You get the idea. I'm a supporter of the military.
But just because someone is in, or is about to be in, or has been in, the military, that doesn't mean they get to throw out all other norms and do whatever they want:
A Nebraska high school is speaking out and defending its actions after receiving major backlash on social media for denying a graduating senior’s request to wear her U.S. Army sash during the graduation ceremonyWhen she gets in the army, perhaps she'll learn the concept of a "uniform". There is a "uniform" for graduation, and at this school it doesn't include an army sash.
Megan Pohlmeier was planning on participating in her high school’s graduation ceremony in May. To celebrate the occasion, the teen said she wanted to wear her Army sash, which was given to her by her recruiter at the Grand Island office in Nebraska four days before graduation, she told Fox News.
Pohlmeier said she called the school to see if she could wear the black and yellow sash during the ceremony.
"It was something I worked really hard to earn. They told me ‘no’ and did not really give me a reason," she told the Omaha World-Herald.
Anyway, the girl decided to see what she could get away with. And neither she nor the principal come out looking very good at this point:
Despite being told no, Pohlmeier decided to wear her sash tucked under her graduation gown so she could take pictures with it after the ceremony.The superintendent at least comes across as an adult here.
However, Principal Szlanda saw the sash peeking out under the black gown and pulled her out of line, she said.
“He pulled me out of line and said, ‘I talked to you and your father and you are not to be wearing that. If I see you wearing that again, you will not receive your diploma,’” she told the World-Herald.
Since the graduation, which Pohlmeier did participate in sans sash, her story has gone viral on Facebook with many calling the school's actions “unacceptable” and “disrespectful.”
Now, Hastings Public Schools Superintendent Craig Kautz is defending his school’s graduation accessories policy, saying “if we don’t award it, you don’t wear it.”
So, what does "peeking out" from under the gown mean? Was this inadvertent, or was she trying to create an issue? Was the principal just being a you-know-what? Hard to know. Even in the military, at least in my day, if what you're wearing under your uniform cannot be seen when the uniform is properly worn, then it is OK.
As I said, neither the student nor the principal covered him/herself in glory here.
I also agree with the school up to a point. Perhaps there should have been better communication between the graduate and the school about why it is the school wants graduating students to wear the prescribed uniform. The school and the student both had a clear understanding of what was allowed and what was not allowed prior to the ceremony. The student chose to bend the rules a little and was corrected. Maybe that correction was not done in the best manner. I don't know. Tone does not really come across very well on the Internet.
ReplyDeleteDoesn't the military also require you to cut your hair? If it's OK for a school to have a uniform because the military does, is it also OK for them to tell you how to cut your hair? Which parts of your life aren't schools allowed to dictate? If they can't tell you who to date (Loving v. Virginia), why can they tell you how to dress yourself?
ReplyDeleteIf the graduation ceremony is tax-payer funded event, isn't it a public event, and therefore Tinker v. Des Moines applies, and people can wear what they want to under the free speech clause of the first amendment as incorporated against the states through the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment (Gitlow v. New York, 1925)?
Anonymous--using your argument, schools can't tell students to be quiet in class. And courts have consistently ruled that school dress codes are entirely legal.
ReplyDeleteI find your reasoning unconvincing.
What no one has appeared to mention in this debate is the HISTORICAL REASON for graduation gowns being implemented.
ReplyDeleteSurely the principal, in this case, should be aware of the historical reasons and should have explained them to the family. It sounds like they called the school, spoke to a secretary who checked with the principal, and relayed his decision. Nothing was explained and the secretary herself probably didn't know any reason. If this is an ongoing issue every year, the school needs to teach the reason to students in advance. When I was in school we were ALL taught the reason for graduation caps and gowns.
Prior to the wearing of graduation gowns, people DID wear whatever they wanted, within reason. I teach in an overseas American school which adhered to the old tradition until just a couple years ago. Girls wore white dresses, but it was up to each girl and her family to get her own. Every year there is a lot of competition and bullying about what people wear, as well as pushback about some attire going too far and being scandalous. But mostly, it was about bullying, and that can even include elaborate hair styles.
Graduation gowns were instituted at American Universities precisely so that no student had to feel any less than any other student. Some students did not even attend the graduation because they were embarrassed about their clothing compared to others. The point is, in the graduation CEREMONY, ALL ARE EQUAL. No one is allowed to stand out as richer or poorer, or as more or less successful, or privileged.
The CEREMONY only lasts for a short time. People should adhere to the common dress for a REASON that ALL ARE RESPECTED FOR THEIR SAMENESS IN EARNING THEIR DIPLOMA, AND FOR THAT MOMENT IN TIME, ALL ARE EQUAL. It is not the right MOMENT to show off something special. The girl in question should have worn her army sash on top of her ordinary clothes, UNDERNEATH her graduation gown. Then, at the MOMENT students are free to take off their caps and gowns, she has her sash on, and other students are also wearing whatever they want. THIS is the moment to celebrate private achievements and stand out.
I was not aware of that historical reasoning. Even if it weren't so, though, your last paragraph would *still* be spot on.
ReplyDeleteThank you, Darren. I really liked your original post.
ReplyDelete