Suspended for Dancing

lmao! Suspended for dancing? His dancing must of really sucked..

How I see it, some people just -don't- like some people... And they will use any trick in the "rulebook" to get rid of them... He has had a nice lesson in life, cause he can expect the same treatment at work... If the "higher ups" don't like you, there will be something in the rules you've broken... And they'll moonwalk all up and down your ass.

That said enjoy the show... Take it away boys.

[youtube]vUrx-lCy-hg[/youtube]
 
2 Samuel 6:14-16 (New International Version)

14 David, wearing a linen ephod, danced before the LORD with all his might, 15 while he and the entire house of Israel brought up the ark of the LORD with shouts and the sound of trumpets.
16 As the ark of the LORD was entering the City of David, Michal daughter of Saul watched from a window. And when she saw King David leaping and dancing before the LORD, she despised him in her heart.
2 Samuel 6:20


20 When David returned home to bless his household, Michal daughter of Saul came out to meet him and said, "How the king of Israel has distinguished himself today, disrobing in the sight of the slave girls of his servants as any vulgar fellow would!"

King David stripped down to his pants and danced :eek::)


So I dont see what the problem is
 
King David stripped down to his pants and danced :eek::)

So I dont see what the problem is
Reading the article the suspended child says
Frost explained that his private Christian school does have a contract stipulating "no dancing."
He was unaware he could be suspended for dancing off campus at another school, but he was aware of the rule and the consequences.

I had no idea where this was going...however....

I chaperoned my children's high school homecoming dance and got an eyeopener. Litterally. The 9-10th grade dance wasn't so bad....they accumulate in a clump and jump up and down with one hand in the air in unison...not what we called dancing...I'm from the 70's we flailed around like chickens with our heads cut off.

But the 11-12th grade dance...wooo...that was something else. First the girls wear skirts that are belts or dresses that barely pass thier crotch. They stumble in on these high heels that they can't walk on, much less dance in, Ginger Rogers they ain't. So soon as they hit the dance floor they plop down and take off their shoes. (there are very few table, now when I say plop down, I mean plop down spread eagle to remove their shoes.) So they say underwear ain't no different than a bathing suit, and true these girls were wearing nice lacy thongs, I never thought of myself as a prude but with a 16 year old daughter suddenly things change somehow.

Now we get to the dancing...at this age it wasn't the mob hop or a slow dance or the waving arms and feet of my day. Sort of the bump and grind without the bump. Groups of boygirlboygirlboygirl in lines grinding crotches, sliding up and down legs...did I mention how short thier dresses were....well this action allowed caused the dress to slide up past the thong to allow you to notice which girls sported lower back tattoos or belly button peircings...

quite the eye opener....
 
I can definitely understand a private school enforcing a rule like that on its own campus, but extending it off-campus after hours?

What is this, Branch Davidian High? (We give you a diploma but it will cost you your soul.)
 
Reading the article the suspended child says He was unaware he could be suspended for dancing off campus at another school, but he was aware of the rule and the consequences.

I had no idea where this was going...however....

I chaperoned my children's high school homecoming dance and got an eyeopener. Litterally. The 9-10th grade dance wasn't so bad....they accumulate in a clump and jump up and down with one hand in the air in unison...not what we called dancing...I'm from the 70's we flailed around like chickens with our heads cut off.

But the 11-12th grade dance...wooo...that was something else. First the girls wear skirts that are belts or dresses that barely pass thier crotch. They stumble in on these high heels that they can't walk on, much less dance in, Ginger Rogers they ain't. So soon as they hit the dance floor they plop down and take off their shoes. (there are very few table, now when I say plop down, I mean plop down spread eagle to remove their shoes.) So they say underwear ain't no different than a bathing suit, and true these girls were wearing nice lacy thongs, I never thought of myself as a prude but with a 16 year old daughter suddenly things change somehow.

Now we get to the dancing...at this age it wasn't the mob hop or a slow dance or the waving arms and feet of my day. Sort of the bump and grind without the bump. Groups of boygirlboygirlboygirl in lines grinding crotches, sliding up and down legs...did I mention how short thier dresses were....well this action allowed caused the dress to slide up past the thong to allow you to notice which girls sported lower back tattoos or belly button peircings...

quite the eye opener....

i see you point, but outside of schools it seem a bit OTT
 
Wil,

Someone posted on another thread recently that despite having and using easy access to porn kids remain ignorant of the basics. Although our generation finds the synchronised grinding and thrusting of modern boy/girl bands lewdly suggestive the kids are probably not thinking like that and are more worried about staying in sync with their buddies. We think nothing of letting toddlers play together virtually or actually naked and the flesh is meaningless to them. Same for youngsters today, the flesh is so normal its not mentally sexualised. The only problem is when us auld foggies jump in with our moralising and make it an issue for them. Ohh... and I would not go hanging round any school discos....that might get you in trouble :p

As for the OP and the school in question.... my only response is unprintable here.
 
Tao, having been in high school fairly recently (about 12 years ago), I beg to differ.

Teens may be a bit foggy on the basics, but that kind of dancing is blatantly sexual and the teens know it. You see more of the same going into the 20s at clubs. All of my friends knew it in high school. It's not like people were thinking "Hm, griding is just a new dance style" and our primary thought was not to keep in time with the music. LOL It's the result of a highly sexualized culture in which sex is plastered everywhere and you realize from puberty that as a girl, you are more powerful and well-liked if you are sexual. Look at the advertising. Kids spend more time watching TV than talking with their parents and so the ads and programs are what kids learn from in terms of their worth and value, social expectations of sexuality and gender roles, etc. And the programming is fairly awful.

I am not sure what "basics" they propose the kids are foggy on- I would imagine the stuff that matters like STDs and birth control. However, we know that statistically kids are increasingly experimenting at younger ages and being rather flagrant about sexuality in public. What they seem unclear about is the dangers of doing so. It is telling that 1/3 of women in the States are assaulted, and only a small fraction report rape and other assault. Studies on college campuses indicate a lot of confusion from both men and women about gender roles in sexuality and when "no" means "no" versus when it means "try harder" or "yes." It's a big mess.

Overall, I find much of my own generation's public behavior revolting. The clothes are ugly and leave nothing to the imagination, the dancing is worse. I'm no prude, but I think many girls and young women confuse sexy with naked and grinding. There is no allure, no mystery, no classiness to it. Furthermore, there is little appreciation of real women and men and real sexuality- everyone is trying to be something they are not. Girls as young as 9 and 10 now are worried about getting fat and having wrinkles. Girls in high school are using anti-wrinkle cream, starving themselves, and getting Botox "as preventative measure." There is a real pressure through the media to conform to an impossible standard of airbrushed models who started off 6 feet tall and had their legs lengthened in photoshop by 30%. Everywhere is a message that one should be an extremely sexual person and perfect in every way, and the self-esteem and happiness of kids is lousy despite their professed sexual bravado. So many of my girl friends in high school had low self-esteem and sought to be affirmed through sexual acts. It's just plain sad.

As for some school suspending a kid for dancing, a lot of Christian schools are a bit over the top. But such is life. Don't like the rules, don't have your kid go to that school.
 
OMG!!!

I hope Nick_A doesn't read this thread.

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

We'll never hear the end of it.

Lmao :D:D:D:D:D

My first reaction to reading Wil's post was somewhere down that very track.

PoO,

I cannot disagree with what you say yet there remains a truth in what I say too. There are indeed those kids that are destroyed by the pressures you highlight but there are others who thrive on it. They are teenagers so of course they will be thinking in and interested in sex but you cannot realistically say that everything sexualised is always perceived as such. The girls around here are constantly half-naked, even if the puddles of their cheap cider induced vomit freezes in a few minutes, there they are...staggering round half naked. Often looking for a fight.
The real world is no ideal. These kids do not care about the social theories that describe their behaviour. They care about what kids here have cared about for generations now, having a laugh. And they do in their own way. They are no more promiscuous than my generation..... how do I know? Because my generation a 16 year old virgin was unheard of. We all had pre-legal sex. I was 11 when two 13 yr old girls introduced me to that fascination. And it was kids being kids. I think humans have always behaved like that when a modicum of freedom of opportunity exists. So we can talk about trends and fashions and all the negative social conditioning but in the sense of core sexuality in youngsters their sexuality will express naturally regardless.
 
Because my generation a 16 year old virgin was unheard of. We all had pre-legal sex. I was 11 when two 13 yr old girls introduced me to that fascination. And it was kids being kids. I think humans have always behaved like that when a modicum of freedom of opportunity exists. So we can talk about trends and fashions and all the negative social conditioning but in the sense of core sexuality in youngsters their sexuality will express naturally regardless.
While my experiences also started young and while I also thought everyone was doing it as I aged I found out everyone I hung out with was doing it. And there were tons of 16 year old virgins, and 18 and 21 year old virgins..I just didn't hang out with them (why would I, I had a one track, well maybe two track mind)

But with the grinding dancing of today...it is definitely for arousal...
 
They are no more promiscuous than my generation..... how do I know? Because my generation a 16 year old virgin was unheard of. We all had pre-legal sex. I was 11 when two 13 yr old girls introduced me to that fascination.

Well, not everybody experienced the kind of sex education you are describing. In the geographical, social and political localities in which I grew up, I perceived most of my peers as virgins who were too career-focused to conduct the kinds of experiments you allude to here.:eek:

Pardon me if I sound a little snobbish, but I went to a rather high-performing public secondary school. My closest peers, as far as I know, were very academic and quite intellectual. I could hardly have imagined them copulating under my nose. I would think that they spent most of their secondary school life working hard to achieve a good ranking in the state secondary school examinations.

It could be a case of classism. I have no idea. Do low-class people have more sex than upper class people?

Well, imagine my shock as a twenty year old when I discovered (posting a question on a message board) that large numbers of people in high school were having sex (around the world). What on earth? Are you kidding me?:eek: What are these kids doing?

Ok, I suppose I was a bit of a nerd in secondary school. I spent too much time trying to get as many A+'s as possible, much like Lisa Simpson. I was also fairly anti-social. I also had rather weird social theories about how the world worked. So perhaps I was deluded in underestimating the number of teenagers having sex.

Tao, having been in high school fairly recently (about 12 years ago), I beg to differ.

Would you mind if I use that 12 years to guess your age? I won't disclose the results of my calculations, I'll just keep it to myself.:):eek:

LOL It's the result of a highly sexualized culture in which sex is plastered everywhere and you realize from puberty that as a girl, you are more powerful and well-liked if you are sexual.

I am not sure what "basics" they propose the kids are foggy on- I would imagine the stuff that matters like STDs and birth control. However, we know that statistically kids are increasingly experimenting at younger ages and being rather flagrant about sexuality in public.

I think it's disappointing when I hear people saying that it's good to lose one's virginity, that a man proves his worth with how well he can get a woman to share her body with him. They say it proves your manhood and greatness if you can get a girl to sleep with you. Rubbish . . . true manhood is founded on prudence, not on recklessness. If a girl offers herself to a guy like that, she can't be very smart either.

People have dreams and ambitions but lunging forward at your dream at an early age is not a good idea. Realised dreams turn out to be disappointments. You realise that this is not all there is; there is more to the world than what you have just sought. Your bubble will burst very quickly.

I am conveniently a virgin. Nobody ever forced me to be or not to be one. It just happened that way. Having said that, I appreciate my virginity a lot. I am happy that I didn't give my body away for some short-term pleasure.

I don't intend to be judgmental here. When you lose your virginity, you gain sexual experience. Experience is knowledge and knowledge is power. When you lose your virginity, you lose a part of your personal dignity. You have been used by someone else for pleasure. You have not only shared a part of your body, you have given away a part of your soul. Yet the experience (and thus power) you gain will compensate for your loss of dignity. The power you gain from having experienced sex may itself be a way of recovering your lost dignity.

If you manage this balancing act poorly, you risk being psychologically damaged. If you're smart, you may actually improve your quality of life.

The merit of being a virgin is that you keep your dignity. Nakedness is a state of great human vulnerability. It is an opportunity for humiliation. You are opening yourself up to be judged and evaluated by a member of the opposite sex. If you're a virgin, you have never been used and made cheap by your sharing your body with someone else. If you're not a virgin, your dignity comes from your sexual experience.

While one may regard me as a coward for being a virgin and not having yet faced a member of the opposite sex, I retain my precious dignity in not having my body used by another. It means I am not cheap. On the other hand, people who lose their virginity for the sake of impressing one's friends and buckle under peer pressure are cowards too. I credit them for exposing themselves to danger, but not for being reckless and for lacking prudence in their behaviour.

Studies on college campuses indicate a lot of confusion from both men and women about gender roles in sexuality and when "no" means "no" versus when it means "try harder" or "yes." It's a big mess.

Furthermore, there is little appreciation of real women and men and real sexuality- everyone is trying to be something they are not.

I reckon there's too much nihilism in this generation (not that I am not myself a nihilist:), but this is over-the-top nihilism). People by default adopt a cavalier, don't-care attitude of not developing adequately sophisticated and mature social theories about how to think and behave.

Overall, I find much of my own generation's public behavior revolting.

The clothes are ugly
and leave nothing to the imagination,
the dancing is worse.

That sounds almost poetic . . . is this a literary style I should have learnt in secondary school?:eek:

Girls as young as 9 and 10 now are worried about getting fat and having wrinkles. Girls in high school are using anti-wrinkle cream, starving themselves, and getting Botox "as preventative measure."

When it comes to women, body shape is not the primary factor for me. The fat people are too fat. The skinny people are too skinny, and there are too many skinny people that it's boring. I actually find skinniness rather ugly and find the chubby and chunky more appealing.

Most of the time when I find a woman attractive, it's because she's nice. An attractive woman is one who psyches me out with her voice, her eyes and her fashion sense. A sophisticated mind and a good education are also factors. It's about messing with my mind and emotions.

Do I subscribe to negative stereotypes about skinny women? I guess I do to some extent. I often feel like they're somehow tainted. That's probably why I've been having so few crushes lately. I don't like them much physically because skinniness for me seems degrading. They seem unattractive rather than attractive. I feel ashamed of them. It's one of the first checks I make and if they don't pass they don't make it to the next stage. But if one of them is nice it just confuses me . . . :confused: It makes me wonder how a nice person can live in a body like that. I feel like kissing the nice person but I'm not sure if I want to kiss that body.

So many of my girl friends in high school had low self-esteem and sought to be affirmed through sexual acts. It's just plain sad.

Oh boy. Don't these women have any pride? I would have thought the feminist movement would have taught them something. Self-respect? Did the movies where you had smart, studious college girls mean anything? What about the cartoon character Lisa Simpson?

The real world is no ideal. These kids do not care about the social theories that describe their behaviour.

Are kids so nihilistic these days that they don't think about social theories at all?

As for some school suspending a kid for dancing, a lot of Christian schools are a bit over the top. But such is life. Don't like the rules, don't have your kid go to that school.

It's not good education anyway. That's indoctrination. Education is not where you tell people what to do with their personal life. Education is where you guide them and get them to think about it. If you contribute your personal experience, that's even better. You pass on your learning to the young ones.
 
Namaste Salty,

Yup, we traveled in different crowds. If my thinking was along yours I chopped my soul into numerous pieces before I got married....but then I suppose I gleaned chunks out of other souls as well?

Sex was, well, sex. And I was a whore at that time in my life...then monagomous for 22 years...and now...mostly raising my kids and dabbling occaisionally. We definitely have differing views from our experiences. I can't imagine your life, and you can't imagine mine. I got married before AIDS hit the scene...I was thankful for that, those were scary years in the 80's.

Kids these days, post Clinton the world has changed yet again, oral sex and anal sex is not sex and you are still a virgin. FWB, freinds with benefits, kids experimenting with friends just to be experienced, practicing to be better, a different world. A different world for a fifty year old single guy too. No chase anymore, no sport. Do ya wanna... Life goes on.
 
Well, not everybody experienced the kind of sex education you are describing. In the geographical, social and political localities in which I grew up, I perceived most of my peers as virgins who were too career-focused to conduct the kinds of experiments you allude to here.:eek:

LOL- I was in a rather high-performing high school and I took all honors classes. I was surrounded by geeks. And they were all having hot tub parties and smoking pot at lunch. LOL Maybe there is a regional difference? I dunno.

I think it is natural for kids to experiment, but it is not natural for kids to grow up with a gazillion ads making them feel bad about their bodies and get a warped sense of self-worth and gender roles. If kids were allowed to grow up without all this noise pushing them to buy stuff and thus making them feel bad if they don't, and displaying unhealthy relationships and senses of human value, fine. But they aren't. They are in an ocean of advertising and media that perverts relational and sexual satisfaction and the type of innocent experience that would otherwise be normal.

What are these kids doing?

Taking a study break. LOL :p Sorry, couldn't resist.

Ok, I suppose I was a bit of a nerd in secondary school. I spent too much time trying to get as many A+'s as possible, much like Lisa Simpson. I was also fairly anti-social. I also had rather weird social theories about how the world worked. So perhaps I was deluded in underestimating the number of teenagers having sex.

I was a nerd too. Except I couldn't underestimate how many people were having sex. It was too blatant and too prevalent.

Would you mind if I use that 12 years to guess your age? I won't disclose the results of my calculations, I'll just keep it to myself.:):eek:

LOL- I don't mind. I'm 30.

I think it's disappointing when I hear people saying that it's good to lose one's virginity, that a man proves his worth with how well he can get a woman to share her body with him. They say it proves your manhood and greatness if you can get a girl to sleep with you. Rubbish . . . true manhood is founded on prudence, not on recklessness. If a girl offers herself to a guy like that, she can't be very smart either.

A good point. I don't think the problem is losing one's virginity, but reasons why one does it. I don't necessarily think "just sex" is bad, but if it's all tied up in power and becoming a man or a sense of self-worth as a woman, etc.- then it's bad. It's having sex for some warped sense of self-esteem, which just isn't fulfilling. And I lost track of how many girls and young women ended up in statutory rape situations (and no, I don't mean a 20 year old man with a 16 year old, I mean a 45 year old biology teacher with a 16 year old), how many were raped by boyfriends or dates, how many were abused... and just kept on giving up their body in hopes it would heal their utter lack of self-worth. Girls who demanded more were "teases" or worse and often spoken of with derision, yet girls who gave themselves up too willingly were "sluts" and "whores." What a screwed up way of looking at women and our sexuality.

The power you gain from having experienced sex may itself be a way of recovering your lost dignity.

I found that if you loved and respected and trusted the person you have sex with, both gain dignity by being vulnerable with each other and finding in this vulnerability, acceptance and love. The danger is, of course, that this other person could trample you. I think this is perhaps even more so for a woman, because we might be literally, physically trampled. Nakedness may make anyone feel vulnerable, but for me as a woman, it is a state of ultimate vulnerability. The way I see it, I either must have a great deal of trust in the person to be that vulnerable, or I have to lack any respect for my own safety and dignity.

To be honest, I found that love is not enough... it is trust that is really the kicker for me. You can love someone and they can still mistreat you if there is not trust and mutual respect. I think it is a mistake many women make. Can't speak for the guys...

That sounds almost poetic . . . is this a literary style I should have learnt in secondary school?:eek:

LOL :p

When it comes to women, body shape is not the primary factor for me. The fat people are too fat. The skinny people are too skinny, and there are too many skinny people that it's boring. I actually find skinniness rather ugly and find the chubby and chunky more appealing.

It's funny, but so many of my friends won't believe me when I tell them there are lots of people that like normal (not skinny) people. I am naturally skinny. I can't help it. I have the metabolism of a vegan marathon runner, and no matter how much butter, cheese, and whole milk goes down the hatch each day it just disappears. I've never been able to reach normal weight for my height. It runs on both sides of my family and most of the women don't reach normal weight until after several children or menopause. Being skinny is not all it is cracked up to be. It's OK, just like anything else. When I was younger, I often longed to be more voluptuous. I look something between extremely fit and waif, which is disappointing when you want to look really feminine. But my husband loves me the way I am, and there are other things I like about my body. So I figure each of us is beautiful in our own way. I would wish for everyone that we all learn to love our bodies without thinking we need to fix this or that about them, just to be grateful for our bodies.

Do I subscribe to negative stereotypes about skinny women? I guess I do to some extent. I often feel like they're somehow tainted. That's probably why I've been having so few crushes lately. I don't like them much physically because skinniness for me seems degrading. They seem unattractive rather than attractive. I feel ashamed of them. It's one of the first checks I make and if they don't pass they don't make it to the next stage. But if one of them is nice it just confuses me . . . :confused: It makes me wonder how a nice person can live in a body like that. I feel like kissing the nice person but I'm not sure if I want to kiss that body.

Eek. I have faced this my whole life. People assume a lot based on my appearance. People have often assumed that I am superficial, when I am anything but. People have assumed I diet and exercise constantly, when I must admit that I am fairly undisciplined in both counts. People assume I must like everything about my body since I am the size that everyone wants to be, when inside I've struggled with self-image at least as much as most other women I meet. I've had doctors assume I am starving myself, and being unwilling to believe I am not, which is insulting. People assume I will be a b***h and I am friendly and open. No one ever thinks I would be anything in terms of a profession. The assumption is that if you're young and look something like people in magazine ads, you are stupid and content to marry and have some man pay your way through life. If my heavier friends wear a cami to work, no one says anything. If I wear a cami to work, it's assumed I'm trying to be sexy. On and on.

The worst of it is that I find most women dislike me before they even know me, and they assume I struggle with none of the things they struggle with. I'm skinny naturally, so my life must be roses. At the same time, since I look vaguely like those magazine ads, men often have treated me like I'm some sort of object to possess. If they obtain a person that looks like me, then they feel like they are some sort of success. Which reduces me to something like a nice car or suit. I learned from a young age to distrust men, because their friendships were not real. I always questioned if I was loved and wanted because I was me, or because of what I looked like. I also learned to distrust women outside my family and close friends, because there was no sympathy or compassion for such as me. I was somehow invincible from being hurt or anxious or insecure because I didn't look to them like I could have any of those human attributes.

It just makes me sad, but it is life. If you're fat, you're told to be skinny. If you're skinny, you're told you're barely a human being. You're just some object that has no feelings and no thoughts and no purpose but to temporarily be an adornment on some guy's arm. There's something perverse about telling women that's what they should be, that's what will make them happy and feel valued. The saddest thing is that plenty of women buy this crap and get their pride from condescendingly hurting men, because they themselves are hurt by men and shunned by women.

Oh boy. Don't these women have any pride? I would have thought the feminist movement would have taught them something. Self-respect? Did the movies where you had smart, studious college girls mean anything? What about the cartoon character Lisa Simpson?

I think many learned that one should do it all. Study, go to college. But make sure you're beautiful and wrinkle-free and available to men, too.

Are kids so nihilistic these days that they don't think about social theories at all?

Yes. Did most kids ever think about social theories? I doubt it. Back in Roman days, there are writers that lament the superficiality of the youth and predict the fall of civilization. Most people don't seem to care about social theory until later in life.
 
I was a nerd too. Except I couldn't underestimate how many people were having sex. It was too blatant and too prevalent.

My impression of how things were like in secondary school was that there was a code of honour. Men and women (ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, whatever you like) had a sense of pride. A girl wasn't just going to give herself over to a man. If you were suspicious of men when you were a teenage girl, then every girl should also be suspicious of men.

Up to a certain year level, people tended to have a sense of disgust with the idea of a girlfriend or boyfriend. Girls were suspicious of boys and boys didn't want to be intimidated by girls.

In theory, if you had a girlfriend, people would tease you. "Oh Peter loves Danielle! Peter's got a girlfriend!" If you had a boyfriend, people would tease you. "Oh Joanna loves Matthew! Joanna's got a boyfriend!" That would happen for a while until people actually started getting used to the idea of a girlfriend or boyfriend.

But there was always a bunch of people who were just sceptical/skeptical of the idea of a girlfriend or boyfriend. It almost sounded like snobbery and arrogance. It's like they were haughty, too proud to flirt or to be intimate.

I was part of a rather small social group (less than ten people). I never had many friends. I didn't fit in. People used to pick on me and bully me. It had a lot to do with me being what people called "a square." A "square" in the place where I grew up was a person who studied too much or tried too hard to be a know-all. I don't know if you use that term over there in the U.S. Please let me know.

I was part of this small social group for much of my secondary school years. As for as dating, romance and girlfriends were concerned (it was an all-male group, a boy's club/"fraternity"), only one member of this group was sexually active. The rest of us, as far as I knew, did not date.

Looking back now, I wonder if it was because of me. I wonder if they had reservations because of my anti-social demeanour and my resulting unpopularity. Maybe they felt sorry for me. They didn't allow their dignity to be defined by whether or not they had a mate. They didn't allow themselves to be consumed by notions of popularity or self-worth based on having a mate.

It could be that the question of whether secondary school kids seek out mates depends on the integrity of an informal/de facto fraternity or sorority. Good male and female mateship and bonding may keep males and females away from reckless sexual behaviour.

I say this because I am sure many of the girls in secondary school probably formed some kind of social group (informal sorority) so that their worth as people wouldn't be defined by their possession of a mate.

Academic pride may also be another factor. A smart girl or smart boy wouldn't expose himself/herself to the vulnerable situation of being humiliated in a potential break-up from a boyfriend or girlfriend. Yuk! Who wants a girlfriend or boyfriend if you're getting A+'s? You're too good for the opposite sex.

Pride, honour, snobbery, arrogance and haughtiness may actually be a good thing. Who wants to play the game of a knight in shining armour and a damsel in distress when there are better things to do and better people to talk to in school?

I was a nerd too.

Were you a square like me?:eek:

LOL Maybe there is a regional difference? I dunno.

Possibly.

Girls who demanded more were "teases" or worse and often spoken of with derision, yet girls who gave themselves up too willingly were "sluts" and "whores." What a screwed up way of looking at women and our sexuality.

I'm not sure what you mean by "girls who demanded more." What were they demanding?:confused:

It just makes me sad, but it is life. If you're fat, you're told to be skinny. If you're skinny, you're told you're barely a human being. You're just some object that has no feelings and no thoughts and no purpose but to temporarily be an adornment on some guy's arm. There's something perverse about telling women that's what they should be, that's what will make them happy and feel valued. The saddest thing is that plenty of women buy this crap and get their pride from condescendingly hurting men, because they themselves are hurt by men and shunned by women.

To me, it sounds like from what you're saying that despite political and legal reforms, society hasn't moved on much from judgmentalism and degrading social values and practices. It seems like the changes are largely superficial. Only the semantics are different.

I still think democracy is a great system, but women don't seem to be enjoying, much, the benefits of the feminist movement.

I think many learned that one should do it all. Study, go to college. But make sure you're beautiful and wrinkle-free and available to men, too.

That may all be in vain when we discover that wrinkle-free girl was really a monster in disguise because she didn't work hard enough to be a nice person. They might just go back to the nice but "average-looking" girls. On the other hand, for the girls: if being wrinkle-free wasn't good enough, it's probably not worth the effort anyway. Besides, if a guy doesn't like your wrinkles, there are plenty of fish in the sea. Just go and find one that does.:) If there are none, who cares anyway? Is your dignity as a person defined by your ability to find a mate? Maybe you're too good for the opposite sex.
 
To me, it sounds like from what you're saying that despite political and legal reforms, society hasn't moved on much from judgmentalism and degrading social values and practices. It seems like the changes are largely superficial. Only the semantics are different.

I still think democracy is a great system, but women don't seem to be enjoying, much, the benefits of the feminist movement.

am glad to hear that from someone young? over on the 'paradigm shift' thread l argued somewhat unsuccessfully that via patriarchy [and the religious authority which ruled that females should be treated unequally] has accounted for this f### up sexuality; women must have been brazen whores in the old days to get such subjugation circumscribed over the centuries, or, more likely, since they were in the image of the goddess, they too must be 'silenced'.
Now post feminist, females are acting equal and treating their body as their own property [as in the rage of tats as a statement], but still as you say superficial in that they are still beholden to men as they are perceived by them. Hence the crazy consumerism towards 'tweenies', targeting girls as young as 9 to be sexy. Perhaps not helped by having young mothers, and a lot of single parents who have serial monogamous relationships, inculcating a desire to continually adorn, attract and catch the 'perfect' man all under the gaze of the prepubescent child. It could also be a move towards copying ethnic/tribal dress [and tats], a move engineered by the global retail conglomerates.
Still, compared to Islam and Judaism, at least we can sing and dance together! just need to be more modest if you are a christian heh
 
Oh boy. Don't these women have any pride? I would have thought the feminist movement would have taught them something. Self-respect? Did the movies where you had smart, studious college girls mean anything? What about the cartoon character Lisa Simpson?

Why would you expect young women to possess any more self respect as young men?

The feminist movement partially achieved what it set out to achieve: women gained a greater foothold in the political arena and the workplace. They can now occupy positions of power unthinkable a few decades ago.

But of course it was not a panacea for wo/mankind's woes.

Here's my solution to achieve more respect and decorum in this world: every child born out of wedlock costs a man 25% of all his earnings until the child is eighteen-years old. Since a man has to have something to live on himself, he gets three "strikes". After the third child, he's castrated... permanently.

You want girls to act like Lisa Simpson? How about getting guys to stop acting like Hugh Hefner?
 
Back
Top