Poll of the Day > 17 y/o GAY Kid is SUSPENDED because he wore NAIL POLISH which Guys CAN'T wear!!!

(+) Yeah! (+)

adjl posted...

Why shouldn't more unnecessary rules to be challenged and changed?

All the unnecessary ones should be challenged. Youre the one who seems to think they should just stick to the rule for no real reason...
---

Metalsonic66 posted...

Bullshit

Let's find out.

LinkPizza posted...

Probably didnt know. Most high schoolers probably only know rules about certain items of clothing. Most dont usually know when the rule forbids something for only one sex/gender...

This is baffling to me. In the UK at least parents and by proxy students are fully informed of the uniform policy of a school.

---

wwinterj25 posted...

Let's find out.

We all already know. You spelled it out very clearly.

You don't think the policy should be changed because you agree that men wearing nail polish is bad.

---

This is discriminatory and homophobic... nah, lol. Spoiled kid can follow the dress code and stop calling the local news for clickbait.

It's gender neutral. No one is supposed to wear nail polish in his rules. Which is stupid... but some if not all dress codes are stupid, get over it.

---

wwinterj25 posted...

When a uniform policy is in place turning up with things that are against it isn't changing anything. It's thinking you're above what the policy stands for. Would you recommend doing this in a work place? If this attention seeker really wanted to change the policy then go down the right channels. School kids turning up with things that are not part of the uniform is nothing new and neither is this.

I'm happy you agree. Any other notions you have in your own head is a reflection of you and your own views.



According to this uniform policy you're wrong. Why do some folk here find it difficult to follow a simple uniform policy? No wounder we have pointless stories like this.

There are no uniforms in public schools in America.

wwinterj25 posted...

Wow. Reported for been homophobic.

You reported yourself?
---

Revelation34 posted...

There are no uniforms in public schools in America.

Did you read the actual article? It seems you didn't yet here you are having a strong stance on it.


---

wwinterj25 posted...

Did you read the actual article? It seems you didn't yet here you are having a strong stance on it.

That's not a uniform policy. Public schools don't have actual uniforms in America like weird countries like yours do.
---

Revelation34 posted...

That's not a uniform policy. Public schools don't have actual uniforms in America like weird countries like yours do.

Here we go:
"Full Throttle posted...

The School District says it normally does not alter its dress code in the middle of the year as they will look into this into consideration into the next school year but says they have a strict grooming code for boys and girls and says they would like both groups to adhere to their gender specific attire"

It has a dress code. Same thing as a uniform policy. Read the article before you try and act smart.

---

adjl posted...

Why shouldn't more unnecessary rules to be challenged and changed?

---

wwinterj25 posted...

This is baffling to me. In the UK at least parents and by proxy students are fully informed of the uniform policy of a school.

This couldve still happened. Its possible that if the mom didnt know her son wore nail polish, she may not have mentioned it. Or probably didnt notice. And that if they had parents who cared about the school rules. Or it could have been a rule someone missed. And since its not something normally against school policies, nobody really thought about it until it was brought up.
---

wwinterj25 posted...

It has a dress code. Same thing as a uniform policy. Read the article before you try and act smart.

I believe those are different. Dress codes are restrictions, where uniforms are uniforms...
---

LinkPizza posted...

This couldve still happened. Its possible that if the mom didnt know her son wore nail polish, she may not have mentioned it. Or probably didnt notice. And that if they had parents who cared about the school rules. Or it could have been a rule someone missed. And since its not something normally against school policies, nobody really thought about it until it was brought up.

... or he knew it was against the dress code and thought he'd be different and gave a surprised pikachu face when he got busted. It's easy to be a apologist for rule breakers.

LinkPizza posted...

I believe those are different. Dress codes are restrictions, where uniforms are uniforms...

Does not compute as uniforms are also restrictions.

---

Why shouldn't more unnecessary rules to be challenged and changed?

Because then the ESS JAY DUBYAS win!

---

Dress codes and uniform policies are technically different, but they both fall under the broad umbrella of dictating what students can and can't wear. Uniform policies just spell it out in more detail.

---

adjl posted...

Dress codes and uniform policies are technically different, but they both fall under the broad umbrella of dictating what students can and can't wear. Uniform policies just spell it out in more detail.

However according to @Revelation34 having a more detailed dress code so everyone knows what to wear is "weird".

---

wwinterj25 posted...

... or he knew it was against the dress code and thought he'd be different and gave a surprised pikachu face when he got busted. It's easy to be a apologist for rule breakers.

Or he didn't know it was against the rules and was surprised that the school had a sexist rule...

wwinterj25 posted...

Does not compute as uniforms are also restrictions.

No. Uniforms are uniforms. They are a certain clothing you have to wear, rather than just restrictions on clothing. Like it usually has a required set of clothing to wear. Dress code is wearing whatever you want to wear with restrictions. You can wear whatever, if it doesn't break the restrictions. They are different, which is why they are called different things in this case...

Full Throttle posted...

The School District says it normally does not alter its dress code in the middle of the year

I wonder if this is the truth. I've heard of many schools changing dress codes in the middle of the year to prevent certain clothes quite often. But I guess they only do it in the middle of the year if they like it. But I still think they may be lying about this so they can get extra time to think of a good excuse for not doing it. or to hope others forget fast enough...
---

LinkPizza posted...

Or he didn't know it was against the rules and was surprised that the school had a sexist rule...

Nah, he totally just wanted to become internet famous for wearing nail polish

---

LinkPizza posted...

Or he didn't know it was against the rules and was surprised that the school had a sexist rule...

I'd love to be that optimistic but sadly I'm cynical. Even more so when he's 17.

No. Uniforms are uniforms. They are a certain clothing you have to wear, rather than just restrictions on clothing. Dress code is wearing whatever you want to wear with restrictions.

Fair. It still amounts to the same thing as he shouldn't wear what he's not supposed to. This results in the same thing too. We had a uniform at school and if we didn't follow it we got given something to wear that follows it or sent home if that wasn't possible or we didn't comply. Mostly the kids at my school loved to wear trainers(sneakers) when it was against the rules I just saw them as 'problem childs' as all it did was hold up the class when it wasn't needed.

---

wwinterj25 posted...

I'd love to be that optimistic but sadly I'm cynical. Even more so when he's 17.

Being 17 would probably make it more likely that he didn't know about the rules. As in the US, I don't think most high schools (or even their parents) know the full dress code. And even if they know some of it, probably don't know about the nail polish rule since it's not a normal rule in the US...

wwinterj25 posted...

Fair. It still amounts to the same thing as he shouldn't wear what he's not supposed to. This results in the same thing too. We had a uniform at school and if we didn't follow it we got given something to wear that follows it or sent home if that wasn't possible or we didn't comply. Mostly the kids at my school loved to wear trainers(sneakers) when it was against the rules I just saw them as 'problem childs' as all it did was hold up the class when it wasn't needed.

At private schools, we have uniforms. But they were like either Khaki or blue pants. And I think polo shirts of a certain color. At my public school, it was pretty normal. Just don't wear too short of a skirt and stuff. We never had any stupid rules about nail polish, though. And most rules (if not all) were for both male and female students. Though, one may never even matter for the other sometimes...

In this case, the rule is kind of dumb, as it shouldn't affect students negatively if his has the nail polish. And if the rule is for no one to wear it, then they should enforce the rule on the whole student body instead of just males. And if the rule is just for males, it should be changed to actually be fair. Or have a legitimate reason for it's existence...
---

Gay or not,

if girls are allowed to wear nail polish and he got disciplined for it its textbook discrimination.

whether I agree or not is irrelevant. The law disagrees. Thats all that matters.

---

wwinterj25 posted...

However according to @Revelation34 having a more detailed dress code so everyone knows what to wear is "weird".

Nah I take back what I said. They're shitty countries instead.
---

LinkPizza posted...

Being 17 would probably make it more likely that he didn't know about the rules. As in the US, I don't think most high schools (or even their parents) know the full dress code. And even if they know some of it, probably don't know about the nail polish rule since it's not a normal rule in the US...

I live and learn.

In this case, the rule is kind of dumb, as it shouldn't affect students negatively if his has the nail polish. And if the rule is for no one to wear it, then they should enforce the rule on the whole student body instead of just males. And if the rule is just for males, it should be changed to actually be fair. Or have a legitimate reason for it's existence...

My own personal views are uniforms should be a thing as to help stop bullying however yes students should be allowed to wear nail polish, make-up, have piercings and long/short hair if they are allowed by the parents or are old enough to make their own choices. Someone wearing these things doesn't effect their ability to learn and that's the point of a school. However I also accept schools and works places have confirms/dress codes at times that must be followed. Nobody wants to follow them but it is what it is. With my last job I had to inform them if I grown a beard and we had a uniform. As much as I wanted to I wasn't allowed to turn up in a gimp suit.

Revelation34 posted...

They're shitty countries instead.

You must have really gave that some thought.

---

I wish there was a 3rd option in poll, which is I think guys wearing nail polish and all that is weird but it isn't any of my business either.

Homophobic? No
Sexist? Yes

I am of the opinion only girls looks cute with nail polish but then again nothing guys could do would make me consider them to be cute.

---

wwinterj25 posted...

With my last job I had to inform them if I grown a beard and we had a uniform. As much as I wanted to I wasn't allowed to turn up in a gimp suit.

With a uniform, it's different, though. Even at my job, we have rules regarding it... On base, at least. And to be honest, they have been even relaxing on those rules, as well... Then there was my other job that had a dress code. We had a uniform we could wear, but didn't have to. And the rules were more relaxed. Because it was a dress code. So, we could wear pretty much whatever as long as it didn't affect work and something was a safety color. Like, they gave us reflective vest. But we also didn't have to wear it if out shirt or jacket was a safety color, or something like that.
---

LinkPizza posted...

But I still think they may be lying about this so they can get extra time to think of a good excuse for not doing it. or to hope others forget fast enough...

Oh, they're 100% just saying that so they can pretend they'll change it later because they know everyone will have forgotten about it by then. There's absolutely no reason not to make a dress code more permissive mid-semester. Making it more restrictive, I can see deferring until the end of a term/year, since that's going to mean that some students will need to buy new clothes to replace the parts of their wardrobes they're no longer allowed to wear, but making it more permissive doesn't require anyone to do anything and therefore doesn't have to have any sort of grace period before coming into effect. Even with making it more restrictive, though, there's no reason they can't announce and commit to the change before bringing it into effect and enforcing it (in fact, they should do so), so this whole "we can't discuss changing the dress code now" is obviously nonsense.

---

deoxxys posted...

Homophobic? No
Sexist? Yes

This. Girls are allowed to get away with all kinds of dress code crap guys aren't, even under a uniforms system. I know it's a duckbear topic so he has to be sensational but I don't see what him gay has to do with. All the straight edgy dudes would be doing this stuff. Maybe the gay guy is the only one that spoke out?

*Well according to him the issues only started after he came out. So was he and other guys doing this the whole time. If so then it's less to do with code than other reasons.

---

adjl posted...

Making it more restrictive, I can see deferring until the end of a term/year, since that's going to mean that some students will need to buy new clothes to replace the parts of their wardrobes they're no longer allowed to wear

I see them do this often, though. Make it restrictive to stop kids from wearing some new fashion they disapprove of...
---

wwinterj25 posted...

Mostly the kids at my school loved to wear trainers(sneakers) when it was against the rules I just saw them as 'problem childs' as all it did was hold up the class when it wasn't needed.

How restrictive were the shoe rules? I wore orthopaedic shoes for most of my childhood and specific shoes that can hold my custom arch supports ever since.
Would either of those be possibly not allowed under those rules, or would a medical exception be made?

---

The rules at least specified by the student handbook screencap provided in this topic does not specifiy gender so assuming their application of the rule is only targetting males than that is indeed an obvious problem.

Also what happens if a bald kid as a head tattoo. Can't have visible tattoos and can't wear headwear.

---

MeteoricBurst posted...

I know it's a duckbear topic so he has to be sensational but I don't see what him gay has to do with. All the straight edgy dudes would be doing this stuff.

Exactly. According to some folk here it's "homophobic" though to not allow these things to happen. Obviously it's sexist but sexuality really has no bearing on this and I'll say the same thing if it was some heterosexual goth kid. Some of my acquaintances are "straight edgy dudes" and wear black nail polish. My dads gf's adopted son also wears it. Hell I've even tried black lipstick. I've no problem with it at all. However a dress code, matter what stupid it is should be followed unless you go down the right channels to change it. This isn't the way and I'd be surprised if they change it.

Nichtcrawler X posted...

How restrictive were the shoe rules? I wore orthopaedic shoes for most of my childhood and specific shoes that can hold my custom arch supports ever since.
Would either of those be possibly not allowed under those rules, or would a medical exception be made?

At the school I was at years ago we had to wear black shoes or boots. That's it unless doing P.E. The rules are the same as far as I know as although the school has merged with another now and been rebuilt they are still wearing a uniform as I see the kids about all the time. My Niece and Nephew who are children also wear a uniform. They attend my old primary school that's still the same. Other schools have uniforms too. It's actually a common thing over here.

__starsnostars posted...

Also what happens if a bald kid as a head tattoo. Can't have visible tattoos and can't wear headwear.

It's possible they won't allow him at the school. Some jobs for example won't employ someone who has their face covered in ink as it doesn't fit into the company image. It's the same thing with schools that have dress codes/uniforms. It's mostly about the schools image. I'm all for them though as it does limit bullying as everyone will be wearing the same. Without order there is only chaos.

---

wwinterj25 posted...

sexuality really has no bearing on this

Its still possible is does. If this only happened after he came out, and the other at straight edgy kids werent talked to, then its still possible it had something to do with it. Unfortunately, we only have info on this one student. AFAIK, we dont even know if the rule was school-wide, or males only...
---

Sexuality is the only reason they would have a rule like that

---

wwinterj25 posted...

At the school I was at years ago we had to wear black shoes or boots. That's it unless doing P.E. The rules are the same as far as I know as although the school has merged with another now and been rebuilt they are still wearing a uniform as I see the kids about all the time. My Niece and Nephew who are children also wear a uniform. They attend my old primary school that's still the same. Other schools have uniforms too. It's actually a common thing over here.

Ah primary school? That is when I wore orthopaedic shoes and they usually just had the one to model to chose from, with no choice in colour or anything else, just the one model they had available at the time I went in for a new pair. So if those happened to not be black, the school would tell me to wear different shoes?

---

Metalsonic66 posted...

Sexuality is the only reason they would have a rule like that

I could easily believe this, as well. I dont really see any other reason for it. And definitely not a legitimate one...
---

wwinterj25 posted...

Exactly. According to some folk here it's "homophobic" though to not allow these things to happen. Obviously it's sexist but sexuality really has no bearing on this and I'll say the same thing if it was some heterosexual goth kid. Some of my acquaintances are "straight edgy dudes" and wear black nail polish. My dads gf's adopted son also wears it. Hell I've even tried black lipstick. I've no problem with it at all. However a dress code, matter what stupid it is should be followed unless you go down the right channels to change it. This isn't the way and I'd be surprised if they change it.

At the school I was at years ago we had to wear black shoes or boots. That's it unless doing P.E. The rules are the same as far as I know as although the school has merged with another now and been rebuilt they are still wearing a uniform as I see the kids about all the time. My Niece and Nephew who are children also wear a uniform. They attend my old primary school that's still the same. Other schools have uniforms too. It's actually a common thing over here.



It's possible they won't allow him at the school. Some jobs for example won't employ someone who has their face covered in ink as it doesn't fit into the company image. It's the same thing with schools that have dress codes/uniforms. It's mostly about the schools image. I'm all for them though as it does limit bullying as everyone will be wearing the same. Without order there is only chaos.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=NIgfiSzCy1o
---

Nichtcrawler X posted...

Ah primary school? That is when I wore orthopaedic shoes and they usually just had the one to model to chose from, with no choice in colour or anything else, just the one model they had available at the time I went in for a new pair. So if those happened to not be black, the school would tell me to wear different shoes?

You have a medical condition, though, IIRC. So, maybe not...
---

Nichtcrawler X posted...

Ah primary school? That is when I wore orthopaedic shoes and they usually just had the one to model to chose from, with no choice in colour or anything else, just the one model they had available at the time I went in for a new pair. So if those happened to not be black, the school would tell me to wear different shoes?

In America they wouldn't be allowed to due to the disability act.
---

LinkPizza posted...

You have a medical condition, though, IIRC. So, maybe not...

Without a condition, there would be no need for the orthopaedic shoes.

---

Nichtcrawler X posted...

Ah primary school? That is when I wore orthopaedic shoes and they usually just had the one to model to chose from, with no choice in colour or anything else, just the one model they had available at the time I went in for a new pair. So if those happened to not be black, the school would tell me to wear different shoes?

I'd assume there is expectations to the rule. Disability is one of them. Although I never known anyone who had a disability that didn't allow them to wear black shoes/boots.

Revelation34 posted...

https://youtube.com/watch?v=NIgfiSzCy1o

https://youtu.be/5A0hhsYVO1Q?t=280

---

wwinterj25 posted...

I'm all for them though as it does limit bullying as everyone will be wearing the same.

You have a rather optimistic view of schoolchildren if you think uniforms make an appreciable difference in bullying rates. You take away the option of bullying people for their outfit choices, sure, but there are many aspects of individuality that a bully can pick on beyond outfit choices. Anyone looking to be a dick to one of their classmates will have no problem finding something else to focus on.

---

adjl posted...

You have a rather optimistic view of schoolchildren if you think uniforms make an appreciable difference in bullying rates. You take away the option of bullying people for their outfit choices, sure, but there are many aspects of individuality that a bully can pick on beyond outfit choices. Anyone looking to be a dick to one of their classmates will have no problem finding something else to focus on.

As kids/teens actually get bullied because they can't afford the latest brands or whatever I'm not wrong. It does help reduce bullying. I'm well aware bullying happens for many reasons but that doesn't change my point. A uniform gives folk one less reason to be bullied at school at least. This is also taken from personal experiences. I don't know why you're trying to argue this.


---

wwinterj25 posted...

Although I never known anyone who had a disability that didn't allow them to wear black shoes/boots.

I am just very dependant on my footwear to be able to walk properly. Back then even moreso than nowadays.

---

wwinterj25 posted...

As kids/teens actually get bullied because they can't afford the latest brands or whatever I'm not wrong. It does help reduce bullying. I'm well aware bullying happens for many reasons but that doesn't change my point. A uniform gives folk one less reason to be bullied at school at least. This is also taken from personal experiences. I don't know why you're trying to argue this.

Clothing and appearance are bullying options, not reasons.

---

Nichtcrawler X posted...

I am just very dependant on my footwear to be able to walk properly. Back then even moreso than nowadays.

Understandable. I'd imagine you would get disability exceptions as you don't have a choice.

Nichtcrawler X posted...

Clothing and appearance are bullying options, not reasons.

So you're saying folk who take the option of bulling folk for clothing isn't a reason said folk are bullied? That's a take I guess.


---

wwinterj25 posted...

So you're saying folk who take the option of bulling folk for clothing isn't a reason said folk are bullied? That's a take I guess.

What they are saying is that it's only an option. Bully are going to bully regardless of uniforms or not.
---

LinkPizza posted...

What they are saying is that it's only an option. Bully are going to bully regardless of uniforms or not.

Pretty much. If you can't bully them for clothes they wear to school, you can bully them for clothes they wear outside of school. Or some other aspect of their appearance. Or their hobbies/interests. Or what toys they have. Or what their parents do for a living. Heck, in North America, where uniforms are pretty much just a private school thing, the fact that some students (often scholarship ones) can't afford a new uniform and need to buy a second-hand one means uniforms themselves a potential avenue for bullying. Bullies will find a way.

---

LinkPizza posted...

What they are saying is that it's only an option.

We have already been over this.

Bully are going to bully regardless of uniforms or not.

In that case let's just give bullies more ammo then. Why bother trying to stop bullying when it just happens anyway? This can apply to racism, sexism, homophobia and other type of victimisation too. Now we come in full circle as you like others here think this kid was a victim of homophobia and is right to challenge the dress code yet homophobia, just like bullying happens anyway so again why bother? Just sit and watch the world burn right?

It matters not though as again those with a uniform policy does indeed prevent bullying to some degree for the obvious reason that everyone wears basically the same and gives bullies less ammo. I'm not saying bullying can't happen anyway but it's certainly one solution. Arguing against this fact with "bullying happens anyway!" doesn't change that. Of course other reasons for uniforms and dress codes are for the schools image too. I'm still a advocate for them whatever way you look at it. It's not a shock that Americans are trying to justify not having uniforms as they don't have them that much in schools. Although there isn't much difference between them and a dress code. Still It's common place over here though to have a uniform in schools and work places.

---