I've read comments from gay persons saying Natalie deserves the money because of her status as a minority. Again, I must disagree. I don't believe any child should be advertising his or her sexual interest in school. I would be just as opposed to a straight kid wearing a tee shirt reading: "I love 69." Clothing that is disruptive has no place in school. That is the law. When I see a school system shelling out thousands of dollars over a frivolous lawsuit, it is clear the settlement was reached for nonlegal reasons. A form of blackmail — give me money or suffer bad publicity — has been used.
As for gay people who support this kind of chicanery because the perpetrator is homosexual, they do themselves no favors. This is the kind of situation that makes the claim gays want special rights appear true. Children are sent home to change inappropriate clothing every day. Natalie should have been treated the same as others are. Her claim of special status should have been ignored. The school system had a good case. Under the caselaw, it is settled that any clothing that is potentially disruptive or disruptive can be excluded. I believe Natalie's shirt was potentially disruptive.
Note: This entry also appeared at Silver Rights.
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments
1 - simon b
Sorry... disruptive clothing?
As my Mum used to say 'they just want you to look at them.'
Basically, nobody really cares about what tshirts say, and the only disruption seems to be caused by people playing into attention seekers hands and making a fuss about it.
2 - Mac Diva
Simon (I love that name) we are in agreement about the kids' motivation. But, the provocation often works. The class or school dissolves into teasing, bickering or fights and no learning gets done. So, it is necessary to have rules about what children can wear. That is why cases like this one have gone all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court several times.
The other student I am thinking about today is the college student who apparently tricked the entire country into believing she had been kidnapped. I am not feeling charitable to teenagers right now.
3 - Ms. Tek
I think she should have gotten the money and this is our own government's fault because we DON'T require students to wear uniforms. The vast majority of children in the UK must wear uniforms. They may hate them (I would if I was a kid... though I think my catholic school uniform was better than the blazer and tie (and sometimes straw hat!!) they have to wear).
By requiring kids to wear uniforms, they are also helping the parents out budget-wise. If a kid needs to wear a uniform 5 out of 7 days a week, they don't need as many designer clothes!!
School is for studying. Wearing a uniform does not stiffle self-expression. That is what after hours and the weekend is for. I am 100% for uniforms!
4 - boomcrashbaby
Perhaps I should home school my daughter if it turns out that most of America agrees with the posters on this thread that the educational system should be reminiscent of boot camp.
Reading further into the story, I find that she was awarded money for several reasons:
1) A teacher laughed at the T-shirt and and then denounced it as being "inappropriate" in front of other pupils.
The teen and her parents filed suit last June in federal court in Manhattan, charging the T-shirt harassment was part of a series of discriminatory incidents at the school. (story)
In addition to paying out the $30,000, the city Department of Education agreed to establish a policy on student dress and to require school staff to undergo sensitivity training.
On an earlier occasion teachers made Young remove rainbow colored beads from her hair, although she was not suspended. (and now I suppose most blogcritics will think that beads in the hair are disruptive and further indication that gay people want special rights, not equal rights)
Schools cannot legally engage in this type of selective, content-based suppression of speech,'' lawyer Dan Perez said. ''If she had worn a 'Barbie Supports the Troops in the War in Iraq' T-shirt, she would have been called a patriot.''
It asks the department to issue guidelines on students' dress and on dealing with students' expression of their sexual orientation.
Hodges said her daughter suffered humiliation and harassment by schoolmates.
Hodges said her daughter's experience at the middle school was very unpleasant. "She couldn't deal with it. She was very unhappy, almost like she was in a shell."
For open-minded, willing-to-see-both-sides-of-the-story, bloggers here, I'd just like to point out that one thing that is FAR FAR FAR more disruptive than text on a t-shirt, is the humiliation and harassment and the fear for one's safety that millions of kids of ALL orientations go through on a daily basis in their schools. THAT is where the focus should lie, not on a 20 dollar hanes t-shirt.
5 - boomcrashbaby
I forgot to add, as for the comment about this being an example of gay people wanting special rights, not equal rights, we should be aware that it was her MOTHER that sued, not Natalie. And we don't know her mother's orientation, so perhaps this really is about a protective mother wanting to help a distressed harassed child and seek some equality and justice, rather than some secretive gay Opus Dei type committee working for special rights.