|
|
Panty Checks At School Dances
|
|
T O P I C
|
Discussion Started: 05-01-2002, 12:16 PM
|
|
|
|
A Rancho Bernardo High School administrator is under pressure to resign after lifting girls' skirts to make sure they weren't wearing thong underwear to a dance. Critics call it a violation of student rights, but some parents say something needs to be done about sexually provocative dress and behavior at student dances. What to you think?
|
|
View Messages: [newest first] | [oldest first]
|
carmen13
|
07-17-2005, 3:03 PM
|
|
|
There was a rumor that one girl had to pull her sundress all the way up to her bra,showing EVERYTHING at the morp.This is not true,I talked to her.She did have to unbutton her blouse to show her bra.She then did have to pull her long skirt DOWN past her panties to show her panties,and they passed.I don't know how this rumor started,but it is NOT TRUE! She wants the whole world to know that.Don't blame Ms. Wilson for this.
|
|
carmen13
|
11-22-2004, 10:47 AM
|
|
|
I think Rita Wilson is a good person who made a mistake.She wanted to protect the students and have a good dance after the 2001 Morp.She shouldn't have been punished,and my mother and I back her all the way.I was a girl student at RBHS who went to the morp,and here is my story.I was in line with about one hundred students,male and female.Many girls got asked about thier panties,and had to show them.I got asked about my panties.Then I got taken out of line about ten feet.I was wearing a knee length pleated skirt. .Then I had to lift my skirt waste high exposing my panties on front of EVERYBODY!My white,high cut panties covered enough to pass.I know I have shown my panties when I played tennis wearing short tennis ,but this was very embarrassing.Rita Wilson and Ms. Johnson shouldn't be punished for making the girls do this though.
|
|
FutureCSI
|
07-12-2003, 11:29 AM
|
|
|
Ok, here this is called pedofilism... no matter the gender of the checker or of the checkee, Perhaps the teacher is a pedofile homosexual but couldn't think of a way to trap a victim to have, and then wallah.. a dance, a perfect opportuinty, just have a panty check. Or if this was a true panty check why not ban boxers from boys? Boxers look like shorts and dont contain anything that well, so girls could easily stick their hands up their shorts as well. Also, what happened to the girls who werent wearing any underwear? That had to be even more humiliating especially if there were guys around. Even girls who were wearing pants or long skirts had to have their undies checked? They were abding by the dress code werent they? Did they inform the students before hand about the check? They should have at least warned them.
~Laura
|
|
sdm230
|
02-20-2003, 1:52 PM
|
|
|
Take a look at this article that was just posted on the NBC website. Looks like this school is taking a more reasonable action against their students freak dancing. Maybe Wilson should have thought of this before her "panty raid?"
PALO ALTO, Calif. -- Palo Alto High School officials are banning a popular way of dancing that simulates sex from all school dances. Students caught "freaking" will be asked to leave.
Principal Sandra Pearson tells students the provocative dance is being outlawed in response to suggestions from parents and students.
Critics say the dance is demeaning and looks like it belongs in an adult movie -- not at a high school dance. Fans of "freaking" say it's a harmless way to snuggle with your partner while enjoying hip-hop and rap music.
Similar bans have already been approved across the country -- from Wilcox High in Santa Clara, Calif., to Oakland Mills High in Columbia, Md.
Palo Alto High's first test comes at a dance Friday night.
|
|
danhawkins
|
11-16-2002, 7:09 PM
|
|
|
CLARIFICATION OF PRIOR MESSAGE: [additions shown in brackets] I like the reference that was made to "the Little House on the Prairie" dress code. [But] While I'm all in favor of [the greatest possible] freedom of expression, I think we have to recognize that "freedom of expression" is also inseparably tied to "freedom FROM [unjustified] individual and [or] group harassment and [or] assault" as well as "freedom to enjoy ones civil rights" according to the [civil, criminal & even some religious] laws that exist here in the USA. I believe we also could be [reasonably] judged [to be] a lot more consistent in our expressions of allowing one another, their & our rights, freedoms & obligations in this country, if we were better educated [in our schools] on the [fundamental U.S.A. laws and] religious as well as non-religious rights and feelings & obligations of people of other religions than our own. To people of some religions [even in the U.S.A.], the dance in question here would not be approved because of the general nature of the [basic moral] environment of the dance. Some would not even be obliged to approve [even] if the Waltz and Two Step or Minuet (Date: 1673 - a slow graceful dance in 3/4 time characterized by forward balancing, bowing, and toe pointing) were the only dance styles used here and even if "Little House on the Prairie" dress styles were the only ones used. But we need to be respectful of other peoples feelings [& rights] and try not to do things in their presence or otherwise [set examples], that would intentionally [& unjustly] harass [and] or embarrass anyone ([who may be] with or without religious affiliation). (I think that's one of the problems we have at present with the harassments & embarrassments that culminated in the "War on Terrorism" involving people of different religions.) [I believe young people need to be able to recognize that experience has taught some adults the pitfalls associated with being too careless, but] Ms. Wilson should [be] dealt with according to the Laws that exist [in the U.S.A., in order to send the right message]. As I see it,
Danny Hawkins
|
|
Asmadeus
|
11-13-2002, 8:20 PM
|
|
|
Steph9999 - I'm glad somebody found the humor on my posts. I think that it was wrong, but shouldn't be a big deal as some yahoos think (I'll be nice and not name any names but the initials DH come to mind). I just hope they can pull the panties out of their a$$ and move on. You are right this topic should be removed. Nothing like beating a dead horse, it sure stirs up the maggots who snap at the bait everytime! And believe me I'm sure there's one maggot that will take the bait again. Gee, I wonder who that could be?
I will leave this topic for the maggots to crawl in and out of!
"....Drying in the cold sun -- Watching as the frilly panties run."
|
|
Steph9999
|
11-13-2002, 5:25 PM
|
|
|
Asmadeus
I had one last comment and I was distracted. My husband pouts if I don't walk out to the car with him before he goes to work.
The Aqua Lung lyrics...you're killing me...you have been. Can't stay silent any longer! Please. No more!
Sincerely, Stephanie
|
|
Steph9999
|
11-13-2002, 4:45 PM
|
|
|
Let's move on to another topic, shall we?
I have actually asked the discussion moderators to close this discussion twice because it has been beaten into the ground so badly. I agree that it has become a joke! I have just done the unthinkable (agreed with you on that). 
The conclusions I have come to as a result of this discussion.
I don't like the situation but it's been dealt with.
If my Daughter does something to warrant that kind of suspicion as a result of her mode of dress, I will deal with it.
It is possible to be very attractive and sexified even, without looking and acting like a tramp. That should be the focus of what is taught to young ladies by their parents. Yes. "sexified". It's my own little word. REGRETABLY there will come a time when I look at my baby and realize that she has grown into a beautiful young lady. She can go down the trampy road or the classy one. I will be steering her down the classy one, modeling the classy one and hoping and praying for the best.
And finally, if anyone other than myself asks to see her undies...they had better watch out for Momma and they had better not be 17 year old males!
Bye you guys!
Sincerely, Stephanie
|
|
Asmadeus
|
11-13-2002, 8:40 AM
|
|
|
Steph9999, Thanks for the correction, I must admit that this subject cracks me up and I can't resist posting posts that get other panty cry babies all upset. I think dh003i should hook up with Ms. Wilson. Maybe she burned them in the past and they are bitter still and can't get over it. It is all too hilarious how some defend the panty issue when it is of little consequence. Ms. Wilson contiunues to work and isn't in jail despite what a tiny minority says or thinks (I know I'm reaching here). I still think Ms. Wilson was trying to help the teens and parents.
RIGHT ON RITA !!!!
|
|
dh003i
|
11-09-2002, 10:48 PM
|
|
|
There is nothing hypocritical about demanding that teachers and other adults in positions of authority over children be asked to follow the same rules of decency that the rest of us follow, obey the same laws the rest of us obey. What Mrs. Wilson did was illegal. If I walked up to any woman on the street and pulled up her skirt to see if she was wearing a thong, I'd be in jail, which is where Mrs. Wilson should be.
Again, Asmadeus, you show your immaturity by lodging irrelevant and absurd personal insults and acting as a cheerleader for this Mrs. Wilson. You might as well be acting as a cheerleader for a child molester. There is nothing funny about a woman violating teenaged girls and getting away with it. Anyone who thinks so is a sorry excuse for a human being, and we can only hope that they aren't parents. Anyone who would accept what Mrs. Wilson did to these kids is not a good parent.
According to you, Mrs. Wilson was doing these children's parents a favor? What an absurd outrageous statement. You might as well say that the priests who molest little boys are doing their parents a favor. How anyone could think such a thing is beyond me and, again, I can only hope that anyone with such a perverse view is not a parent. I feel sorry for the children of any parents who think that what Mrs. Wilson did was ok.
Do you realize how fanatical and cruel you sound? You think that as a institutional policy, teachers should check their students underwear to determine the type of underwear they're wearing? Only a nutcase would support that view. If anyone, the only people who have the right to make those kind of private inquires is the children's parents; teacher's have no place sticking their nose where it doesn't belong.
It's really very simple. What Mrs. Wilson did was morally wrong and, more importantly, illegal. Myself and others have provided clear references which show that what Mrs. Wilson did was illegal by several laws. You can ignore or deny the facts all you want; that doesn't change them. Had I done the same thing to some random person on the street, I'd be in jail. If you think otherwise, try walking up to a female officer and pulling down her pants to make sure she isn't wearing a thong. What? You don't want to do that? But, wait, I thought it was perfectly legal? Oh wait, you were lying and talking out of your ass. This kind of behavior (pulling up someone's clothing to see what's underneath) wouldn't even be tolerated at a strip club, and certainly shouldn't be tolerated in a school.
|
|
Top
News