Reply
Highlighted
Honored Contributor
Posts: 28,017
Registered: ‎03-12-2010

Re: Utah Elementary Valentines Dance/Mandatory Consent?

That's an easy one.  I'd tell my kid he/she wasn't going.  It's sending out the wrong signal in that you aren't supposed to say no.

 

I thought one thing that USED to make this country so great was that we could voice our opinion (within reason).

 

A parent is supposed to teach their child how to be kind and considerate.  That does not mean 'grin and bare it'.  It means being able to say, "No thank you".

 

It's up to the parents to complain about it if they don't like it (I wouldn't like it).

 

Sign of the times...period.  I'm so glad I'm 71 years old.  It's really, really difficult raising children today.  

 

I know, I have 7 grandchildren (ages 16 - 6), several teenagers.  I hear all about it from both sides.

 

Neither one of my daughters work.  Being their mom these days is a full time job.  I don't know how working mother's do it and keep their brain in tact.

Highlighted
Respected Contributor
Posts: 2,863
Registered: ‎04-04-2015

Re: Utah Elementary Valentines Dance/Mandatory Consent?


@NYC Susanwrote:

@Isobel Archerwrote:

OK my mistake.  I thought those concerned with girls being able to "say no to boys" had to do with protecting them from unwanted sexual advances.

 

Sorry.  So instead it's really about being able to say no to offensive people - and possibly also to touch (totally unrelated to sex).

 

So then should girls be able to say no to sports in gym - could be plenty of unwanted touching there.  How about saying no to being on a particular team - where there might be an "offensive person" 

 

If it's not just about touch - how about saying no to being paired with an "offensive person" in a lab or on a study project team.

 

And why just girls (again I has mistakenly thought this was about their potential for sexual victimizing but since it clearly is not) - what about boys being able to say no to associating with "offensive people?"

 

 


No, it's not about being allowed to say no to offensive people.  

 

It's about being forced to say yes to males simply because they're male.  It's about women being equal to men, and not subservient.  No female should ever be forced to say yes to a male, and it's never too soon for young girls to know that.  It doesn't matter what the male is asking.  He doesn't get to take away a woman's free will simply because he's male.

 

Both boys and girls need to know that.


Wow the objections to this policy are all over the place.  First it was unwanted touching.

 

Then it was - as you note about the concern that girls would learn that boys abusing them - even by simply asking them to dance - was acceptable and we can't have that.  Simply agreeing to dance with  a boy means that boys are superior and anything they ever ask must be granted - apparently leading to furtherance of rape culture or something.

 

Then - oh no it has absolutely nothing to do with sex or abuse, it's about not having the ability to refuse to dance with someone who offends you - and there was comment about the school even suggesting (in order to appease this concern) that girls could make a "list" of those potential offenders.

 

Again, I ask - just where do we draw these lines - over being "forced" to accede to requests (do students now get to refuse assigned  lab partners, or study teams, participation in sports).  I mean girls should never apparently have to do anything they don't want to - particularly with anyone they don't want to or who knows what will happen.

 

 

Highlighted
Honored Contributor
Posts: 18,752
Registered: ‎03-09-2010

Re: Utah Elementary Valentines Dance/Mandatory Consent?

@Isobel Archer

 

You aren't the only person who believes women should let men make the decisions and tell women what to do.

 

No one is stopping you from living that way, others choose to make their own path.

Highlighted
Respected Contributor
Posts: 2,863
Registered: ‎04-04-2015

Re: Utah Elementary Valentines Dance/Mandatory Consent?


@Noel7wrote:

@Isobel Archer

 

You aren't the only person who believes women should let men make the decisions and tell women what to do.

 

No one is stopping you from living that way, others choose to make their own path.


  Yes I suppose going to a ballroom dance (back when I was still doing that) and actually dancing with whoever asked me - and even asking others to dance - really brands me as someone who "lets men make decisions and tell me what to do."

 

So sad that I never learned how to stand up for myself I guess. 

Highlighted
Honored Contributor
Posts: 18,752
Registered: ‎03-09-2010

Re: Utah Elementary Valentines Dance/Mandatory Consent?

[ Edited ]

@Isobel Archerwrote:

@Noel7wrote:

@Isobel Archer

 

You aren't the only person who believes women should let men make the decisions and tell women what to do.

 

No one is stopping you from living that way, others choose to make their own path.


  Yes I suppose going to a ballroom dance (back when I was still doing that) and actually dancing with whoever asked me - and even asking others to dance - really brands me as someone who "lets men make decisions and tell me what to do."

 

So sad that I never learned how to stand up for myself I guess. 


 

It was never about ballroom dancing @Isobel Archer  You keep mentioning that but it has nothing to do with the issue. It's a nice hobby for mature adults but this is about children.

Highlighted
Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 6,745
Registered: ‎03-13-2010

Re: Utah Elementary Valentines Dance/Mandatory Consent?


@Isobel Archerwrote:

@NYC Susanwrote:

@Isobel Archerwrote:

OK my mistake.  I thought those concerned with girls being able to "say no to boys" had to do with protecting them from unwanted sexual advances.

 

Sorry.  So instead it's really about being able to say no to offensive people - and possibly also to touch (totally unrelated to sex).

 

So then should girls be able to say no to sports in gym - could be plenty of unwanted touching there.  How about saying no to being on a particular team - where there might be an "offensive person" 

 

If it's not just about touch - how about saying no to being paired with an "offensive person" in a lab or on a study project team.

 

And why just girls (again I has mistakenly thought this was about their potential for sexual victimizing but since it clearly is not) - what about boys being able to say no to associating with "offensive people?"

 

 


No, it's not about being allowed to say no to offensive people.  

 

It's about being forced to say yes to males simply because they're male.  It's about women being equal to men, and not subservient.  No female should ever be forced to say yes to a male, and it's never too soon for young girls to know that.  It doesn't matter what the male is asking.  He doesn't get to take away a woman's free will simply because he's male.

 

Both boys and girls need to know that.


Wow the objections to this policy are all over the place.  First it was unwanted touching.

 

Then it was - as you note about the concern that girls would learn that boys abusing them - even by simply asking them to dance - was acceptable and we can't have that.  Simply agreeing to dance with  a boy means that boys are superior and anything they ever ask must be granted - apparently leading to furtherance of rape culture or something.

 

Then - oh no it has absolutely nothing to do with sex or abuse, it's about not having the ability to refuse to dance with someone who offends you - and there was comment about the school even suggesting (in order to appease this concern) that girls could make a "list" of those potential offenders.

 

Again, I ask - just where do we draw these lines - over being "forced" to accede to requests (do students now get to refuse assigned  lab partners, or study teams, participation in sports).  I mean girls should never apparently have to do anything they don't want to - particularly with anyone they don't want to or who knows what will happen.

 

 


That's not the point at all, and I don't think I've seen anyone here say that.

 

It's about girls (and boys) being taught at an early age that females do not have to do whatever males want.  It's okay to say no.  It's really as simple as that.

 

This is about setting a precedent that covers a whole lot of things in addition to touching.  Men are not superior to women, although generations were brought up to believe that they are.  No one should be teaching girls that they HAVE TO say yes to a boy whether it's dancing, s*x, touching, or anything else.  Being male is not a superpower that empowers them to have women automatically do their bidding.  That kind of thinking is unfortunately prevalent and quite dangerous.

 

Boys need to learn this too, so we don't end up with yet another generation filled with people who believe that women should be subservient.  Male/female relationships are partnerships, and females of all ages have the right to say, "No thank you".  A school that forces girls to say yes to boys sends the completely wrong message.

 

I think a lot of posters here have explained this very well.  It seems to be a pretty basic concept to me.

 

 

 

Highlighted
Valued Contributor
Posts: 889
Registered: ‎03-09-2010

Re: Utah Elementary Valentines Dance/Mandatory Consent?

First or all ridiculous rule.   Secondly can't believe this story made it to CNN.    Lastly why do elementary children even need to have dances..  

Highlighted
Respected Contributor
Posts: 2,863
Registered: ‎04-04-2015

Re: Utah Elementary Valentines Dance/Mandatory Consent?

[ Edited ]

@Junebug54wrote:

First or all ridiculous rule.   Secondly can't believe this story made it to CNN.    Lastly why do elementary children even need to have dances..  


As to CNN et. al. it feeds into the "Me Too" narrative.  An elementary school girl needs to learn that she does NOT have to submit to the abusive, bulliyng, coercive request of an elementary school boy to dance with him. 

 

Now given that, it is a wonder that they are allowing the dance at all - since it will be so upsetting for girls to potentially be asked to dance by someone they then have to refuse.  But apparently it will build their character.

Highlighted
Trusted Contributor
Posts: 1,335
Registered: ‎08-05-2011

Re: Utah Elementary Valentines Dance/Mandatory Consent?

I really have little to add. So much has been covered here.

I think it is healthy for girls to learn to be able to say no for her own reason and for boys to learn to respect a girl when she says no and that no is a complete sentence. ( My husband would always tell our girls that)  When they are young is when they have to learn.

As we've seen, too many men did not learn that when young and many are not convinced of it even today yet.

I'm 73 and we pretty much were taught if you turned someone down for a dance the polite thing was to not say yes if another boy asked you right after. You could say not now but I hope you'll ask me again.

Our grandchildren are just starting school so we'll be learning a lot.

 

Highlighted
Respected Contributor
Posts: 3,120
Registered: ‎04-17-2015

Re: Utah Elementary Valentines Dance/Mandatory Consent?


@Isobel Archerwrote:

@NYC Susanwrote:

@Isobel Archerwrote:

OK my mistake.  I thought those concerned with girls being able to "say no to boys" had to do with protecting them from unwanted sexual advances.

 

Sorry.  So instead it's really about being able to say no to offensive people - and possibly also to touch (totally unrelated to sex).

 

So then should girls be able to say no to sports in gym - could be plenty of unwanted touching there.  How about saying no to being on a particular team - where there might be an "offensive person" 

 

If it's not just about touch - how about saying no to being paired with an "offensive person" in a lab or on a study project team.

 

And why just girls (again I has mistakenly thought this was about their potential for sexual victimizing but since it clearly is not) - what about boys being able to say no to associating with "offensive people?"

 

 


No, it's not about being allowed to say no to offensive people.  

 

It's about being forced to say yes to males simply because they're male.  It's about women being equal to men, and not subservient.  No female should ever be forced to say yes to a male, and it's never too soon for young girls to know that.  It doesn't matter what the male is asking.  He doesn't get to take away a woman's free will simply because he's male.

 

Both boys and girls need to know that.


Wow the objections to this policy are all over the place.  First it was unwanted touching.

 

Then it was - as you note about the concern that girls would learn that boys abusing them - even by simply asking them to dance - was acceptable and we can't have that.  Simply agreeing to dance with  a boy means that boys are superior and anything they ever ask must be granted - apparently leading to furtherance of rape culture or something.

 

Then - oh no it has absolutely nothing to do with sex or abuse, it's about not having the ability to refuse to dance with someone who offends you - and there was comment about the school even suggesting (in order to appease this concern) that girls could make a "list" of those potential offenders.

 

Again, I ask - just where do we draw these lines - over being "forced" to accede to requests (do students now get to refuse assigned  lab partners, or study teams, participation in sports).  I mean girls should never apparently have to do anything they don't want to - particularly with anyone they don't want to or who knows what will happen.

 

 


Apples and oranges. There is a big difference between a dance, which is social... and voluntary, and students in an academic situation where both boys and girls will be assigned to each other (without a social component) and without one child being required to accept the invitation of another child.