The V Word

[denny]

http://tinyurl.com/27esmf

http://hallmonitor.lohudblogs.com/2007/03/06/406/ (also available at http://jjhs.klschools.org/home.aspx )

http://hallmonitor.lohudblogs.com/2007/03/07/the-v-word-controversy-in-their-own-words/

Interesting stuff.

Personally, I'm inclined to go with the 'two wrongs make a right' theory here - the school's censorship attempt was wrong, and therefore the girls' disobedience of that censorship attempt was right. I think the principal should apologise for both the initial censorship attempt, and for the school's reaction to the girls breaking the conditions imposed on their performance - but most importantly for the former.

Opinions?

Comments

[kelemvor.livejournal.com]

People are confusing "action" with "effective action" - as long as they are seen to be doing something, whatever they do must be correct.
If it goes much further, the ACLU will most likely wade in. [Disclaimer - I've only read the first one, in case the other links mention them.]

[sepheri.livejournal.com]

The girls were standing up for something they believed in and were hurting no one. They were absolutely right and should be applauded.

[dakeyras.livejournal.com]

I'm inclined to go the other way. Yes, there is an argument that lies within this about censorship v. appropriateness but the point here is that there's also an issue of respect for authority.

According to the principal, "When a student is told by faculty members not to present specified material [...] and they agree to do so, it is expected that the commitment will be honored and the directive will be followed." The girls blatantly disregarded their previous agreement and the school quite justifiably punished them for that.

The appropriate point at which to raise the issue of censorship would have been when they were asked not to say "vagina", and I honestly believe that they'd have had a much better argument if they'd done so then, without having the issue of disobedience to muddy the waters. Frankly, they've shot themselves in the foot on the censorship score.

[dakeyras.livejournal.com]

(Sorry, in case anyone hasn't read the article, I should point out that the emphasis in the quote was placed there by me, not the principal)

[oedipamaas49.livejournal.com]

when I read something like this, my overwhelming instant reaction is to cheer the girls on, no matter what the details are. I don't think my emotions would let me ever come down on the side of the school authorities. Plus I'm a free speech absolutist, and I don't have a problem with 10-year-olds hearing the word 'vagina' - but perhaps that's an unusual position.

I guess in the girls' position I would have done what they did, and just accepted that the school was going to punish them.

[deerfold.livejournal.com]

I'd have to agree that their case is not helped by the fact it seems that they've done what they expressly agreed not to do - this is then the factor that is being punished, not what they've read.

[dennyd.livejournal.com]

I'm regarding their action as similar to civil disobedience - for instance, people spoke at great length on why the poll tax was unfair, but it didn't get them very far, in fact it didn't get them anywhere. What got the poll tax changed was the fact that people point-blank refused to pay it - even, in many cases, when they were taken to court for non-payment.

These girls could have complained about the censorship attempt being unfair ,and it would have got them absolutely nowhere (come on, think back to school, how many teachers were willing to engage in reasoned debate on an issue they'd already made a decision about?). Instead, they nodded politely, agreed to be good passive citizens, but then did 'the right thing' anyway... with the twin benefits of (a) having done the right thing, and (b) having gained publicity for the fact that they were being asked to comply with unfair (imho) conditions.

[dennyd.livejournal.com]

As a separate (or is it?) issue, I should point out that I don't believe in respect for authority. Respect is earned, not granted by position, and it's always open to being reassessed on the basis of a person's recent deeds and accomplishments.

[dakeyras.livejournal.com]

Your poll tax analogy only works if they did exhaust the other avenues first. People were absolutely vociferous about poll tax and it was only when they'd already made their complaints and had them point blank ignored that they went down the route of civil disobedience. Would they have been awarded the same martyrdom status if they'd not actually bothered saying anything beforehand, quietly letting everything go through and then not paid it?

They could have complained beforehand, and you're possibly right, which begs the questions that presumably we won't necessarily find an answer to: did they? Did they raise those points with the school at the time? Did they ask their parents to raise those points (which might have garnered more of a response)? Did they canvass the opinion of the audience who were going to be there, to see if those people would have been offended? Who knows? Maybe if the school had agreed to advertise the Open Mic night with a disclaimer of potentially inappropriate content, then they would have allowed it anyway, no censorship, just the best information available to all.

From what I can tell (and I'm perfectly happy to accept that they may have raised objections previously but I have no information one way or the other at the moment) they blindsided the school by agreeing and then disobeying. This in my opinion is morally wrong, because they just didn't actually care enough to respect the school's opinion (whether or not they respect the school itself) or the audiences sensibilities, and tactically stupid, for the reason that I mentioned about muddying the waters with the disobedience issue.

[ulorin-vex.livejournal.com]

what on earth is wrong with the word vagina! that they werent allowed to say it is totally ridiculous. well done to them

[hythloday.livejournal.com]

Nope, sorry. I think the school is more-or-less in the right and the girls are more-or-less in the wrong.

Free speech is the right to speak, not the right to be heard. The girls do not have a natural right to speak at the session. I think this is by definition true, as if one pupil wanted to have a four-hour slot they'd be told to reduce it - if everyone wanted to speak they'd have to draw lots for it. This is not how rights work.

Given that the school is organising this session, and bears the responsibility and the cost of doing so, I think they're entitled to regulate the content of it (within reason, obviously). They let the girls know that they were going to be doing this, and the girls then agreed to a course of action in bad faith, which the school accepted.

I find it difficult to see breaking that as a moral action - the moral action, in my view, would be to not lie about your intentions, and to escalate it to a more senior level if the school is unwilling to compromise. Lying about your intentions makes you appear to be complicit with the school, which benefits no-one. I think the school has perhaps not been so clever about the choice of punishments, but I don't think they ought not to have been punished.

As for the original decision to censor the work, eh, it's neither here nor there for me - I can see their point about the parents being unable to actually chose what their children hear, which I think is a pretty reasonable thing to want to ensure.

[robert-jones.livejournal.com]

I've never really understood this position. Why is respect necessarily earned? Why isn't obtaining a certain position a valid way of earning respect?

[dennyd.livejournal.com]

Well, it is, but not so much of my respect because it was earned based on other people's perceptions of that person's prior actions, and I don't trust other people :)

It also may be a very new position (in which case their skill at it remains unproven) or a very old one (in which case the actions that got them there are long-gone). For example, I've just been made a manager. The fact that I can give that as my job title now doesn't mean I deserve any respect for it - the matter of whether I'm a good manager remains unproven at this point. It may or may not mean I deserve respect as a programmer, but that's largely irrelevant if it's being a manager that I'm trying to gain respect for.

Similarly, a headmaster in this country might have got that position largely through being a teacher for 20 years. I don't think that necessarily qualifies them to be respected as an administrator and policy-setter, particularly when half of that experience is probably seriously outdated were they to re-enter the classroom.

[dennyd.livejournal.com]

Your poll tax analogy only works if they did exhaust the other avenues first.

Fair point. My guess would be that they didn't, but I'm basing both that guess and my lack of disapproval of it on the assumption that they didn't do it because they felt their views would be ignored. They had no power in a discussion with the school administration, where they did have power (to act) on the stage. I imagine they were pretty scared when they took their stand and read out their line.

It would be interesting to hear whether anyone in the audience was offended. I get the impression from the way things are being phrased ("there could have been") that there were no young children in the audience, so that whole "Won't somebody think of the children?!" thing is being overplayed a bit by the school imho. I tend to think that if anyone in the audience actually had complained, the school would be leaning on that fact in their statement.

Actually, I also would expect to have seen it mentioned in the girls' statements by now if they'd tried to go down the pre-event negotiation route, so I think we can safely assume they didn't do so.

[blackmetalbaz.livejournal.com]

I agree with this wholeheartedly.

[robert-jones.livejournal.com]

But I struggle to see how you could have an opportunity to develop or demonstrate your management skills unless the people you're managing start out by giving you the benefit of the doubt and respecting you qua manager, whether or not they respect you personally.

[dennyd.livejournal.com]

Really? I don't see the problem. I make judgement calls, decisions about what direction we should take on a project, whatever. They choose whether or not to pay any attention to me, initially probably based on how well my opinion lines up with their own. Later on we find out whether I was right or not. If I'm right more than I'm wrong, and particularly if I'm right when they're wrong, their respect for my judgement presumably rises.

Alternatively, I might win similar credit merely by bringing out aspects of a problem for discussion and consideration that hadn't occurred to them. Overly simple example: "We need to do D before we can do F" "Oh yeah". I imagine I'd get a bit of credit just for thinking of it, if they hadn't.

[dennyd.livejournal.com]

I find it difficult to see breaking that as a moral action

Fair enough. I think we have axiom lock in that case :)