Wasatch School District defends decision to edit yearbook photos

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Nov. 3, 2014 10:24 p.m.

    They did something foolish that is now in the world and can't be taken back. What else can they do but defend it?

  • I know it. I Live it. I Love it. Provo, UT
    Nov. 2, 2014 1:13 a.m.

    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.

  • I know it. I Live it. I Love it. Provo, UT
    Nov. 1, 2014 7:25 p.m.


    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.

  • JonathanPDX Portland, Oregon
    June 10, 2014 6:11 p.m.

    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.

  • MurrayGuy Murray, UT
    June 3, 2014 2:46 p.m.

    @ 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.

  • K Mchenry, IL
    June 1, 2014 12:30 a.m.

    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.

  • TheOneandOnlySallyOMalleyIm50 United Kingdom, 00
    May 31, 2014 9:00 a.m.

    @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!

  • Sequoya Stafford, VA
    May 31, 2014 8:08 a.m.

    "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!!)

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    May 31, 2014 7:41 a.m.

    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 places.

  • FanOfTheSith Vernal, UT
    May 31, 2014 6:52 a.m.

    “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 Shoemaker

    That is they key element, lack of consistency in enforcing it.

  • greatbam22 andrews afb, MD
    May 30, 2014 8:11 p.m.

    @ 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?

  • greatbam22 andrews afb, MD
    May 30, 2014 8:01 p.m.

    @ Brave Sir Robin

    Because 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?

  • Strider303 Salt Lake City, UT
    May 30, 2014 3:56 p.m.

    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.

  • Kinderly Riverdale, MD
    May 30, 2014 1:01 p.m.

    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.

  • get her done Bountiful, UT
    May 30, 2014 12:31 p.m.

    Trying to enforce dress standards on others is not free agency.

  • uteman1011 South Jordan, UT
    May 30, 2014 12:27 p.m.

    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.

  • FelisConcolor North Salt Lake, UT
    May 30, 2014 12:19 p.m.

    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.

  • uteman1011 South Jordan, UT
    May 30, 2014 12:03 p.m.

    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.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    May 30, 2014 11:54 a.m.

    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 Highschool.

  • ProctorMS Eagle Mountain, UT
    May 30, 2014 11:17 a.m.

    I would have been more annoyed that my photo was blurry,........

  • Janet Ontario, OR
    May 30, 2014 11:14 a.m.

    @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.

  • LivinLarge Bountiful, UT
    May 30, 2014 10:51 a.m.

    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.

  • So-CalAggie Park City, Ut
    May 30, 2014 10:40 a.m.

    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!

  • docport1 ,
    May 30, 2014 10:08 a.m.

    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?

  • lixircat Indianapolis, IN
    May 30, 2014 10:06 a.m.

    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.

  • Aggie253 Logan, UT
    May 30, 2014 10:01 a.m.


    "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.

  • gittalopctbi Glendale, AZ
    May 30, 2014 9:51 a.m.

    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.

  • Aggie238 Logan, UT
    May 30, 2014 9:46 a.m.

    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.

  • arand Huntsville, u
    May 30, 2014 9:44 a.m.

    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.

  • Helmigr Brighton, CO
    May 30, 2014 9:38 a.m.

    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.

  • JimDavidson Port Richey, FL
    May 30, 2014 9:21 a.m.

    @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.

  • The Rock Federal Way, WA
    May 30, 2014 9:16 a.m.

    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 book.

  • xert Santa Monica, CA
    May 30, 2014 9:12 a.m.

    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?

  • activ2004 Clearfield, UT
    May 30, 2014 8:18 a.m.

    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.

  • JBQ Saint Louis, MO
    May 30, 2014 8:16 a.m.

    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.

  • Xplor Mesquite, NV
    May 30, 2014 8:16 a.m.

    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?

  • a bit of reality Shawnee Mission, KS
    May 30, 2014 7:48 a.m.

    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!

  • hockeymom Highland, UT
    May 30, 2014 7:46 a.m.

    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 yearbook
    2. Student/parent pay for a re-take
    3. Fee assessed for photo editing

    Or 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 avoided.

  • NedGrimley Brigham City, UT
    May 30, 2014 7:35 a.m.

    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.

  • Dante Salt Lake City, UT
    May 30, 2014 7:09 a.m.

    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.

  • Jefferson, Thomas Bluffdale, UT
    May 30, 2014 7:03 a.m.

    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.

  • JimDavidson Port Richey, FL
    May 30, 2014 6:38 a.m.

    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.

  • LOU Montana Pueblo, CO
    May 30, 2014 6:29 a.m.

    Typical Utah......but behind close doors..

  • gotold Ivins, UT
    May 30, 2014 6:28 a.m.

    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.

  • PurpleUnicorn New Zealand, 00
    May 30, 2014 6:17 a.m.

    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.

  • Bill Freeze Lindon, UT
    May 30, 2014 5:52 a.m.

    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!

  • newsjunkie13 Rochester, NY
    May 30, 2014 5:51 a.m.

    It is ironic that such a right wing state like Utah would deny those girls the right to "bare arms"

  • cambodia girl Phnom Penh, Cambodia
    May 30, 2014 5:32 a.m.

    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.

  • RustedHalo Australia, 00
    May 30, 2014 4:36 a.m.

    Wonder how many males had their photographs edited? Not important. Got to keep them thar women pushed down where they belong eh?

  • agb Layton, UT
    May 30, 2014 4:32 a.m.


    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.

  • Two For Flinching Salt Lake City, UT
    May 30, 2014 2:34 a.m.

    It's hilarious that so many people are afraid and/or ashamed of the human body.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    May 30, 2014 12:29 a.m.

    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.

  • M0001 HEBER CITY, UT
    May 30, 2014 12:14 a.m.

    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.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    May 29, 2014 11:12 p.m.

    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.

  • mountainmusicmom Heber, UT
    May 29, 2014 10:57 p.m.

    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?!!!

  • Holly Mullen Salt Lake City, UT
    May 29, 2014 10:51 p.m.

    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.

  • dubdub Lindon, UT
    May 29, 2014 10:14 p.m.

    did they edit the team pictures for the Girls basketball team? Track team? Swim team? Tennis? and of course cheerleaders.

  • Tekakaromatagi Dammam, Saudi Arabia
    May 29, 2014 9:30 p.m.

    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 very far.

  • President Camacho SLC, UT
    May 29, 2014 9:25 p.m.

    They 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 Shoemaker.

  • Laura Bilington Maple Valley, WA
    May 29, 2014 9:03 p.m.

    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.

  • djk blue springs, MO
    May 29, 2014 8:15 p.m.

    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 !

  • NeilT Clearfield, UT
    May 29, 2014 7:58 p.m.

    I thought it was illegal for a minor to have a tattoo. Just a thought.

  • Why O Why Layton, UT
    May 29, 2014 7:40 p.m.

    @ TheOcean


  • Shaking my head Layton, UT
    May 29, 2014 7:37 p.m.

    "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

  • oldcougar Orem, UT
    May 29, 2014 6:59 p.m.

    The kids knew about the dress code...they chose not to follow it, their photos were edited. Simple, fair, nothing more to discuss.

  • Big_Bird West Jordan, UT
    May 29, 2014 6:59 p.m.

    Cute girl! The "edited" photo is much nicer.... assuming it isn't really blurry.

  • Laura Bilington Maple Valley, WA
    May 29, 2014 6:34 p.m.

    TandJ---Your words puzzle me. Please describe what a "mature" tattoo (for a sophomore) would look like?

    May 29, 2014 5:59 p.m.

    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.

  • dlw7 LOGAN, UT
    May 29, 2014 5:53 p.m.

    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.

  • TandJ LaVerkin, Utah
    May 29, 2014 5:43 p.m.

    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?

  • O'really Idaho Falls, ID
    May 29, 2014 5:32 p.m.

    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.

  • jeanie orem, UT
    May 29, 2014 5:16 p.m.


    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.

  • grandmagreat Lake Havasu City, AZ
    May 29, 2014 5:16 p.m.

    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.

  • Oblio Salt Lake City, UT
    May 29, 2014 5:10 p.m.

    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.

  • BYR West Bountiful, UT
    May 29, 2014 5:06 p.m.

    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.

    May 29, 2014 5:01 p.m.

    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.

  • CDL Los Angeles, CA
    May 29, 2014 4:53 p.m.

    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?

  • Curmudgeon Salt Lake City, UT
    May 29, 2014 4:50 p.m.

    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.

  • JSB Sugar City, ID
    May 29, 2014 4:43 p.m.

    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.

  • pharmacist South Jordan, UT
    May 29, 2014 4:41 p.m.

    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.

  • my_two_cents_worth university place, WA
    May 29, 2014 4:37 p.m.


    "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.

  • jeanie orem, UT
    May 29, 2014 4:22 p.m.

    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 police everyone.

  • Hunt Spanish Fork, UT
    May 29, 2014 4:12 p.m.

    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?

  • USAlover Salt Lake City, UT
    May 29, 2014 4:05 p.m.

    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 Utah....

  • Overdubbed San Diego, CA
    May 29, 2014 3:55 p.m.

    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.

  • truth in all its forms henderson, NV
    May 29, 2014 3:48 p.m.

    I don't see how shoulders are controversial. They should have left the photos unaltered.

  • Brave Sir Robin San Diego, CA
    May 29, 2014 3:34 p.m.


    "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.

  • Frozen Fractals Salt Lake City, UT
    May 29, 2014 3:22 p.m.

    @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.

  • Well.ok Lehi, UT
    May 29, 2014 3:07 p.m.

    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?

  • prelax Murray, UT
    May 29, 2014 3:05 p.m.

    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.

  • jeanie orem, UT
    May 29, 2014 3:01 p.m.

    Oh, and then there are the "burqa" comments. Too funny. I don't think simple modesty at school is that complex of an issue.

  • chicagoborn Salt Lake City, UT
    May 29, 2014 3:01 p.m.

    This is ridiculous. I wonder if they are also editing boys' pictures as well. Probably not.
    @Say No to BO
    Kind of like everyone likes to play the victim card over here.

  • jeanie orem, UT
    May 29, 2014 2:58 p.m.

    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.

  • shadow01 Edwardsville, IL
    May 29, 2014 2:55 p.m.

    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 refund.

  • Liberal Ted Salt Lake City, UT
    May 29, 2014 2:55 p.m.

    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....

  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    May 29, 2014 2:49 p.m.

    The edited photo is more blurry. I guess that is part of the penalty?

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    May 29, 2014 2:43 p.m.

    Iran must be sharing their photoshop secrets (they'd edited Michelle Obama's clothing before for one).

  • agb Layton, UT
    May 29, 2014 2:41 p.m.

    Why stop with editing the neckline and the sleeves? Just superimpose a burqa over all the girls in the yearbook.

  • Say No to BO Mapleton, UT
    May 29, 2014 2:32 p.m.

    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.