'Top 25' list details students' looks, bodies

[albionmoonlight]

OK--I just did some looking and apparently the "list" is making the college email rounds AND Howard Stern read it on his radio show.

And you people still can't hook me up? Where's your sense of the greater good?

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

The only problem I see here is that now all the adults know which girls are headed for the pole. Being on a list doesn't make you a slut, sucking a lot of cock does.

Yeah, cause high school guys don't lie to their friends about what a girl did or let them do.

[Abe Sargent]

What I find out that is funny about this is that the parents said the school waited too long before investigating by waiting from April 6th until the 17th.

April 6th, a Thursday, they find out. They probably discuss what to do about it.

April 7th, a Friday. At the end of the day, Spring Recess begins.

April 7-16th - Spring Recess

April 17th, a Monday. They begin investigating.


They began investigating two business days after being informed. TWO. That's not a massive delay. Stupid parents.


Not all parents are stupid, but I deal with enough stupid parents in my line of work that I know them when I see them.


-Anxiety

[ISiddiqui]

Really stupid parents. Claiming discrimination based on sex against the school because it was "too little, too late"? WTF?! Well, then the girls should make their own list against the guys and see what the school does.

[Maple Leafs]

Salon.com had some excerpts from the list a few days ago. Let's just say it went beyond rating the girls from 1/10 -- some of the stuff in there was pretty offensive.

[ISiddiqui]

I read it... I still say no big deal. Stuff like this was said (but not put down on paper) in my high school all the fucking time. And I'm sure mine wasn't an isolated incident.

The only reason this is an issue is because it was put down on paper.

Though I have wondered if high school girls did this about the boys (and they do speak that way, even if they don't write it down so), would this be such an issue? I'm guessing not... Daddy's little princess needs protecting after all.

[Schmidty]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I read it... I still say no big deal. Stuff like this was said (but not put down on paper) in my high school all the fucking time. And I'm sure mine wasn't an isolated incident.

So that makes it OK?????????????

Just because "it's happened to me", doesn't make it one fucking bit right.

Parents stink now days. My wife and I teach our daughter class and respect, and have been told many times, even by strangers, that she's one of the most well-behaved children they've ever seen. Even though she's awesome by nature, the respectful part of her personality doesn't come just from genes.

This is not to say that things won't get challenged by middle school, high school, etc., but she will have a HUGE advantage over the kids who don't have a basis of mature empathy.

[Glengoyne]

Respectful huh?

Maybe if the boys in her school make a list like this she'll get bonus points for eye-contact.








I'm going to hell, aren't I?

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Schmidty

So that makes it OK?????????????

Just because "it's happened to me", doesn't make it one fucking bit right.

Sure it does .

Let's not kid ourselves here. This happens EVERYWHERE, but it isn't written down and no one tells the girl (or boy... if you don't think girls do this you are insane) what was said about her, so its a non issue. I mean really with raging hormones and teenagers you think you won't have these type of discussions going on?

Frankly, its much ado about nothing, IMO. "Sex & the City" is funny and liberating when they all sit around and talk about their men's physical attributes, magazines like Maxim and FHM talk in detail about female anatomy (and rank them), and then we wonder how stuff like this happens? We've accepted it in other areas, but Daddy's little princess gets talked about here, so got to be a federal case... give me a break.

And, of course, this wasn't meant to be seen by any of the girls in the first place. So I'm trying to find out what sexual harrasment occured because of this list.

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

Respectful huh?

Maybe if the boys in her school make a list like this she'll get bonus points for eye-contact.








I'm going to hell, aren't I?

Yeah.....and I'm coming with you for laughing at that.....

[IwasHere]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

And, of course, this wasn't meant to be seen by any of the girls in the first place. So I'm trying to find out what sexual harrasment occured because of this list.

I think this is where they are going to get in trouble. Writing a list in your notebook of the top 25 babes in school and then letting your friends read it is one thing. Taking that list to the copy machine and running off 100+ copies and passing them out at a basketball game is another. I wonder if they were selling the list at the Basketball game?

There is a difference between personal use and distribution of copies. I think this does legally qualify as harassment.

Another question is does this qualify as kiddie porn? Pictures of underage girls in various poses with hadrcore discriptions?

[Vinatieri for Prez]

The answer to both your questions is no and no. The police already investigated, closed their investigation, and charged no one.

By the way, writings of sex with children is not illegal. Only pictures. Why, because there is no child victim involved. For the same reason, the federal government's recent law to illegalize simulated child porn involving computer graphics/photoshop to make it appear like a child is involved was struck down.

[IwasHere]

Originally Posted by Vinatieri for Prez

By the way, writings of sex with children is not illegal. Only pictures. Why, because there is no child victim involved.

But, there are pictures of children here.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by IwasHere

But, there are pictures of children here.

Not sexually explicit photos. You can't arrest someone for having a headshot of a 16 year old.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by IwasHere

I think this is where they are going to get in trouble. Writing a list in your notebook of the top 25 babes in school and then letting your friends read it is one thing. Taking that list to the copy machine and running off 100+ copies and passing them out at a basketball game is another. I wonder if they were selling the list at the Basketball game?

There is a difference between personal use and distribution of copies. I think this does legally qualify as harassment.

Another question is does this qualify as kiddie porn? Pictures of underage girls in various poses with hadrcore discriptions?

IIUC, the creators of the list weren't the ones who made copies of it. And I believe that only the questionaires were handed out at the basketball games, not the list. But, as pointed out, the police have closed their investigation into the matter and said there was no crime here because it wasn't sent to the girls. I think the girls may even have a problem winning a civil case on this issue.

And also as Biggie said, you have to have sexually explicit photos to qualify as kiddie porn. Clothed minors with hardcore descriptions doesn't count.

[Maple Leafs]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

The only reason this is an issue is because it was put down on paper.

... and copied, and distributed around the school to make sure everyone saw it. You don't see that being a bit of a distinction from normal locker room talk?

[Solecismic]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances; or the right of the people to live their lives free of being offended."

If a teacher distributed this list in class, that would call for action.

Teenage boys are jerks. That's just part of their charm. The ones who continue to see women in this light once they become adults are doomed to several divorces and miserable relationships.

Sanitizing life for them and the women they ogle isn't doing anyone a favor. It's just delaying inevitable life lessons.

[Suburban Rhythm]

Someone should at least recognize the boys' desktop publishing skills...not bad for some 17 or 18 year olds. Hell, there might even be a PowerPoint presentation out of this thing. I wouldn't have known how to use all this multimedia crap 12 years ago...

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Maple Leafs

You don't see that being a bit of a distinction from normal locker room talk?

Not a significant distinction, no.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by Suburban Rhythm

Someone should at least recognize the boys' desktop publishing skills...not bad for some 17 or 18 year olds. Hell, there might even be a PowerPoint presentation out of this thing. I wouldn't have known how to use all this multimedia crap 12 years ago...

Link?

[Maple Leafs]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Not a significant distinction, no.

Really?

Here's a comparable situation. At my job, there are certain people I work with that I respect a great deal and certain people that I don't. When I'm talking to others and these people come up, it's quite common for us to express our views in very plain language -- "So-and-so has their head up their ass, I can't believe they're capable of feeding themselves let alone running this sort of project". I'd imagine this is a very, very common workplace scenario at just about every office in the world. I'm sure there are peopel who say the same sort of thing about me when I'm not around. Nobody thinks twice about it.

But if I write this stuff down, photocopy it and pass it around the office, I'd be fired immediately. And deservedly so -- I don't think anyone would defend me by saying "people say that stuff all the time". It's not just what's being said, it's the extra step of making sure it's public knowledge that takes this over the line.

[ISiddiqui]

I think a better example would be if you wrote down a list of the biggest fuckwads in the office and passed it to a few friends, and then one of those friends copied it and handed it to a bunch of people except the ones listed (and the boss, of course).

Now the question is who should be fired here? You (who may have given it to 4 or 5 guys) or the guy who passed it around to everyone? Or both?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Maple Leafs

Here's a comparable situation.

I'm not sure how comparable I believe the two scenarios are. (Heck, I'm not sure that I believe there's a lot that's comparable between school & work, so no wonder I think it's kind of a stretch).

...

it's the extra step of making sure it's public knowledge that takes this over the line.

Actually, it'd probably be the blatant insubordination that'd get you fired.
Which isn't what's at issue in the school scenario.

[Maple Leafs]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Actually, it'd probably be the blatant insubordination that'd get you fired.
Which isn't what's at issue in the school scenario.

Assume the people I'm bad-mouthing are peers, not my bosses.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by Maple Leafs

Assume the people I'm bad-mouthing are peers, not my bosses.

Then you'd just have grudges with them if they heard about it. Or possible harassment.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Maple Leafs

Assume the people I'm bad-mouthing are peers, not my bosses.

Then you might get jammed up for "conduct detrimental to the organization" or whatever phrase is in the employee handbook.

But you're still in two different environments with two different sets of rules, AND perhaps more to the point, you'd be subject to being equally jammed up if the wrong person overheard the conversation anyway.

[Maple Leafs]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

But you're still in two different environments with two different sets of rules, AND perhaps more to the point, you'd be subject to being equally jammed up if the wrong person overheard the conversation anyway.

Right, but that's par for the course. You talk about other people and they find out, you face consequences. We all get that.

The point is that everybody talks about other people behind their back. Sometimes it's harmless, sometimes it's mean-spirited, sometimes it's actually damaging.

But if you go one step further and actively make sure that everyone knows what you're saying, then it's not run-of-the-mill talk. If you go out of your way to makes sure that people know what's being said, so they can be properly humiliated, then you're a jerk and you'll face the consequences of that too.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by Maple Leafs

But if I write this stuff down, photocopy it and pass it around the office, I'd be fired immediately. And deservedly so...

But you aren't going to get arrested for kiddie porn.

[Maple Leafs]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

But you aren't going to get arrested for kiddie porn.

True enough... I'm not arguing for any particular legal result, just that "this is no different from any locker room in America" argument doesn't work.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Still see no significant distinction. First the work/school scenario is different. At work, the boss can pretty much do what he wants including firing you. He could also say great job, I didn't like those guys either. However, suspending someone from school is completely different. There are a number of restrictions that prevent a school from doing this - especially a public one.

But apart from that, I still think it is insignificant for another reason. It is the same as locker room talk because if I told a couple of people this and then they went around and repeated it, attributing the statements to me (which happens a million times in schools), the resulting embarrassment to the student being insulted would be pretty much the same as a written list. Kids have been ridiculed without writings before. A classic example of course would be the guy walking up to the girl in the cafeteria and screaming "you're a slut, you suck coc&." I believe the girl would be embarrassed just as much if not more so than being on this list. And that verbal comment by the student would never have made the press. Why? Because it happens all the time.

Believe it or not, I have way more problem with the guys who circulated the list than the one who created it. If the guy who created it meant it to be for internal consumption only then you can't say he was at all trying to be mean to the girls.

[Suburban Rhythm]

The end...for now, until the civil suits pop up...

http://www.postgazette.com/pg/06145/693049-55.stm

[Suburban Rhythm]

And...the first lawsuit is filed...

http://www.postgazette.com/pg/06174/700671-100.stm

[Easy Mac]

It's only defamation if its untrue, correct? Finally, quiksand's tests can be put into use.

"That girls so good it's like she can put 3 ping pong balls and a banana split in her mouth"

[cthomer5000]

Your honor, I call for a writ of "Boys will be boys."

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Loser lawsuit. Truth is one defense. During trial, I would ask that the plaintiff show her ass to the jury to prove she indeed has a big dumper.

On a more serious note, the statement also has to be one of fact, not an opinion, so rating girls would not be defamation. So I don't see where this is going. I guess only if the statement was that the girl blew someone when she didn't. However, you can't sue the kid's parents, so what do they hope to get from the kid in damages?

But the worst part is the outraged parents involving the poor daughter in a lawsuit. Haven't her body parts been discussed enough? This will just heap more emotional trauma on her. Nice parents.

[Suburban Rhythm]

This thing just gets dumber by the day...

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06175/700918-55.stm

"Jane Doe," however, was not one of the top 25 girls. She was the 26th entry -- given zero points and the grade "Z."

The narrative that accompanies her entry includes demeaning descriptions of her. While the other girls on the list were identified by their first and last names, "Jane Doe" is identified only by her first and middle names.

So, she (well her parents) are not suing because the list states she has a grade A ass or rack...but, ranking LAST, that she does NOT have grade A ass or rack? Or that her oral skills are slightly lacking?

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Yup, that's America for you.

[Abe Sargent]

I love that the plantiff attorney is allowed to cite who the defendant is but wants to keep the identity of the plantiff secret. And the paper apparently agrees with that inconsistant policy.

-Anxiety

[sterlingice]

Even more amusing is that it's listed as Jane Doe in the legal proceedings despite the fact that you can find her name all over the internet.

SI

[Suburban Rhythm]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

I love that the plantiff attorney is allowed to cite who the defendant is but wants to keep the identity of the plantiff secret. And the paper apparently agrees with that inconsistant policy.

-Anxiety

While I agree that is dumb, I don't think it's new or shocking. Not to make this out to be on the same level, but in the Duke lacrosse case, all 3 ALLEGED defendants are named, but not the plaintiff (although, same way, if you really want to know, you can find it on the internet). Yeah, rape shield laws, blah blah blah, but should work both ways.

[Desmond]

The fact that this "list" has caused such a stir is a testament to the sad state of this country, let alone the fact that legal action has come from it.

If they remade The Breakfast Club today it would be a fuckin courtoom drama and poor Principal Vernon would be taken to the cleaners.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Originally Posted by Suburban Rhythm

While I agree that is dumb, I don't think it's new or shocking. Not to make this out to be on the same level, but in the Duke lacrosse case, all 3 ALLEGED defendants are named, but not the plaintiff (although, same way, if you really want to know, you can find it on the internet). Yeah, rape shield laws, blah blah blah, but should work both ways.

I think it's totally different. That's a criminal rape case. This was a civil defamation case.

[Suburban Rhythm]

Resurrecting this thread...because of two articles appearing today in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette.

Apparently, to reform the males of the school, someone had the great of idea of getting speakers to get through to them

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07032/758384-55.stm

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07032/758386-55.stm

[RendeR]

After reading both articles it looks like nothing got through to anyone. The students rediculed and taunted the female speaker and lauded the male one, was either message even heard or understood? I highly doubt it.

Teenagers are cruel and sometimes truly ignorant creatures. Whose fault is that? we know its the parenting, but its also the society and behaviours we allow them to be molded by.

The kids aren't getting any real guidance about what they see and hear about and instead of asking if its right or wrong they simply assume its acceptable.

As for the top-25 list? if it were my daughter on the list I'd be highly pissed off, but frankly there isn't much that can be done about it, its not a crime to do what was done. Its a childhood prank, for lack of better decriptions.

Has anyone seen or heard of any results from the civil case? I can't find anything on it. My Search-Fu is weak today.

[Oilers9911]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

Does anyone else think that this would not even be an issue if the genders were reversed?

"Johnnie has a huge penis and is an awesome fvck" = NO LAWSUIT!

Johnnie would probably lead the charge to publish that info.

[Klinglerware]

On the other hand,

"10-second man Johnnie, AKA, Dixon Ticonderoga..." = LAWSUIT! (settlement proceeds going to the Jag)