The part that it really doesn’t fucking matter in this case.
Given your location, I HOPE that was a whoosh [sub]Terry Schiavo[/sub].
FWIW, Frisco is a formerly small town on the outskirts of D/FW which has only recently been subject to a massive infection of suburban-itis. It has gone from a small farming/ranching community to a major suburb with HUGE shopping malls (the areas only Ikea is there), toll roads, a minor league baseball stadium, and multi-million dollar homes in a fairly short time frame. Frisco has growing pains.
Also, there are some astonishingly puritannical minded people in the area. Think Southern Baptist and then cube that. However, that’s true for any area. It’s a spectrum ya know.
What I find surprising and disheartening about this isn’t the parents who find that the sight of an unclothed human body is shameful because it’s not covered with fur or something, it’s that the teacher was suspended for not believing that. Either the school board and the principal are spineless cowards for caving to a single child’s parents, or they already had an axe to grind with this teacher and this just gave them enough ammo to do what they wanted to do anyway.
Also FWIW, concerning the claims of Texas being filled with small minded reactionaries, in the Friday Dallas Morning News there were several letters to the editor published on this subject. Not a single one of them felt that this teacher did anything wrong, or should be subjected to any discipline.
Sorry, I meant the Onion article was on kids seeing boobies, not on blurred patches. Don’t want to mislead anyone.
You’re just ignorant, then, of how schools work. The principal is obligated to take responsibility here, given the fact that he approved the trip. His refusal to do so is unethical, and that’s why this teacher is going to win.
Daniel
Minor nitpick: the principal is a she.
field trip to a zoo, perhaps. field trip to the factory, we’d hope. field trip to a cider mill, of course. Field trip to an art museum - you’ve got to be nuts. art exhibits where? an art gallery? not at all surprising, since they’ll focus an exhibit on one, maybe two artists or themes. but an art museum, by classification, would have examples of arts from all the major groups, mediums etc.
Hell, on the history channel, you’d see examples of nudes in art. While I can’t recall a specific nude statue in my hometown, even the traditional scales of justice can show a bit of [/url=“http://www.reach.net/ccparalegals/Scales_of_Justice_C__C_Paralegal_Agency.jpg”] tit
Contrapuntal brought up the nude bathing bit. Teachers simply don’t show fifth graders naked pictures or statues. If this is truly an accident, then all should be forgiven. I suppose that you think that deliberating exposing fifth graders to nude pictures or statues is fine? I think that would put in a contrary position to many parents in the state of Texas.
Not if John Ashcroft has anything to about it.
goddam coding.
Really, it sure seems to be how it’s working Frisco, TX. I doubt that she we’ll win, nor will she get her job back.
yea, I was thinking of him in my earlier post. but had thankfully blanked out his name. Now that you’ve recalled it for me, I now have that clip of him singing “when the eagle soars” running through my brain. thanks a lot. :mad:
( 
)
If the context is an appropriate one, such as an art museum under the guidance of a knowledgeable and experienced teacher, you are correct that i have no trouble with it whatsoever.
If that puts me in a contrary position to a bunch of wilful ignoramuses and reactionary philistines, then i’m afraid that’s a burden i’m just going to have to live with.
From the story:
So aside from your rather bizarre notion of the meaning of the word “preponderance,” you are also willing to ignore the fact that “about a thousand” kids from the same community have already seen the same museum “without a single complaint” and you want to pretend that this teacher (who had uniformly sterling reviews until this incident) has done something wrong.
Rather than morality and modesty, stupidity and hasty conclusions based on a lack of evidence are frowned upon, here. What a foolish comment.
Honestly, I wouldn’t expect to find nudity, without it being hidden to some degree with warnings that nudity would be displayed, in any public art museum or display withing field trip distance from where I live. I kind of seriously doubt that locally, any art exhibit, would permit nude art. It’s just the facts of the matter of society where I live.
How many public general art museums have you been to recently?
Daniel
Nude art != immorality. It doesn’t even equal sexuality. :rolleyes:
Jesus, I know I’ve told this story countless times, but when I was in first grade, at a CATHOLIC school, we used to giggle at the nude pictures in our children’s Bible. (No naughty bits-they were covered by strategically placed leaves or whatever). Our teacher was an old-school nun and she used to just roll her eyes.
So the kids saw some nudity in ART. Big deal. They’ll giggle about it for a day or so then forget about it.
where on earth do you live? The Statue of David, one of the worlds most recognizable pieces of art is a nude. Hell, I used to have multiple copies of that as a magnet in my cubicle (complete w/cross dressing capabilities).
I think the stupid and hasty conclusions are being made by those who believe that even though seeing nude art hasn’t brought any trouble in the past, that it couldn’t be a problem currently. Besides, are these thousand kids all fifth graders in this lady’s class.
It’s like that in Saudi Arabia too. Maybe you’d be more comfortable there.
Has it really gotten this backwards in Texas? What do you guys thing about those magic, talking picture boxes?
It couln’t be a problem EVER unless you are an imbecile.