They did something foolish that is now in the world and can't be taken
back. What else can they do but defend it?
My High School year book 'index pictures' were taken by a company and
delivered to the school. After that, a group of students managed by a single
teacher simply added them into the software they were using to design the
yearbooks, and called it a day. In the meantime, these students and the teacher
were designing all the 'memorable moments' info that went into the
publication. The fact of the matter is that it is a highly collaborative
effort.School administrators put attention into modesty on day 1.
The rest of the process didn't include their involvement. That isn't
really a calculated conspiracy to impose a gender double standard. That argument
is just as offensive as the rest of the anti-LDS hatred that for some reason or
another is still being posted on here.
uteman1011,Growing up in Utah, I had a catholic administrator, and
LDS one, an atheist, gay teachers, and so on. They still required the same
standard and gave very secular reasons for it.We can argue it until
the sun goes down and liberals will hold their opinion and so will
conservatives. The truth remains though, which is that girls look far more
beautiful when they dress well and smile with a positive attitude.Girls who dress like Penny from 'The Big Bang Theory' only look like
one thing... trashy. Dressing like someone going to a Vegas strip club
doesn't belong in a school for kids. If you think it does, I'm sorry
but us conservatives aren't the ones who have issues or a hidden agenda.If we have any agenda, it's to protect the youth. That's more
than I can say for what liberals are arguing for.
Bad judgment of this type would make me wonder about other decisions the school board makes. They had no business altering the photos after the fact,
especially if the students and/or their families paid for them.If the school district were acting in a responsible manner, they would have
informed the students ahead of time and had someone there at the time the
pictures were taken to inform the students of the dress requirements.If nothing else, the school district should refund the cost of the
pictures to those whose images were altered.
@ Pharmacist, yes the LDS Church is out to get you, they drafted all the dress
codes around the state, I find it funny just how much people can obsess over how
the Mormons are out to ruin their lives.
This is a school pulling a prank on the students. If the students had pulled a
prank the school would have required they reimburse all new amended copies for
all. The school should republish at it's expense and promise not to do such
a thing in the future.
@RustedHalo Exactly! Ironically, over at the SL Trib's site, their story
has been updated to show the hypocrisy and double-standard via a page (117) from
the same yearbook entitled "Wasatch Stud Life," whose tag line is
"Studs doin' what studs do best." Not surprisingly it features a
bare male chest, a young man pulling up his shirt to reveal his boxers for the
camera to capture, cut-off sleeves and horror of horrors: a tattoo.
Where's the modesty police? Oh, right, they're busy randomly editing
and amateurishly photoshopping select girl's photos to an invisible
double-standard, in a Puritan-like effort to shame and shun, while meanwhile in
Boys Town, it's just business as usual. Pathetic!
"Only is an LDS town like Heber would this happen. Try doing it in San
Fransico or New York, and see what the press would say."Comparing Heber to SF or NY is a bit like a comparison with Sodom and Gomorrah
from my view.Also, the "Press" has not been censored. What
was censoreds is a mis-perceived "right" to push the envelope on
propriety. All this underscores points made in other articles and
posts: The gap between good and evil, standards and "let it all hang
out" is increasing. ((And of course, the evil M-Chrch is all to blame!!)
This little embarrassment is making it onto the big news web pages. Forcing
girls to be ashamed of their body image for religious reasons (face it) is one
of those things that was only supposed to happen in those foreign, backwards
“We believe the rules are fairly clear, and yes we believe also …
that we could have done a better job in enforcing it consistently.”Wasatch School District Superintendent Terry ShoemakerThat
is they key element, lack of consistency in enforcing it.
@ Holly Mullen"let's stop shaming young girls for showing
their shoulders. Let's stop allowing public school leaders paid with tax
dollars to enforce a narrow, patriarchal view of what is acceptable attire for
young women."Ok well then where do you draw the line upon
modesty? "Today we can't sham girls for showing their
shoulders"..ok then what can we sham them then? Is it ok to "sham"
them showing a bunch of cleavage.Today you'll probably say no
you shouldn't allow THAT but tomorrow who knows?
@ Brave Sir RobinBecause of the logistics in getting a year book
done? There is a lot of photos to be taken and usually to make year books
affordable they do it all in one day (maybe per grade per day). It has been a
while since I was in high school. So what is worse not having your
photo in the year book or having it altered?
A couple of thoughts on this matter. I find that high school yearbooks are
looked through, signed and commented upon by friends and families and in two
weeks are consigned to a bookshelf, then a trunk in the basement and
forgotten.That being my opinion, I do find that the issue, to me, is
one of control. The education cabal from kindergarten to the post high school
years appears to be a universe of people vying for control of other people.
This is a non-issue, if someone has a lousy class photo, let it be, it's
their problem, weed your own garden.Have the photo shoot monitored
by a faculty member if standards are an issue. Ham handed re-touching is really
poor leadership. This was all preventable if the faculty or
administration was monitoring the shoot instead of trying to correct the
"problem" after the fact.Teenagers are not adults, they
required monitoring and supervision. The adults in this fiasco were conspicuous
by their absence.
I'm confused about the tattoo. Does the dress code state no tattoos?It is time for a change in policy. It is fine to have a dress code but I
agree with other comments that editing the photos isn't the best solution.
Especially without the student's knowledge or consent. Warn students before
picture day and leave the picture out if it doesn't follow dress code,
notifying the student before the year book is published, of course.
Trying to enforce dress standards on others is not free agency.
Go over to the "other" local newspaper's article and look at the
pictures in the yearbook that weren't edited. Many kids had tank tops on.
Many pictures of the tennis team as well as the track team with young ladies in
tank tops. All apparently should have been edited or excluded (according to
their supposed policy) but were not. There are two issues hear, the actual
editing and the exclusionary nature of who was edited and who was not.
The dress code sounds a bit arbitrary and kinda silly, but it's probably a
good lesson for these kids to learn. Every employer has a dress code of some
kind, and if these students can't obey a simple high school dress code then
it's not going to get any easier when they get out into the real world and
try to find a job.I've sat on several hiring committees for my
employer and I can confirm how a candidate chooses to dress speaks volumes about
their personal habits, their attention to detail and their desire to belong to
the organization. And no, the stereotype of the slovenly genius is not true, at
least in my experience; most of the candidates who were poorly dressed tended to
be the ones who were the least qualified for the position.
When the school's dress code mimic's the LDS Young women's dress
code then yes, there is something to be said about the influence of the dominant
religion on secular activities. To say that ANY of those pictures were immodest
requires an extremely narrow view! And the fact that certain students were
selected shows a lack of maturity and a lack of control over the process.
After reading this, and hearing the girls on the news last night, I think that
this is probably going to be on of the least embarrasing things these girls have
happen to them in their lives.I could understand there being some
outrage if faces were altered in order to mock them. But erasing a tatoo, and
adding bits of clothing is really not that important. Yes it may seem really
important now, but in 5 years nobody will care. In 20 years you will look at
the picture and just shake your head at the fashon styles when you were in
I would have been more annoyed that my photo was blurry,........
@Well.ok: I agree completely! This wasn't an "LDS" debacle, but
it gets blamed on the LDS Church, which pours a lot of money into the
"I'm a Mormon" campaigns to show that we're not weird. A lot
of people already get us mixed up with the FLDS. This isn't going to help.
I hope young men and young women understand that if they get a tattoo that is
visible they are greatly diminishing their opportunity to be hired. Many
companies now have a zero tolerance for tattoos, meaning, if any tattoo is
visible they are a "do not hire". Some companies are now terminating
"newly" tattooed employees who have previously been warned.
Utah just can't seem to take last step into the 20th century can it? Silly
and confusing liquor laws that are blatantly and obviously punitive, shaming
young women who's dress doesn't live up to some arbitrary standard
that was applied post mortem, wild west land management mentality, violating
civil rights of it's citizens, etc. But hey! Come to Utah to ski! Move
your business here and take advantage of our underpaid and over-educated
gullible work force! Please validate us amongst the sage brush, rocks and large
bodies of salty water!
If the school has a dress code then why were these students allowed to even pose
for the photo if they weren't meeting the requirements?
It's kind of funny to read these comments from people inside the bubble. I
attended schools both in Utah and in another state and I promise you Utah's
dress code and overall "control" is WAY looser than some parts of the
country. In my high school in the 90's, if you wore umbros, you went home.
If your jeans had holes in the knees, you went home. If your shirt lacked
sleeves, you went home. Boys and girls. Skipping classes didn't happen. If
you didn't show up and your parents didn't call in, the cops went out
looking for you. Great story-I once came back to visit SLC while my school
was on break, but my old SLC school was still in session. My friends invited me
to go to school with them. I was confused at the request, but I went with
trepidation. Throughout the entire day, only the HomeEc teacher noticed I
didn't belong! I was wearing my lettermen jacket for crying out loud! No
one cared. I've often wondered what that teacher did with the biology test
I turned in.
@gittalopctbi"At least this district is one that is willing to
enforce their dress code and for that I applaud them."Except
that, according to what I've read on the issue so far, they didn't
enforce it except for this particular instance, and even then it was
inconsistently applied. If they had enforced it uniformly and consistently for
the entire school year, this would be a very different story. But we both know
that's impossible to do, so they should have just let it be.
Amazing to me how many people want to attribute this to "Utah" or
"Mormon" culture. Not so. I've taught in five states and six school
districts, none of which were in Utah and three of which were in California.
*gasp* You know, THAT state? All school districts I taught in had similar dress
code standards and all had the "no bare shoulders" requirement. You can
disagree with it if you want, but it is not limited to this state nor this
perceived "religious culture."The students were warned, they
also had a huge, obvious sign at the picture shoot. At least this district is
one that is willing to enforce their dress code and for that I applaud them.
Maybe next time they should just say that their picture will not be taken at
all. That would solve any photoshopping issues.
I'm going to have to say that the school and district are going to be the
ones with egg on their face for this one. As an educator, I can say
that it's difficult, if not impossible to enforce a dress code like this
consistently and fairly. The fact is, enforcing most of these Utah-style strict
dress codes creates a far bigger distraction from the learning environment than
the so-called violation itself. None of the students pictured would have even
raised an eyebrow in my classroom, regardless of what the school dress policy
said. It just wouldn't be worth the hassle. I'm not going to take
class time to measure the length of some girl's skirt. I'd probably
get in trouble for harassment besides.To have an enforceable dress
code, you have to pretty much either institute school uniforms, or have a policy
that permits pretty much everything but gang symbols and showing up naked.
Anything in between gets way too difficult to define, monitor, and enforce, and
creates situations like this when it is inevitably applied inconsistently.
Just have a dress code and enforce it all the time, not after the fact. We
wonder why Japan, So Korea, China, India etc are passing us up in education?
They actually have rules and regulations for students that are enforced. Our
public schools are becoming just another place to socialize. Bring back Reading,
Writing, Arithmetic by the rule of a Hickory Stick.
I'm all for modesty but this is fundamentalism at it's finest. These
same people would probably put a monitor at the chapel doors. I'm LDS so I
can say that without bias.
@hockeymom, another option is for schools to emphasize their primary function of
education and get out of the business of yearbooks. If kids want their photos
taken it should be a private matter.
Don't edit, just omit the picture.Post a sign with the rules and if
they choose to violate the rules, their picture just does not make the year
Once again, a Utah story goes viral! National exposure and for no money. Sure
we're the nations punch line to a joke, but at the same time, many modest
people know us for who we are and we'll attract more of them to our
camp----oh. Wait a minute. This wasn't about BYU was it?
It is a tragedy that, apparently, the Principle knows more about the horrific
evil in this world then the 'FATHER' does. One more reason why "WE
THE PEOPLE" need to get out of the education business and leave it to the
communities. Look how many of our young children from the big cities and now the
quiet small cities are used as pawns in a game of political Russian (Common
Core) roulette while their lives are being destroyed.How many more
young girls (and boys) like this are going to be seduced by evil and conspiring
individuals into a life much less then they are destined for?It is
horrific that we care more for a rock with graffiti that isn't required to
follow rules then we do our beautiful graffiti damaged young people who are
required to follow rules.
According to the U.S. Constitution, Education is a "state function". It
is up to the local school board to set standards and to influence the community
that they serve. Individual students do not set the standards for a school
through rebellion. Rightfully, the Little Rock School District used bayonets to
instigate change. The issue of "toos" and skimpy clothing are not of the
same standard of a civil right. Good for the school district. Legally, freedom
of expression has its limitations.
Sure seem to be a lot of folks whimpering about posts on the other papers'
forum. One of the things that make it disturbing is the haphazard way it was
applied. No wonder people suspect there was something other than strict
enforcement of the dress code at play. Who wouldn't?
I'm offended that this so-called "family friendly" newspaper would
print an example of one of these immodest "before' picture in its
paper. It's pornography!
Another easy solution to prevent yearbook day outrage, would be for the yearbook
staff to approve every picture taken before it is sent home. If they are deemed
in-appropriate, send it home with a note inside stating again the dress code
with a list of options: 1. Name only published in the yearbook2.
Student/parent pay for a re-take3. Fee assessed for photo editingOr maybe a reminder note about the dress code sent home attached to the
picture order form.Or maybe a black T-shirt offered on photo day, with the
option to go home and change.Or maybe a check-in with signature stating
they understand their photo may be edited for the yearbook.Or maybe a
yearbook staff member supervising the photo shoots and not allowing kids who are
not meeting the dress code to even sit on the stool.It seems there
are may checkpoints at which this final edit without notification may have been
When my high school took pictures for the year book, it was all head shots only.
And the seniors wore choir robes. But, then, in those days, girls wore dresses
to school and boys wore collared shirts.... That was the dress code.
Even when I was in high school 40 years ago, dress standards were a hot topic.
In hindsight, it seems so pointless in the greater scheme of things. Your life
is much more than your tattoo or your yearbook. When we're 17 or 18 years
old, we don't realize how limited our perspective is. The school may have
blown this decision or implemented it clumsily, but this is a nothingburger.
Doesn't both me in the least. If they were disrobing them in the photo
shop then perhaps. It is a total non story to me. No harm, no foul. Move on
folks. I wish more schools would make an attempt to enforce a dress code. My
kids school has a code but it isn't enforced because too many kids just
don't follow it. Even if Wasatch went overboard or was inconsistent, so
what. Just not concerned about it. In this day and age the declining values is
far more prevalent and causing much greater long-term harm to our society.
The Wasatch School District hinges their actions on the claim that placing what
they call "a large sign (4 feet by 5 feet) ... where students could see
it" is adequate consent to doctor photos when and how they deem necessry is
fraught with problems. First many of these students are not at an
age of consent. The school district undermined the parents right to consent.
The parents ulitmate have the responsibility of determining whether their child
is or even should be compliant with dress codes and how that compliance should
be enforced. Second posting a sign does not constitute a defensible
form of explicit consent. There's no way to determine whether the sign was
actually place, where it was placed, it's wording and format, all important
because they determine whether or not a student was even aware of the signs
existence. For that matter, if the Wasatch School District contends that this
is adequate consent then what protects students from innapropriate use of
photos?I suspect this issue will be settled in a court of law and it
won't go well for the Wasatch School District fashion police.
Typical Utah......but behind close doors..
Oh Great, another story out of Utah to make the rest of the country have a good
laugh. I know a large number of Utahns are struck in the fifties but I continue
to be amazed that they actually do stuff like this. There is nothing wrong with
dress codes but they should be updated and communicated much better than this
school has been able to accomplish........very poor administrative performance.
No offense but I don't see why it's necessary. People who care can use
a permanent marker. For example when I was younger I coloured a shirt onto a
half-naked Taylor Lautner glued on the front of my science book.
Young people need to learn to follow the rules. Parents need to learn to support
the school when decisions are made. If you don't like the rules.....then
don't have your picture taken!
It is ironic that such a right wing state like Utah would deny those girls the
right to "bare arms"
Times have certainly changed and it has begun in the homes where parent's
do not even know what is appropriate dress for their children. Modesty is not
"out dated". One would think that parent's, especially with young
girls, would want their children to dress modestly. Why would they consent to
cleavage, bare midriff, butt showing outfits that are seen in every store? Are
these the same parents who want to have others ogle their child? Call me
"out dated" if you will but it is extremely important to me to keep my
children protected from unwanted attention, especially of the sexual nature.
Dressing appropriately and acting appropriately can keep them safe.
Wonder how many males had their photographs edited? Not important. Got to keep
them thar women pushed down where they belong eh?
Jeanie:You're all for enforcement of the dress code eh?Therefore by definition you are calling for the editing of the photos of
cheerleader unis, girls volleyball and basketball unis right?Looks
like the funny comment belongs to you.
It's hilarious that so many people are afraid and/or ashamed of the human
Re: Chicagoborn "I wonder if they are also editing boys' pictures as
well. Probably not." No, we really sweat over how much skin
women show. Why? Maybe we are afraid of the power attractive women can have
over hetero - men. I enjoy looking at women, and they can be really persuasive!
Maybe we are just afraid of having a good time.
Wasatch High school has been photo shopping yearbook pictures for years. Last
year my daughter wore a “modest” blouse that covered the top of her
shoulders yet the school added full sleeves to it. We were upset that her image
was altered without consent and that her classmates did the alteration. Who
knows what other Photoshop manipulations could have been done to her image.
There was no sign or notification of the policy last year. If there was a sign
this year, there are a lot of people who didn’t see it. The administration
was notified of our concerns so this is not a new issue. Maybe now with all of
the press they will reconsider their dress code and approach; however, the
superintendent is only apologizing for not editing every questionable image.
Ironically the district’s home page for years featured a group of kids
that included a girl with a spaghetti strap shirt.
The kids in question should be notified if their photo won't be published,
and given the option to have no photo printed. Instead, a caption such as
'Wasatch School has deemed the image of this individual inappropriate for
publication'. Something like that. In any case, the school needs to own
it's share of responsibility for the censorship. If that attracts nation
wide publicity, that's OK. If they want to go that route, they have to own
it. If they don't want to publicly own it, and my guess is
that's the case here, I hope the kids remind them they are no longer
anonymously empowered to do the church's bidding. A few tweets or a posts
should have them taking questions from national media soon; maybe even a few
late night punch lines.
Pharmacist-- If you are a pharmacist then I would assume you have a post high
school degree. An educated person would not say" only in an LDS town like
Heber would this happen". Really!! Do you even know what the LDS population
is in Wasatch County? And this could and does happen in other random cities in
the US. To be religiously biased and condescending is inappropriate.This is not
a religous issue. It is a common sense issue. I am proud to live in Heber and I
am proud to have a school district who tries to have a dress code so when you
walk in to our schools you don't feel you are on a set of the
"Kardasians"! To say the press wouldn't notice in NYC city you are
probably right but thank goodness I don't live in New York! I choose to
live in Heber-been here lately?!!!
I hardly know where to being in responding to Oblio, but how about this:
Let's teach our sons that lusting after a woman doesn't allow them to
sexually assault her. Let's teach our sons they are equally responsible as
our daughters in learning boundaries and respecting another human being's
right to be his/her own person and to be left alone. Let's stop shaming
young girls for showing their shoulders. Let's stop allowing public school
leaders paid with tax dollars to enforce a narrow, patriarchal view of what is
acceptable attire for young women. This embarrassment goes well beyond enforcing
dress codes--which are legal and fine for schools to put in place. This is a
deliberate attempt to turn out meek and passive women who won't fight back
when walked on. I'm thrilled the young women involved stood up and in my
book, they should be applauded.
did they edit the team pictures for the Girls basketball team? Track team?
Swim team? Tennis? and of course cheerleaders.
I live in Saudi Arabia. What is happening at this high school is nothing.I differ with the local customs on dress. But I am open-minded enough
to look for how I can be benefited from the cross-cultural experience. I never
cease to be amazed how close-minded some people in Utah are when it comes to
looking across a cultural divide.It is a big world out there and if
everytime we see a cultural difference and have a fit and moan about the Taliban
and suffering because our rights are being taken away we aren't going to go
@CDLThey said there was a big sign near where the pictures were taken
stating the photos may be edited. After speaking with several of the students
(including those whose photos were not edited) nobody recalled this so called
sign. Even parents and teachers that have been interviewed do not remember this
large sign. I find it strange that the ONLY person that saw the sign was
Neil, a minor can have a tattoo with parental permission. I think it's
dumb (and I don't like tattoos), but that's the law.
the young women and young men were given a dress code to work with. i stand up
with the schools decision. when we are asked to dress with class then do it !
you know the standards !
I thought it was illegal for a minor to have a tattoo. Just a thought.
"Westergard said she believes the photos that were edited suggest a possible
issue of discrimination. She said she worries that photos were chosen not
because of the student's dress but because of school cliques."There’s really not any rhyme or reason to why they chose the girls
they chose to edit and who they left alone," she said.So help me
understand that if there is "REALLY not any rhyme or reason" then HOW
can it be "discrimination"???People need to get a grip. Why does
she not TEACH her CHILD to follow the dress code? Then NO issues. sigh
The kids knew about the dress code...they chose not to follow it, their photos
were edited. Simple, fair, nothing more to discuss.
Cute girl! The "edited" photo is much nicer.... assuming it isn't
TandJ---Your words puzzle me. Please describe what a "mature" tattoo
(for a sophomore) would look like?
This is not a religious issue.This is not a school or district
issue.This is a student and parent issue.The students
and parents need to take ownership of their choices and actions.They
can take action and attend board meetings to change the district dress policy if
they don't agree with it.They can choose to go home and change
if they come dressed for their picture in a way that goes against the district
policy. The can choose to have their picture taken and expect it to
be "corrected for publication" as the sign warned.Any
"outrage" on the part of students and parents against the school or
district in this situation is misplaced. They and they alone, by their choices
and actions, are responsible for what was published in the yearbook.
In the "olden days' when school pictures were taken, we were told girls
would wear dark sweaters with rounded necks and boys would wear dark shirts with
a collar. If you didn't comply, your picture wasn't taken and you were
not in the year book. Of course, that was in the days when students followed
instruction and parents would ground us forever if we sassed a teacher. Now
days......well, so much for progress.
I cannot figure any mother having any common sense that would accompany her
daughter (a sophomore in high school) to school with a plunging neckline which
also showed a rather immature tattoo as shown by the original photograph. How
the daughter got the tattoo is another question that is not answered. Did the
mother also condone the tattoo or did the girl get the tattoo on the sly?
If parents get all bent out of shape and make a stink over this issue, what is
that teaching their kid? Really! Complain and whine when you don't like the
result of not following the rules and guidelines. And we wonder where the
entitled attitude of current youth comes from? The whole thing is kind of funny
if you ask me. It'll be something to remember the school year by.
My-two-cents-worth,It is always interesting to me when people use
the word "prudish" to excuse violations of known dress codes. If a
parent has an issue with the dress code of their child's school they should
discuss it with the administration as soon as they are made aware of it at the
beginning of each school year. Otherwise it would be the parents who owe their
kids an apology for not championing their child's choice of clothing before
their child violated the dress code on picture day and became embarrassed at the
rule being enforced.
Modesty is not a problem just for Wasatch High School girls, It is all over the
nation, some schools condoning it, and some having enough courage to let the
girls know that there is a dress code at the School. My daughters have been out
of school for a good many years, but as I look at their High School Pictures I
am so happy that they had a dress code, and never complained. I personally do
not think any young woman should defile her body with Tattoos,and feel that is
just another problem that parents are going to have to face, including my
Granddaughters who have children.I would say to the mothers, you might want to
take a look at what you are doing to your daughters, when there is no discipline
about skimpy clothes or tattoos. Our Body is a temple, and it should be treated
that way. Girls in Arizona, as well as the rest of the nation, have
responsibilities to make the right decisions, and their mothers have the
responsibility to teach them what is right.
Dear Hunt- you ask good questions, but the answers seem obvious to me (and
different from what you seem to be assuming). There is a big difference between
the sexuality of a woman/girls stomach and a man's. I am a father and,
knowing what I know about how some boys and men think, I wouldn't want men
lusting after my daughter's body. Do you? I would be surprised
if the same were true of boys'/men's stomachs but if it is, then break
out the old 1910 one-piercers for men. The reality is, I
don't know where to draw the line (on what is too revealing and what is
not) but the line drawn by the school is reasonable and maybe the only that is
practical (otherwise what is there? measurements?). Everyone is caught up in
personal rights-- what about wisdom? what about practicality? Traditionally,
school is not about getting to do whatever you want -- that is for home. School
is for creating an environment where kids can learn (and, hopefully, be safe).
Lets focus on the objectives of school. Make a reasonable rule and apply it
consistently as practical.
to the parents of any student whose photo was edited AND feel it is unfair that
another student's photo was not edited: so what? It does not matter what
any other students photo was edited. What matters is whether or not your child
met the published requirements for the yearbook. Stop seeking an excuse by
blaming someone else.
I always thought you could look at Utah students as a role model for modesty and
good taste. Then you read about girls upset over a yearbook picture!! The news
writer should publish the names of the parents and girls so that they get credit
for the attention they crave so badly. I am frustrated with news writers that
cannot find something more important to write about,,,,, like academic
achievement and student successes.
Sometimes things seem a bit over the top, but in this case they did warn the
kids. So it would seems they frankly don't have the right to complain. They
did it to themselves. If they had issues they should have taken it up before the
pictures were taken, and isn't it just those photos placed in the yearbook?
Since the DN censored out my last (benign) comment, I'll try something a
little more PC. Why not just use head shots of all students, male and female.
Show nothing from the neck on down. Problem solved.
In England and in many other countries, schools have school uniforms that all of
the students wear-no exceptions. A school dress "code" is a non issue in
these schools. Uniforms are much less expensive because the kids don't have
to shop for the newest styles each year. And no kid needs to feel like a jerk
because he can't afford the fancy clothes the other kids are wearing. Plus,
there are no "modesty" issues. I'd love to see this happen
especially in Utah where this issue comes up so frequently.
So in just a short time, the High School has taught all its students that
censorship of the press is to be condoned. What does this teach the same
students about the rest of the laws of the land? I for I am on the side of the
upset students. Only is an LDS town like Heber would this happen. Try doing it
in San Fransico or New York, and see what the press would say.
@Jeanie "I don't think simple modesty at school is that
complex of an issue."I have looked at the few pictures available
in the media and I'm sorry but I can't find a single
"immodest" photo in the batch. The school district has chosen to impose
it's prudish version of "modesty" on a select number of female
students and has succeeded only in bringing embarrassment and ridicule on the
district and its schools. If I were a parent of one of these singled out
students I would be raising a serious stink with district officials and
demanding an immediate refund and apology from them.
Brave Sir Robin, I have no argument with your point. I wish the schools
in our area would enforce their dress codes better through the year as well.
However, being a public school teacher, and being married to one, I do
understand that it is difficult to do consistently. With a high school student
population that vastly outnumbers administration and faculty it is hard to
My daughter had an end of year swim party put on by her school. The School
informed parents with only a couple day's warning that were required to
wear a one piece swim suit so that their belly button would be covered. My
daughter had to go out last minute with her mother and spend money trying to
find a one piece when she already had two very modest two piece suites
available. Why is my daughter punished for the perceived sexual deviancy that
the school district must believe will ensue with the showing of a belly button?
Why is a females belly button considered a sexually attractive feature in need
of covering while the same does not hold true for a males belly button? Why are
our girls forced to cover features as to not entice the boys while the boys are
free to show it all? Not that most boys would wear one but a speedo would have
been appropriate attire. How ridiculous are we as a society with some of the
purely sexist rules we continue to enforce on a daily basis?
You enforce the policy at the time you take the pictures or when they are
submitted for the yearbook. You don't edit photos without permission and
randomly.And, oh yeah, bear arms are probably okay. Even for
This is a good decision on their part. However, in addition to
fixing the yearbook they should really have enforced the dress standards
throughout the school year. Moreover, the revised photos should not
have been so fuzzed up.
I don't see how shoulders are controversial. They should have left the
@jeanie"What's so bad about just following the dress code?
Everyone knew it. Good for the school for enforcing it."I agree,
but if you're going to enforce the dress code, then enforce the dress code.
Why are these students in violation of the dress code even at school long
enough to get their yearbook photos taken? Shouldn't they have been sent
home to change long before getting their pictures taken?If the
school wants to enforce the dress code, they should enforce it proactively
rather than retroactively altering photos after the fact.
@Liberal Ted"If nothing else, they're helping these students from
being embarrassed in the future when the media, police, employers, children etc
look at these pictures."Except that those original pictures
aren't embarrassing. Now what is embarrassing is having your school shame
you by poorly editing your photo because they deemed your attire improper.
Once again, another Utah story which will be blasted on late-night TV and
featured in every morning radio show's "news of the wierd" segment.
Nothing wrong with having a dress code, but exposed shoulders are now immodest
in a secular school?
Why weren't the photo's policed before they were taken? You mean to
tell me that a member of the faculty could not be present to send them home
before the pictures were taken? The edits look terrible, it could
have been avoided with the proper administration of the rules.
Oh, and then there are the "burqa" comments. Too funny. I don't
think simple modesty at school is that complex of an issue.
This is ridiculous. I wonder if they are also editing boys' pictures as
well. Probably not. @Say No to BOKind of like everyone likes to play
the victim card over here.
Yes, I read through many of those comments too. It was entertaining. A lot of
emoted comments about rights and individuality and people pushing their religion
on others and shaming girls. Oh brother! What's so bad about just following
the dress code? Everyone knew it. Good for the school for enforcing it.
I see nothing wrong with a school having dress standards and enforcing them. If
the photos were taken at the school, why were the standards not enforced prior
to the photo shoot? I can also understand having the photos edited to bring the
images into standards. What I would be especially disappointed with is letting
some amateur photo-shopper that doesn't know how to maintain photo quality
hack away and butcher the photos prior to submission to the yearbook. If the
touched up photo is representative of what's in the yearbook... get a
The Trib commenters seem to have a severe case of paranoia. Everything that
happens in their life that they perceive as being "bad" is only because
of the "boogeyman" LDS church. For such a "progressive"
audience of "intellectual thinkers" they seem to be going through a
drought of comparing facts rather than paranoid opinions.With that
said. If the school had the sign up and explained to the students the dress
code. Then the only error was not applying it consistently when the editing was
done.If nothing else, they're helping these students from being
embarrassed in the future when the media, police, employers, children etc look
at these pictures.I suppose we can say the same thing about Marines
and Military when their pictures are taken. All in modest uniforms. No smiles.
Tattoos covered. You don't hear about them crying about their expression
being covered up.If they feel that it's that important, then
they can take a pic of themselves and insert it in their yearbook.Iguarantee in a year, you'll never look through it again until your child
pulls it out. Sees you and laughs. Then ask why they can't get tattoo....
The edited photo is more blurry. I guess that is part of the penalty?
Iran must be sharing their photoshop secrets (they'd edited Michelle
Obama's clothing before for one).
Why stop with editing the neckline and the sleeves? Just superimpose a burqa
over all the girls in the yearbook.
Over at the other newspaper in town there is a feeding frenzy in the comments
section.Posters there allege that there is a secret plot by the LDS Church
to impose outdated modesty standards in the public schools.Then again, the
LDS Church gets blamed for just about everything over there.