Women Buys All The Indecent T-Shirts In Orem Store Mall.

[Yirgacheffe]

In my school the photos were shot on site by a professional photographer. And manner of dress was specified for the photos to establish some standard of uniformity.

 

Of course, that was back in the stone age; maybe times have changed.

That's the way it was for us in the 80,s-90's and if we didn't meet the code we had to put something on that met the code or we could not have our pictures taken.  We had over 700 kids in our graduating class they all were photographed in dress code compliant clothing.

[Scott Lloyd]

That's the way it was for us in the 80,s-90's and if we didn't meet the code we had to put something on that met the code or we could not have our pictures taken.  We had over 700 kids in our graduating class they all were photographed in dress code compliant clothing.

That's how I remember it from the late '60s and early '70s.

[Scott Lloyd]

It occurs to me that there would be an even greater uproar if the school had simply chosen to exclude photos of students who didn't comply with the dress standard as it had been explained to them.

 

It seems to me the school was as accommodating as it could reasonably have been expected to be under the circumstances.

Edited May 29, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[Thinking]

So, it's the people who made the rules who have caused this problem, and not the people who choose not to follow them?

 

I'll say it again. "People should also be careful to not create consequences that create a bigger mess than what they are trying to clean up."

 

Note that I never claimed that what they were trying to fix didn't need to be fixed. IMHO, before any edit is done, the parent should be notified that what the child wore in the picture is unacceptable, and a retake photo is requested.

[Scott Lloyd]

 

 Those whose photos were edited are now forever labeled as immodest in their high school yearbooks.

On the contrary, they always and forever will appear in the yearbook as having worn modest clothing for that particular shoot.

 

The only way they will be regarded as immodest is if they choose to make an issue of this in public and identify themselves by name as being upset about it.

[Scott Lloyd]

I'll say it again. "People should also be careful to not create consequences that create a bigger mess than what they are trying to clean up."

 

And I'll say again: I don't see all that big of a mess here.

 

Note that I never claimed that what they were trying to fix didn't need to be fixed. IMHO, before any edit is done, the parent should be notified that what the child wore in the picture is unacceptable, and a retake photo is requested.

 

And I'll say again, you don't know what the logistics of the production process are. There may not have been time or opportunity to do what you suggest.

 

I recall clearly from my days on the high school yearbook staff that we had to produce the book in sections, each with its individual deadline, and the book was sent to press long before the school year ended.

Edited May 29, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

If I wanted to stage a protest, I would have taken a shirt outside the store and (after calling radio and TV media) burned the t-shirt. Or I would have worn the shirt, while cutting it into strips, revealing my disgustingly fat "love handles". That would turn away any prospective buyers, the implication being that under that t-shirt sits a grossly overweight older man.

You're commenting on an old topic. We've moved on. Skip to the end of the thread.

[Thinking]

And I'll say again, you don't know what the logistics of the production process are. There may not have been time or opportunity to do what you suggest.

 

Actually I am very familiar with the logistics, and if there was time to examine closely each photo and edit it, there was time to notify the offending students and their parents. All those edits didn't happen instantly.

[MorningStar]

I wonder if the students would be more upset if the school decided not to put their picture in the yearbook?  They could have chosen that option. 

[Storm Rider]

That doesn't address the fact that they were allowed to attend school wearing the clothes in the pictures.  If they were in violation of the dress code they never should have made it to the point of having their picture taken in the violating clothing, they should have been sent home, made to change, what ever the school does with kids who violate the dress code.  If the outfits were good enough for the school day they are good enough for the yearbook.

 

I agree with you. If a school has a dress code it should be enforced every day. If a child is so stupid as to violate the dress code then send them packing immediately back to their home. No need to fool with the little buggers if they cannot follow clear instructions. If they miss school it is their own fault and that of their parents.  

 

It works for me.  Wonder how it works for others?

[bluebell]

I'll say it again. "People should also be careful to not create consequences that create a bigger mess than what they are trying to clean up."

 

 

I know that's what you said.  What I'm asking is 'why'?  

 

Why does the school have a moral obligation to cater to the people who knowingly did not follow the rules or to do whatever it is in their power to do to keep people who may choose not to follow the rules from complaining about dealing with the consequences after breaking them?

 

Note that I never claimed that what they were trying to fix didn't need to be fixed. IMHO, before any edit is done, the parent should be notified that what the child wore in the picture is unacceptable, and a retake photo is requested.

 

 

If the school notified the students that not following the dress code would mean the photo would be edited, then why should the school also notify the parent before the editing is done?

Edited May 29, 2014 by bluebell

[toon]

People have a right to implement their own decency laws in their county by vote, regardless of the reason they choose the laws they do.  Anyone who thinks that someone trying to make sure the decency laws (as she understands them) are being enforced is equal to 'forcing her conservative values onto other people' needs to go back to school and learn more about the way that laws work in America.

 

Subject to the First Amendment, of course.  I haven't seen the shirts in question, but I have a hard time believing that they would fall into the category of unprotected obscenity, regardless of community standards.

[thesometimesaint]

Kudos to the 5-year-old, say I.

 

If the mother is going to get upset about an innocent comment from a 5-year-old, she has a bit of maturing herself to do.

 

Parents should do what they can to teach consideration and good manners, but the reality is that young children are going to behave in certain ways until they grow and learn better. It is not reasonable to expect parents to refrain from teaching their children modesty on the odd chance that a child might on some rare occasion say or do something deemed by others to be awkward.

 

And notwithstanding the dig against Utah and Utahns, this incident could have happened anywhere.

 

I'm so old that I was a Senior in HS when the dress codes were eliminated. Now I dress to keep warm and not scare the public.

[thesometimesaint]

Says who?

 

The law.

[thesometimesaint]

Subject to the First Amendment, of course.  I haven't seen the shirts in question, but I have a hard time believing that they would fall into the category of unprotected obscenity, regardless of community standards.

 

Agreed.

[Thinking]

Why does the school have a moral obligation to cater to the people who knowingly did not follow the rules or to do whatever it is in their power to do to keep people who may choose not to follow the rules from complaining about dealing with the consequences after breaking them?

 

You are assuming that they knowingly did not follow the rules. Two people can read the same rule and interpret it differently.

 

If the school notified the students that not following the dress code would mean the photo would be edited, then why should the school also notify the parent before the editing is done?

 

Spirit of the law?

[toon]

Actually it doesn't. The courts have repeatedly said that style of clothing in public schools is a First Amendment issue. I don't recommend that anyone including high school students, bare it all in public, but style of clothing is just an irrelevancy to me. 

 

That's not entirely true.  While students do not give up their First Amendment rights when at school, those rights are balanced against the school's interests in good discipline, order and maintaining an atmosphere conducive to education, or at least one that does not distract from that goal.  Try wearing clothing heavily associated with gangs to school.  I think a students would have a hard time arguing they have a First Amendment right to wear revealing, provocative, and potentially distracting clothing.  (I make no comment on whether I think bare shoulders is revealing, provocatig, and potentially distracting.)

[Thinking]

FWIW: I work closely with the faculty adviser in charge of the yearbook at our high school. I asked him if it would be easier to request a new photo or edit each individual picture. Without hesitation he said, "New photo."

[Scott Lloyd]

Actually I am very familiar with the logistics, and if there was time to examine closely each photo and edit it, there was time to notify the offending students and their parents. All those edits didn't happen instantly.

So you're saying it takes longer for a technician to Photoshop a photo than it does to contact somebody's parents, wait for a response, schedule a reshoot or wait for someone to provide a replacement?

Nope. Doesn't compute.

[toon]

You are correct.

 

However, I believe this thread more about how the dress code was enforced. The yearbook, once printed, is permanent. The pictures supplied to the yearbook staff were most certainly taken in August (plenty of time for retakes). Did the administration really believe that editing photos was the best solution? Sometimes people can be so focused on making sure everybody conforms that they don't examine how that conformation is achieved. Those whose photos were edited are now forever labeled as immodest in their high school yearbooks.

 

My graduating hight school class had a group photo of the entire class in the yearbook.  One kid thought it would be funny to make a well known offensive gesture in the photo.  It was almost unnoticable in such a large photo, but the school made sure everyone saw it when it just whited it out.  So in a large multi color photo, the first thing anyone would see was a whited out middle finger.

[Scott Lloyd]

FWIW: I work closely with the faculty adviser in charge of the yearbook at our high school. I asked him if it would be easier to request a new photo or edit each individual picture. Without hesitation he said, "New photo."

Must be very inexperienced at photo editing.

Do you realize it can take days to reach an individual or his/her parents and wait for a response? I could Photoshop a picture in an hour, and I have very little experience.

It could take a fraction of that time for an expert who already had the software and photo composite elements set up to handle multiple pictures. An artist where I work could have it done in 10 minutes.

Besides, as Bluebell rightly pointed out, if everyone has been properly notified in advance what to expect, why take all the extra time and trouble for those who deliberately violate the instructions?

Edited May 29, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[toon]

And I'll say again: I don't see all that big of a mess here.

 

And I'll say again, you don't know what the logistics of the production process are. There may not have been time or opportunity to do what you suggest.

 

I recall clearly from my days on the high school yearbook staff that we had to produce the book in sections, each with its individual deadline, and the book was sent to press long before the school year ended.

 

The logistics may indeed have prevented a more sensible solution.  When my daughter graduated a couple years ago, the senior yearbook photos were taken in August, just before school started.  But it was still possible to take a make up photo, primarily but not exclusively for those who missed the original opportunity, as late as January.  I know because that's when my daughter had her photo taken.  I recognize that the logistics vary from school to school, publisher to publisher, and photographer to photographer.  But at my daughter's school, it would have been quite easy to review photos and give a second chance, presumably at the student's expense, before a later deadline.

 

It's entirely possile that the school made an actual decision to edit and not allow for a retake because of logistics.  More likely, I suspect the option of a retake was never actually considered.  That even though there may have been time, the problem wasn't really noticed or discussed, and someone then just went ahead with the editing.  At the end of the day, so what?  High school year book photos are like prom, they lose all meaning after graduation, when life really begins.

Edited May 29, 2014 by toon

[bluebell]

Subject to the First Amendment, of course.  I haven't seen the shirts in question, but I have a hard time believing that they would fall into the category of unprotected obscenity, regardless of community standards.

 

I honestly have no idea.  This topic has been dead for a long time and as far as i am aware nothing has come of it since it was mentioned in the news months ago.

[bluebell]

You are assuming that they knowingly did not follow the rules. Two people can read the same rule and interpret it differently.

 

 

And you are assuming that they accidentally broke the school's dress code.

 

My assumption is based on what the news has reported about the incident, where the school specifically stated that all students were informed how the pictures would work.  What is your assumption based on?  Has someone claimed they 'didn't know'?  (honest question).

 

 

Spirit of the law?

 

 

I don't think i'm understanding you.  Spirit of what law?

[Scott Lloyd]

My graduating hight school class had a group photo of the entire class in the yearbook. One kid thought it would be funny to make a well known offensive gesture in the photo. It was almost unnoticable in such a large photo, but the school made sure everyone saw it when it just whited it out. So in a large multi color photo, the first thing anyone would see was a whited out middle finger.

When I was on the yearbook staff we had almost that exact thing happen. Except it was a group shot of the golf team, and the kid's finger was extending downward as he held his golf club.

Our photographer used a gamma card to retouch the photo, painting out the kid's finger to blend it in with the golf club handle. (No Photoshop or even digital photography in those long ago days. )