Prom Fashion or Faux Pas?
Marche Taylor showed up at her Madison High School prom in Houston earlier this month wearing a barely-there dress. Not just semi-topless. Not just backless. But truly more skin than fabric.
The 17-year-old told KHOU-TV, "I actually liked the dress, everybody else liked the dress." But not quite everyone. A school official told Taylor the dress violated the school dress code. A confrontation between the official and Taylor resulted in Taylor getting handcuffed and led away from the prom. And Taylor ended up on television.
And that's where the story could end. Except, mom.logic has kept it going this week with a follow-up interview with Taylor. Taylor says that no, mom and dad didn't see the dress. She doesn't live with them. Her grandmother did see her get dressed and thought she looked "pretty." As for lessons, "I learned when it has something to do with the school, you shouldn't dress like that."
What would you say to your daughter if she tried to wear a dress like this in public? And is a confrontation over a skimpy dress worth handcuffs?
By Stacey Garfinkle |
May 21, 2008; 7:00 AM ET
| Category:
Teens
Previous: Batter Up! |
Next: Parent Punishment?
Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 7:13 AM
Of course it is not worth being led away in hand cuffs. Kids need to learn that there are dress codes in all sorts of places (resturants, hotels, jobs, stores, and schools). It is never to early to learn that.
There is probably nothing wrong with an adult women wearing that at a night club but the HS prom is not the place. What is wrong with this grandmother?
Posted by: foamgnome | May 21, 2008 7:41 AM
She wasn't led away in handcuffs because of the dress but because of the way she mouthed off to the authorities. Don't dramatize this anymore than it already has been. If anyone watched the interview, this girl clearly has not been well raised. The dress was barely fit for street walkers let alone a prom.
Posted by: 21117 | May 21, 2008 7:50 AM
The dress didn't lead to the handcuffs - the confrontation did. This girl should know that at school events, school administrators have the last word. Period. Maybe they should have handled it better, but a dress like that -- any girl would know it would be talked about, at the very least.
I wonder if the school made it clear re: dress code beforehand. For example, saying that if a dress was found to be inappropriate, the student would be turned away. (this is what they did at the high school where I taught).
Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 7:50 AM
And we wonder why our culture often depicts/treats women as sex objects? Young women need to know their value should not depend on how they look to men but how they relate to everyone. Heck, we all need to know that. I work with survivors of sexual assault so I know (and believe) that no one deserves to be sexually assaulted or abused no matter how they dress. That's a given. But we do send mixed messages into the world when we dress in a way that is meant to flaunt our bodies and our sex appeal. When we do that, what is our message?
Posted by: Vienna | May 21, 2008 7:54 AM
And the Oscar for the WaPo Nitwit Topic of the Year goes to:
Gasp: It's a Tie!!
The winners are:
Prom Fashion or Faux Pas?
Award accepted by Spacey Stacey
What Are You Doing May 30th? (Sex and The City Premier)
Award accepted by She Who Lives in a 12+ Room Mansion with a Husband Who Makes Buckets of $$$ Redistributing Wealth from one Rich Bunch to Another Rich Bunch
Posted by: Jake | May 21, 2008 7:55 AM
Yes, the dress is skimpy and no, I wouldn't let my daughter wear a dress like that. However, how is treating the girl like a criminal and giving her 15 minutes of fame going to teach her anything?
Posted by: Ishgebibble | May 21, 2008 7:59 AM
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 8:04 AM
"What would you say to your daughter if she tried to wear a dress like this in public?"
Easy answer. "No."
"And is a confrontation over a skimpy dress worth handcuffs?" Dumb question, Stacey. The following post has it right. "The dress didn't lead to the handcuffs - the confrontation did." Correct!
Posted by: colton | May 21, 2008 8:05 AM
"What would you say to your daughter if she tried to wear a dress like this in public?"
"No daughter of mine is going to walk the streets looking like a hooker. You're better than that."
Posted by: Laura | May 21, 2008 8:10 AM
Where do you get a dress like that? Seriously. Who thinks clothes like that are normal, outside of the Hollywood deserted island movies?
Posted by: md | May 21, 2008 8:11 AM
Ghetto
Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 8:15 AM
Let's see now quote of the moment:
"Ghetto..." good kinda sums up the sense of entitlement you have now doesn't it? I bet your daughter wears a dress made of stars and bars with a picture of Jefferson Davis. Would you wear a sheets and hood?
"No daughter of mine is..." Did you take your daughter to the purity ball in CO Springs last week? Of course when ends up on girls gone wild that will be fine. Just a stage. Feel taller and better when you call someone else a hooker?
"Trashy girl trashy parents..." Feeling proud of your self? Happy you can say that about someone else from your gated community? What's it like being perfect? Waiting to be lead to the cross? If you knew she wasn't a virgin would you stone her?
Posted by: BongBoy | May 21, 2008 8:44 AM
That poor girl. how desperately must you crave male attention to want to dress like that? how little must you respect yourself? obviously the bad decisions didn't start with the dress but a long time before that. It mentioned that she lived with her grandma. I can't imagine a dad allowing his daughter to go out like that, even if the mom thought it was okay.
Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 8:51 AM
I'd hope my theoretical daughter wasn't interested in wearing something like that after being brought up in my home.
And I would certainly voice my opinion about it. And I would voice the reality that although nothing would justify being harassed or raped, that some men might take such an article of clothing as license to do so. But I would also have to reassure her that even if she chose to wear it she wouldn't 'deserve' anything.
THEN I guess - at 15, if she were dead set on wearing something like that, I think I would let her experience the consequences of it from school officials. I'd rather she learn it in high school than by not getting jobs at 25 long after she was out from under my control.
And frankly I think a 15 year old should be starting to make her own decisions about some of these things so that she is ready at 18 or 19 to make more serious ones.
Posted by: Shandra | May 21, 2008 8:54 AM
I would not want my daughter wearing a dress like that to the prom or really at any other time in her life. I hope she will never even think to purchase a dress like that. On the handcuffs, even though the confrontation led to them, I suspect they could have gotten her to leave the prom without them and it has just led to overdramatizing the event. I'm sure she's not the first girl to show up at prom inappropriately dressed. Getting all of this media attention (positive and negative - agree with Bongboy that "trashy" and "ghetto" comments are really out of line) is not helping her or other young girls following the story.
Posted by: Pt Fed Mof2 | May 21, 2008 8:57 AM
"I can't imagine a dad allowing his daughter to go out like that, even if the mom thought it was okay"
Right. Dads never make bad choices.
Posted by: To the nitwit | May 21, 2008 9:01 AM
Agree that I wouldn't want any (future) daughter of mine to wear a dress like that. But isn't the real issue teaching positive self-image to girls (and boys)? We live a hyper-sexualized society and lacking positive messages and role models, girls derive self-confidence from the attention they receive wearing skimpy clothes. I am a child of the early 90's when we wore more clothes, not less in HS (anyone else remember layering button down over a t-shirt?!?) - I feel bad for girls these days.
Posted by: Product of a Working Mother | May 21, 2008 9:09 AM
Jake, I disagree. This is a reasonable topic. The on balance topic today is by far the winner for the most moronic blog topic.
Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 9:23 AM
"Jake, I disagree. This is a reasonable topic. The on balance topic today is by far the winner for the most moronic blog topic."
The votes have been tabulated.
Posted by: Jake | May 21, 2008 9:26 AM
Pt Fed Mof2
"agree with Bongboy that "trashy" and "ghetto" comments are really out of line) is not helping her or other young girls following the story
Are "young girls" the target audience of the OP?
Most of the posters are middle aged....
Posted by: Huh? | May 21, 2008 9:30 AM
"The on balance topic today is by far the winner for the most moronic blog topic"
Yup. And the most moronic comment so far is by cal girl:
"friendships and marriages are different. ... but the reality is that friends can walk out on you for any reason and there is nothing you can do. "
Right. Spouses never, never, ever walk out.
Posted by: There are no guarantees in life | May 21, 2008 9:58 AM
"What is wrong with this grandmother?"
i went blind 18 years ago. I've never seen a girl wear a sports bra and expose her thong underwear while walking her dog through the neighborhood. As I understand, nowadays it's a pretty common sight. I'm not the father of a 17 year old yet, (just a few more months though), but I can definately understand that a person from a generation before me can get confused by the standards of decency acceptable for today teenagers.
What I can't understand though, is why the school official didn't just hand the girl a condom, tell her to protect herself, and send her on her merry way. Or what, handing out condoms to teenagers is only appropriate in the classroom, not during prom night?
Posted by: DandyLion | May 21, 2008 10:06 AM
Cute girl, obviously she can wear whatever she wants. It doesn't look like craving male attention, more like showing off. On the beach nobody would bat an eye, so it's only a context and an overzealous official that did her in. She, in fact, had an "emergency" train attached to her dress, which she offered to apply as a shawl. Then (see the video) things got more interesting: that official (or sponsor, in another version) accused her in not wearing undergarments. If it was about panties, we got ourselves school officials with X-Ray vision. If it's about bra (true!) half of female prom goers would be discqualified.
The girl has spirit. I'm sure this exposure will benefit her. Actually, I'm thinking of calling a friend of mine who is a dean of admissions in a small but edgy college, she might just get a free ride, watch for updates!
Posted by: Nine | May 21, 2008 10:08 AM
Shandra-The girl is 17. Not 15.
I wonder if people would feel differently if the girl was 18. Many seniors are 18 by the time their prom rolls around.
Minus the train, I actually really LIKED the girl's prom dress. To me, it doesn't look like something a hooker would wear. Rather what you see on the red carpet worn by female A-list celebrities. And it helps that she has the body to wear it.
Posted by: Soguns1 | May 21, 2008 10:11 AM
I just checked MomLogic interview. She actually designed that dress (and mentioned that it "did not turned out exactly" as she drew it. It was not bought at some hooker supply store. You know how kids got attached to their creations and don't see any flaws? Don't you have some hideous fingerpaint or clay art on display:)?
Posted by: Nine | May 21, 2008 10:18 AM
First off, to those who don't like the blog topics, click elsewhere. Easy.
Re: the use of "trashy" . . . I'm not the one who used the term originally but that's what she looks like (even if that is not what she is). Not sure what "ghetto" implies.
My girl will NOT be allowed out of the house in a dress like this for a number of reasons, not the least of which is her own safety. Unfortunately, I have sad experiences with MUCH older men acting inappropriately around me and my friends when we were in HS. And, we did not dress anywhere near this (I was quite covered in lace and bows at my prom).
I am not sure if this young lady suffers from a need for attention or is acting out. Hopefully, in either case, this is a product of her youth and she will appreciate appropriate dress and behavior as she gets older.
Posted by: Jen | May 21, 2008 10:44 AM
I understand that I'm probably in the minority here, but I'm really happy she was handcuffed because it was the kind of extreme action that might try to shake some sense into her that what she was doing was borderline criminal. I've heard lots of rumors that she was handcuffed because she was unruly since they wouldn't let her into the prom, but overall it's just rumors. There is a difference between outfits that are in bad taste and indecent exposure, there are not-so-fine lines that are drawn between them. By her own admission she wasn't wearing a bra and frankly, you know, the police did the right thing and I hope the kids in her community realize that.
Posted by: DCer | May 21, 2008 10:44 AM
I wonder if people would feel differently if the girl was 18.
-----
yes, of course, it's a very clear legal dividing line between 17 and 18.
Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 10:47 AM
Jen
"First off, to those who don't like the blog topics, click elsewhere. Easy."
That's not how it works, babe.
Posted by: Huh? | May 21, 2008 10:48 AM
"It was not bought at some hooker supply store."
So why does the fact that she made it herself make the end result more acceptable? DL, to help you envision the dress, imagine a bandolier -- basically, two strips of unlined fabric, 2-3" wide, cris-crossed across the chest, and a short skirt.
Yes, kids show bad judgment sometimes. But that's why parents (or grandparents) and schools need to set minimum standards. I don't think she's a bad kid at all -- but like most kids, she needs guidance. That's what the school did here: the news clip shows a prom attire handout that says max 1" midriff showing, no see-through showing private parts, proper undergarments (which I read as "we shouldn't be able to see your nipples through your dress"). This didn't even come close.
I've seen more fabric on streetwalkers. And if my daughter appeared in something like that, that's exactly what I'd tell her (oh, and BongBoy, saying someone is dressed like a hooker is different from saying she is one -- might want to consider some remedial reading comprehension classes). It's got nothing to do with "chastity balls" (lol). It's about valuing yourself, about not feeling like you have to blatantly display your privates to get attention, about not being willing to sink to the lowest common denominator to make the boys pay attention to you, about having higher standards for yourself (and others), about dressing appropriately for the situation. I'd hope we'd get through all that long before prom night. But if my girl appeared downstairs on prom night looking like that, I'd send her back upstairs to change before I let her out of the house. Because when her normally good judgment fails her, it's still my job to protect her from herself.
Posted by: Laura | May 21, 2008 10:51 AM
Please post Stacey's prom photo.
Posted by: For the Record | May 21, 2008 10:57 AM
I watched the interview with her and with the school administrator. The person from the school showed a flyer that was given in advance to all prom attendees that clearly stated that students not wearing appropriate dress would not be allowed to attend. I can't remember if it spelled out what that might be, but it looked pretty clear to me.
The student complained that she was only given the choice of "going home", I would assume that the first choice she was given was to "go home and change" into something appropriate.
It was clear she knew what the rules were, but being a teenager I understand her pushing at that. However, someone (Grandma?) adult needs to step in and explain what is appropriate and what is not.
I've seen bathing suits with more material than that!
(and for the record, my daughter is not allowed to wear belly shirts, and would only be allowed to wear that dress to the beach or to the pool, not to prom or any school function.)
Posted by: HM | May 21, 2008 11:06 AM
Laura: saying someone is dressed like a hooker and saying they are a hooker is splitting hairs but if you feel better so be it. If I say your 'girl' (as in possession) was BBW is that like saying she is a porker? Language is critical and we say what we mean.
Posted by: BongBoy | May 21, 2008 11:07 AM
The girl made a huge error in judgement, there was a dress code that was distributed and she ignored it. Her parents/guardians did not help her. She went to prom, and the school officials told her no way she was going in. She argued that she wanted her money back. Then, there was back and forth - so much so, that the police were called. And she was still arguing when the police arrived! It seems as though she was causing a scene, and not just 'asking for he money back'.
This girl felt she could do what she wanted, when she wanted and she wasn't going to be stopped. Little to no supervision. She mouthed off, made a scene so much so that police were called.
I feel like this story is not so much about the dress, but he actions afterwards.
Posted by: prarie dog | May 21, 2008 11:13 AM
BongBoy, you seem to have reading comprehension issues. Laura's post was right on the money, IMNSHO.
First, "my" as in possession: yes, "my" children belong to me. That's not to say they don't have rights, privileges and responsibilities; of course they do. The 19 year old is legally an adult and has all the rights and responsibilities associated with that. The 11 year old, less so. The 16 and 17 year olds, in the middle. But that doesn't change the fact that they're "MY" children because I'm their father. (Their mother gets to make similar claims about possession.)
Second, saying someone is dressed like a hooker and saying someone IS a hooker are two dramatically different things, and there's no way it's close to "splitting hairs". One statement asserts that the subject in question trades sexual favors for cash compensation. The other statement asserts that one is dressed in a manner similar to such people, but does not assert that the subject engages in such behavior. Do you get it now?
Posted by: ArmyBrat | May 21, 2008 11:17 AM
DCer-how was the girl's behavior boarderline line criminal? Indecent exposure? If that's the case, near half of all teenage girls would be led away in handcuffs wearing their micro short and skirts and tank tops that expose so much of their shoulders, back, and torso.
You already admit that it's uncertain whether she got unruly.
Anyhow, I don't see how not wearing a bra is inappropiate. During my prom year-7 years ago, lots of female didn't wear one with their dress. Hello-low back and backless dresses.
Posted by: Soguns1 | May 21, 2008 11:19 AM
Just for the record -- for low-back and backless dresses, there are bras and such that are made for such attire. Lots of people choose to forego them, but they do exist (and are at many department stores).
Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 11:24 AM
A few facts about this situation. From http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=6140353
"The young lady came to the prom wearing an inappropriate dress after the students were told what the guidelines were," Houston Independent School District press secretary Terry Abbott said.
Only one inch of an attendants' midsection was permitted to be shown and slits in dresses could be no more than three inches above the knee, according to the Madison High School prom 2008 guidelines obtained by ABCNEWS.com.
Additionally, "see-through fabrics should not be worn in places which reveal private body parts," the document read.
Students planning to attend the function were required to sign the guideline document and return it to their homeroom teacher, school officials told ABCNEWS.com.
If students did not sign the guidelines and adhere to the dress code, they would not be allowed to attend the prom, school officials said.
And, according the prom chaperones, Taylor's dress fit few of the school's guidelines.
Prom Night Ends With Handcuffs
Taylor failed to leave the prom when she was asked to, according to Abbott, and instead began making a scene. Abbott said Taylor began yelling and acting "belligerently."
"After she was told she would not be allowed in unless she went home and changed, [Taylor] became aggressive and belligerent and eventually police were called to escort her from the building," Abbott said. Police hired internally by the school district handcuffed the teen and placed her in a patrol car until she calmed down, Abbott said.
No official arrest was made, according to several local authorities.
_______________________
So:
- she knew in advance what the dress code was
- she deliberately came to the prom in a dress that she knew violated numerous provisions of the dress code
- she was told that if she wanted to attend the prom, she'd have to go home and change
- she became belligerent and argumentative
- she refused to calm down and behave
- the police - hired by the school to help out - came over and escorted her out of the building. She was not arrested, but she was escorted out of the building in handcuffs because she was being so belligerent that police were concerned about what she would do
She wasn't "arrested because of the dress". She wasn't arrested at all. There was no big surprise; she knew what the dress code was; she knew she was violating it; she knew that the consequences would be denial of entrance to the prom; and when all of that happened like it should have she became so belligerent and argumentative that she had to be escorted out of the building by police.
And what's with that "Mom.logic" site? That's got to be the most illogical interview/article I've seen in years. If that were truly representative of the logic of Moms no kids would ever survive to adulthood.
Posted by: m2j5c2 | May 21, 2008 11:25 AM
17, even better. Sorry for the mistake though. :)
Actually returning to this topic has brought up nightmares of the huge bow I had on my butt at my 80s prom. It probably had more fabric than that entire dress. AND, it was seafoam coloured.
I think I'll go cringe some more now. :-)
Posted by: Shandra | May 21, 2008 11:27 AM
Thanks Laura, But you left out the most important things - height, hair,and color of her eyes.
Posted by: DandyLion | May 21, 2008 11:32 AM
Interestng moral compass.
Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 11:37 AM
Gee, DL, thought you'd top that list with bust size. :-) Let's just say that she was tall and slim and willowy and the dress actually looked pretty fabulous on her.
Posted by: Laura | May 21, 2008 11:37 AM
I guess I'm more conservative than I thought. I can't see how this dress is appropriate - for any occasion, at any age.
Posted by: cm9887 | May 21, 2008 11:40 AM
Laura
"Because when her normally good judgment fails her, it's still my job to protect her from herself."
Please post Laura's prom photo.
Posted by: For the Record | May 21, 2008 11:50 AM
"Just for the record -- for low-back and backless dresses, there are bras and such that are made for such attire. Lots of people choose to forego them, but they do exist (and are at many department stores)."
Oh, I know. I am a frequent shopper of Victoria's Secret. Those kind of bra aren't at all comfortable. Especially bras worn for backless dresses. I would rather forgo wearing them. But then again, I can get away with it since I have small breasts.
Posted by: Soguns1 | May 21, 2008 11:55 AM
Ghetto. Classic ghetto.
Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 11:56 AM
Anyways, I think her dress was fabulous. To me, it says A-list celebrity walking down red carpet.
Posted by: Soguns1 | May 21, 2008 11:56 AM
"Please post Laura's prom photo."
LOL! Actually, though, you'd be disappointed: I wore my grandmother's wedding dress. Ivory full-length drapey sheath, with a jewel neck, some clear beading on the bodice, and little cap sleeves. Very classic 1930s -- and so NOT 1984! For which I am now eternally grateful :-) Now if we could only do something about that hair. . . .
Posted by: Laura | May 21, 2008 12:18 PM
I think cal girl's point was that it is understandable for a family to be worried about someone not being married because there is no legal requirement for anyone to take care of them. "Abandonment" of your legal spouse is a big deal. abandoning a friend is, legally speaking, OK. If I'm single and end up in a coma, may family living on the other side of the country has no way to ensure that my friends help out-- but my family could put legal pressure on a legal spouse to support me.
So it gives families a greater measure of security if their adult offspring are married, rather than if they are single.
Posted by: cjt | May 21, 2008 12:24 PM
cjt
"If I'm single and end up in a coma, may family living on the other side of the country has no way to ensure that my friends help out-- but my family could put legal pressure on a legal spouse to support me.
So it gives families a greater measure of security if their adult offspring are married, rather than if they are single."
Women live longer than their husbands. Women tend to end their lives single.
"Greater measure of security" is NOT a spouse, it's insurance.
"but my family could put legal pressure on a legal spouse to support me. "
Ask the kids of deadbeat parents who are growing up in poverty how the "legal pressure" for support is working out for them.
Have you ever been in a nursing home AKA dumping ground for the unwanted elderly/sick?
Sick/old people with money do the best. Wow, there's a shocker!
Posted by: What planet are you from? | May 21, 2008 12:40 PM
Please post ArmyBrat's prom photo. THAT might border on criminal conduct.
Posted by: For the Record | May 21, 2008 12:49 PM
The outfit screams Jennifer Lopez.
Posted by: Nothing New | May 21, 2008 12:53 PM
Yes. The outfit does scream Jennifer Lopez. It also screams Beyonce.
If either of those two wore a dress like that walking down the red carpet, they would've been picked as one the the best dressed that night.
I love the dress.
Posted by: Soguns1 | May 21, 2008 1:11 PM
"Please post ArmyBrat's prom photo. THAT might border on criminal conduct."
LOL. It probably would be criminal to subject the world to such an image. Fortunately, I'm fairly positive that no copies of such a photo exist any longer. But just thinking about it is making me cringe again. Auggh - there's no way to get that visual out of my brain!!!
Posted by: ArmyBrat | May 21, 2008 1:12 PM
Soguns, haw haw, you're funny and you didn't read the articles about this. The rest of us are being serious, ok?
Posted by: DCer | May 21, 2008 1:12 PM
DCer
"Soguns, haw haw, you're funny and you didn't read the articles about this. The rest of us are being serious, ok?"
Is humor a no-no on the OP?
Posted by: Sam Clemens | May 21, 2008 1:19 PM
i bet those kids of deatbeat parents are doing better than they would be if there weren't any legal protection. In this society there is more legal stability enforced on marriages than there is with friend relationship-- what planet are you from that you don't see that? You think you can sue a friend that abandons you? WAKE UP!
Posted by: cjt | May 21, 2008 1:42 PM
Oh, lighten up you early posters, Stacey DID say that the handcuffs were due to the CONFRONTATION, but she alluded that the confrontation was itself due to something not worth arguing to the point of being arrested, namely the skimpy dress. ("And is a confrontation over a skimpy dress worth handcuffs?")
And as for "What would you say to your daughter if she tried to wear a dress like this in public?", I know that I would know for weeks, if not months, my daughter's plans for her prom, but that's because I have a real relationship with her. If somehow she insisted on a dress like that, maybe because she designed it and was proud of it, I would have made sure she checked that it was acceptable. Then again, she can consider consequences on her own and ahead of time already, and we've got quite a few years until she'll have a prom.
Posted by: The Cosmic Avenger | May 21, 2008 1:55 PM
Cosmic Avenger wrote ("And is a confrontation over a skimpy dress worth handcuffs?")
It depends. What kind of confrontation? Was she out of control? Was she making threats? There is little you can tell from the description or the tape link. If a confrontation is going from bad to worse handcuffs are appropriate, even if it is over an ice cream cone.
Posted by: Get Real | May 21, 2008 2:09 PM
Well the main point is that if you haven't given your child good fashion sense and fashion judgement by the time they are in their teens, it's really not your battle to fight anymore even if you choose to make it one.
I'm against dress codes in general, but the fact is that they exist and in this case were ignored. Adding to her confrontational behavior, things got out of hand because of her bad choices.
Everything else is a matter of personal taste. I remember vividly the summer I was 18 going out to a kinky party. My mom knew I had stopped wearing undies for awhile, but would not abide me leaving the house without them that night. Ridiculously, I went and pretended to put them on- only to end up fully naked and enjoying the heck out of myself on a cross later.
Still don't wear undies, but my mom has learned to not ask.
Posted by: Liz D | May 21, 2008 2:17 PM
Cosmic Avenger, quoting Stacey: "And is a confrontation over a skimpy dress worth handcuffs?"
No, which is why she should have backed down. But then she never should have shown up dressed like that, since she knew both the rules and the consequences.
The bottom line on that issue is that she knew the rules and the consequences. She chose to ignore them both. When they were enforced she became belligerent. The school officials at the prom had two choices: do what they did, which was summon security and let them handle the situation; or just say "well, gee, if you're going to raise that big a stink over this, okay we'll cave and you can come in."
Only one of those two choices strikes me as rational for the school administration.
As far as the police/security I think they handled it very well based on what little has been published. They were faced with a loud, belligerent teen who couldn't get her way. They needed to remove her from the situation. They did that. They didn't arrest her; they didn't club her or hit her; they didn't Tase her, bro. They did put her in handcuffs for their own safety, walked her out of the hotel, and put her in a squad car until she calmed down. When she calmed down they released her.
Sounds to me like both the school and the police handled it very well, indeed.
Was it worth it? No. The young lady in question should have followed the rules; when she chose to break them she should have accepted the consequences; and she should not have tried to get her way by becoming loud, unruly, argumentative and belligerent.
"What would you say to your daughter if she tried to wear a dress like this in public?"
"No." But then it would never have gotten to that point, because I talk to my children and know what's going on. I know what the rules and consequences are, and make sure that they understand what they are, and that if they choose to break the rules and are caught they'll suffer the consequences.
Posted by: m2j5c2 | May 21, 2008 2:29 PM
Is humor a no-no on the OP?
-----
Devil's advocacy, the troll-like posting of alternative opinions with nothing behind them might as well be. It took me a while to get that Soguns was joking.
Posted by: DCer | May 21, 2008 2:34 PM
"Still don't wear undies, but my mom has learned to not ask."
I'm sorry; did *we* ask?
Okay, I admit to a minor vicarious thrill, but still, girl - TMI!
Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 3:03 PM
"Still don't wear undies, but my mom has learned to not ask."
I'm sorry; did WE ask?
Okay, I might admit to a minor vicarious thrill over that one, but still, girl - TMI!
Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 3:05 PM
Liz D, what the heck does this mean?
"Ridiculously, I went and pretended to put them on- only to end up fully naked and enjoying the heck out of myself on a cross later."
Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 3:21 PM
"The bottom line on that issue is that she knew the rules and the consequences"
I'll admit that I've one that doesn't neccessarily follow rules base on consequences, though I understand the concept of rules and punishments
but
Today we are talking about a girl that designed her own dress, looks fabulous to some, and pushes the boundaries of acceptable attire for young adults.
Sounds like the girl launched herself a successful fashion design career at the young age of 17. If this plays out, she'll have that pesky school official to thank.
Posted by: DandyLion | May 21, 2008 3:39 PM
"Kids need to learn that there are dress codes in all sorts of places (resturants, hotels, jobs, stores, and schools). It is never to early to learn that."
yes--that and a bunch of other social graces that this entitled brat generation needs to learn.
Posted by: Silver Spring | May 21, 2008 3:40 PM
3:21, I've already gotten shot down for TMI about not wearing undies, I don't think I should go into details explaining what being naked on a cross and having a good time means.
Posted by: Liz D | May 21, 2008 3:47 PM
DCer-what do you think I'm joking about? I don't believe a made a joke or a sarcastic remake in this blog so far. I'm even serious when I say the dress looked fabulous.
I asked you a serious question; how is what the girl did boarderline criminal conduct?
Posted by: Soguns1 | May 21, 2008 4:01 PM
What she did is borderline criminal conduct because she was agressive and verbally assaulting an officer of the law. Do you not actually get that?
Won't be long anyway before she's in prison. Sad, really.
Posted by: wtf | May 21, 2008 4:29 PM
I understood the reference, Liz D, but then, I work in San Francisco. ;)
For anyone else who can't figure it out and can't stand not knowing - google "BDSM cross" and you'll *really* have TMI! Fair warning!
P.S. Never tried it myself - my "personal life" is pretty much plain vanilla, but I've never begrudged anyone for enjoying chocolate syrup, sprinkles, whipped cream, and a cherry on top. Whatever flavors satisfy the craving!
Posted by: Sue | May 21, 2008 5:24 PM
wtf-Did you not read DCer's comment that her acting agressive and being verbally assaultive were unconfirmed rumors according to him?
Posted by: Soguns1 | May 22, 2008 9:42 AM
Soguns, Did you not actually do the research for yourself and view the footage of this girl acting like a trashy, mouthy tramp, which she is? Some self-reliance, please.
Posted by: wtf | May 22, 2008 10:07 AM
I plan on teaching my children how to address and interact with the police. The problem with many of these kids is that they fundamentally do not understand how society works and how to interact with teachers, principals and law enforcement. Then they act bewildered when they go to jail, get expelled etc.
Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 10:07 AM
Ghetto supastar that is what you are
Comin from afar reachin for the stars
Run away with me to another place
We can rely on each other uh huh
From one corner to another uh huh
For those of you unfamiliar with the tune, please sing it to the music of "Islands in the Stream" by Dolly Parton and Kenny Rogers.
Posted by: Ryan | May 22, 2008 3:05 PM
Older son startled an officer once in a 7-11. He walked up and said, "Thank you nice officer, for keeping us safe."
That's exactly what DH and I say when we're driving anywhere and notice law enforcement. It's a simple alert to the driver to check speed and driving behavior - without teaching our kids the terrible attitudes we had in the 70's.
We felt it was *very* important that our autistic kid feel safe and protected, not threatened by those people in uniforms. He might need them to help him if his unusual, autistic behaviors ever get him in bad situation, and the right attitude should prevent him from getting himself into even worse trouble.
Posted by: Sue | May 22, 2008 3:13 PM
Liz D.
Don't worry, my spouse wears granny panties with enough fabric to cover three average behinds!
So I guess in the balance of things, her generous coverage more than makes up for your lack of undies!
Posted by: I wish she would wear less | May 22, 2008 10:22 PM
I am OK with the dress...it is her idea of fashion, even if it does remind me of swimwear...however she needs to abide by school standards if she is going to a school-sponsored event. On her own time, going to places with her friends etc., she can wear whatever she wants. So, they were right to deny her admission. For her to act out & become belligerent at that point, was wrong. They should have firmly denied her admission and escorted her away, yes. Handcuffing her seems excessive (for a slim 17yr old girl, do you need such forceful methods!)...it seems disrespectful of her person.
Posted by: NCmom | May 31, 2008 2:20 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.











Trashy dress for a trashy girl - probably raised by trashy parents.
None of my kids would have a dress like that as we wouldn't allow it. Simple.