Police in Schools

School Cop Tries to Arrest Teenage Girl for Violating the Dress Code

"You either come with me to the control room to change your shirt or we will arrest you."

|

Shirt
Screenshot via NBC Charlotte

Summer, a high school senior in Harrisburg, North Carolina, was suspended for 10 days and barred from attending her graduation ceremony because her shirt revealed a little too much shoulder.

What's more, the school resource officer actually threatened to arrest the girl, she told a local news station.

The officer "was within five feet of me, he had his hand on his gun," Summer told NBC-Charlotte. At that point, Summer reports, the principal said, "I'm gonna give you an ultimatum. We have tried to call your mother. You either come with me to the control room to change your shirt or we will arrest you."

Hickory Ridge High School described Summer's actions as "insubordination," even though she complied with the initial demand to cover up by borrowing a friend's jacket.

Glamour describes the incident as example of dress-code sexism in schools, where girls are often expected to make unreasonable wardrobe alterations because administrators worry that bare arms and tight leggings will distract the boys. But the most worrisome aspect of Summer's story has to the police involvement. Is this what cops in schools are for? Threatening teenagers who were insufficiently deferential to an administrator's overbearing puritanism?

Advertisement

NEXT: The Fifth Column Branches Out to Sirius XM POTUS!

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. “These lights keep blinking out of sequence.”

      1. Will then make them blink in sequence!

  1. Simple solution: rather than these prohibitive dress codes that are vague and open to misinterpretation, why not institute a prescriptive dress code for girls that guarantees a distraction-free environment? Maybe a full-body covering with a slit or veil for the eyes.

  2. At that point, Summer reports, the principal said, “I’m gonna give you an ultimatum. We have tried to call your mother. You either come with me to the control room to change your shirt or we will arrest you.”

    With the principal and SRO watching? Fuckin’ pervs.

    Is this what cops in schools are for? Threatening teenagers who were insufficiently deferential to an administrator’s overbearing puritanism?

    Yes. It’s the easiest way they know, next to physically abusing old ladies, to get the authoritah boners they so crave.

    1. Wait a minute! Forget the pervs…they stock shirts for students to change into??!

    2. This isn’t porn hub. Those scenes from porn movies don’t happen in high school. 100% chance there is a separate room or bathroom. Good grief.

  3. If the rules are the same for boys and girls, then there is no “dress code sexism”. There’s nothing unreasonable in principle about a school having and enforcing a dress code.

    1. True, though I think enforcement should mean detention, rather than being arrested.

      1. That this even needs to be said…

      2. Ours was “not allowed to be in class until you cover up or change”. Kids learned pretty quick not to push the boundaries too hard.

    2. They never are, though. Girls are allowed to wear anything the boys are, OR clothes that breathe in the summer.

      1. Reverse discrimination for the win?

    3. I read other articles, it seemed more like she just didn’t want to listen and change her shirt as instructed. While I think the OMG she’s showing shoulder is stupid, she could have changed her shirt and moved on with her day with a warning but she kept arguing with them.

  4. And if they get challenged on this “Everyone involved was following established procedure”

    Government Stooges. Guillotine. Some disassembly required.

    1. That’s a great bumper sticker or t-shirt:

      Government: Some disassembly required

  5. Hickory Ridge High School described Summer’s actions as “insubordination,” even though she complied with the initial demand to cover up by borrowing a friend’s jacket.

    Glamour describes the incident as example of dress-code sexism in schools, where girls are often expected to make unreasonable wardrobe alterations because administrators worry that bare arms and tight leggings will distract the boys.

    So a teenage girl is threatened by an agent of the State with his hand on his gun over a dress code violation, and
    Glamour sees sexism.

    This is just how fucked up our priorities are.

    1. So are you saying dress codes aren’t sexist?

      1. Not inherently. If a dresscode states everyone must dress the same, then that doesn’t seem very sexist to me.

        Yes, this dress code is sexist.

        But if you focus on the sexist aspect of the dress code, you completely blunder past the idea that it would be ok for officers to threaten kids with guns for a dress code violation, as long as the dress code isn’t sexist.

        I can’t believe that you think it’s ok to threaten kids with guns as long as the dress code is even handed?

        1. It was about bared shoulders. If the cop/principal would have treated a wife-beater wearing male student the same way, then yes it would be sexist. If not, then no it would not.

          I say this because when I was a student the big Chicano style at the time was khakis and wife beaters. And it was against the dress code. Which eventually led to Chicano males wearing button up shirts with only the collar button buttoned.

        2. “Yes, this dress code is sexist.”

          Why do you say that? Do you know that the boys at that school are allowed bare shoulders and backs?

    2. I think it shows how fucked up Robby’s priorities are. He actually thought a Glamour article had enough value to link to.

      1. Hey, if unarmed white people were killed by the state at the same rate as minorities, then we have no problem with police violence. Nothing to see here. The problem is racism, not unaccountable police violence.

      2. You remember that rule about ignoring everything before the ‘but’?

        1. All I got out of that was “‘?”

        2. heh, heh, heh…you said but….heh, heh, heh

      3. I’d bet a buck that Glamour is read by more people than Reason.

        1. I’ll take that bet and raise you $1 that more people masturbate to Glamour than Reason!

          1. I’m technically infinite and I read Reason so you understand.

          2. ENB is fine tho

        2. Only because there’s nothing else to read at the dentist’s….

        3. And I’d bet that Hugh Hefner would have made Reason a whole lot better in circulation figures than Nick Gillespie.

    3. It is pretty amusing that people see sexism in this; meanwhile like 98% of people killed by police are male, a disparity far more severe than the racial disparity, and there’s not a peep about sexism there.

      1. I suspect you don’t even have to be that global. I’d be willing to bet that not only are more boys busted in HS and that they’re busted for more ambiguous offenses or offenses that don’t exist. Girl gets busted for wearing off-the-shoulder shirt at school which is plainly unacceptable by school policy while boy gets busted for posting a picture of a pop-tart gun from the privacy of his home.

        1. *but that they’re busted… as well

    4. So a teenage girl is threatened by an agent of the State with his hand on his gun over a dress code violation, and Glamour sees sexism.

      To be fair, Glamour probably sees sexism in everything. And they’ probably fine with armed agents of the State arresting kids over minor disciplinary infractions.

      “THERE MAKEN TEH SKOOLZ SAYFER 4 TEH CHILLDENZ!!1!!!!!! WHY DO U H8 CHILLENZ!111!!!1!!!!!!!!”

      1. *…they’re probably fine…*

    5. “Insubordination” implies the students are working for the staff, rather than vice versa. The hand on the gun implies things stopped just short of another statistic. But perhaps the most disturbing of all is…10 days before graduation??!! What kind of chickenshit!? They have nothing better to do, I guess. It’s not about setting a tone or drawing a line at the beginning of a term; no, this is a parting shot, like they were just itching to bother this senior, or maybe srs. in gen’l, over something.

  6. they are worried about dress code sexism but a cop with his hand on his gun ready to shot her down is not even considered an issue.

  7. The report states Summer responded with, “I think my shirt is fine”. The principal then told Summer that her lower back was also completely exposed, so she was still not in compliance with dress code. Summer repeats again, “My shirt is fine.

    “They can’t take me anywhere unless my mother is called,” she says. “So I said ‘I apologize, I can’t go anywhere with you unless my mom is called.”

    Totality of the circs, good arrest.

    1. They were pissed because she made them follow procedure.

      1. “What we’re dealing with here is a complete lack of respect for the law.”

        1. “What we’ve got here is a failure to communicate.” Luke (just before he is shot in the neck by Boss Godfrey.)

  8. I didn’t think cops needed to do an arrest in order to have reason for a pat down.

    1. I think an arrest is required to run the train…otherwise it’s one and done, and that’s no way to cover up an opportunity like this.

    2. Is this “pat down” ritual part of the “feel up” ritual?

  9. Is this what cops in schools are for? Threatening teenagers who were insufficiently deferential to an administrator’s overbearing puritanism?

    Uh huh. One person’s “puritanism” is another’s “removal of distractions so the kids who want to learn can actually do so”.

    As for the cops, they are there because the administrators are not allowed to so much as breathe on the kids for fear of a lawsuit. Not saying it’s right but it is what it is.

    1. And what it is, is WRONG.

    2. What about the kids who want to learn and ogle the girls? How come no one ever thinks of them?

      In any case, you’d have to have a pretty frumpy/Islamic dress code to make girls not a distraction to most high school boys. If that’s what you are really worried about, single sex education is really the only answer. And that only works for straight people.

      1. What about the kids who want to learn and ogle the girls?

        Ogle the girls on your own time. But yeah, there are worse distractions – fighting, for example.

        I’m probably being too contrarian today. I didn’t have any problem with this stuff in high school. I found out last night that my high school went to a dress code a few years ago. Sheesh, in the eighties we demanded and won the “right” to wear shorts in warm weather. Times change.

        1. The entirety of both of my kids’ public schooling involved school “uniforms”. I was none to happy about it either, but you can’t fight city hall.

        2. Sheesh, in the eighties we demanded and won the “right” to wear shorts in warm weather.

          Did you wear a kilt to protest that rule?

        3. Ogle the girls on your own time.

          It’s all my own time.

        4. Ogle the girls on your own time.

          Students are getting paid now?

        5. SJW’s are Islamic Nazis.

        6. The obsession w what the kids wear seems bizarre to me. What if some boys want to ogle a girl? Great, it means they won’t be distracting anybody else; the only ones distracted are those who want to be.

          I’m even bugged that the club I coached children in football specified a pants color for games. As long as you can tell the teams apart, who cares? The shirts were the uniforms.

      2. What about the kids who want to learn and ogle the girls? How come no one ever thinks of them?

        We make do, Zeb.

      3. We had a fairly strict dress code and it was strictly enforced. Most of what kids are wearing today would not be allowed – tank tops (guys or girls), shorts that don’t touch the knee, skirts that don’t touch the knee, yoga pants, leggings without a skirt – all were verboten.

        Unless you were a cheerleader. Funny that.

    3. “removal of distractions so the kids who want to learn can actually do so”.

      Yeah, I know when I was teenager I found the sight of bare female collarbones to be soooo distracting. /sarc

    4. I remember whenever I saw an exposed collarbone, I couldn’t study for the rest of the day.

      1. I remember whenever I saw an exposed collarbone, I couldn’t study for the rest of the day.

        A classmate of mine fell out of the passenger side of a pickup truck and exposed part of his scapula. I don’t remember it being particularly distracting the *entire* rest of that day, but it is my default mental picture whenever someone says ‘exposed [bone]’.

  10. Home work assignment:
    1. Females are so weak minded and ineffective at communication that authoritarian dress codes are required to protect them from themselves and from males. Corollary; all males are rapists.
    2. Females are fully equal members of society, and any attempt to even pretend to consider about thinking otherwise is unbridled sexism at the level of felony.

    Compare and contrast these two statements from feminists; for extra credit, try to cite reliable, verifiable sources for either or both. Relate either or both to the article above.

  11. She could have realistically been killed over this. Seriously. Had she failed to obey and then fought back when the officer attempted to kidnap her, shooting her on the spot would not have been a violation of policy. After all, failure to obey is punishable by death.

    1. She could have realistically been killed over this. Seriously.

      Exactly, so our #1 priority is to straighten out the dress code.

      1. Um, no. The #1 priority is unquestioning obedience. Compliance as they call it. Comply or die.

        1. I’m weighing the options, and trying to figure out which societal problem is easier to fix:

          Getting the schools to change their dress code to be equitable between boys and girls (insert crack about there being no difference between the two).

          Reworking the way our national police forces apply authority, and change the training procedures from top to bottom, possibly requiring the firing and re-hiring of tens of thousands of officers to better fit a less aggressive, more service-based model which applies violence as a last resort.

          1. Thing is, officer safety is the most important thing. If a thousand innocent bystanders have to die to keep one officer safe, then so be it. They are all heroes. The moment they get accepted into the Academy they become heroes. They have chosen to serve the public and put themselves in harm’s way. They do this by demanding unquestioning obedience and doing nothing that might jeopardize their safety. They can’t do anything unsafe because if they are not safe, then they cannot serve the public. They keep the public safe by putting themselves in harm’s way. And one of the few things that can get them fired is to put themselves into harm’s way, because officer safety is paramount. After all, if they put themselves into harm’s way, and get harmed, how will they be able to put themselves in harm’s way and serve the public that must serve them?

            My head hurts.

  12. Hand on his gun?

    Is that a euphemism, or did her bare shoulders actually frighten the unionized gov’t chickenshit?

    1. Is that a euphemism, or did her bare shoulders actually frighten the unionized gov’t chickenshit?

      My guess would be both.

  13. because administrators worry that bare arms and tight leggings will distract the boys

    The administrators have plainly forgotten what it’s like to be a teenager. Teenage boys are distracted by girls regardless of what they’re wearing. Whatever they’re wearing, the boys are thinking about what’s underneath.

    1. Teenage boys are distracted by girls regardless of what they’re wearing. Whatever they’re wearing, the boys are thinking about what’s underneath.

      Whether (the) girls are present or not. Also, sometimes, teenage boys are even distracted by activities that have nothing to do with girls or their (lack of) clothing. Frequently, the school encourages, sponsors, and/or even condones these ‘extra-curricular’ activities.

    2. They weren’t worried that it would distract the lesbians?

  14. Is this what cops in schools are for?

    What is it about “Your Children Belong To Us” don’t you understand?

    1. Really. A teacher at a transplanted English boarding school assured us that he could condition a child in its first seven years to determine what that one would believe to the grave. We also had to wear uniforms. But it wasn’t nationalsocialist Lebensborn conditioning. There were no prayers said nor cadaverous effigies on the walls.

  15. “Glamour describes the incident as example of dress-code sexism in schools, where girls are often expected to make unreasonable wardrobe alterations because administrators worry that bare arms and tight leggings will distract the boys.”

    Come now, Robbie. Clearly, the Peoples’ Representatives were simply trying to rescue this young woman from sex objectification! She undoubtedly had been brutalized by the male patriarchy into believing in the Beauty Myth and thinking that she needs to dress for the benefit of males! She clearly needed to be saved from herself!

  16. I was really distracted by that weird lower stomach hump all the female teachers seemed to have. It blew my mind and I couldn’t understand how children could morph into these grotesque adult bodies. I fucked everything up didn’t I guys.

  17. Makes me think of my high school. Technically speaking, we didn’t have a “uniform”. Because then the school would have to arrange for uniforms to impoverished students. But we did have a very strict dress code.

    Excepting “spirit wear” (shirts produced by an approved school club), you had to wear a collared shirt, either polo or button-down. You had a choice of pants, shorts and skirt, that had to be navy blue, khaki or hunter green. Denim was not allowed. Flamboyant colors on footwear was not allowed. Skirts and shorts must be at least knee length. “unnatural hair colors” were not allowed.

    As much as I hated it the first year, looking back now it seems like a good idea in that it nips all these clothing related problems (on all sides) right in the bud.

    1. So for you:

      clothing related problems > freedom

      1. I don’t consider the dress code at the youth indoctrination camps to be a relatively serious issue.

  18. In the RELATED list some of the dates are weeks in the future.

  19. So she noticed his hand on his gun, which means he probably also noticed her “targeting glance.” It isn’t histrionic to think this could have ended badly.

  20. If the rules are the same for boys and girls, then there is no “dress code sexism”. There’s nothing unreasonable in principle about a school having and enforcing a dress code.
    My recent post: No Store Method Review
    My recent post: Wizard Video Kit V2 Review

  21. because administrators worry that bare arms and tight leggings will distract the boys

    The administrators have plainly forgotten what it’s like to be a teenager. Teenage boys are distracted by girls regardless of what they’re wearing. Whatever they’re wearing, the boys are thinking about what’s underneath.
    My recent post: Linkedtify Review

  22. Is it better for teachers to use force against students, instead of police?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.