or you allow all comers.

TWC, while you and I don't always agree we're usually in the same ballpark. In this case, we're hangin' up on the word 'arbitray'...which is a somewhat typical complaint on the part of libertarians for justifying not having any standard at all. That's cool with me.

Since that's where you're going, I'll see your arbitrary and raise with an appeals system that mitigates letting the wankers have their way too much of the time and lets (sometimes) more sensible folk weigh in.

Sad thing is that school boards are every bit as bad as every other politically motivated group of power-grabbing jackasses...and likely wouldn't do any good.

Which is to say, I'm not taking a hard position on this whole mess one way or another...except for the assertion that the principal is a dickhead and the kid in question is a dork.

That anyone - ANYONE - takes a high school yearbook photo this seriously is a sad testament to lives loaded full of screwed up priorities.

I am making reference to the larger issue of forced attendance--mandatory schooling, something that approaches involuntary servitude, with jail time for the most egregious of parental offenders.

As for this, 'Servitude' seems a little dramatic...but I'm gonna go out on a limb and figure you don't really want large numbers of teens who've chosen not to attend school, roaming around looking for something too occupy their boredom...like robbing your house.

In the absence of a better plan, I'm content to have large numbers of aimless teens warehoused for a small chunk of the day while me and the rest of the quietly desperate masses are working.

|2.18.07 @ 9:39PM|

As Heinlein said:

"A board is long and narrow. It is made of wood."

The Wine Commonsewer|2.19.07 @ 1:44AM|

In the absence of a better plan, I'm content to have large numbers of aimless teens warehoused for a small chunk of the day while me and the rest of the quietly desperate masses are working.

Hey, I'm a drama queen, but I also live a long way from the city, so those roving bands of jobless school exempt teens are going to your house long before they hike to mine. :-)

LOL

The Wine Commonsewer|2.19.07 @ 1:51AM|

So, Mad, where do you surf?

|2.19.07 @ 3:52AM|

Madpad,

The main reason why your hypothetical teens act like idiots, is because they are treated like children. Personally, I think 14 (or maybe 15 or 16) should be the legal beginning of adulthood. The teens won't be bored if they are working!

There is no reason why people can't have a high-school education by 14; it's really not that much to learn.

|2.19.07 @ 8:11AM|

So, Mad, where do you surf?

Not sure I understand the question, country boy.

The main reason why your hypothetical teens act like idiots, is because they are treated like children.

No...lot's of real teens act like idiots. They often get treated like children because they are fundamentally immature and act that way.

I realize this is is not a zero sum proposition...there are lots of stupid parents and educational personnel out there. And there are lots of smart kids. And you are probably right that real life should start earlier for most kids.

Still, I would be careful jumping to the defense of children as more mature than they are given credit for...by and large, they are not.

The Wine Commonsewer|2.19.07 @ 9:45AM|

I think Real Bill has a point about busy hands being happy hands. Nature intended teens to be adults at puberty. Modern culture has pushed that out quite a ways.

I used to work for an old guy who began his career laying railroad track at 14. He worked six ten hour days every week. Got paid the same as the men. He didn't really have a choice, his parents were dead and his little brother needed a roof over his head. In our modern piece of America that circumstance isn't likely to arise, giving us the luxury of an extended adolescence. Aside from that, he couldn't make that choice today, it's illegal.

That isn't to say Mad's take is wrong, just to say that I agree that some of the problems we have with high school kids stems from the fact that they're just marking time, they're bored, they're idle, and we have low expectations of them.

And it isn't a new problem, my grandfather had a saying.....What are you? A smart ass or a high school kid?

The Wine Commonsewer|2.19.07 @ 9:45AM|

Mad, looked at your email address, which I assume to be fake, but I also assumed surfer to mean one who surfs, the beach kind. Guess that could also be one who surfs, the internet kind. Or it could mean nothing at all. :-)

|2.19.07 @ 11:08AM|

Mad, looked at your email address, which I assume to be fake, but I also assumed surfer to mean one who surfs, the beach kind. Guess that could also be one who surfs, the internet kind. Or it could mean nothing at all. :-).

Gotcha. I had forgotten about that. I suck at surfing but every couple of years, I pick up a surfboard and give it a go. My brother - who I ski and SCUBA dive with - is a much better and avid surfer and skateboarder (i suck at that too). We live in Northeast Florida...worse surf than some but better than most.

The 'surfer' on the e-mail address was a pean to that AND an online concept I had been working on call Profit Surfer. Didn't go far. Focus shifted. All that's left is a memory. Now that address (which is not a fake, BTW) is a catchall place to send nosy e-mail marketers and abusive Hit-&-Run posters.

My oldest is 10 so I'm planning on getting he and I into surfing this summer. We'll see how it goes.

How 'bout you? You shredder or a long boarder?

|2.19.07 @ 11:16AM|

Jeez, I wish they would do away with senior vanity pics altogether. Remember the girl who was mauled by a tiger during her senior photo shoot?

http://www.bigcatrescue.org/big_cat_news_files/2005/17yroldkilledbytiger.htm

These pics are ridiculously pricey. I paid for them for my sis 10 years ago and they were more than $400. I did not have to pay for them for my oldest as she hated high school, got a GED and is going to community college. The little one will be taking hers next year and I guarantee that she will get the basic cap and gown set.

|2.19.07 @ 11:17AM|

That isn't to say Mad's take is wrong, just to say that I agree that some of the problems we have with high school kids stems from the fact that they're just marking time, they're bored, they're idle, and we have low expectations of them.

No doubt...my observations as to the lack of maturity of most 14-year-olds doesn't negate that.

The Wine Commonsewer|2.19.07 @ 6:03PM|

Mad, Brian Wilson and I had one thing in common, neither one of us surfed. The closest I got to surfing was body surfing, which I still do, although I admit it is a little hard on this old body. Especially in Hawaii, where the shore break seems like it would be more aptly named the neck break.

|2.19.07 @ 7:37PM|

Madpad,

You make good points, but my main point (which was poorly expressed) is that teens might mature (psychologically) more quickly if they weren't treated like children until they are eighteen! Heck, I remember being in college and having friends that still acted like kids (thanks to hand-outs from parents). God, they disgusted me. It's awful to see a 20-year-old still fear his parents. All I could say to them was, "If you still fear your parents at 20, you are a lame-ass POS! Grow up you fucktard!"

The time to begin growing up is when a child is a toddler. Of course, you don't give a three-year-old heavy responsibilities, but how many teens have you met that have never had any real responsibility except for schoolwork and the like (and didn't take even that seriously)? I've met many, and they suck.

Kids can grow up faster and, IMO, they should. I blame it on the best thing discovered in the 20th century, antibiotics. Before them, half of all children lost a parent by the age of 12 (or something like that). That taught them the facts of life! (Not that I'd ever want to see those days return, but something a bit gentler needs to replace that harsh lesson.)

Point: Kids can be more mature at 14. Their stupidity is only partially inherent.

|2.19.07 @ 7:48PM|

Mad, Brian Wilson and I had one thing in common, neither one of us surfed.

It's always struck me as bizarre that the only Beach Boy that actually surfed, Dennis, drowned after diving off a boat tied to a dock.

I've heard that about the shore break. That's what happens when you lack a continental shelf.

|2.19.07 @ 8:47PM|

Real Bill,

No doubt. You speak a million truths. I was an example of a maximum fucktard. I skated through high school and hit college completely unprepared for responsibility. I pissed it away and learned hard over the subsequent 10 years the value of brains and hard work.

Not to be too hard on my single mom who worked hard herself but I struggle to make sure my boys hit life more prepared than I was.

Sometimes I can be found arguing points on this board that are less than libertarian when it come to kids and school and what not.

At the end of the day, I already feel like I'm fighting the rest of the world to make sure my kids wind up with good heads on their shoulders. So when I cut schools a little slack for pushing for more nutritious options in vending machines and I defend teachers who have to put up with wacko parents, I'm not some pollyanna.

I send my kids to private school but even that is not without problems. Yes, as a directly paying customer I have slighty more leverage. And yes, I can yank them out and send them somewhere esle.

But anyone who's really a parent will tell you that that's rarely easy and may not solve the problem.

Sometimes the only choices you have for private schools (balanced against all the other choices for careers, places to live and such) are a small menu of schools with varying degrees of
fucked-upedness. Sometimes they're better in some ways and worse in others. So there's the market for ya'

I'm not spoiling for an argument so please, don't post some Objectivist or libertarian argument, because I'm way not interested. I'm just venting is all.

In sum, I agree with you. I think we all for the most part agree.

It'd just be nice if the world worked to better provide those opportunities rather than providing so many things one, as a parent, has to fight against. And I don't just mean stupid principals. The blessed free market (did I mention I'm a graphic designer and multimedia producer who specializes in marketing material?) can be just as big a problem.

Ah...life if filled with ironies.

|2.20.07 @ 8:20AM|

madpad,

I'm not spoiling for an argument either. You make good points. My libertarianism applies mostly to adults, not really to children. I believe that children are born wild animals and must be civilized prior to becoming libertarians! ; )

(I don't for a minute think that this world is ready for Libertopia. For me, it's a dream for the future, when we have a critical mass of intelligent, open-minded, and broadly-educated individuals. Right now, I think most human beings are quite primitive. I'm not even sure I'm civilized enough!)

|2.20.07 @ 10:32AM|

I believe that children are born wild animals and must be civilized

Amen, brother...amen.

Right now, I think most human beings are quite primitive. I'm not even sure I'm civilized enough!

Double amen.

Most Popular Stories

Reason RUPE: Public Opinion Survey

advertisements

Get Reason E-mail Updates!

Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptions

Site comments/questions:

Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:


(310) 367-6109

Editorial & Production Offices:

3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245

Home|About|Advertise|Privacy|Contact
Copyright 2012, Reason.com