<p>
</p>
<p>All I can say is …WOW!</p>
<p>WHY would a principal need the names of couples, gay or straight? First of all, can’t she just open her eyes and look at the behavior in the hallways to see if there’s inappropriate PDA? Is what’s appropriate in school different if someone is a “couple” or not? </p>
<p>And secondly, did she plan to update the list every 5 minutes - because this is high school, and “couple” status changes fast. Did she want couples who are “going out”? Or couples who are just “together”? There’s a difference, according to my 10th grader. And nowadays, you’re not an official couple until you’re Facebook official.</p>
<p>Seriously, this principal is off the wall. There is no way she needed a “list” of couples to cut down on inappropriate PDA.</p>
<p>Wow…that’s ridiculous. I’m disgusted.</p>
<p>wing nut
absolutely</p>
<p>So inappropriate. Where was her judgment?</p>
<p>I remember a somewhat similar story from a couple of years ago. A teacher or principle unnecessarily outed two students while talking to their parents about her concerns over their PDA. I don’t remember the details.</p>
<p>
[WREG-TV</a> Memphis - ACLU Says Gay Students Mistreated At Memphis school](<a href=“http://www.wreg.com/Global/story.asp?S=8246221&nav=3HvD]WREG-TV”>http://www.wreg.com/Global/story.asp?S=8246221&nav=3HvD)</p>
<p>I’m making a donation to the ACLU.</p>
<p>I wonder did they think that maybe the teachers should take shifts and walk around the campus to make sure that they aren’t being sexually explicit? Oh I Bet they did but the teachers union/contract would not allow it. </p>
<p>This story freaks me out on so many layers, now I am wondering how lax this school is, if the kids are in sexual positions on the campus and nobody is aware of it what happens when the girl is raped oin campus because the teachers weren’t watching out…</p>
<p>Wow…the ACLU version of the story sure differes from the school district version. How could a person come to any accurate conclusions based on the information available?</p>
<p>I really don’t see a difference. The facts seem basically the same. And the idea that they didn’t list sexual orientation is disengenuous, if you list Nicholas and Andrew as a couple.</p>
<p>And I’d like to see an explanation as to why Nicholas was not allowed on the NO trip.</p>
<p>The 11th grader Nicholas had just made the Dean’s List and the honors students tells ABC 24 it was “frightening to see a list with my name on it where not just other teachers could see but students as well.” … I really feel that my personal privacy was invaded. I mean, Principal Beasley called my mother and outed me to my mother!"</p>
<p>[Principal</a> Outs Two Black Gay Students at High School - The Daily Voice - Black America’s Daily News Source](<a href=“Ridgewood Looks For Architects, Engineers For Multi-Level Garage | Ridgewood Daily Voice”>Ridgewood Looks For Architects, Engineers For Multi-Level Garage | Ridgewood Daily Voice)</p>
<p>I cannot believe the school district response- what if they had been a straight integrated couple?</p>
<p>Obviously the school’s position will be that all students were treated “equally” but since gay teens do not have equal rights and many still have to live in very homophobic environments, outing them exposed them unnecessarily to all kinds of potential prejudice, harrassment and possible physical harm. They may well have naively outed themselves but if so the school administrator’s concern should have been to protect/advise/support them-- jmho</p>
<p>Well…let’s see garland. The school said it made a private communication to parents and never publicized a list. The ACLU claims the school ‘outed’ people with a public list. </p>
<p>Privacy is the crux of the issue, and it seems the parties involved have different versions on that point.</p>
<p>Btw…if the school did notify parents of a violation of district policy in a private manner, then I suppose the parents and students should view that as a favor and be grateful they weren’t disciplined with detention or suspension, a much more sticky public record to deal with than a phone call to mom and dad. Imho, it is very possible the ACLU is frothing this up into something it’s not (what?? NO!). At any rate, it will be very interesting when more facts come out.</p>
<p>Even if all the school did was notify the parents, there would be no need to give the name of the student’s boyfriend (thereby possibly outing him to his parents).</p>
<p>I was taking a New Jersey Transit train from New York the other day. I got into a conversation with the woman on the train who collects the tickets. Last week, she went to pick up her 12-year-old niece at an inner city middle school and was shocked to see a boy and girl engaged in some type of sexual activity in the hallway, in direct sight of a teacher there. The teacher was doing nothing to discourage their behavior. This woman reportedly said to the couple, “Excuse you! Break it up!” After that, the teacher appeared embarrassed and then finally said, “Yeah. Break it up,” but it appeared to this woman that the teacher would have done nothing if another adult had not been there.</p>
<p>I think the actions of the principal who is the subject of this thread, which apparently involved sending a letter home to families of students warning them against being overly affectionate in school, was very possibly entirely appropriate. Perhaps the school was headed toward an environment similar to the one encountered by the woman to whom I was talking. Although several posters have assumed it to be the case, nothing in the article mentions anything about the suspected partners being identified for each child. Receiving such a letter might have been upsetting not only for parents of gay students but also for some other parents who did not think their children were romantically involved. However,the principal seems to have thought she was heading off a situation before it got worse. Do gays want equal treatment, or do they want to be “more equal” than others? Furthermore, PUBLIC displays of sexual activity / affection have nothing to do with privacy (except of course for the ACLU).</p>
<p>I think the privacy issue at hand is not the act [PDA], but the manner in which the parents were notified. </p>
<p>But I agree…this issue is off kilter. A violation of school policy is a violation of school policy. It’s the principal’s job to enforce school policy. A warning phone call home to parents regarding an infraction is probably the most minor means of punishment available to that principal, and on the face of it, entirely within her scope of authority. </p>
<p>And anyone who violates the rules against PDA should expect the same punishment. What are the alternatives? If you are are gay and kissing in the hallway it’s okay…but if you are straight, it’s a phone call home or off to detention with you? </p>
<p>Furthermore, it is not the school’s job to protect the privacy of gay students who wish to be ‘out’ at school, but closeted at home. Closeted, or not, is a personal choice with personal responsibility attached.</p>
<p>“The principal did not list any information other than students’ names on her personal call list, and she certainly did not specify the sexual orientation of any student. Additionally, the list was never posted publicly anywhere at the school.” </p>
<p>I don’t see where it says here that the students were listed in couples. Rather it seems it was a just a list of names of students who had violated the PDA rules of the school. Am I missing something here?</p>
<p>Our schools have cameras in the hallway. There is no need for a “list” of couples. If kids are behaving inappropriately and do not stop, the parents can simply be invited to watch the recording.</p>
<p>I still don’t get why they need a list of couples. Send a letter to all parents of all students regarding what is considered inappropriate behavior, and enforce your standards when you see it happening. And inappropriate standards should be the same for gay or straight couples.</p>
<p>I am not very good at internet research and can’t find if the nytimes or wsj has reported on this yet; also don’t know the correct way to reference a website but you will all know how to find this one. The aclu website press release, which seems to be where most of the information is coming from at this point, states:</p>
<p>the two young men were trying to keep their relationship quiet; they were never observed in any pda by school staff; other students gave their names when the pricipal was making a list of potential pda offenders; one mother saw her son’s name on the list posted in plain site in the principal’s office; the other mom was called and asked if she knew her son was gay? told by the principal that she didn’t like gay people and wouldn’t tolerate homosexuality at school.</p>
<p>It is not yet clear to me there actually was any violation of school policy by the young men.</p>
<p>The inference I draw from the school district press release was the principal made phone calls to parents after several warnings and inappropriate behavior persisted. </p>
<p>I don’t know if I buy that whole claim by the parent that the principal stated ‘she didn’t like gay people’. School administrators are very well-versed in all things ‘PC’, so it’s seems unlikely a principal would jump out on a limb in that manner. I’m more inclined to think this particular facet of the incident falls in the ‘litigious parent’ category.</p>
<p>Sounds like a private list became public. Sounds like maybe it was a list of names that did not list couples; but if there were, say 10 boys names and 8 girls names, it wouldn’t take long to figure out one of the couples was same sex. It would then not take long for a 1-2 students or school personel to pair off the other 16 and figure out who the two boys were that were a couple. With lists available in in administrative areas, and with the number of students working in the office, (our Juniors and Seniors are able to use a period to be a teachers assistant, lab assistant, AD assistant, principal’s assistant), the list could easily have been made public. Once that happened, there was no stopping the movement of “information.” </p>
<p>Making a list of couples and making the leap to the assumption that these were the students that needed parental notification…? Sounds like if there is PDA, the offenders need to be spoken to then and there, with the ususal sequence of events–warning with phone call to parent, after school detention, ISS, etc–whatever the code of conduct calls for. If the high school is on the college campus, the kids still must have to carry or wear ID, and produce it if needed. . My guess is that the high school students are also held to a different standard than the college students. </p>
<p>We will wait for the “rest of the story…” But approaching this problem by creating a list of couples at the school?</p>