Schools

School Made 11-Year-Old Girls Pull Down Their Pants for Disgusting Inspection

"I felt uncomfortable and I didn't want to do it"

|

Eliza
MyFox8

Parents are furious with administrators at a public school in Gustine, Texas, after learning that their kids were subjected to a partial strip-search and a humiliating, feces-related inspection.

School officials at Gustine Elementary routinely find that the gym floor has been smeared with human waste, and in an effort to unmask the culprit they went way too far. Boys were sent to one room, girls to another—and then administrators ordered both groups to pull down their pants. One parent told myfox8.com that the officials were checking  "to see if they could find anything," pertaining to the crime, which obviously implies a significant breach of the students' privacy, let alone basic dignity.

Indeed, 11-year-old Eliza Medina told local reporters that she felt violated, but didn't have a choice in the matter: "I felt uncomfortable and I didn't want to do it. I didn't want to, but I had to because all the kids had to."

The district superintendent has called these actions "not appropriate" and promised an investigation. He did clarify, however, that the kids only had to drop trow a little.

Medina claimed it was more than a little: "To like, where your butt is."

While the specific details of this story are uniquely disgusting—as far as I can recall—there's nothing unusual about a public school treating its students like inmates rather than autonomous human beings. Zero tolerance rules have gradually promoted a school environment where young people's fundamental rights are routinely disrespected. And every day brings more stories of kids who were abused by school authorities for inoffensive behavior, pointless adherence to protocol, or artistic expression.

Shouldn't parents have the right to make a different choice for their kids? To select an educational path that nurtures, rather than dehumanizes, their children? Or, at the very least, to pick a school not run by Guantanamo Bay prison guards?

Reason Foundation is a partner in National School Week, an annual event that draws attention to increasing educational options for K-12 students and their parents. For more information on resources and activities, including more than 10,000 events taking place nationwide between January 25-31, go here now.

Advertisement

NEXT: Inspector General Pissed Over TSA Censorship of Critical Report

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 for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Some teachers should be going to prison. Better yet. Make them stand in the cafeteria with their pants down all day.

    1. They should be paying through their asses for this. I mean real folding money. Motherfucker is this evil.

      1. It doesn’t matter how much they pay they’ll never admit they did something wrong.

        1. I don’t really care what few sparks the neurons in their little brains fire, so long as they pay and are never again employed in a profession involving kids.

          Frankly, how is this not a sex offense?

          1. Procedures were followed. Jobs are thus protected and if they pay out any settlements it comes from the same people the settlement money goes to and the Great Bureaucratic Mobius continues unabated.

            1. No teachers were harmed in the ass inspections. Move along. Nothing to see here.

              I mean, nothing to see except the asses of prepubescent peasant children. Meh. Call me when it’s cavity searches for everybody!

          2. Exactly. A sex offense.

            And if the offense had been happening regularly, why not just stick on a wireless camera and find the offender that way ?

            What the Phuc were they looking for anyway ?

            1. why not just stick on a wireless camera and find the offender that way ?

              What’s these newfangled wireless cameras? /school administors at Gustine Elementary.

        2. I would not give a shit if they admitted guilt or not.

          If my kid was involved. someone would be getting their ass whipped. A real whipping, not the kind of love-taps that give fat lips. Broken bones kinda whipped. The kind that gives you a limp for life.

          1. Sad to say this happened in Texas.

            But the bright side is , that because it is in Texas their may be some of those exact kind of as whippings on the horizon.

            A lot depends on whether or not the school is full of Texas “good ole boys” kids or Democrat voting illegal immigrant kids.

            1. Based on it’s location, southwest of Ft. Worth, it’s probably a mix of both.

            2. It’s not the illegal immigrants who are responsible for this retardation here in Texas. In fact, the insanity in our public schools is far more likely to be because of the “good ole boys.” And its the fucking parents not the kids.

            3. Sad to say this happened in Texas.

              Why? Remember the roadside inspection of two girls’ anuses (woops, no drugs after all, no harm no foul!) by cops in Texas?

              Don’t Mess With Texas my foot. Laws in Austin are as bad as in Los Angeles.

            4. Neither Illegals, or children vote, It also sounds like your implying a democrat father would not be upset.. a Texas democrat is a Colorado republican, you now.

          2. And here’s the thing:

            Eliza Medina told local reporters that she felt violated, but didn’t have a choice in the matter

            If she had the assurance that she was backed by a parent who would whip ass, that girl DID have a choice in the matter. Kids need to know that.

            I guess the parents never saw it coming. Gotta stop assuming such atrocities just don’t happen in America.

          3. Broken bones kinda whipped. The kind that gives you a limp for life.

            Absolutely. I’d talk to my daughter about who exactly did what. And then proceed to scene of the crime to break cheek bones.

        3. “They” won’t pay anything. Residents in the school district will be held at gun point to pay whatever punitive damages are required. It’s statist justice.

        4. Good. Let them evangelize. They can spend the brief remainder of their careers reminding parents that unapologetic amoral douchebags think they own their children.

      2. what good would making them pay taxpayer money do?

    2. Why punish the kids, again?

      How about they line up the administrators and bring in some monkeys to fling some poo?

    3. Murder is ok when the state does it.
      Kidnapping is ok when the state does it.
      Lying is ok when the state state does it.
      Robbery is ok when the state does it.

      It should be no surprise that now somebody thinks that child abuse is ok when the state does it.

      1. The public screwel should have brought in a few TSA agents for the entire experience.

        1. I should have included:

          Voyeurism is ok when the state does it.

  2. Besides the fact that this is wholly inappropriate, offensive, and a violation of the rights of the kids no matter what the reason, it’s also stupid. What could they have possibly found that would lead them to the culprit(s)? “Say, that’s the same color shit! If the shit hues, pay your dues!”

    1. You’re missing the point, ProL. I mean, think about it. What kind of person gravitates to a job where you get to boss kids around and occasionally strip search them? Think about who that job attracts, and you have your answer.

      1. What kind of person gravitates to a job where you get to boss kids around and occasionally strip search them?

        Stop looking at me like that.

        1. Are you coming out of retirement?

          1. Errrrrr… whatever do you mean?

      2. Who are you decide that the school amdins that they cannot strip search kids?

    2. Yeah, what could they have been thinking? That somebody who was smearing duty on the floor would be storing it in their pants? That someone with duty would get rid of it by smearing the floor with it? The mind boggles.

      1. Oh, I get it: The boss must’ve said, “Get to the bottom of this.”

  3. I don’t have the words. Ok, how about sexual assault of a minor?

    1. Sounds like sexual assault of *dozens* of minors.

      If a peasant did this, they would go to prison for *hundreds* of years. But rulers rule, and peasants take it and like it.

  4. Yeah, pretty sure I’ll end up homeschooling, if I ever have kids. The stuff reason reports is insane of course, but even the ideal school is a weird environment to expose your kids to.

    1. Don’t let CPS hear you say that.

  5. It doesn’t excuse the administration but:

    School officials a Gustine Elementary routinely find that the gym floor has been smeared with human waste

    What the hell is wrong with people these days?

    1. Good question. I don’t have an answer for you though.

    2. Would be hilarious to learn later that the fecal mosaics are the work of a disgruntled employee.

      1. The classic National Lampoon’s High School Yearbook Parody had a subplot about the “Mad Crapper,” who was leaving fecal surprises around the school. There were some pretty blatant clues that the culprit was actually the principal, especially that there was an “assistant bathroom assistant” who looked exactly like the principal wearing a fake mustache.

        You live long enough, you see all fictional ideas actually take place.

      2. The EPA has had this problem. I’m serious.

    3. Probably a homeless guy who sleeps there at night. Why would they even assume it’s one of the kids? Could be, but by no means necessarily.

      1. Yeah, it’s an elementary school. If it’s a prank, it’s more of a high school prank, no?

        1. I’m 35, and…. never mind

      2. Kindergartener who isn’t sufficiently potty trained. There were kids in my son’s kindergarten class who were not potty trained.

        1. And not wearing pants? Or like, “not potty trained” in the sense of not recognizing a potty?

    4. Somebody regularly smeared poop inside the bathrooms at my middle school.

      1. I was on a Navy ship with “The Mystery Shitter”. The main suspect got shit under his pillow his last night in the service. Unpleasant for him, but hilarious for everyone else.

    5. Why the hell do you take the word of school officials as truth?

      1. Also, if the shit is smeared, it makes it more difficult to determine that it is human waste. Maybe some kid brings in dog shit and smears it. How the fuck would some dumbass administrator determine the “kind” of shit it is?

    6. And what evidence do they have that the *children* did it?

      Seems like the people fixated on anuses in that school are a bit older.

  6. *Clarence Thomas nods in agreement.*

  7. What’s the deal with the title? Boy’s lives matter too!

    1. Boy’s lives matter too!

      Boy’s lives are for sacrificing for the good of the State. Or at least women.

  8. School administrator is a dream gig …………
    for a pedophile.

  9. Why do they suspect the students rather than the administrators? I mean who’s the ones looking at everyone’s naked ass. That’s the sick clique, and the likely peer group of the poop artist.

  10. School officials a Gustine Elementary routinely find that the gym floor has been smeared with human waste…

    “Routinely”, eh? So, set up cameras, or have someone monitor the premises, or something.

    1. By resorting to mass searches like this the admins are in effect admitting that the 11 year old master criminal/poop smearer has outwitted them.

      1. They ought to hire Encyclopedia Brown, I’ll bet he could solve the case.

        1. Instead they hired Encyclopedia Brown Eye.

          1. +1 full moon

      2. If it were that important, they could DNA test. Still requires sampling, but not from their ass.

        1. And then the DNA test goes on their Permanent Record

    2. Cheaper to strip search, or are you seriously suggesting the admins divert some of their income to pay for cameras?

      1. “Cheaper to strip search,”

        And SO much more fun!

  11. Fuck every single school employee involved in this abortion of human interaction. What the actual FUCK is wrong with people any more? Jesus Christ – I remember they hauled Gail Mizer out of school by his hair in elementary school, but that was after a couple FISTFIGHTS, for fuck’s sake.

    PS He was back in class the next day and NOTHING ELSE HAPPENED

  12. When I went to elementary school any kid crapping his (or her) pants and/or sliding one out on the floor would have been so ostracized by his classmates that he would have had to change schools. And believe me, the kids would have known who did it even if the staff did not. No one would have worried about dignity either.

  13. The reason they did this is because they know they can get away with it and they will.

    1. The reason.

      BFYTW.

      Thanks for reminding me.

  14. The possibility that someone stepped in dogshit and didn’t know it never occurred to them?

    1. If they were smart enough to think of that, they wouldn’t be public school employees.

  15. Wouldn’t surveillance cameras be a less intrusive solution? Heck, just put up fake ones and tell the kids they’re real.

    1. Not to excuse this reprehensible search but the headline “School Administrators Install Spy Cams in Children’s Bathrooms” would also be.. problematic

      1. The problem was with the gym floor, not the bathrooms.

  16. Because I don’t think what they did passes the sniff test.

    Thank you, and remember to tip your waitress!

  17. On a lighter and less creepy note, but hold the epic the stupidity of the New York Times. If you clean your kitchen yourself, you were a text daughter since you could’ve hired someone to do that and they would’ve pay taxes on that income. Reason will not accept the link but Google it and see what I’m talking about. It may be the dumbest call you read this yearcocker would be embarrassed to publish something this stupid

    1. Do you have anymore info? I can’t find it based on the information you provided and ‘text daughter’ has to be the best John typo I’ve seen in a while because I have no idea what it’s even supposed to mean.

      1. Google new york times tax house work and it will come up. Reason squirels mark all new york times links as spam.

        It is also refenced on the best of the web today.

        1. This?

          ” The tax code is already hugely distorted in favor of stay-at-home parenting: Labor outside the home is taxed; household work, such as stay-at-home parenting, is not.

          I realize that sounds like a bizarre thing to say. Why would there be a tax on parenting, and why would the lack of such a tax constitute a tax preference? But productive activities within the home are not especially different from the taxable work we do outside the home. We labor, and instead of receiving a cash wage, we receive something else we value: a clean house or a mowed lawn or a well-behaved child….

          …If I pay you to watch my child and you pay me to watch your child, we both owe income tax. If you and I each watch our own children, the I.R.S. collects nothing ? even though we have done substantially the same work for the same benefit. This tax preference for housework over paid work creates a significant distortion: Some people (mostly women) choose to stay home when, absent tax considerations, they might work outside the home instead.”

          1. Remember – there’s no war being waged on traditional marriage – such thoughts are simply paranoid!

            1. Its the true war on womynz!

          2. It took some fucking GENIUS in the NYT comments to actually muster the economic brilliance to point out =

            “Well, we don’t pay taxes on labor. We pay taxes on income”

            meanwhile, 200,000 other prog-morons are now ‘explaining’ to their peers how Housework is Tax Benefited, *just like Obama says*

            1. How long before Tony and shreek will be posting this little nuget.

            2. The Derp…it burns!

              G. Slocum
              Akron 5 days ago

              No and yes and no. The child care tax break is a great idea that should have come long ago. The capital gains break is bad, because it discriminates against those who have no capital gains, but more importantly because it discriminates against those of us who make a living from our wages rather than our investments. Even Reagan thought that was a bad idea.

              1. So a tax cut discriminates against the people who don’t pay that kind of tax.

                That’s the kind of retarded bullshit I come to the New York Times to read.

              2. Not everyone in Akron is that stupid. I promise.

                …just mostly everyone.

            3. I bet this wouldn’t apply to folks performing volunteer community work that resembled something that somebody could get paid for.

          3. Some people (mostly women) choose to stay home when, absent tax considerations, they might work outside the home instead.

            It’s true, but that’s really just an argument for eliminating the income tax.

          4. the I.R.S. collects nothing

            This is a feature, not a bug.

          5. Imagining this asshole trading tax forms after a play date at least puts a smile on my face.

            And is it ironic or just inevitable that the party proclaiming to be for the working man.. er, person.. should be so stupid as to come up with new and “creative” ways to tax labor rather than income?

            1. And is it ironic or just inevitable that the party proclaiming to be for the working man.. er, person.. should be so stupid as to come up with new and “creative” ways to tax labor rather than income?

              Josh Barro isn’t a Democrat. He’s a RINO Republican who has a gigantically inflated ego, thinks he’s vastly more intelligent than he is, and spends enormous amounts of time coming up with long-winded justifications for terrible ideas so that he can assure everyone that his sophistry is proof of his genius.

              He’s the worst. He’s like Nicole if Nicole was even worse than she is currently.

              1. Feast on the internal contradictions =

                “Joshua A. “Josh” Barro is an American opinion journalist who identifies as neoliberal[1] and Republican.[2] …

                … In early 2013, he was a prominent supporter of a potential trillion dollar coin,[9] although by late 2013 he had changed his mind.[10]

                …A former aide of Barack Obama included Barro on a short list of President Obama’s favorite columnists.[13]…

                … He has been described by others as conservative, liberal, and libertarian.[16][17]”

                Sounds legit. he’s like a gay guy that only fucks women and calls himself a Muslim Athiest.

                1. I’m convinced he just claims to be a Republican because that way people pay attention to him.

                  Think about it: If Josh Barro were a statist economic illiterate writing buffoonish posts about taxing stay at home moms and was a Democrat he’d be just like every other Democratic columnist and no one would pay attention to him.

                  But by claiming to be a Republican and writing the same stupid posts, Barro gets called ‘the good Republican by Salon and The Atlantic.

                  Writing fascist nonsense as a Democrat gets you lost in the crowd, but writing fascist nonsense while claiming to be a small government, semi-libertarian Republican means people pay attention to you.

                  1. Nail. Head. Was hit.

                  2. He is called a Republican so the NYT can claim they have an opposing viewpoint to Paul Krugman and ensure that the opposing viewpoints are exactly the same.

                2. I laughed…

              2. He’s a RINO Republican who has a gigantically inflated ego, thinks he’s vastly more intelligent than he is, and spends enormous amounts of time coming up with long-winded justifications for terrible ideas so that he can assure everyone that his sophistry is proof of his genius.

                Except in this case, this kind of sophistry is on par with the kind of sophistry used before by the United States Supreme Court.

              3. So… He’s Krugman?

                -jcr

            2. No shit.

              Now how much will I owe the Fed Gov after I mow my lawn ?

              1. “I used to mow my own lawn. But it actually became cheaper to hire it out.”

          6. If you and I each watch our own children, the I.R.S. collects nothing ? even though we have done substantially the same work for the same benefit.

            Won’t somebody please think of the IRS??

          7. If I pay you to watch my child and you pay me to watch your child, we both owe income tax. If you and I each watch our own children, the I.R.S. collects nothing

            Gee, I wonder if that members of Krugman’s Washington DC babysitting co-op paid income taxes on the value of services rendered. I rather doubt it, though all were DC bureaucrats and such.

          8. Two economists were walking down the street when one of them dared the other to pull down his pants and take a dump on the sidewalk. “If you do, I’ll give you $100,” he said.

            So the second economist took a shit on the sidewalk and said to the first one, “I’ll give you $100 to clean it up.”

            After the first economist cleaned up the bowel movement, the second one said, “We just added $200 to the economy!”

            1. Thread post win!!!

          9. And if they simply do favors for each other as the need arises, the IRS will consider it barter and have a conniption fit.

          10. f you and I each watch our own children, the I.R.S. collects nothing ? even though we have done substantially the same work for the same benefit.

            Technically, you’re not getting paid to watch your own children. And if the government did give you an allowance for it, some union asshole would want a cut.

            1. some union asshole would want a cut

              “He’s not certified!”

        2. I see it’s noted ‘conservative’ Josh Barro, the dimwit son of the actually intelligent Robert Barro.

          When we hire people to come into our homes to do these things, the labor is counted as part of the economy and subject to tax. If I pay you to watch my child and you pay me to watch your child, we both owe income tax. If you and I each watch our own children, the I.R.S. collects nothing ? even though we have done substantially the same work for the same benefit. This tax preference for housework over paid work creates a significant distortion: Some people (mostly women) choose to stay home when, absent tax considerations, they might work outside the home instead.

          That’s not a ‘distortion’ dipshit. I like the term distortion because like ‘market failure’ it means ‘I don’t like this but I can’t explain why, therefore we should change it.’

          His claim that people doing work around their own home is exactly like doing work at someone else’s home is also absurd. If I do work at my house, I get the benefit of the cleaning or the work that’s been done. If I do work at someone else’s house, they get the benefit of the work I’ve done.

          That’s why in the second instance I get paid and in the first instance I don’t. This is not a difficult concept.

          1. I can’t get over him describing ‘babysitting’ and ‘being at home with family’ as “substantially the same.”

          2. Some people (mostly women) choose to stay home when, absent tax considerations, they might work outside the home instead.

            Sounds like lowering the income tax would empower women by making it easier for them to choose to work. Right?

          3. Some people (mostly women) choose to stay home when, absent tax considerations, they might work outside the home instead.

            What bizarre universe does Barro inhabit that this statement is even remotely true? And what is Superman’s origin story there?

            1. Yeah, the reason I stay at home is the tax considerations. This guy either doesn’t have children or is a complete idiot, perhaps both.

          4. I wonder how much I have to pay for fixing my own car.

        3. Wow! I really hope the Progressives pick up on this theme.

      2. “tax dodger”

        Don’t know about “call” or , ahem, “yearcocker”

        1. Damn voice recognition.

        2. yearcocker was my college nickname.

          1. That is what you get for cleaning the kitchen.

      3. Think he’s talking about this one.

        Let’s work out the numbers. According to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, married mothers with young children at home spend 50.7 hours a week on housework, shopping and caring for household members if they are not employed outside the home, compared with 29.4 hours spent on those activities if they are employed full-time outside the home. So, stay-at-home moms do an extra 21 hours a week of unpaid and untaxed labor; at a median full-time wage of just over $37,000 and a marginal tax rate of 20 percent, a typical mother would face about a $4,400 tax penalty for doing that work at an office instead of staying home.

        Mr. Obama’s plan would offset much of that tax disincentive if she had one young child, and more than offset it if she had two or more. The circumstances would vary: In some cases, the tax code would provide a stronger incentive to stay home than to work outside it, and in others vice versa. But that would replace the current system in which the strong tax incentive is in favor of stay-at-home parenting.

        1. damn reason. Just use this: nyti.ms/1CAlWW1

        2. It is so stupid you cant look away. Its like some hideous side show freak.

          1. I agree with you = this is among the most retarded things I’ve ever seen in the NYT

            And that is saying a great deal

          2. Like the chick with three breasts. Count’em. THREE!

        3. They will put the two together and tax everyone for all labor done outside of employment for compensation. That mom that goes out to work and then comes home to take care of her family/do housework should be taxed for that labor otherwise we would have to set up a 2 tier system that only makes some labor taxable.

          1. Don’t forget male and female prostitution services for sex. The IRS has a schedule, based on the attractiveness, age, physique, and technical skill of each prostitute, to evaluate the cash value of their in-kind contributions.

      4. I’m not sure what half of that post was supposed to mean. From “but hold” to “text daughter” to “dumbest call you read this yearcocker” that whole post was a festival of epic John typos.

        I really hope that was auto correct run amok because the only other explanation I can think of is John was having a stroke as he typed.

    2. I’m filing this John post away. Classic stuff.

    3. I am finding nothing.

      Better clues on what to google?

      1. I’m scared to google yearcocker.

        1. All about cocker spaniels of a certain age.

    4. Actually, what he is saying isn’t stupid at all.

      In fact, it just needs to be extended a little, to everything people used to do at home, which is almost the entire economy.

      Nice argument for libertarianism and abolishing the income tax, from a progressive and Obama worshiper.

    5. “text daughter”?

      Is that like in Cinderella, where her ugly stepsisters forced her to write their filthy SMS messages?

  18. I personally love that they thought they’d find anything. If someone smeared poo on the floor on purpose, then why would there be feces on their underwear?

    The logic here seems a bit lacking, unless they just really wanted to get those kids down to their skivvies.

    1. I bet it was a school employee respnsible.

      1. Probably one that the administration knows is doing it. But they can’t discipline due to the union. But to shpw that they are doing something, they dream up this insanity.

    2. “Where else would you find duty?”

      “What else floats? A duck.”

  19. When a school has been vandalized it is just logical to ask the young children to drop their pants for a thorough inspection.

    If any of you had a masters degree in education you would know this!

  20. Someone’s been leaking emails from Al Jazeera to National Review, and the first two leaked email chains have been ridiculous.

    Here’s Al Jazeera staffers saying Charlie Hebdo was ‘goading’ extremists.

    “I guess if you insult 1.5 billion people chances are one or two of them will kill you,” wrote Mohamed Vall Salem, who reported for Al Jazeera’s Arab-language channel before joining its English wing in 2006. “And I guess if you encourage people to go on insulting 1.5 billion people about their most sacred icons then you just want more killings because as I said in 1.5 billion there will remain some fools who don’t abide by the laws or know about free speech” [sic].

    “What Charlie Hebdo did was not free speech it was an abuse of free speech in my opinion, go back to the cartoons and have a look at them!” Salem later wrote. “It’ snot [sic] about what the drawing said, it was about how they said it. I condemn those heinous killings, but I’M NOT CHARLIE.”

    I love when ‘moderate’ Muslims pull a good cop/bad cop routine with the extremists.

    “You’d better be nice to me and stop exercising free speech, or my crazy buddy over here might kill you!”

    It’s almost like a lot of alleged moderates aren’t actually moderates but tacitly support the goals of the extremists as a means to an end.

    1. And here’s Al Jazeera management declaring that you shouldn’t refer to the people who carried out the hotel bombing in Libya as ‘extremists’ because they could be considered freedom fighters:

      In an email obtained by National Review Online, van Meek warned the network’s journalists against the use of terms including “terrorist,” “militant,” “Islamist” and “jihad.”

      “One person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter,” the Al Jazeera executive wrote.

      1. Freedom fighter. Hmmm. What freedoms are they fighting for again? I can’t remember.

        1. Well, in Yemen there are currently two bands of ‘freedom fighters’ who are fighting each other for the freedom to decide whether they should stone adulteresses in the name of Sunni Islam or Shiite Islam.

        2. The “freedom” to practice their religion.

          DUH!

        3. The freedom to kill you for insulting the Religion of Peace, infidel!

      2. “”One person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter,” the Al Jazeera executive wrote.”

        Uh, no.

        There should be a quick checklist of

        THINGS FREEDOM-FIGHTERS DO NOT DO

        1 – cut people’s heads off on TV as a threat to foreign nations who are not currently involved in any conflict to stay out of your way

        2 – convince children to kill others or themselves and telling them it makes the Sky Daddy happy

        3 – Hijack aircraft and fly them into buildings where lots of people are involved in businesses entirely unrelated to your Global Jihad.

        etc.

        1. (4) Eat the heart of someone they just killed.
          – J. McCain, Arizona. Longtime reader, first time posting.

    2. Meh, the emails mentioned all condemn the attacks, but complain that they’re being required to express solidarity with something they didn’t like out of political correctness.

      This would be like suggesting anyone who doesn’t watch the Daily Show secretly supports Revolution Muslim’s bomb threat toward Comedy Central.

      1. That’s actually not what it’s like at all.

        It would be like if John Stewart were murdered by a conservative and I said ‘Eh, the guy shouldn’t have murdered him, but John Stewart also shouldn’t have been mean to conservatives and goaded them into attacking him. I mean, there are tens of millions of conservatives in this country, so obviously if you go around saying this stuff, one of them might kill you. Really he should have known better than to be so offensive and he abused his right to free speech.’

        I’m going to assume you wouldn’t defend someone who made such an argument, Stormy.

        1. If a girl gets blackout drunk at a party and gets raped and I said “Eh, the guy shouldn’t have raped her, but maybe she shouldn’t get black out drunk. It puts you at risk of getting taken advantage of”, am I being pro rape?

          1. Stormy Dragon|1.28.15 @ 9:41PM|#
            “If a girl gets blackout drunk at a party and gets raped and I said “Eh, the guy shouldn’t have raped her, but maybe she shouldn’t get black out drunk. It puts you at risk of getting taken advantage of”, am I being pro rape?”

            I don’t think so.
            You’re pointing out that certain activities are likely to lead to certain results.
            Rape remains repugnant and illegal, and a guy who raped under that circumstance is still a rapist deserving punishment. None of which affects your statements, nor does your statement affect that.

            1. Sort of like: if you allow your children to go to public screwel it puts them at risk for shit like this EVEN THOUGH shit lilke this should never occur and when it does it is not the fault of the children?

          2. If a girl gets blackout drunk at a party and gets raped and I said “Eh, the guy shouldn’t have raped her, but maybe she shouldn’t get black out drunk. It puts you at risk of getting taken advantage of”, am I being pro rape?

            Several problems with this:

            1. They actually seem more upset by the sacrilege than by the murders.

            Consider this paragraph:

            “What Charlie Hebdo did was not free speech it was an abuse of free speech in my opinion, go back to the cartoons and have a look at them!” Salem later wrote. “It’ snot [sic] about what the drawing said, it was about how they said it. I condemn those heinous killings, but I’M NOT CHARLIE.”

            Notice how this person seems angrier about the ‘abuse of free speech’ than the does about the killings? He throws in the ‘I condemn the killings’ almost as an afterthought.

            2. Getting piss drunk is not equivalent to exercising basic free speech rights. Any number of bad things can happen to you if you get too drunk, whereas in a western society we don’t expect to be shot to death for satire.

  21. Throw the principal in prison wearing a shirt which reads “I like to inspect the butts of young schoolchildren.”

    1. Anyone ever wonder why pedohiles get shanked in the joint?

      It isn’t because most cons have some kind of code of ethics. They don’t.

      It is because the many of them were sexually molested as children. They are taking out their rage by proxy.

      Think about that for a minute.

      1. Mr or ms princiPAL.

      2. Good point. I think that motivation still qualifies as a code of ethics, though. A Lawful Evil ethos, maybe, but a code nonetheless.

  22. Am I the only one who longs for the days when ths would have resulted in the Principle being horsewhipped?

    1. Tar and feather?

      1. I’ve said it many times: we’d only have to tar and feather a handful of bureaucrats every year to make most of the rest of them clean up their act.

        -jcr

      1. Principle got horsewhipped big time here.

  23. Coach Balbricker took over the asylum.

  24. Good Lord! So who’s shitting on the gym floor?

    1. “No one in this school will be allowed to relieve themselves until someone confesses!”

        1. You think this is funny?

            1. I’ll take that as a ‘yes’.

  25. Find the stupid kid poopin on the floor and beat them good.

    http://www.BestAnon.tk

    1. Anon-bot is getting scarily close to on topic.

      1. Anon bot’s day job is Vice Principal.

      2. It’s spooky, like when you see what you assumed was a statue move & go, “Boo!”

      3. Actually, it makes me suspect that Anon-a-bot actually reads Reason. Grey-hats tend to be libertarian by nature; at least I was when I was involved in the game, and still am (libertarian, that is). And while his marketing strategy is questionable, his product is definitely one that should appeal to many libertarians. Further, I don’t see him actually “spamming” the comments, as I see his posts once or twice a day. By comparison, when I used to spam Craig’s List, I would post to every city in the U.S. multiple times a day. (Hint, 7 years ago “Free Car” was mine)
        So, what happens is that he has his scripts that routinely comment on various boards with his link, but every now and then he actually is commenting him/herself, with the link being an automatic signature thing.
        I would bet money that this particular time, he forgot he was already signed in to Reason on a different window/tab (probably by a script), and actually was posting as a real person. He may even have a different log in that we all recognize, and this time he just made an error as to which account he was signed in to.
        By the way, Anon-a-bot, I am looking for a new job, have a spreadsheet full of hundreds of sites and gmail accounts, can write basic macros, and have the software to write more advanced macros… just saying…

  26. The district superintendent … did clarify, however, that the kids only had to drop trow a little.

    “I mean, it’s not like the inspectors were workin’ up a hot sweat, crouchin’ in the kid’s pea patch, plowin’ through her bean field.”

    Let the law suits begin.

  27. Greek markets implode as a result of Syriza’s election.

    An index of Greek lenders dropped to its lowest level since at least 1995, with National Bank of Greece SA, Eurobank Ergasias SA and Piraeus Bank SA declining as much as 30 percent.
    “Besides the well-known concerns on the political side there are issues with potential management changes in banks and concerns over liquidity,” said Alexandros Boulougouris, an analyst at Wood & Co. in Athens. “The overall environment is very negative and everybody is waiting to see if the new government will come to some sort of consensus with its lenders.”

    So when Greece has a banking crisis in 2 or 3 years, do you think Krugman will blame austerity?

    1. Something something… Elections have consequences… Something something SPARTA!!!

    2. Irish|1.28.15 @ 9:03PM|#
      “Greek markets implode as a result of Syriza’s election.”

      Late on Monday, I ran across a web page claiming Euro stocks had jumped. I can only guess it was a flight from bonds.

    3. What makes you think Greece is going to be able to defer their banking crisis that long?

      I give it a couple of months.

      -jcr

      1. I knew a doctor that had a patient come in and he gave him six months to live. The patient couldn’t pay the bill so he gave him another six months.

        1. + one rimshot.

      2. “What makes you think Greece is going to be able to defer their banking crisis that long?”

        Because the rulers of Europe will keep passing them money for a long time.

        I’m all atingle waiting for the Greeks to cash some of those checks, and then never make good on the promises they made in return.

        Get your popcorn ready!

  28. I think that at 11, I would have already known enough to run away, find a phone and call 911 if some pervert demanded that I take my clothes off, even if said pervert was a public-school bureaucrat.

    If I were a parent of one of the kids involved in this crime, I would be kicking the shit out of the perps, and trusting my fellow citizens on the jury to recognize that doing so was a public service.

    -jcr

  29. It is to bad they weren’t looking for drugs.

    1. The highly-acclaimed movie “Don Jon,” for example, highlighted what is a reality for many couples and families: that addiction to porn tears men away from their girlfriends, spouses, and children. As such, it is often a major factor in divorce.

      Hah, that movie went right over his head.

    2. HAHAHAHAHA!

      He quotes Gail Dines!

      Dr. Gail Dines, a professor of sociology and women’s studies at Wheelock College who also chairs its American Studies department, said in comment for this piece that “we know that trafficking is increasing — which means demand is increasing. This means that men are increasingly willing to have sex with women who are being controlled and abused by pimps and traffickers.”

      “As an academic, a sociologist, and mother, I believe it is the way men are shaped by society,” said Dines. “The biggest sex educator of young men today is pornography, which is increasingly violent and dehumanizing, and it changes the way men view women.”

      Dines is not alone in her view. According to the non-profit Fight The New Drug (FTND), which relies on dozens of studies for its pornography data, “men who go to prostitutes are twice as likely to have watched a porn film in the last year compared to the general population.”

      Dozens of studies? A whole dozens?!?! Well, I’m convinced.

      1. It gets worse. The author writes “Pornography doesn’t just cause harm to those held in slavery — it has been linked to premature ejaculation and a loss of sexual control among men,”

        Linked. You’d think that was a reference to a purported causal relationship argued by the authors of a peer-reviewed empirical study.

        The claim is from a fucking GQ article that cites evidence from that distinguished academic journal “Reddit”.

        Stupidity? Mendaciousness? Both?

      2. Holy fuck, that Fight the New Drug website is the funniest thing I’ve ever seen.

        Part of the lie porn producers want customers to buy into is that porn is legitimate entertainment made by glamorous people who are doing it because it’s what they want; it’s OK for the user to enjoy it because the people they’re watching seem to be enjoying it. What they don’t say is that some of those people look like they’re having a good time because behind the scenes they have a gun pointed at their head. And if they stop smiling, it will go off. [4]

        Is…is this website claiming that it’s common practice in the porn industry to point guns at your actors and shoot them to death if they don’t perform?

          1. I’m sure their personal religious beliefs are in no way biasing their arguments and leading them to make claims not founded upon scientific evidence.

            I mean, what religion based around Salt Lake City could possibly lead this many people to have a searing hatred of pornography?

          2. What do you know, you were on to something!

            LDS men launch youth anti-pornography campaign

            You don’t drink it. You don’t inhale it. And you can’t inject it. But scientific evidence is beginning to show what general authorities have been saying for years: pornography can be as addicting as any drug–and just as harmful. Wanting to stop the spread of this addiction, four Utah State University graduates launched an anti-pornography campaign to educate youth about the addictive effects of pornography.

            Founded in January 2010, the organization Fight the New Drug aims to educate people that pornography has the same effects on the brain as substance addictions like alcohol, nicotine, and other drugs. According to an article on the organization’s website, “viewing pornography tricks your brain into releasing the same pleasure chemicals that drugs do,” eventually building up stronger and stronger desires for the counterfeit relationships pornography provides.

            SCIENCE

            1. “viewing pornography tricks your brain into releasing the same pleasure chemicals that drugs do,”

              That’s awesome, because all pleasurable experiences are a result of serotonin and dopamine in the brain.

              Drinking coffee tricks your brain into releasing the same pleasure chemicals that drugs do.

              A well-cooked prime rib tricks your brain into releasing the same pleasure chemicals that drugs do.

              Crushing your enemies, seeing them driven before you, and hearing the lamentations of their women tricks your brain into releasing the same pleasure chemicals that drugs do.

              1. Saweeeeet!

              2. Drinking coffee tricks your brain into releasing the same pleasure chemicals that drugs do.

                Probably not the best counterexample for a Mormon anti-porn campaign, since they ban coffee too.

                1. Probably not the best counterexample for a Mormon anti-porn campaign, since they ban coffee too.

                  Are you related to Bo?

                  1. Are you related to Bo?

                    He was Bo-Bo before Bo-Bo even existed.

                    He’s not quite as stupid, but he is a pedantic prog concern troll like Bo-Bo.

              3. Very nice on the last one. Nothing like a good Conan ref.

              4. What is this devil’s brew of iniquity you call “coffee”?

      3. “men who go to prostitutes are twice as likely to have watched a porn film in the last year compared to the general population.”

        You mean, the general population that includes kids and blind people?

        1. …blind people go blind for a reason, you know.

          1. Because they can’t stop when they just need glasses?

          2. I laughed, Lady B….

        2. And here I thought that hairy palms were the only sign of…

          *looks around guiltily, heads for bathroom with bottle of Nair*

      4. …”men who go to prostitutes are twice as likely to have watched a porn film in the last year compared to the general population.”…

        Uh, how about that?

      5. Dines is not alone in her view. According to the non-profit Fight The New Drug (FTND), which relies on dozens of studies for its pornography data, “men who go to prostitutes are twice as likely to have watched a porn film in the last year compared to the general population.”

        Wow? No shit, Doctor Obvious?

        Who would have figured that men who like to have sex also enjoy looking at pictures of sex? Next you’ll be telling us that men who like architecture are more likely to enjoy looking at pictures of houses.

        1. Frank Lloyd Wright was married thrice, divorced twice.

          Just saying’.

      6. we know that trafficking is increasing — which means demand is increasing

        Well, no, it actually means that supply is increasing.

        men who go to prostitutes are twice as likely to have watched a porn film in the last year compared to the general population

        Perhaps half of the general population is simply asexual? Or maybe half the general population is actually female, and women generally don’t watch porn.

      7. “As an academic, a sociologist, and mother, I believe it is the way men are shaped by society,” said Dines.

        Unintended irony is always the tastiest.

    3. Dr. Gail Dines

      …is nuts. Stark raving mad, gibbering at the moon while tearing imaginary rats off her arms and legs nuts.

      She is nothing more than the Ward Churchill of women’s studies.

      1. I wonder what kind of porn she secretly digs.

        1. Paging SugarFree ?.

        2. Pegging videos, I imagine…with a snuff film ending.

          She strikes me as one of those “penis evil” types.

      2. She’s more insidious than Ward Churchill though. She’s just as crazy, but she’s crazy in a way that if you call her out, you’re evil.

  30. In Texas you do have a choice, Home schooling!

  31. they should all be fired but I preferred to line them up and shoot them but we don’t live in that kind of world. Too bad though.

    1. It is Texas. They’re not perfect by any means but they tend to be more OK with self-help against government overreach.

      If a parent of one of the kids went and shot the perpetrators, he might get the jury to acquit.

      Of course, that assumes he lives long enough to see the inside of a courtroom.

      1. nullification for the win.

  32. I am Jack’s raging bile duct.
    I am Jack’s complete lack of surprise.

    1. The first rule of Elementary School Pedophile Club is, you do not talk about Elementary School Pedophile Club.

      1. The second rule of Elementary School Pedophile Club is you pay others to talk a lot about Private School Pedophilia.

  33. The district superintendent has called these actions “not appropriate”

    The peasants call it sexual assault of minors. But what do they matter?

    The teachers figured if the TSA can have their hands down the pants of your kids in public, why shouldn’t they get in on some of that sweet prepubescent action?

    Rulers rule. Peasants take it. Nothing to see here.

  34. Separation of school and state – see earlier thread.

  35. I got to “public school” in the article and stopped.

  36. OT: Meeting held in Ferguson to discuss a potential citizen oversight board for the police. Much hilarity ensues.

  37. If I were one of those parents there’d be some dead school administrators and teachers.

  38. Mr.Mackey: Now you might all think I’ve given up finding who crapped in the urinal, m’kay. And maybe, maybe you think it’s a victimless crime. This is Mister Venezuela, the school janitor, m’kay. He’s the person who has to clean up when some trickster drops a dookie in the wrong toilet. Mr. Venezuela makes six bucks an hour at best! M’kay? He’s got three kids at home, he’s got a car that barely works he’s gotta clean up puke with sawdust, m’kay. And then he walks into the boy’s room and sees a big meaty chud staring him in the face. So when you crapped in that urinal, m’kay, you might as well just dropped your pants and laid a turd right on Mr. Venezuela’s head.
    [the kids laugh]
    Mr. Mackey: Oh, you think that’s funny, huh? Yeah, that’s real funny!

    1. LMFAO! Well done, m’kay.

  39. But this was GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS, so it must be OK!
    Seriously, if it were my kid, any motherfucker involved better have police protection, because I would beat them until they died. I mean it, I don’t care if you are a pedophile or an upset principle: if you sexually humiliate/abuse my kid, you will die in a slow and painful way. And then I will sue the school district, even if it is from Death Row.
    How did not even ONE adult present stop and say “hey, wait a minute, maybe we should re-think this…”
    Has the government become so out of control that even school administrators and teachers think that they are above the law and common decency?

    1. Rhetorical question?

  40. In my imagination the kids chant “You first!”

  41. Hey all these kids all signed the social contract, right? I’m pretty sure there’s a clause giving the govt the rights to anything in your ass…

  42. Also govt being the name for things we all do together, were all pulling these kids’ pants down. Team building!

  43. “Or, at the very least, to pick a school not run by Guantanamo Bay prison guards?”

    Kinda insulting some E-3s an E-4s there. I’ve known Gitmo prison guards and they were really decent human beings…

  44. I felt uncomfortable and I didn’t want to do it

    But enough about Warty’s basement

  45. We’ll only rape you ‘a little bit’ by lowering your pants ‘a little bit’.

    1. Yup, that’s right. When parents change a childs diaper they are actually committing an act of pedophilia. When you change your childs clothing, it is full on child rape. totally. Uh huh, yeah.

      1. You that stupid to not recognize the difference between a parent helping a child change their clothes and a stranger forcing a child to drop his pants for him to have a look-see?
        Go eat a bowl of dicks.

  46. Start a new lucrative career. Our firm is looking for 10 people to represent our services?.
    You will have business coming to you on a daily basis
    Check Here Don’t Miss Golden Chance,
    ????? http://www.Workvalt.Com

  47. This is a wrong that just keeps bringing more wrong. These schools are teaching our young people to give more and more of their autonomy to the “authorities”. Public schools are a far greater threat to our Nation than even the current government.

  48. So let me get this straight. Somebody pooped on the floor. And in order to find out who did it, the school separated the boys and the girls and told them BOTH to pull their pants down to check for feces.

    But this article decides to make it a gendered issue?

    1. Even the rational Reason magazine is immune to the allure of misleading headlines to generate outrage clicks.

  49. So this ridiculous misleading headline is what we are to expect from this paper ? This was done to both the boys and the girls. To try and make out it was somehow only happening to the girls or that it was worse for the girls is idiotic and irresponsible journalism.

  50. my best friend’s step-sister makes $70 hourly on the computer . She has been out of a job for 5 months but last month her payment was $20578 just working on the computer for a few hours. you can look here……..

    http://www.Jobsyelp.com

  51. I can imagine whoever ordered this wanting to play either the song from the “bring out the gimp” svene in Pulp Fiction (Comanche?) or Goodbye Horses from that scene from Silence of the Lambs over the PA system.

  52. We had a pooper in college. The RA’s tried to get him to eat a lot of corn at meals to confirm their suspicions.

  53. “…there’s nothing unusual about a public school treating its students like inmates rather than autonomous human beings.”

    Wait. Aren’t inmates auautonomous human beings? Shouldn’t the be treated with dignity and respect as well? Inmates retain their inalienable rights. Commiting a crime, particularly in a police state, does not reduce one’s humanity.

    Did nobody else find this line disturbing?

  54. this is as idiotic as it is disgraceful.

    so, i think the issues with violating the kids have been covered above, but i just need to ask: “what is hell was this even supposed to demonstrate”? how does this catch a culprit?

    the easy way to handle this is simple:

    put the kids in charge of cleaning the gym. make them all pitch in, create a rota, whatever. if they have to clean it, they will not poop in it or, at the very least, sure as hell will figure out who is.

    i went to an expensive boarding school, and that’s how we did it. we took turns cleaning the halls in our dorms. everyone knew they would get a turn cleaning, so no one was a jerk about making a mess and when people did, they were brought into line.

    of course, making today’s little darlings work is probably against the law and you’d be jailed for child abuse or some such, but the system works like a charm. make them responsible and let them become responsible.

    this is not rocket science.

  55. This is great post and usefull for us. i will often come here,and support any post which your push.

  56. Hmm, is the a sexual offense? Is it some form of illegal search and seizure? An assumption of guilt of every student?

    Those parents need to band together, press charges and get those involved fired. Anything less is a travesty.

  57. It saddens me that there are fathers out there who after learning of this disgusting sexual assault of their daughters have not visited violence on the pedophiles responsible.

  58. Child Protective Services to the rescue!

    Imprison those parents for abandoning their children *all day*, *day after day* to this gang of sexual predators!

  59. What did they hope to find? Clearly whoever did this was routinely taking care of evidence. If they still had shit on their ass someone would have noticed the smell.

  60. When you give one group of people the power to impose their will on others, they will do so for the simple reason that they can. It is the nature of our horribly flawed species. This is why we need to be ever vigilant in controlling government. Government and all its minions are not benevolent. They are self absorbed bureaucrats who, if left unchecked, will continue to invent new ways to run amok.

  61. This is really nice and very informative post. i have go through some comments and i resolved my queries, which was making me frustated. thanks to you guys are doing well. clash of clans hack

  62. They went too far, actually even they make the children do that, they will find nothing. Children have rights, too, and they will remember this things for their whole life. No teacher protests?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.