No quitten we're whelan on to chitchat 11

See Thomas Pringle was quoting Coolio's Gangsters Paradise in the dail yesterday re lobbying, he's right.

Earworm of the day!

https://youtu.be/fPO76Jlnz6c

_Brian

whelan2 wrote: »

I'm sure some of the lads wear tight fitting pe gear too?

Aparantly the lads (or some of them) are wearing on leggings in support of the girls.

At the end of the day if what the girls are wearing falls within the school dress code then they are fine. As for asking them not to take off their jumpers, that sounds ridiculous to me.
Saying that adults are finding children in tight clothes distracting is very concerning. Surely the adults have the ability to be professional in their jobs. It’s possible to se someone is wearing leggings without examining them closely. I’d have concerned for any adult not capable of behaving appropriately.

I checked the uniform policy of our own local school and it specifically says shorts and t shirt, but in winter time my daughter always wore leggings as is common and it seems to be acceptable.

whelan2

O Neil's tracksuit bottoms, school polo shirt and half zip for pe here.

Say my name

Do students not protest anymore?

Things like this occur when those in authority are allowed get away with it.
First thing those students need to do is organise a committee and decide course of action.

With the spot light on it now and info coming out it sounds like it's just being accepted by the students bar a few renegades.

whelan2

Say my name wrote: »

Do students not protest anymore?

Things like this occur when those in authority are allowed get away with it.
First thing those students need to do is organise a committee and decide course of action.

With the spot light on it now and info coming out it sounds like it's just being accepted by the students bar a few renegades.

We are in a pandemic. I think most students are focused on their education atm, in case it gets pulled

Say my name

whelan2 wrote: »

We are in a pandemic. I think most students are focused on their education atm, in case it gets pulled

The principal is on morning Ireland atm.

He's reiterating that it's a problem with just the girls as they use their PE wear as a fashion show.

NcdJd

Say my name wrote: »

The principal is on morning Ireland atm.

He's reiterating that it's a problem with just the girls as they use their PE wear as a fashion show.

What did you think of the interview, according to the principle nothing was said about teachers feeling uncomfortable about what girls were wearing. It seems to me a story thats completely unsubstantiated and grew legs on social media over the weekend if you listened to what the principle said there this morning.

_Brian

NcdJd wrote: »

What did you think of the interview, according to the principle nothing was said about teachers feeling uncomfortable about what girls were wearing. It seems to me a story thats completely unsubstantiated and grew legs on social media over the weekend if you listened to what the principle said there this morning.

Right, and he’s not going to talk it down even a little bit.

NcdJd

_Brian wrote: »

Right, and he’s not going to talk it down even a little bit.

Did you listen to the interview?

Say my name

NcdJd wrote: »

What did you think of the interview, according to the principle nothing was said about teachers feeling uncomfortable about what girls were wearing. It seems to me a story thats completely unsubstantiated and grew legs on social media over the weekend if you listened to what the principle said there this morning.

I didn't think much of him.

He said it was noticed by the teachers and remarked on. As the pupils have to wear the gear all day re covid that it wouldn't be an acceptable part of uniform.
Then went on to blame social media for scandalous accusations.

If he was the principal in my old tech he'd be shown what's what by the pupils fairly quick.

_Brian

NcdJd wrote: »

Did you listen to the interview?

I didn’t

NcdJd

School's reputation is damaged either was I suppose. Should have called all students in whether boy or girl to remind them of the school's uniform policy.

whelan2

I heard some of the interview. I can see what the school wanted. There is as in all schools a uniform policy. Leggings are not part of it. I think this is something that has been blown out of proportion. Rules are rules

_Brian

NcdJd wrote: »

School's reputation is damaged either was I suppose. Should have called all students in whether boy or girl to remind them of the school's uniform policy.

Exactly.
Anything should have been framed in that way.

If there was talk if tight clothing and staff being distracted it’s very concerning and probably warrants further investigation.

whelan2

_Brian wrote: »

Exactly.
Anything should have been framed in that way.

If there was talk if tight clothing and staff being distracted it’s very concerning and probably warrants further investigation.

There was no talk of staff being distracted. A story that grew wings

White Clover

NcdJd wrote: »

Did you listen to the interview?

I heard it. I thought he explained very well what happened. He would have my support 100%

_Brian

whelan2 wrote: »

There was no talk of staff being distracted. A story that grew wings

That’s interesting , a story to watch to see how it pans out.

White Clover

NcdJd wrote: »

School's reputation is damaged either was I suppose. Should have called all students in whether boy or girl to remind them of the school's uniform policy.

He explained very well why this didn't happen. In my eyes the school did nothing wrong.

_Brian

White Clover wrote: »

He explained very well why this didn't happen. In my eyes the school did nothing wrong.

It will be interesting to see. I don’t think every girl in the school will have picked it up wrong or intentionally twisted what was said so surely as the day progresses things will become clearer.

wrangler

_Brian wrote: »

It will be interesting to see. I don’t think every girl in the school will have picked it up wrong or intentionally twisted what was said so surely as the day progresses things will become clearer.

My schooldays were the start of miniskirts and there's no doubt the girls wore them to intimidate the male staff not distract, don't think it's much different now.
Of course the rest of us were delighted
A friends daughter was on about it and the staff pulling her up over dress and her comment was they shouldn't be looking,
Surely it's a pert of discipline ....... no discipline, chaos

Tonynewholland

_Brian wrote: »

Exactly.
Anything should have been framed in that way.

If there was talk if tight clothing and staff being distracted it’s very concerning and probably warrants further investigation.

Investigate by questioning male teachers? I’d hate to be a male teacher in this school today and it will do nothing to promote males taking teaching as career.
Rules were broken simple as.

_Brian

Tonynewholland wrote: »

Investigate by questioning male teachers? I’d hate to be a male teacher in this school today and it will do nothing to promote males taking teaching as career.
Rules were broken simple as.

There’s no talk of rules being broken though.

So our own school day or gear is T-shirt and shirts. But kids can’t change at the moment so are told to wear or gear all day, obviously they done wear T-shirt and shorts all day. Leggins and running gear is worn across the board.

They were foolish to single girls out for this talk. That was the first mistake. Any manager with a brain knows not to single females out to talk to and let men off.

I listened to the principle speaking,I’d like to hear the overall feedback from the girls in fairness, there will always be enough honest kids to tell exactly what was said. It’s not beyond the real of possibility that someone giving an assembly made a silly off the cuff remark that sparked this.

Tonynewholland

_Brian wrote: »

There’s no talk of rules being broken though.

So our own school day or gear is T-shirt and shirts. But kids can’t change at the moment so are told to wear or gear all day, obviously they done wear T-shirt and shorts all day. Leggins and running gear is worn across the board.

They were foolish to single girls out for this talk. That was the first mistake. Any manager with a brain knows not to single females out to talk to and let men off.

I listened to the principle speaking,I’d like to hear the overall feedback from the girls in fairness, there will always be enough honest kids to tell exactly what was said. It’s not beyond the real of possibility that someone giving an assembly made a silly off the cuff remark that sparked this.

Yes they could have handled it better but hindsight is great. It started out as just another school talk on school rules now all over the media and in the Dail
Tracksuits allowed leggings are not for obvious reasons
If it’s sports day why not just wear tracksuits over the shorts and remove if they want

whelan2

On the school's website it specifies tracksuit bottoms for pe. Leggings are not tracksuit bottoms.

_Brian

whelan2 wrote: »

On the school's website it specifies tracksuit bottoms for pe. Leggings are not tracksuit bottoms.

Indeed.
Hopefully so they conversation was about sticking to the uniform code and not the story that is circulating. Listening to a student on the radio there and I’m not so sure that’s what happened. There’s definitely a time that some at least feel body shamed by this and that’s straying into dangerous territory.

At this stage a third Kett needs to be brought in and some clarification brought quickly to this. Either way innocent people’s reputations are being tarnished.

We must always remember our history in Ireland, a group of adults saying nothing to see here move along doesn’t always mean there is nothing to see. If I were a teacher in the school I’d be pushing for proper clarity on this and a third party is the only way this will happen.

While every group of kids can have those willing to cause trouble, it’s not all kids and there will always be enough honest kids to get a straight picture.

I’d be hoping this is nothing but keeping an open mind until more information is out. Rumours of teachers having relationships with leaving cert students aren’t helping much either.

_Brian

whelan2 wrote: »

On the school's website it specifies tracksuit bottoms for pe. Leggings are not tracksuit bottoms.

I can see allot of conversations in school offices about updating policies given current restrictions on changing areas etc.

_Brian

Ok it shouldn’t but this made me laugh

greysides

Not everybody may be aware of it, but there's an on-going thread in Help Desk that I would like to draw your attention to.

The issue revolves around the acceptance in the Vegan & Vegetarian charter of the use of the word 'cruelty' in relation to animal farming.


It is explained in the charter that as part of the Vegan belief system it has to be accepted in a forum dedicated to discussing Veganism.

A farmer's view might be that such an inclusion in the charter opens the door for the smearing of the industry on a publicly accessible forum, albeit in a small section of the whole site.

Any other inflammatory terms and offensive suggestions that could be used against animal farming are banned.


This is obviously an awkward situation for the people who have to decide what goes in a charter and what doesn't, as there doesn't seem to be any middle ground.


F&F moderators have already given their opinions in our mod forum so if you wish to add yours visit the thread here.

Panch18

greysides wrote: »

Not everybody may be aware of it, but there's an on-going thread in Help Desk that I would like to draw your attention to.

The issue revolves around the acceptance in the Vegan & Vegetarian charter of the use of the word 'cruelty' in relation to animal farming.


It is explained in the charter that as part of the Vegan belief system it has to be accepted in a forum dedicated to discussing Veganism.

A farmer's view might be that such an inclusion in the charter opens the door for the smearing of the industry on a publicly accessible forum, albeit in a small section of the whole site.

Any other inflammatory terms and offensive suggestions that could be used against animal farming are banned.


This is obviously an awkward situation for the people who have to decide what goes in a charter and what doesn't, as there doesn't seem to be any middle ground.


F&F moderators have already given their opinions in our mod forum so if you wish to add yours visit the thread here.

Thanks for that Grey

People should take a look at the link if you can

I started the thread as I felt the change in charter was totally unnecessary and allowed a free for all on farmers with regards to cruelty

If anyone wants to give me feedback via PM, whatever you think, rather than posting that’s good to

Or you don’t have to do anything, that’s good to!!

gozunda

Just to say I've been and posted and said my own piece.

However I've noted that the logic presented in support of a small group being given explicit permission to openly call all animal agriculture cruel and by extension all such farmers as participating in cruelty is seriously flawed.

The idea seems to be that because (for example) the hunting forum states that hunting is ethically sound - then the v&v forum should be allowed to claim that farming is not.

This ignores the essential point that one forum states that its own activities are legal and acceptable to its members and those who hunt etc.

Whilst another forum demands the right to describe another sector (in this case farmers) as being perpetrators of cruelty without exception.

Imo something not right there....