http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/no-room-for-girlfriends-at-ivanhoe-girls-dance-20101109-17m4g.html

A few weeks earlier, a teacher had told the year 11 student she wasn't allowed to attend the Preston dinner dance with her 15-year-old girlfriend, Savannah Supski. She was asked to bring a male instead.

''It made me very upset. I thought it was unfair so I didn't go,'' she said.

''I put a lot of effort into trying to fix things. I had a meeting with principals, looked through the Equal Opportunity Act, all my friends put posters up around the school and the teachers ripped them down. There was an easy solution; they just needed to let me go with my girlfriend.''

Hannah's father, Peter Williams, lodged a complaint with the Equal Opportunities Commission, alleging the school had discriminated against his daughter because of her sexual orientation.

''The school kept saying because it is an all-girls' school we want to make an event where they can meet boys in a social scenario,'' he said. ''That process is anachronistic and creates feelings of discrimination among girls who are same-sex attracted.''

After lodging the complaint in September, Mr Williams had a mediation session with the school, but the two parties were unable to reach a conclusion.

The Williams family did not take matters further because it was becoming too stressful for their teenage daughter, who will complete her VCE next year.

Mr Williams said the experience had forced his daughter to move to Swinburne Senior Secondary College, a ''more accepting'' school in Hawthorn.

''We made the decision that the best thing to do was to leave the school. The basis has been the whole sense of institutionalised discrimination,'' he said.

''They had a clear idea of why they ran the event, but the world has moved on. It's not the greatest time in someone's educational life to move schools.''

Savannah, now 16, is also moving schools to be with her girlfriend and was happy to hear that Swinburne Secondary College allows same-sex couples to attend formals together.

''I have been not very happy with private schools all my life and this was pushing it. It was a homophobic issue and I feel extremely discriminated against at the old school,'' she said.

Sian Supski supports her daughter's decision to leave the school.

''The idea that there had to be a gender balance at the dinner dance seemed to be discriminatory. It was a very difficult time for Savannah but she's an amazingly strong young person and we are very proud of her.''

Mrs Supski said she was disappointed Ivanhoe Girls' Grammar did not adopt a more progressive approach to same-sex couples. ''It would have been a good thing for other girls who might be in a same-sex relationship and don't feel brave enough to come out, tell their parents and be in a school situation.''

Ivanhoe Girls' Grammar principal Heather Schnagl said the event did not discriminate against same-sex couples and was designed to promote a co-educational experience.

''I don't think it's appropriate they feel discriminated against, and I'm very upset they feel that,'' she said.

''If we opened it up and said girls could bring another female they would all bring females; the policy is trying to create an event where boys are invited. We are a school that has an all-girls environment, and they are meant to invite guests, not partners.''

Dr Schnagl said the event was under review for next year.

She said the students' ages had also been an issue. ''It's an event for year 11s and the student's guest was in year 10.''

Hannah said her classmates had taken younger males to the event and she was the only student asked to provide the age of her partner. ''They kept on making up excuses, and said everything was a problem for me.''

Roz Ward, co-ordinator of the Safe Schools Coalition, unveiled by the state government last month to tackle homophobia in schools, said the incident was a blatant example of discrimination.

''It's a big issue for schools to be visibly supportive of same-sex couples and one of the most visible events of the year is the school formal or dinner dance. One of the six recommendations we make to schools is to allow students to take their same-sex partners or friends to their school formal and they should make it obvious that is the case,'' Ms Ward said.

The Equal Opportunity Commission said it could not comment on the case.

Is this the christian philosphy that over the eons condemned Mary Magdalene to be a prostitute just because she was a disciple of Jesus and the early christians did not want women involved in the church so altered the history of the early church to condemn her to be a prostitute.Virgin in olden times actually meant unwed,now it has moved to its modern version.I fail to see any resemblance of early christian values and philosophy coming through to the modern sanitised variant.Jesus was not celibant and had friends and disciples of male and female, so I fail to see a issue of allowing bisexuals, homosexuals or any other variant to attend formals as this is the real world not a sanitised version of the bible.

HigherBeam wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 6:44am:

Is this the christian philosphy that over the eons condemned Mary Magdalene to be a prostitute just because she was a disciple of Jesus and the early christians did not want women involved in the church so altered the history of the early church to condemn her to be a prostitute.Virgin in olden times actually meant unwed,now it has moved to its modern version.I fail to see any resemblance of early christian values and philosophy coming through to the modern sanitised variant.Jesus was not celibant and had friends and disciples of male and female, so I fail to see a issue of allowing bisexuals, homosexuals or any other variant to attend formals as this is the real world not a sanitised version of the bible.

HO HUM


;)

The (so called) partner was at the SAME school in a year below, so to have allowed her to attend the Year 11 Dance, would have then opened the way for ALL year 10's to go to the Year 11 dance.

They sound like a couple of attention seeking trouble makers aided and abetted by foolish parents.    I can't help wondering if any (publicity) money changed hands.

nichy wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 6:55am:

The (so called) partner was at the SAME school in a year below, so to have allowed her to attend the Year 11 Dance, would have then opened the way for ALL year 10's to go to the Year 11 dance. They sound like a couple of attention seeking trouble makers aided and abetted by foolish parents.    I can't help wondering if any (publicity) money changed hands.

Year 11 and 12 MALES often take their younger female partners to school formals - some girls end up going to 4 formals in their high school life.  I've never heard anything said about that.

This issue comes up every year at formal time - and it's generally the religious schools that won't allow it.  Some say "well, send your child to a religious school, suck it up" - that misses the point that these schools get government funding - in fact they often get MORE per pupil than state schools!  

I believe it's discriminatory and schools should not be allowed to discriminate against our kids based on their sexual orientation.

bwood1946 wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 6:46am:

HigherBeam wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 6:44am: Is this the christian philosphy that over the eons condemned Mary Magdalene to be a prostitute just because she was a disciple of Jesus and the early christians did not want women involved in the church so altered the history of the early church to condemn her to be a prostitute.Virgin in olden times actually meant unwed,now it has moved to its modern version.I fail to see any resemblance of early christian values and philosophy coming through to the modern sanitised variant.Jesus was not celibant and had friends and disciples of male and female, so I fail to see a issue of allowing bisexuals, homosexuals or any other variant to attend formals as this is the real world not a sanitised version of the bible. HO HUM ;)

A TRUE FOLLOWER OF THE SANITISED BIBLE,COMPLACANCY

HigherBeam wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 6:44am:

Is this the christian philosphy that over the eons condemned Mary Magdalene to be a prostitute just because she was a disciple of Jesus and the early christians did not want women involved in the church so altered the history of the early church to condemn her to be a prostitute.Virgin in olden times actually meant unwed,now it has moved to its modern version.I fail to see any resemblance of early christian values and philosophy coming through to the modern sanitised variant.Jesus was not celibant and had friends and disciples of male and female, so I fail to see a issue of allowing bisexuals, homosexuals or any other variant to attend formals as this is the real world not a sanitised version of the bible.

What a crock of pedantic pissantry.
YAWWWWWWWWWWN.!!!

aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 7:29am:

HigherBeam wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 6:44am: Is this the christian philosphy that over the eons condemned Mary Magdalene to be a prostitute just because she was a disciple of Jesus and the early christians did not want women involved in the church so altered the history of the early church to condemn her to be a prostitute.Virgin in olden times actually meant unwed,now it has moved to its modern version.I fail to see any resemblance of early christian values and philosophy coming through to the modern sanitised variant.Jesus was not celibant and had friends and disciples of male and female, so I fail to see a issue of allowing bisexuals, homosexuals or any other variant to attend formals as this is the real world not a sanitised version of the bible. What a crock of pedantic pissantry. YAWWWWWWWWWWN.!!!

Its good to see trolls here trying to scare of new members who have a different opinion but trolls who have a IQ of a amoeba protoplasm and have no humour what so ever is pathetic.If you have not got anything intelligent to say and I know you have not bugger off and troll some where else or every post of yours I will troll.

I saw these two little creeps on ACA last night, total waste of oxygen, the pair of them. Good thing they`re lesbians, don`t need trash like them breeding.

HigherBeam wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 7:44am:

aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 7:29am: HigherBeam wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 6:44am: Is this the christian philosphy that over the eons condemned Mary Magdalene to be a prostitute just because she was a disciple of Jesus and the early christians did not want women involved in the church so altered the history of the early church to condemn her to be a prostitute.Virgin in olden times actually meant unwed,now it has moved to its modern version.I fail to see any resemblance of early christian values and philosophy coming through to the modern sanitised variant.Jesus was not celibant and had friends and disciples of male and female, so I fail to see a issue of allowing bisexuals, homosexuals or any other variant to attend formals as this is the real world not a sanitised version of the bible. What a crock of pedantic pissantry. YAWWWWWWWWWWN.!!! Its good to see trolls here trying to scare of new members who have a different opinion but trolls who have a IQ of a amoeba protoplasm and have no humour what so ever is pathetic.If you have not got anything intelligent to say and I know you have not bugger off and troll some where else or every post of yours I will troll.

Whatever helps you to cough up that fur ball dearie. ;D

I don't believe in Homosexuality and as Imp once put it, next we'll be 'forced' to accept Moneghan and his Dog along with all the other Beastiality marriages. Remember the guy in the States who got the Ho-down with a Horse, sent to gaol and then release, went back to the same horse ...because it was 'love'.

If anyone KNOWS the CO-EDUCATIONAL system, then you would know that after spending most of the time next to a girl in class 'studying/working' together - come 'Dancing' time or 'social' time, the boys and girls keep VERY seperate. I even say a female 'school captain' get in trouble and abused by teachers because she refused to get up and dance with one of us very reluctant boys.

Go to a night club. The Co-Eds will be in their boy and girl groups while the teenagers who went to Single-Sex schools were on the dance floor with the opposite sex ...you could almost see a Nun there with a ruler between them making sure there was ample room for modesty, etc.

Not only is all this 'Homosexuality equality and rights' emerging from a Nation that has too much FREEDOM on its hands, but we are ignoring the act of Celibacy and the greater sacrifice it takes.

I think the issue is that people just don't wanna face facts and draw a line. Religion seems an easy target to 'attack' by Gays because it doesn't promote Homosexuals.

...I've also noticed that the regular female contributers on this Forum don't appear as often now, since the Homosexual Threads showed that the majority of Males dissagree with the Gay thing. (like der!)

Encore: -


what_katy_did wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 7:08am:

Year 11 and 12 MALES often take their younger female partners to school formals - some girls end up going to 4 formals in their high school life.  I've never heard anything said about that. This issue comes up every year at formal time - and it's generally the religious schools that won't allow it.  Some say "well, send your child to a religious school, suck it up" - that misses the point that these schools get government funding - in fact they often get MORE per pupil than state schools!   I believe it's discriminatory and schools should not be allowed to discriminate against our kids based on their sexual orientation.

It is clear that the school has made a homophobic decision - and that it is unapologetic about doing so...

If these girls had been in the same year, then they would have both been automatically allowed to attend the formal...

I believe that there are grounds for the HREOC to audit all of the stated bases of the decision and assess the consistency of the application of those bases for 2010 and previous years...

The boys only school/s in the same Diocese should also be audited - so as to establish the overall nature and extent of the homophobic discrimination, including any inconsistencies with this case...

Either way, if the complainant can establish that she was the only person who was singled out and asked to provide the age of her 'guest', then the school has deliberately targeted (and technically harassed) the complainant in a discriminatory fashion...



PS I wonder if any other guests' names were so exotic as to be gender-ambiguous!?

It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 9:09am:

I don't believe in Homosexuality and as Imp once put it, next we'll be 'forced' to accept Moneghan and his Dog along with all the other Beastiality marriages. Remember the guy in the States who got the Ho-down with a Horse, sent to gaol and then release, went back to the same horse ...because it was 'love'.

Noone will accept beastiality - animals can't even consent. Not to mention everyone finds it disgusting.


Quote:

If anyone KNOWS the CO-EDUCATIONAL system, then you would know that after spending most of the time next to a girl in class 'studying/working' together - come 'Dancing' time or 'social' time, the boys and girls keep VERY seperate. I even say a female 'school captain' get in trouble and abused by teachers because she refused to get up and dance with one of us very reluctant boys.

This is not true. I went to a co-ed school and everyone was dancing with everyone at my formal. Of course, when it was dancing lessons as part of PE in front of the teachers, we were quite reluctant.

From another source....


Quote:

A complaint by the Year 11 student's father to the Equal Opportunity Commission and has been dismissed, Dr Schnagl said. http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/breaking/8292448/principal-defends-same-sex-dance-ban/

So even the EOC knows it's all a load of rubbish.

nothing to see here folks, save your righteous indignation for where it's warranted.

I for one cant wait for the two girls to turn 18.  I love lesbians, but I really love hot ones starting out in the exploration of the wonder that is the female body.

Verge wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 10:23am:

I for one cant wait for the two girls to turn 18.  I love lesbians, but I really love hot ones starting out in the exploration of the wonder that is the female body.

I'm sure that someone else will say something to that effect about your own offspring one day...

::)

Seriously, tho', how's everything coming along with the wife and the bub?

Equitist wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 9:32am:

Either way, if the complainant can establish that she was the only person who was singled out and asked to provide the age of her 'guest', then the school has deliberately targeted (and technically harassed) the complainant in a discriminatory fashion...

Yes regardless of what we personally think of the situation/lifestyle choice. The bottom line is summed up exactly as Thy has stated.

Besides up-tight religious freaks, who really cares if a lesbian couple attend a high school dance together.  It just shows that some religious fanatics are a bunch of morons with their mentality stuck in the 15th  Century.

My niece is an 18yo lesbian who came to her parents and family when she was 14.  No one with a brain gives a rats about this garbage anymore, as every individual deserves the human right to live their lives as they want.  

culldav wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 10:58am:

Besides up-tight religious freaks, who really cares if a lesbian couple attend a high school dance together.  It just shows that some religious fanatics are a bunch of morons with their mentality stuck in the 15th  Century. My niece is an 18yo lesbian who came to her parents and family when she was 14.  No one with a brain gives a rats about this garbage anymore, as every individual deserves the human right to live their lives as they want.

Keep in mind that it's not just religious people who are offended by homosexuals.

... wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 10:20am:

From another source.... Quote: A complaint by the Year 11 student's father to the Equal Opportunity Commission and has been dismissed, Dr Schnagl said. http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/breaking/8292448/principal-defends-same-sex-dance-ban/ So even the EOC knows it's all a load of rubbish. nothing to see here folks, save your righteous indignation for where it's warranted.

Was the case actually 'dismissed' - or is Dr Schnagl misrepresenting the facts!?

Equitist wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 10:48am:

Verge wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 10:23am: I for one cant wait for the two girls to turn 18.  I love lesbians, but I really love hot ones starting out in the exploration of the wonder that is the female body. I'm sure that someone else will say something to that effect about your own offspring one day... ::) Seriously, tho', how's everything coming along with the wife and the bub?

Two and a half weeks to go!!!!  All is really good, and the wife is doing really well and is fairly well rested.

And if its a girl, she isnt dating until she is 32!

Verge wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 11:23am:

Equitist wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 10:48am: Verge wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 10:23am: I for one cant wait for the two girls to turn 18.  I love lesbians, but I really love hot ones starting out in the exploration of the wonder that is the female body. I'm sure that someone else will say something to that effect about your own offspring one day... ::) Seriously, tho', how's everything coming along with the wife and the bub? Two and a half weeks to go!!!!  All is really good, and the wife is doing really well and is fairly well rested. And if its a girl, she isnt dating until she is 32!

LOL...best wishes to all of you, at this exciting albeit stressful time!

;)

PS My first-born came 2 weeks early: just 2 days after my last Uni exam for the year - ouch!

Equitist wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 11:09am:

... wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 10:20am: From another source.... Quote: A complaint by the Year 11 student's father to the Equal Opportunity Commission and has been dismissed, Dr Schnagl said. http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/breaking/8292448/principal-defends-same-sex-dance-ban/ So even the EOC knows it's all a load of rubbish. nothing to see here folks, save your righteous indignation for where it's warranted. Was the case actually 'dismissed' - or is Dr Schnagl misrepresenting the facts!?

You've got to assume that if it's reported, it's factual.

But I guess if you MUST work yourself into a tizz over this childish tanty, knock yourself out!

culldav wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 10:58am:

Besides up-tight religious freaks, who really cares if a lesbian couple attend a high school dance together.  It just shows that some religious fanatics are a bunch of morons with their mentality stuck in the 15th  Century. My niece is an 18yo lesbian who came to her parents and family when she was 14.  No one with a brain gives a rats about this garbage anymore, as every individual deserves the human right to live their lives as they want.

I think you will find some religious people are pretty liberal about it.

I know plenty that are religious and dont give two hoots about it.

Sometimes this place is pretty quick to throw lables to a pretty large section of society.  Since when does a few extremists represent the majority.

Equitist wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 11:26am:

Verge wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 11:23am: Equitist wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 10:48am: Verge wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 10:23am: I for one cant wait for the two girls to turn 18.  I love lesbians, but I really love hot ones starting out in the exploration of the wonder that is the female body. I'm sure that someone else will say something to that effect about your own offspring one day... ::) Seriously, tho', how's everything coming along with the wife and the bub? Two and a half weeks to go!!!!  All is really good, and the wife is doing really well and is fairly well rested. And if its a girl, she isnt dating until she is 32! LOL...best wishes to all of you, at this exciting albeit stressful time! ;)

Thanks thy, although I have to admit we are pretty cruisy at the moment and no stress.  Im sure that will change upon arrival!

... wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 11:26am:

Equitist wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 11:09am: ... wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 10:20am: From another source.... Quote: A complaint by the Year 11 student's father to the Equal Opportunity Commission and has been dismissed, Dr Schnagl said. http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/breaking/8292448/principal-defends-same-sex-dance-ban/ So even the EOC knows it's all a load of rubbish. nothing to see here folks, save your righteous indignation for where it's warranted. Was the case actually 'dismissed' - or is Dr Schnagl misrepresenting the facts!? You've got to assume that if it's reported, it's factual. But I guess if you MUST work yourself into a tizz over this childish tanty, knock yourself out!

Not necessarily so - the father 'reports' a different version of events (and the Principal is doing a shytehouse reactionary PR job)...



HigherBeam wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 6:37am:

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/no-room-for-girlfriends-at-ivanhoe-girls-dance-20101109-17m4g.html A few weeks earlier, a teacher had told the year 11 student she wasn't allowed to attend the Preston dinner dance with her 15-year-old girlfriend, Savannah Supski. She was asked to bring a male instead. ''It made me very upset. I thought it was unfair so I didn't go,'' she said. ''I put a lot of effort into trying to fix things. I had a meeting with principals, looked through the Equal Opportunity Act, all my friends put posters up around the school and the teachers ripped them down. There was an easy solution; they just needed to let me go with my girlfriend.'' Hannah's father, Peter Williams, lodged a complaint with the Equal Opportunities Commission, alleging the school had discriminated against his daughter because of her sexual orientation. ''The school kept saying because it is an all-girls' school we want to make an event where they can meet boys in a social scenario,'' he said. ''That process is anachronistic and creates feelings of discrimination among girls who are same-sex attracted.'' After lodging the complaint in September, Mr Williams had a mediation session with the school, but the two parties were unable to reach a conclusion. The Williams family did not take matters further because it was becoming too stressful for their teenage daughter, who will complete her VCE next year. Mr Williams said the experience had forced his daughter to move to Swinburne Senior Secondary College, a ''more accepting'' school in Hawthorn. ''We made the decision that the best thing to do was to leave the school. The basis has been the whole sense of institutionalised discrimination,'' he said. ''They had a clear idea of why they ran the event, but the world has moved on. It's not the greatest time in someone's educational life to move schools.'' Savannah, now 16, is also moving schools to be with her girlfriend and was happy to hear that Swinburne Secondary College allows same-sex couples to attend formals together. ''I have been not very happy with private schools all my life and this was pushing it. It was a homophobic issue and I feel extremely discriminated against at the old school,'' she said. Sian Supski supports her daughter's decision to leave the school. ''The idea that there had to be a gender balance at the dinner dance seemed to be discriminatory. It was a very difficult time for Savannah but she's an amazingly strong young person and we are very proud of her.'' Mrs Supski said she was disappointed Ivanhoe Girls' Grammar did not adopt a more progressive approach to same-sex couples. ''It would have been a good thing for other girls who might be in a same-sex relationship and don't feel brave enough to come out, tell their parents and be in a school situation.'' Ivanhoe Girls' Grammar principal Heather Schnagl said the event did not discriminate against same-sex couples and was designed to promote a co-educational experience. ''I don't think it's appropriate they feel discriminated against, and I'm very upset they feel that,'' she said. ''If we opened it up and said girls could bring another female they would all bring females; the policy is trying to create an event where boys are invited. We are a school that has an all-girls environment, and they are meant to invite guests, not partners.'' Dr Schnagl said the event was under review for next year. She said the students' ages had also been an issue. ''It's an event for year 11s and the student's guest was in year 10.'' Hannah said her classmates had taken younger males to the event and she was the only student asked to provide the age of her partner. ''They kept on making up excuses, and said everything was a problem for me.'' Roz Ward, co-ordinator of the Safe Schools Coalition, unveiled by the state government last month to tackle homophobia in schools, said the incident was a blatant example of discrimination. ''It's a big issue for schools to be visibly supportive of same-sex couples and one of the most visible events of the year is the school formal or dinner dance. One of the six recommendations we make to schools is to allow students to take their same-sex partners or friends to their school formal...

Verge wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 11:28am:

Equitist wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 11:26am: Verge wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 11:23am: Equitist wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 10:48am: Verge wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 10:23am: I for one cant wait for the two girls to turn 18.  I love lesbians, but I really love hot ones starting out in the exploration of the wonder that is the female body. I'm sure that someone else will say something to that effect about your own offspring one day... ::) Seriously, tho', how's everything coming along with the wife and the bub? Two and a half weeks to go!!!!  All is really good, and the wife is doing really well and is fairly well rested. And if its a girl, she isnt dating until she is 32! LOL...best wishes to all of you, at this exciting albeit stressful time! ;) Thanks thy, although I have to admit we are pretty cruisy at the moment and no stress.  Im sure that will change upon arrival!

Glad to hear that - enjoy your peace, quiet, sleep, privacy, autonomy and anonymity whilst it lasts...

Verge wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 11:28am:

Equitist wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 11:26am: Verge wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 11:23am: Equitist wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 10:48am: Verge wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 10:23am: I for one cant wait for the two girls to turn 18.  I love lesbians, but I really love hot ones starting out in the exploration of the wonder that is the female body. I'm sure that someone else will say something to that effect about your own offspring one day... ::) Seriously, tho', how's everything coming along with the wife and the bub? Two and a half weeks to go!!!!  All is really good, and the wife is doing really well and is fairly well rested. And if its a girl, she isnt dating until she is 32! LOL...best wishes to all of you, at this exciting albeit stressful time! ;) Thanks thy, although I have to admit we are pretty cruisy at the moment and no stress.  Im sure that will change upon arrival!

Hey congratulations and good luck mate to you and your wife. The best days of your life are about to begin.

Equitist wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 11:09am:

... wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 10:20am: From another source.... Quote: A complaint by the Year 11 student's father to the Equal Opportunity Commission and has been dismissed, Dr Schnagl said. http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/breaking/8292448/principal-defends-same-sex-dance-ban/ So even the EOC knows it's all a load of rubbish. nothing to see here folks, save your righteous indignation for where it's warranted. Was the case actually 'dismissed' - or is Dr Schnagl misrepresenting the facts!?

From the au.news story...
"A complaint by the Year 11 student's father to the Equal Opportunity Commission and has been dismissed, Dr Schnagl said.

Victorian Equal Opportunity Commissioner Helen Szoke said she was legally unable to comment on the complaint"

If the Commissioner is 'legally unable to comment', then it must still be under investigation....

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 1:36pm:

Equitist wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 11:09am: ... wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 10:20am: From another source.... Quote: A complaint by the Year 11 student's father to the Equal Opportunity Commission and has been dismissed, Dr Schnagl said. http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/breaking/8292448/principal-defends-same-sex-dance-ban/ So even the EOC knows it's all a load of rubbish. nothing to see here folks, save your righteous indignation for where it's warranted. Was the case actually 'dismissed' - or is Dr Schnagl misrepresenting the facts!? From the au.news story... "A complaint by the Year 11 student's father to the Equal Opportunity Commission and has been dismissed, Dr Schnagl said. Victorian Equal Opportunity Commissioner Helen Szoke said she was legally unable to comment on the complaint" If the Commissioner is 'legally unable to comment', then it must still be under investigation....

Actually, I've been pondering the ramifications of this case - should not the HREOC have some semblance of an obligation to 'prosecute' clear test cases as an advocate and enforcer of HREO 'principles', rather than force parties with differing levels of power and/or resources into 'mediation'...

Nothing that I have seen in the media suggests that the school has acted in anything other than an overtly discriminatory fashion - and the Principal obviously has zero remorse (or insight into the ramifications of her actions)...

IM(no-so)HO, the family has acted in the overall best interests of their daughter, by moving her to another school, but the mediation process was inappropriate and they have given up on a war of attrition - but I reckon that the onus of engaging in mediation ought never have been foistered upon them...

Either way, this has been a most unsatisfactory outcome because the unrepentant (and unreprimanded) Principal has been able to front the media with a dubious claim that the complaint was 'dismissed'...

There have been clear acts of systematic and serial discrimination (and possibly demonisation, vilification, harrassment and/or bullying) - some of which are on the public record via videoed news conferences - for which the offender is flagrantly unrepentant and therefore the HREOC ought to intervene to prosecute of its own volition...

I, for one, hope that this case is taken up by some lawyer/s on a probono basis...

Equitist wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 1:46pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 1:36pm: Equitist wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 11:09am: ... wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 10:20am: From another source.... Quote: A complaint by the Year 11 student's father to the Equal Opportunity Commission and has been dismissed, Dr Schnagl said. http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/breaking/8292448/principal-defends-same-sex-dance-ban/ So even the EOC knows it's all a load of rubbish. nothing to see here folks, save your righteous indignation for where it's warranted. Was the case actually 'dismissed' - or is Dr Schnagl misrepresenting the facts!? From the au.news story... "A complaint by the Year 11 student's father to the Equal Opportunity Commission and has been dismissed, Dr Schnagl said. Victorian Equal Opportunity Commissioner Helen Szoke said she was legally unable to comment on the complaint" If the Commissioner is 'legally unable to comment', then it must still be under investigation.... Actually, I've been pondering the ramifications of this case - should not the HREOC have some semblance of an obligation to 'prosecute' clear test cases as an advocate and enforcer of HREO 'principles', rather than force parties with differing levels of power and/or resources into 'mediation'... Nothing that I have seen in the media suggests that the school has acted in anything other than a flagrantly discriminatory fashion - and the Principal has zero remorse (or insight into the ramifications of her actions)... IM(no-so)HO, the family has acted in the overall best interests of their daughter, by moving her to another school, but the mediation process was inappropriate and they have given up on a war of attrition - but this has been a most unsatisfactory outcome because the unrepentant (and unreprimanded) Principal has been able to front the media with a dubious claim that the complaint was 'dismissed'... I, for one, hope that this case is taken up by some lawyer/s on a probono basis...

Yes ,and I'd be curious to know if any other of the students brought 'non' Year 11 guests....

Most of the kids I went to school with had boyfriends/girlfriends who were either a year ahead or a year behind them...

The impression I get is that daddy dearest will jump through hoops at his darling daughters request.

A whole lot of childish foot-stamping, with daddy the drip more interested in being his daughters friend than living upto his role as her parent.

But that's just my opinion.

... wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 1:54pm:

The impression I get is that daddy dearest will jump through hoops at his darling daughters request. A whole lot of childish foot-stamping, with daddy the drip more interested in being his daughters friend than living upto his role as her parent. But that's just my opinion.

C'mon Wes, I'm sure you can think of a number of equally principled positions, on which you would be prepared to stand up, against a pettily discriminatory regime, for the rights of your own offspring to be proud of who and what they are!?

... wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 1:54pm:

The impression I get is that daddy dearest will jump through hoops at his darling daughters request. A whole lot of childish foot-stamping, with daddy the drip more interested in being his daughters friend than living upto his role as her parent. But that's just my opinion.

LOL most father would, and do already Wesley...

The only time I saw MY father actually threaten to break someones neck, was when the guy was hassling my sister...

Equitist wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 2:00pm:

... wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 1:54pm: The impression I get is that daddy dearest will jump through hoops at his darling daughters request. A whole lot of childish foot-stamping, with daddy the drip more interested in being his daughters friend than living upto his role as her parent. But that's just my opinion. C'mon Wes, I'm sure you can think of a number of equally principled positions, on which you would be prepared to stand up, against a pettily discriminatory regime, for the rights of your own offspring to be proud of who and what they are!?

Yes, but that's me.  

I know there are an awful lot of drips out there, and this guy seems like one of them.
For a start, I wouldn't let my daughter change schools just beacsue she wasn't allowed to bring a certain person to the ball.  Best she learn you can't always get your own way by throwing a tantrum.

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 2:04pm:

... wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 1:54pm: The impression I get is that daddy dearest will jump through hoops at his darling daughters request. A whole lot of childish foot-stamping, with daddy the drip more interested in being his daughters friend than living upto his role as her parent. But that's just my opinion. LOL most father would, and do already Wesley... The only time I saw MY father actually threaten to break someones neck, was when the guy was hassling my sister...

Oh I know...my daughters not quite 2 and has already got me doing her bidding.  But theres limits...the thought is always in the back of my mind - 'if I do this, will it be good for her in the long run?  Will this make her spoiled?'

... wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 2:08pm:

Equitist wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 2:00pm: ... wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 1:54pm: The impression I get is that daddy dearest will jump through hoops at his darling daughters request. A whole lot of childish foot-stamping, with daddy the drip more interested in being his daughters friend than living upto his role as her parent. But that's just my opinion. C'mon Wes, I'm sure you can think of a number of equally principled positions, on which you would be prepared to stand up, against a pettily discriminatory regime, for the rights of your own offspring to be proud of who and what they are!? Yes, but that's me.   I know there are an awful lot of drips out there, and this guy seems like one of them. For a start, I wouldn't let my daughter change schools just beacsue she wasn't allowed to bring a certain person to the ball.  Best she learn you can't always get your own way by throwing a tantrum.

You wouldn't change your daughter's school because they discriminated against her, for being HERSELF??

You'd rather keep paying several thousand dollars per year and have a miserable, depressed child???

Tell me Wesley, you don't have kids do you??

... wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 2:08pm:

Equitist wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 2:00pm: ... wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 1:54pm: The impression I get is that daddy dearest will jump through hoops at his darling daughters request. A whole lot of childish foot-stamping, with daddy the drip more interested in being his daughters friend than living upto his role as her parent. But that's just my opinion. C'mon Wes, I'm sure you can think of a number of equally principled positions, on which you would be prepared to stand up, against a pettily discriminatory regime, for the rights of your own offspring to be proud of who and what they are!? Yes, but that's me.   I know there are an awful lot of drips out there, and this guy seems like one of them. For a start, I wouldn't let my daughter change schools just beacsue she wasn't allowed to bring a certain person to the ball.  Best she learn you can't always get your own way by throwing a tantrum.

If only the School Principal's parents had been so inclined, eh!?

::)

Seriously, tho', having seen the Principal interviewed on the news, I don't think that the girl or her father are most at fault here...

I wouldn't be surprised if someone took up this case on the family's behalf - nor that the Principal was moved 'aside' or sacked altogether for bringing the school and diocese into such notorious disrepute...

Check out their Wiki page - which is dominated by articles on the discrimination...

Watch a video news report here...

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/blogs/blunt-instrument/private-school-pr-fails-to-excuse-antilesbian-sentiment/20101110-17mmm.html

Quote:

Just because you are a grown up doesn't mean you have grown up. A rather natty little motto I just made up and would forward on to Ivanhoe Girls Grammar School except I imagine they already have a motto, something like “No Homos

The opening line from your link equitist.  

Don't think I'm gonna get an objective, unbiased account here....

the computer I'm on doesn't have sound though, so won't get much from the interview either...

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 2:15pm:

... wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 2:08pm: Equitist wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 2:00pm: ... wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 1:54pm: The impression I get is that daddy dearest will jump through hoops at his darling daughters request. A whole lot of childish foot-stamping, with daddy the drip more interested in being his daughters friend than living upto his role as her parent. But that's just my opinion. C'mon Wes, I'm sure you can think of a number of equally principled positions, on which you would be prepared to stand up, against a pettily discriminatory regime, for the rights of your own offspring to be proud of who and what they are!? Yes, but that's me.   I know there are an awful lot of drips out there, and this guy seems like one of them. For a start, I wouldn't let my daughter change schools just beacsue she wasn't allowed to bring a certain person to the ball.  Best she learn you can't always get your own way by throwing a tantrum. You wouldn't change your daughter's school because they discriminated against her, for being HERSELF?? You'd rather keep paying several thousand dollars per year and have a miserable, depressed child??? Tell me Wesley, you don't have kids do you??

It is a religious school, yes?
Sooo, it would be discriminatory to force them to compromise their religious beliefs wouldn't it?

If she doesn't want to abide by them, theres plenty of godless schools where she can be petulant to her hearts content.

Ok wesley, take a step back, and imagine it's 30 or 40 years ago, and your daughter is being punished for being (gasp) left-handed....

How would you react???

Okay, Im gonna ask this, but doesnt being a private school give them the right to exclude people for whatever reason they choose, and by joining that school you agree to be bound by the rules of that school?

If this happened in a public school my arms would be high in the air.  But as for a private school Im pretty undecided only because since its private when you go there you do agree to their rules, and if you dont like them you are also free to leave.

I feel for the kid, but no one made them go there in the first place.

... wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 2:33pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 2:15pm: ... wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 2:08pm: Equitist wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 2:00pm: ... wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 1:54pm: The impression I get is that daddy dearest will jump through hoops at his darling daughters request. A whole lot of childish foot-stamping, with daddy the drip more interested in being his daughters friend than living upto his role as her parent. But that's just my opinion. C'mon Wes, I'm sure you can think of a number of equally principled positions, on which you would be prepared to stand up, against a pettily discriminatory regime, for the rights of your own offspring to be proud of who and what they are!? Yes, but that's me.   I know there are an awful lot of drips out there, and this guy seems like one of them. For a start, I wouldn't let my daughter change schools just beacsue she wasn't allowed to bring a certain person to the ball.  Best she learn you can't always get your own way by throwing a tantrum. You wouldn't change your daughter's school because they discriminated against her, for being HERSELF?? You'd rather keep paying several thousand dollars per year and have a miserable, depressed child??? Tell me Wesley, you don't have kids do you?? It is a religious school, yes? Sooo, it would be discriminatory to force them to compromise their religious beliefs wouldn't it? If she doesn't want to abide by them, theres plenty of godless schools where she can be petulant to her hearts content.

Then WHY did you say you wouldn't let your daughter change schools???

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 2:57pm:

... wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 2:33pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 2:15pm: ... wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 2:08pm: Equitist wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 2:00pm: ... wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 1:54pm: The impression I get is that daddy dearest will jump through hoops at his darling daughters request. A whole lot of childish foot-stamping, with daddy the drip more interested in being his daughters friend than living upto his role as her parent. But that's just my opinion. C'mon Wes, I'm sure you can think of a number of equally principled positions, on which you would be prepared to stand up, against a pettily discriminatory regime, for the rights of your own offspring to be proud of who and what they are!? Yes, but that's me.   I know there are an awful lot of drips out there, and this guy seems like one of them. For a start, I wouldn't let my daughter change schools just beacsue she wasn't allowed to bring a certain person to the ball.  Best she learn you can't always get your own way by throwing a tantrum. You wouldn't change your daughter's school because they discriminated against her, for being HERSELF?? You'd rather keep paying several thousand dollars per year and have a miserable, depressed child??? Tell me Wesley, you don't have kids do you?? It is a religious school, yes? Sooo, it would be discriminatory to force them to compromise their religious beliefs wouldn't it? If she doesn't want to abide by them, theres plenty of godless schools where she can be petulant to her hearts content. Then WHY did you say you wouldn't let your daughter change schools???

Because  I was talking about the girl in the story, not my own daughter.
I wouldn't send mine to a religious school to begin with.

How are these precious little brats ever going to deal with real life?
Will their answer to every little problem be neurotic wrist flapping?

aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 3:09pm:

How are these precious little brats ever going to deal with real life? Will their answer to every little problem be neurotic wrist flapping?

If I want your opinion on this thread I will give it for you amoeba

HigherBeam wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 3:17pm:

aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 3:09pm: How are these precious little brats ever going to deal with real life? Will their answer to every little problem be neurotic wrist flapping? If I want your opinion on this thread I will give it for you amoeba

The joke museum must be clearing some of it`s old crap out.

aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 3:39pm:

HigherBeam wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 3:17pm: aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 3:09pm: How are these precious little brats ever going to deal with real life? Will their answer to every little problem be neurotic wrist flapping? If I want your opinion on this thread I will give it for you amoeba The joke museum must be clearing some of it`s old crap out.

You wanting to play amoeba as you have nothing other than a half witted brain

I saw the segment on the "lesbian" brats last night, a more worthless pair of deadbeats would be hard to find anywhere.

aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 3:46pm:

I saw the segment on the "lesbian" brats last night, a more worthless pair of deadbeats would be hard to find anywhere.

Your daughters amoeba

aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 3:46pm:

I saw the segment on the "lesbian" brats last night, a more worthless pair of deadbeats would be hard to find anywhere.

Huh!?

They seemed like pretty typical 21st century teenage girls to me...judging by the female peers of my sons, nieces, nephews and neighbours...

HigherBeam wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 3:49pm:

aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 3:46pm: I saw the segment on the "lesbian" brats last night, a more worthless pair of deadbeats would be hard to find anywhere. Your daughters amoeba

I`m proud to say, nothing in common at all to these whining lesbian wrist flappers, who need to be wrapped in cotton wool, just to survive.
I`m condemning their whining whimpishness, not their sexuality.

Equitist wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 3:50pm:

aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 3:46pm: I saw the segment on the "lesbian" brats last night, a more worthless pair of deadbeats would be hard to find anywhere. Huh!? They seemed like pretty typical 21st century teenage girls to me...judging by the female peers of my sons, nieces, nephews and neighbours...

Tell your kids to be a bit more selective, discriminatory even.  They won`t need to go far to find a role model.   ;D ;D

aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 3:55pm:

Equitist wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 3:50pm: aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 3:46pm: I saw the segment on the "lesbian" brats last night, a more worthless pair of deadbeats would be hard to find anywhere. Huh!? They seemed like pretty typical 21st century teenage girls to me...judging by the female peers of my sons, nieces, nephews and neighbours... Tell your kids to be a bit more selective, discriminatory even.  They won`t need to go far to find a role model.   ;D ;D

They wont find it in you amoeba

HigherBeam wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 3:56pm:

aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 3:55pm: Equitist wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 3:50pm: aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 3:46pm: I saw the segment on the "lesbian" brats last night, a more worthless pair of deadbeats would be hard to find anywhere. Huh!? They seemed like pretty typical 21st century teenage girls to me...judging by the female peers of my sons, nieces, nephews and neighbours... Tell your kids to be a bit more selective, discriminatory even.  They won`t need to go far to find a role model.   ;D ;D They wont find it in you amoeba

Higherbeam is throwing a tanty these girls would be proud of.

aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 3:53pm:

HigherBeam wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 3:49pm: aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 3:46pm: I saw the segment on the "lesbian" brats last night, a more worthless pair of deadbeats would be hard to find anywhere. Your daughters amoeba I`m proud to say, nothing in common at all to these whining lesbian wrist flappers, who need to be wrapped in cotton wool, just to survive. I`m condemning their whining whimpishness, not their sexuality.

Yeah right - you just keep telling yourself that...

... wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 4:00pm:

HigherBeam wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 3:56pm: aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 3:55pm: Equitist wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 3:50pm: aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 3:46pm: I saw the segment on the "lesbian" brats last night, a more worthless pair of deadbeats would be hard to find anywhere. Huh!? They seemed like pretty typical 21st century teenage girls to me...judging by the female peers of my sons, nieces, nephews and neighbours... Tell your kids to be a bit more selective, discriminatory even.  They won`t need to go far to find a role model.   ;D ;D They wont find it in you amoeba Higherbeam is throwing a tanty these girls would be proud of.

I dont like trolls with no brains and have only negative things to say.and wont participate except to troll.if he wants to stop his trolling I will back off

Apparently, the year 11 girl Hannah did not break any documented school rules - and she was not suspended or expelled, rather she is being withdrawn from the school due to parental concern over targeted discrimination...

If anything, it would seem that the school's Principal has been making up special discriminatory rules around that particular girl's case as it went along...

It has been claimed, that a Yr 10 boy (who cannot be a student at the all-girls school and cannot therefore be a fee-paying student) was ultimately permitted to attend that Formal as a 'guest' of another Yr 11 girl...

However, the girl Hannah's Yr 10 girlfriend is/was a fee-paying student at the school...

So, if that claim is true, then the school ought to be in deep shyte - especially if girl Hannah was (as has been alleged) the only student who was asked to provide details of the age of her intended Formal 'guest'...

Equitist wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 4:19pm:

Apparently, the year 11 girl Hannah did not break any documented school rules - and she was not suspended or expelled, rather she is being withdrawn from the school due to parental concern over targeted discrimination... If anything, it would seem that the school's Principal has been making up special discriminatory rules around that particular girl's case as it went along... It has been claimed, that a Yr 10 boy (who cannot be a student at the all-girls school and cannot therefore be a fee-paying student) was ultimately permitted to attend that Formal as a 'guest' of another Yr 11 girl... However, the girl Hannah's Yr 10 girlfriend is/was a fee-paying student at the school... So, if that claim is true, then the school ought to be in deep shyte - especially if girl Hannah was (as has been alleged) the only student who was asked to provide details of the age of her intended Formal 'guest'...

You'd think if that was true, then the EOC would have made a ruling against the school pretty quick smart?  But they havent.....

HigherBeam wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 4:14pm:

... wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 4:00pm: HigherBeam wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 3:56pm: aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 3:55pm: Equitist wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 3:50pm: aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 3:46pm: I saw the segment on the "lesbian" brats last night, a more worthless pair of deadbeats would be hard to find anywhere. Huh!? They seemed like pretty typical 21st century teenage girls to me...judging by the female peers of my sons, nieces, nephews and neighbours... Tell your kids to be a bit more selective, discriminatory even.  They won`t need to go far to find a role model.   ;D ;D They wont find it in you amoeba Higherbeam is throwing a tanty these girls would be proud of. I dont like trolls with no brains and have only negative things to say.and wont participate except to troll.if he wants to stop his trolling I will back off

Go your hardest silly, retards don`t bother me.

It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 9:09am:

...I've also noticed that the regular female contributers on this Forum don't appear as often now, since the Homosexual Threads showed that the majority of Males dissagree with the Gay thing. (like der!)

When you say gay thing, do you mean a person who is a bit goofy and lame?  

Or something (anything) that you don't like and/or agree with?

Or sexual relations between two members of the same sex?

Or do you mean to disagree with the act of penetrative sex between two males?

 

I feel sorry for the girls but on the other hand -

why couldn't they arrange  male dance partners just for the night?

Perhaps they would have learnt something & it would have been
a rewarding experience for them?

Bobby. wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 11:07pm:

I feel sorry for the girls but on the other hand - why couldn't they arrange  male dance partners just for the night? Perhaps they would have learnt something & it would have been a rewarding experience for them?

Why should they have had to bobby??

How would you feel if you were told you HAD to take a male partner to a dinner/dance, instead of your wife/girlfriend????

... wrote on Nov 11^th, 2010 at 4:57pm:

Equitist wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 4:19pm: Apparently, the year 11 girl Hannah did not break any documented school rules - and she was not suspended or expelled, rather she is being withdrawn from the school due to parental concern over targeted discrimination... If anything, it would seem that the school's Principal has been making up special discriminatory rules around that particular girl's case as it went along... It has been claimed, that a Yr 10 boy (who cannot be a student at the all-girls school and cannot therefore be a fee-paying student) was ultimately permitted to attend that Formal as a 'guest' of another Yr 11 girl... However, the girl Hannah's Yr 10 girlfriend is/was a fee-paying student at the school... So, if that claim is true, then the school ought to be in deep shyte - especially if girl Hannah was (as has been alleged) the only student who was asked to provide details of the age of her intended Formal 'guest'... You'd think if that was true, then the EOC would have made a ruling against the school pretty quick smart?  But they havent.....

Wrong.  This is the reason it was dismissed:

ANTI-DISCRIMINATION ACT 1977 - SECT 49ZO
Education
49ZO Education

(1) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a person on the ground of homosexuality:
(a) by refusing or failing to accept the person’s application for admission as a student, or
(b) in the terms on which it is prepared to admit the person as a student.

(2) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a student on the ground of homosexuality:
(a) by denying the student access, or limiting the student’s access, to any benefit provided by the educational authority, or
(b) by expelling the student or subjecting the student to any other detriment.

(3) Nothing in this section applies to or in respect of a private educational authority.

what_katy_did wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 7:18am:

Wrong.  This is the reason it was dismissed: ANTI-DISCRIMINATION ACT 1977 - SECT 49ZO Education 49ZO Education (1) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a person on the ground of homosexuality: (a) by refusing or failing to accept the person’s application for admission as a student, or (b) in the terms on which it is prepared to admit the person as a student. (2) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a student on the ground of homosexuality: (a) by denying the student access, or limiting the student’s access, to any benefit provided by the educational authority, or (b) by expelling the student or subjecting the student to any other detriment. (3) Nothing in this section applies to or in respect of a private educational authority.

You see, private schools can do what they want.  NONE of the anti-discrimination legislation applies to them - they can refuse a child if they have a disability!  

And the state funds private schools and allows them to have exemption from basic human rights legislation.

what_katy_did wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 7:18am:

Wrong.  This is the reason it was dismissed: ANTI-DISCRIMINATION ACT 1977 - SECT 49ZO Education 49ZO Education (1) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a person on the ground of homosexuality: (a) by refusing or failing to accept the person’s application for admission as a student, or (b) in the terms on which it is prepared to admit the person as a student. (2) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a student on the ground of homosexuality: (a) by denying the student access, or limiting the student’s access, to any benefit provided by the educational authority, or (b) by expelling the student or subjecting the student to any other detriment. (3) Nothing in this section applies to or in respect of a private educational authority.

You see, private schools can do what they want.  NONE of the anti-discrimination legislation applies to them - they can refuse a child if they have a disability!  

And the state funds private schools and allows them to have exemption from basic human rights legislation.

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 6:38am:

Bobby. wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 11:07pm: I feel sorry for the girls but on the other hand - why couldn't they arrange  male dance partners just for the night? Perhaps they would have learnt something & it would have been a rewarding experience for them? Why should they have had to bobby?? How would you feel if you were told you HAD to take a male partner to a dinner/dance, instead of your wife/girlfriend????

Why? - I just said why - a rewarding & learning experience.
You are supposed to learn something a school.

I wouldn't accept having to go to a dance with a guy because I am a guy.
Guys don't dance together - what a stupid question.
Only poofs dance together.

Bobby. wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 7:40am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 6:38am: Bobby. wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 11:07pm: I feel sorry for the girls but on the other hand - why couldn't they arrange  male dance partners just for the night? Perhaps they would have learnt something & it would have been a rewarding experience for them? Why should they have had to bobby?? How would you feel if you were told you HAD to take a male partner to a dinner/dance, instead of your wife/girlfriend???? Why? - I just said why - a rewarding & learning experience. You are supposed to learn something a school. I wouldn't accept having to go to a dance with a guy because I am a guy. Guys don't dance together - what a stupid question. Only poofs dance together.

That's my point bobby, you would be angry if you were told to take a man, because YOU prefer girls....
The same thing applies to this girl, she prefers girls, so why should she be forced to go to the dance with someone other than her preference???

what_katy_did wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 7:18am:

... wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 4:57pm: Equitist wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 4:19pm: Apparently, the year 11 girl Hannah did not break any documented school rules - and she was not suspended or expelled, rather she is being withdrawn from the school due to parental concern over targeted discrimination... If anything, it would seem that the school's Principal has been making up special discriminatory rules around that particular girl's case as it went along... It has been claimed, that a Yr 10 boy (who cannot be a student at the all-girls school and cannot therefore be a fee-paying student) was ultimately permitted to attend that Formal as a 'guest' of another Yr 11 girl... However, the girl Hannah's Yr 10 girlfriend is/was a fee-paying student at the school... So, if that claim is true, then the school ought to be in deep shyte - especially if girl Hannah was (as has been alleged) the only student who was asked to provide details of the age of her intended Formal 'guest'... You'd think if that was true, then the EOC would have made a ruling against the school pretty quick smart?  But they havent..... Wrong.  This is the reason it was dismissed: ANTI-DISCRIMINATION ACT 1977 - SECT 49ZO Education 49ZO Education (1) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a person on the ground of homosexuality: (a) by refusing or failing to accept the person’s application for admission as a student, or (b) in the terms on which it is prepared to admit the person as a student. (2) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a student on the ground of homosexuality: (a) by denying the student access, or limiting the student’s access, to any benefit provided by the educational authority, or (b) by expelling the student or subjecting the student to any other detriment. (3) Nothing in this section applies to or in respect of a private educational authority.

I feel for the kid, but it wasnt the kid who was denied access, it was their partner.

Also, the whole idea of a private school is that.

People are free to come and go, but if you come you do so under the rules of that organisation.

Its a tough luck situation, but it wasnt a public school.

Verge wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 8:39am:

what_katy_did wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 7:18am: ... wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 4:57pm: Equitist wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 4:19pm: Apparently, the year 11 girl Hannah did not break any documented school rules - and she was not suspended or expelled, rather she is being withdrawn from the school due to parental concern over targeted discrimination... If anything, it would seem that the school's Principal has been making up special discriminatory rules around that particular girl's case as it went along... It has been claimed, that a Yr 10 boy (who cannot be a student at the all-girls school and cannot therefore be a fee-paying student) was ultimately permitted to attend that Formal as a 'guest' of another Yr 11 girl... However, the girl Hannah's Yr 10 girlfriend is/was a fee-paying student at the school... So, if that claim is true, then the school ought to be in deep shyte - especially if girl Hannah was (as has been alleged) the only student who was asked to provide details of the age of her intended Formal 'guest'... You'd think if that was true, then the EOC would have made a ruling against the school pretty quick smart?  But they havent..... Wrong.  This is the reason it was dismissed: ANTI-DISCRIMINATION ACT 1977 - SECT 49ZO Education 49ZO Education (1) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a person on the ground of homosexuality: (a) by refusing or failing to accept the person’s application for admission as a student, or (b) in the terms on which it is prepared to admit the person as a student. (2) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a student on the ground of homosexuality: (a) by denying the student access, or limiting the student’s access, to any benefit provided by the educational authority, or (b) by expelling the student or subjecting the student to any other detriment. (3) Nothing in this section applies to or in respect of a private educational authority. I feel for the kid, but it wasnt the kid who was denied access, it was their partner. Also, the whole idea of a private school is that. People are free to come and go, but if you come you do so under the rules of that organisation. Its a tough luck situation, but it wasnt a public school.

Well whaddya know...there IS a bit of common sense applied to the anti-discrimination act after all!

Why should people/organisations be forced to condone things which go against their beliefs?  

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 8:34am:

Bobby. wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 7:40am: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 6:38am: Bobby. wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 11:07pm: I feel sorry for the girls but on the other hand - why couldn't they arrange  male dance partners just for the night? Perhaps they would have learnt something & it would have been a rewarding experience for them? Why should they have had to bobby?? How would you feel if you were told you HAD to take a male partner to a dinner/dance, instead of your wife/girlfriend???? Why? - I just said why - a rewarding & learning experience. You are supposed to learn something a school. I wouldn't accept having to go to a dance with a guy because I am a guy. Guys don't dance together - what a stupid question. Only poofs dance together. That's my point bobby, you would be angry if you were told to take a man, because YOU prefer girls.... The same thing applies to this girl, she prefers girls, so why should she be forced to go to the dance with someone other than her preference???

Because it is good for her development.
It's part of the process of learning.
She will have interact with males at some stage & this will prepare her.

Bobby. wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 10:21am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 8:34am: Bobby. wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 7:40am: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 6:38am: Bobby. wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 11:07pm: I feel sorry for the girls but on the other hand - why couldn't they arrange  male dance partners just for the night? Perhaps they would have learnt something & it would have been a rewarding experience for them? Why should they have had to bobby?? How would you feel if you were told you HAD to take a male partner to a dinner/dance, instead of your wife/girlfriend???? Why? - I just said why - a rewarding & learning experience. You are supposed to learn something a school. I wouldn't accept having to go to a dance with a guy because I am a guy. Guys don't dance together - what a stupid question. Only poofs dance together. That's my point bobby, you would be angry if you were told to take a man, because YOU prefer girls.... The same thing applies to this girl, she prefers girls, so why should she be forced to go to the dance with someone other than her preference??? Because it is good for her development. It's part of the process of learning. She will have interact with males at some stage & this will prepare her.

And at the risk of sounding cliche, what if she preferred orangutans, but was told to bring a human?  eh?

 

Bobby. wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 10:21am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 8:34am: Bobby. wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 7:40am: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 6:38am: Bobby. wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 11:07pm: I feel sorry for the girls but on the other hand - why couldn't they arrange  male dance partners just for the night? Perhaps they would have learnt something & it would have been a rewarding experience for them? Why should they have had to bobby?? How would you feel if you were told you HAD to take a male partner to a dinner/dance, instead of your wife/girlfriend???? Why? - I just said why - a rewarding & learning experience. You are supposed to learn something a school. I wouldn't accept having to go to a dance with a guy because I am a guy. Guys don't dance together - what a stupid question. Only poofs dance together. That's my point bobby, you would be angry if you were told to take a man, because YOU prefer girls.... The same thing applies to this girl, she prefers girls, so why should she be forced to go to the dance with someone other than her preference??? Because it is good for her development. It's part of the process of learning. She will have interact with males at some stage & this will prepare her.

The girl's 16 or something isn't she?? How likely is it that a 16 yr old hasn't interacted with boys for most of her life??

She's only been going out with her girlfriend for 8 months ,so possibly the girl herself had only realised her sexuality in the last couple of years.....

12 or 14 years of 'interacting' with males should be all the practice she needs....

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 10:37am:

Bobby. wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 10:21am: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 8:34am: Bobby. wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 7:40am: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 6:38am: Bobby. wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 11:07pm: I feel sorry for the girls but on the other hand - why couldn't they arrange  male dance partners just for the night? Perhaps they would have learnt something & it would have been a rewarding experience for them? Why should they have had to bobby?? How would you feel if you were told you HAD to take a male partner to a dinner/dance, instead of your wife/girlfriend???? Why? - I just said why - a rewarding & learning experience. You are supposed to learn something a school. I wouldn't accept having to go to a dance with a guy because I am a guy. Guys don't dance together - what a stupid question. Only poofs dance together. That's my point bobby, you would be angry if you were told to take a man, because YOU prefer girls.... The same thing applies to this girl, she prefers girls, so why should she be forced to go to the dance with someone other than her preference??? Because it is good for her development. It's part of the process of learning. She will have interact with males at some stage & this will prepare her. The girl's 16 or something isn't she?? How likely is it that a 16 yr old hasn't interacted with boys for most of her life?? She's only been going out with her girlfriend for 8 months ,so possibly the girl herself had only realised her sexuality in the last couple of years..... 12 or 14 years of 'interacting' with males should be all the practice she needs....

LOL...yes, because 16 year old boys or girls are sooo worldly, wise and mature aren't they?

... wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 10:43am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 10:37am: Bobby. wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 10:21am: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 8:34am: Bobby. wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 7:40am: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 6:38am: Bobby. wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 11:07pm: I feel sorry for the girls but on the other hand - why couldn't they arrange  male dance partners just for the night? Perhaps they would have learnt something & it would have been a rewarding experience for them? Why should they have had to bobby?? How would you feel if you were told you HAD to take a male partner to a dinner/dance, instead of your wife/girlfriend???? Why? - I just said why - a rewarding & learning experience. You are supposed to learn something a school. I wouldn't accept having to go to a dance with a guy because I am a guy. Guys don't dance together - what a stupid question. Only poofs dance together. That's my point bobby, you would be angry if you were told to take a man, because YOU prefer girls.... The same thing applies to this girl, she prefers girls, so why should she be forced to go to the dance with someone other than her preference??? Because it is good for her development. It's part of the process of learning. She will have interact with males at some stage & this will prepare her. The girl's 16 or something isn't she?? How likely is it that a 16 yr old hasn't interacted with boys for most of her life?? She's only been going out with her girlfriend for 8 months ,so possibly the girl herself had only realised her sexuality in the last couple of years..... 12 or 14 years of 'interacting' with males should be all the practice she needs.... LOL...yes, because 16 year old boys or girls are sooo worldly, wise and mature aren't they?

Funny Wesley, but most children work out the basics of human  interaction by the time they start high school, the rest is just fine-tuning....

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 10:45am:

... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 10:43am: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 10:37am: Bobby. wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 10:21am: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 8:34am: Bobby. wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 7:40am: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 6:38am: Bobby. wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 11:07pm: I feel sorry for the girls but on the other hand - why couldn't they arrange  male dance partners just for the night? Perhaps they would have learnt something & it would have been a rewarding experience for them? Why should they have had to bobby?? How would you feel if you were told you HAD to take a male partner to a dinner/dance, instead of your wife/girlfriend???? Why? - I just said why - a rewarding & learning experience. You are supposed to learn something a school. I wouldn't accept having to go to a dance with a guy because I am a guy. Guys don't dance together - what a stupid question. Only poofs dance together. That's my point bobby, you would be angry if you were told to take a man, because YOU prefer girls.... The same thing applies to this girl, she prefers girls, so why should she be forced to go to the dance with someone other than her preference??? Because it is good for her development. It's part of the process of learning. She will have interact with males at some stage & this will prepare her. The girl's 16 or something isn't she?? How likely is it that a 16 yr old hasn't interacted with boys for most of her life?? She's only been going out with her girlfriend for 8 months ,so possibly the girl herself had only realised her sexuality in the last couple of years..... 12 or 14 years of 'interacting' with males should be all the practice she needs.... LOL...yes, because 16 year old boys or girls are sooo worldly, wise and mature aren't they? Funny Wesley, but most children work out the basics of human  interaction by the time they start high school, the rest is just fine-tuning....

Yes, but similarly, most 6 year olds have learnt the basics of football, but they need *just a bit* of practise before you could say they are competent at it.

These useless brats will howl at every obsticle that presents itself in their lives.  FFS, a middle aged male meets more discrimination than this trivia every day.  Time  for them to grow up a bit.

aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 11:46am:

These useless brats will howl at every obsticle that presents itself in their lives.  FFS, a middle aged male meets more discrimination than this trivia every day.  Time  for them to grow up a bit.

Fat chance with her nutless daddy pandering to her every whim.  I foresee a promising future in frivolous lawsuits a'la kristy fraser-kirk, for this girl, aided and abetted by a limp, emasculated 'man' too afraid to tell his daughter to stop being so precious and get on with it.

This whole thrtead is getting rather silly.

The girls need practice in dealing with males.
They will have plenty of time for their carpet munching activities
for the rest of their lives.

They should have gone to the function & picked a male partner.

Bobby. wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 12:14pm:

This whole thrtead is getting rather silly. The girls need practice in dealing with males. They will have plenty of time for their carpet munching activities for the rest of their lives. They should have gone to the function & picked a male partner.

Who says they dont have practice in dealing with males?


Just because they are lesbians doesnt mean they have never met a male , talked to a male or even had male friends.

You seem to be suggesting that if only they would associate with males (by going to a dance with them) their lesbianism would be "cured".

darkhall67 wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 12:24pm:

Bobby. wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 12:14pm: This whole thrtead is getting rather silly. The girls need practice in dealing with males. They will have plenty of time for their carpet munching activities for the rest of their lives. They should have gone to the function & picked a male partner. Who says they dont have practice in dealing with males? Just because they are lesbians doesnt mean they have never met a male , talked to a male or even had male friends. You seem to be suggesting that if only they would associate with males (by going to a dance with them) their lesbianism would be "cured".

In many cases, it does.  Not all, but many.

Bobby. wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 12:14pm:

This whole thrtead is getting rather silly. The girls need practice in dealing with males. They will have plenty of time for their carpet munching activities for the rest of their lives. They should have gone to the function & picked a male partner.

Ok so what do you  think the girl would have 'learned' by going to the dance with a male???
That she's not attracted to males??? I think she already knows that....
Or could it be she'd learn that other people have the right to dictate her lifestyle choices???

This ban was simply based on the fact that her partner was another girl....it wasn't about 'Year 10 students can't attend', because a Year 10 boy did attend, and from the way the article was written, Hannah was the only one who wanted to bring a girlfriend, so that's unlikely to 'destroy' the balance of boy-vs-girl at the dance....
It was the bias of the Headmistress and, possibly, the school that caused all this ruckus....

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 12:40pm:

Bobby. wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 12:14pm: This whole thrtead is getting rather silly. The girls need practice in dealing with males. They will have plenty of time for their carpet munching activities for the rest of their lives. They should have gone to the function & picked a male partner. Ok so what do you  think the girl would have 'learned' by going to the dance with a male??? That she's not attracted to males??? I think she already knows that.... Or could it be she'd learn that other people have the right to dictate her lifestyle choices??? This ban was simply based on the fact that her partner was another girl....it wasn't about 'Year 10 students can't attend', because a Year 10 boy did attend, and from the way the article was written, Hannah was the only one who wanted to bring a girlfriend, so that's unlikely to 'destroy' the balance of boy-vs-girl at the dance.... It was the bias of the Headmistress and, possibly, the school that caused all this ruckus....

No, it was the sensationalistic media that caused all this ruckus.  Gotta give the army of clapping seals something to get all outraged about - and what fits the bill better than a good spot of christian bashing eh?

... wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 11:50am:

aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 11:46am: These useless brats will howl at every obsticle that presents itself in their lives.  FFS, a middle aged male meets more discrimination than this trivia every day.  Time  for them to grow up a bit. Fat chance with her nutless daddy pandering to her every whim.  I foresee a promising future in frivolous lawsuits a'la kristy fraser-kirk, for this girl, aided and abetted by a limp, emasculated 'man' too afraid to tell his daughter to stop being so precious and get on with it.

Wes, my boy was involved in a horror car accident, broken back, lost one foot, all ribs on left side broken & more. He was in IC for over five days, many months recuperating, isn`t a paraplegic but had to learn to walk again etc.  He and his family lost their family home, due to his loss of income and expenses.  Apart from going after the idiot who hit his landcruiser on the left hand side at very high speed, the only comment he`s ever made on the event is to say how lucky his wife wasn`t in the car as she would have been but not for freak circumstances.   I`m proud of him, I can`t help but compare these whining rsoles.

... wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 12:58pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 12:40pm: Bobby. wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 12:14pm: This whole thrtead is getting rather silly. The girls need practice in dealing with males. They will have plenty of time for their carpet munching activities for the rest of their lives. They should have gone to the function & picked a male partner. Ok so what do you  think the girl would have 'learned' by going to the dance with a male??? That she's not attracted to males??? I think she already knows that.... Or could it be she'd learn that other people have the right to dictate her lifestyle choices??? This ban was simply based on the fact that her partner was another girl....it wasn't about 'Year 10 students can't attend', because a Year 10 boy did attend, and from the way the article was written, Hannah was the only one who wanted to bring a girlfriend, so that's unlikely to 'destroy' the balance of boy-vs-girl at the dance.... It was the bias of the Headmistress and, possibly, the school that caused all this ruckus.... No, it was the sensationalistic media that caused all this ruckus.  Gotta give the army of clapping seals something to get all outraged about - and what fits the bill better than a good spot of christian bashing eh?

Well  it got us writing posts  ;D

... wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 12:58pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 12:40pm: Bobby. wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 12:14pm: This whole thrtead is getting rather silly. The girls need practice in dealing with males. They will have plenty of time for their carpet munching activities for the rest of their lives. They should have gone to the function & picked a male partner. Ok so what do you  think the girl would have 'learned' by going to the dance with a male??? That she's not attracted to males??? I think she already knows that.... Or could it be she'd learn that other people have the right to dictate her lifestyle choices??? This ban was simply based on the fact that her partner was another girl....it wasn't about 'Year 10 students can't attend', because a Year 10 boy did attend, and from the way the article was written, Hannah was the only one who wanted to bring a girlfriend, so that's unlikely to 'destroy' the balance of boy-vs-girl at the dance.... It was the bias of the Headmistress and, possibly, the school that caused all this ruckus.... No, it was the sensationalistic media that caused all this ruckus.  Gotta give the army of clapping seals something to get all outraged about - and what fits the bill better than a good spot of christian bashing eh?

And aren't christian schools and churches bound by the same rules as the rest of Australia????

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 1:12pm:

... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 12:58pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 12:40pm: Bobby. wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 12:14pm: This whole thrtead is getting rather silly. The girls need practice in dealing with males. They will have plenty of time for their carpet munching activities for the rest of their lives. They should have gone to the function & picked a male partner. Ok so what do you  think the girl would have 'learned' by going to the dance with a male??? That she's not attracted to males??? I think she already knows that.... Or could it be she'd learn that other people have the right to dictate her lifestyle choices??? This ban was simply based on the fact that her partner was another girl....it wasn't about 'Year 10 students can't attend', because a Year 10 boy did attend, and from the way the article was written, Hannah was the only one who wanted to bring a girlfriend, so that's unlikely to 'destroy' the balance of boy-vs-girl at the dance.... It was the bias of the Headmistress and, possibly, the school that caused all this ruckus.... No, it was the sensationalistic media that caused all this ruckus.  Gotta give the army of clapping seals something to get all outraged about - and what fits the bill better than a good spot of christian bashing eh? And aren't christian schools and churches bound by the same rules as the rest of Australia????

Nope.


Quote:

ANTI-DISCRIMINATION ACT 1977 - SECT 49ZO Education 49ZO Education (1) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a person on the ground of homosexuality: (a) by refusing or failing to accept the person’s application for admission as a student, or (b) in the terms on which it is prepared to admit the person as a student. (2) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a student on the ground of homosexuality: (a) by denying the student access, or limiting the student’s access, to any benefit provided by the educational authority, or (b) by expelling the student or subjecting the student to any other detriment. (3) Nothing in this section applies to or in respect of a private educational authority.

And why should they be?  They are entitled to their beliefs.  
What the shrill, screaming lefties need to understand is that forcing everybody to compromise whatever beliefs they may have, so as not to offend some whining jokers, is discrimination too.

... wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 1:17pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 1:12pm: ... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 12:58pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 12:40pm: Bobby. wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 12:14pm: This whole thrtead is getting rather silly. The girls need practice in dealing with males. They will have plenty of time for their carpet munching activities for the rest of their lives. They should have gone to the function & picked a male partner. Ok so what do you  think the girl would have 'learned' by going to the dance with a male??? That she's not attracted to males??? I think she already knows that.... Or could it be she'd learn that other people have the right to dictate her lifestyle choices??? This ban was simply based on the fact that her partner was another girl....it wasn't about 'Year 10 students can't attend', because a Year 10 boy did attend, and from the way the article was written, Hannah was the only one who wanted to bring a girlfriend, so that's unlikely to 'destroy' the balance of boy-vs-girl at the dance.... It was the bias of the Headmistress and, possibly, the school that caused all this ruckus.... No, it was the sensationalistic media that caused all this ruckus.  Gotta give the army of clapping seals something to get all outraged about - and what fits the bill better than a good spot of christian bashing eh? And aren't christian schools and churches bound by the same rules as the rest of Australia???? Nope. Quote: ANTI-DISCRIMINATION ACT 1977 - SECT 49ZO Education 49ZO Education (1) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a person on the ground of homosexuality: (a) by refusing or failing to accept the person’s application for admission as a student, or (b) in the terms on which it is prepared to admit the person as a student. (2) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a student on the ground of homosexuality: (a) by denying the student access, or limiting the student’s access, to any benefit provided by the educational authority, or (b) by expelling the student or subjecting the student to any other detriment. (3) Nothing in this section applies to or in respect of a private educational authority. And why should they be?  They are entitled to their beliefs.   What the shrill, screaming lefties need to understand is that forcing everybody to compromise whatever beliefs they may have, so as not to offend some whining jokers, is discrimination too.

Ok so if the school objected to her lifestyle choice, why didn't they a) expell her, or b) admit that the reason she couldn't bring her girlfriend was, well, because she WAS a girl???

Why go through the song and dance about 'no Year 10 students' and then allow a male Yr 10 student to attend???

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 1:23pm:

... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 1:17pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 1:12pm: ... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 12:58pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 12:40pm: Bobby. wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 12:14pm: This whole thrtead is getting rather silly. The girls need practice in dealing with males. They will have plenty of time for their carpet munching activities for the rest of their lives. They should have gone to the function & picked a male partner. Ok so what do you  think the girl would have 'learned' by going to the dance with a male??? That she's not attracted to males??? I think she already knows that.... Or could it be she'd learn that other people have the right to dictate her lifestyle choices??? This ban was simply based on the fact that her partner was another girl....it wasn't about 'Year 10 students can't attend', because a Year 10 boy did attend, and from the way the article was written, Hannah was the only one who wanted to bring a girlfriend, so that's unlikely to 'destroy' the balance of boy-vs-girl at the dance.... It was the bias of the Headmistress and, possibly, the school that caused all this ruckus.... No, it was the sensationalistic media that caused all this ruckus.  Gotta give the army of clapping seals something to get all outraged about - and what fits the bill better than a good spot of christian bashing eh? And aren't christian schools and churches bound by the same rules as the rest of Australia???? Nope. Quote: ANTI-DISCRIMINATION ACT 1977 - SECT 49ZO Education 49ZO Education (1) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a person on the ground of homosexuality: (a) by refusing or failing to accept the person’s application for admission as a student, or (b) in the terms on which it is prepared to admit the person as a student. (2) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a student on the ground of homosexuality: (a) by denying the student access, or limiting the student’s access, to any benefit provided by the educational authority, or (b) by expelling the student or subjecting the student to any other detriment. (3) Nothing in this section applies to or in respect of a private educational authority. And why should they be?  They are entitled to their beliefs.   What the shrill, screaming lefties need to understand is that forcing everybody to compromise whatever beliefs they may have, so as not to offend some whining jokers, is discrimination too. Ok so if the school objected to her lifestyle choice, why didn't they a) expell her, or b) admit that the reason she couldn't bring her girlfriend was, well, because she WAS a girl??? Why go through the song and dance about 'no Year 10 students' and then allow a male Yr 10 student to attend???

Because the reaction of the brainless PC clowns is as predictable as clockwork?

... wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 1:28pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 1:23pm: ... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 1:17pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 1:12pm: ... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 12:58pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 12:40pm: Bobby. wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 12:14pm: This whole thrtead is getting rather silly. The girls need practice in dealing with males. They will have plenty of time for their carpet munching activities for the rest of their lives. They should have gone to the function & picked a male partner. Ok so what do you  think the girl would have 'learned' by going to the dance with a male??? That she's not attracted to males??? I think she already knows that.... Or could it be she'd learn that other people have the right to dictate her lifestyle choices??? This ban was simply based on the fact that her partner was another girl....it wasn't about 'Year 10 students can't attend', because a Year 10 boy did attend, and from the way the article was written, Hannah was the only one who wanted to bring a girlfriend, so that's unlikely to 'destroy' the balance of boy-vs-girl at the dance.... It was the bias of the Headmistress and, possibly, the school that caused all this ruckus.... No, it was the sensationalistic media that caused all this ruckus.  Gotta give the army of clapping seals something to get all outraged about - and what fits the bill better than a good spot of christian bashing eh? And aren't christian schools and churches bound by the same rules as the rest of Australia???? Nope. Quote: ANTI-DISCRIMINATION ACT 1977 - SECT 49ZO Education 49ZO Education (1) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a person on the ground of homosexuality: (a) by refusing or failing to accept the person’s application for admission as a student, or (b) in the terms on which it is prepared to admit the person as a student. (2) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a student on the ground of homosexuality: (a) by denying the student access, or limiting the student’s access, to any benefit provided by the educational authority, or (b) by expelling the student or subjecting the student to any other detriment. (3) Nothing in this section applies to or in respect of a private educational authority. And why should they be?  They are entitled to their beliefs.   What the shrill, screaming lefties need to understand is that forcing everybody to compromise whatever beliefs they may have, so as not to offend some whining jokers, is discrimination too. Ok so if the school objected to her lifestyle choice, why didn't they a) expell her, or b) admit that the reason she couldn't bring her girlfriend was, well, because she WAS a girl??? Why go through the song and dance about 'no Year 10 students' and then allow a male Yr 10 student to attend??? Because the reaction of the brainless PC clowns is as predictable as clockwork?

And just as predictable as the reaction of the anti-gay patrol...

Let's face it, if the girl's 'boyfriend' had been banned for being the wrong colour, or from the wrong religion or too old.....you'd be complaining about 'discrimination'..
But because the school's bias is in line with yours, you don't see it as 'discrimination'.....

Tell me, what are you going to do if your daughter walks up to you ( in 15 or 16 years) and 'comes out'??????

Just remember, there's pretty much a 50/50 chance that she might...

Quote:

Just remember, there's pretty much a 50/50 chance that she might.

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

... wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 2:17pm:

Quote: Just remember, there's pretty much a 50/50 chance that she might. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Laugh way, but it's really true...well maybe 33 1/3 chance then...
But think, she's either going to like boys, or girls, or both....
So if your daughter only has 3 choices, then it's a 1/3 bet on
which...yes??

That's NOT based on statistics across the population...just on 1 case...LOL

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 2:46pm:

... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 2:17pm: Quote: Just remember, there's pretty much a 50/50 chance that she might. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Laugh way, but it's really true...well maybe 33 1/3 chance then... But think, she's either going to like boys, or girls, or both.... So if your daughter only has 3 choices, then it's a 1/3 bet on which...yes?? That's NOT based on statistics across the population...just on 1 case...LOL

On the off chance she did, do you think i would expect everyone else to abandon their beliefs to accommodate her?  Hopefully she'll be raised with a little more respect than this 'it's all about what I want and stuff the rest of you' girl.

the school runs the dance, they decide who can come and who can't.

schoolgirl lesbians want to run a dance, fine. go and do it.

... wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 3:20pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 2:46pm: ... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 2:17pm: Quote: Just remember, there's pretty much a 50/50 chance that she might. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Laugh way, but it's really true...well maybe 33 1/3 chance then... But think, she's either going to like boys, or girls, or both.... So if your daughter only has 3 choices, then it's a 1/3 bet on which...yes?? That's NOT based on statistics across the population...just on 1 case...LOL On the off chance she did, do you think i would expect everyone else to abandon their beliefs to accommodate her?  Hopefully she'll be raised with a little more respect than this 'it's all about what I want and stuff the rest of you' girl.

But would you expect a school that you paid $4k or $6k per month to be a little more understanding...or at least a little more 'upfront' about their rules???

It's mostly the idea that they had to 'make up' a bogus rule that annoys me...

If they'd at least been honest enough to say, straight out, that same sex couples couldn't attend school dances, that would be acceptable (wrong, for discrimination reasons, but at least honest)....WHY lie about the reason for the refusal???

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 3:27pm:

... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 3:20pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 2:46pm: ... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 2:17pm: Quote: Just remember, there's pretty much a 50/50 chance that she might. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Laugh way, but it's really true...well maybe 33 1/3 chance then... But think, she's either going to like boys, or girls, or both.... So if your daughter only has 3 choices, then it's a 1/3 bet on which...yes?? That's NOT based on statistics across the population...just on 1 case...LOL On the off chance she did, do you think i would expect everyone else to abandon their beliefs to accommodate her?  Hopefully she'll be raised with a little more respect than this 'it's all about what I want and stuff the rest of you' girl. But would you expect a school that you paid $4k or $6k per month to be a little more understanding...or at least a little more 'upfront' about their rules??? It's mostly the idea that they had to 'make up' a bogus rule that annoys me... If they'd at least been honest enough to say, straight out, that same sex couples couldn't attend school dances, that would be acceptable (wrong, for discrimination reasons, but at least honest)....WHY lie about the reason for the refusal???

History has demonstarted that the gay lobby aren't too keen on anything or anyone who doesn't immediately fall to their knees, fawning over fhow faaaaabulous they are.  Whether unlawful or not, any action that casts homosexuals in anythign less than a positively glowing light is met with shrill protests that would just get on ya bloody nerves.  
If you could avoid having a busload of screaming queers picketing outside your office, merely for exercising your right to live according to your beliefs, you'd take it, right?

I mean, it's not exactly a secret that christianity doesn't condone homosexuality, is it?  It wouldn't take a genius to realise they're not exactly going to encourage a student to flout the very foundations of their teachings.

... wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 3:33pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 3:27pm: ... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 3:20pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 2:46pm: ... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 2:17pm: Quote: Just remember, there's pretty much a 50/50 chance that she might. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Laugh way, but it's really true...well maybe 33 1/3 chance then... But think, she's either going to like boys, or girls, or both.... So if your daughter only has 3 choices, then it's a 1/3 bet on which...yes?? That's NOT based on statistics across the population...just on 1 case...LOL On the off chance she did, do you think i would expect everyone else to abandon their beliefs to accommodate her?  Hopefully she'll be raised with a little more respect than this 'it's all about what I want and stuff the rest of you' girl. But would you expect a school that you paid $4k or $6k per month to be a little more understanding...or at least a little more 'upfront' about their rules??? It's mostly the idea that they had to 'make up' a bogus rule that annoys me... If they'd at least been honest enough to say, straight out, that same sex couples couldn't attend school dances, that would be acceptable (wrong, for discrimination reasons, but at least honest)....WHY lie about the reason for the refusal??? History has demonstarted that the gay lobby aren't too keen on anything or anyone who doesn't immediately fall to their knees, fawning over fhow faaaaabulous they are.  Whether unlawful or not, any action that casts homosexuals in anythign less than a positively glowing light is met with shrill protests that would just get on ya bloody nerves.   If you could avoid having a busload of screaming queers picketing outside your office, merely for exercising your right to live according to your beliefs, you'd take it, right? I mean, it's not exactly a secret that christianity doesn't condone homosexuality, is it?  It wouldn't take a genius to realise they're not exactly going to encourage a student to flout the very foundations of their teachings.

But would it really have hurt to allow ONE student, from a group of, roughly, 40 or 50 a little slack for ONE function???

What did they expect, that EVERY girl in the 'next' Yr 11 class would want to bring a female partner to the next Yr 11 formal???
Seriously, shouldn't they either bend to current attitudes, or at least state publically they they won't??

It seems to be a fairly isolated case.....what would the school do about a girl who, while being heterosexual, didn't know any boy well enough to invite to the dance?? Ban her too???

It's still an unjustified over reaction....

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 3:39pm:

... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 3:33pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 3:27pm: ... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 3:20pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 2:46pm: ... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 2:17pm: Quote: Just remember, there's pretty much a 50/50 chance that she might. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Laugh way, but it's really true...well maybe 33 1/3 chance then... But think, she's either going to like boys, or girls, or both.... So if your daughter only has 3 choices, then it's a 1/3 bet on which...yes?? That's NOT based on statistics across the population...just on 1 case...LOL On the off chance she did, do you think i would expect everyone else to abandon their beliefs to accommodate her?  Hopefully she'll be raised with a little more respect than this 'it's all about what I want and stuff the rest of you' girl. But would you expect a school that you paid $4k or $6k per month to be a little more understanding...or at least a little more 'upfront' about their rules??? It's mostly the idea that they had to 'make up' a bogus rule that annoys me... If they'd at least been honest enough to say, straight out, that same sex couples couldn't attend school dances, that would be acceptable (wrong, for discrimination reasons, but at least honest)....WHY lie about the reason for the refusal??? History has demonstarted that the gay lobby aren't too keen on anything or anyone who doesn't immediately fall to their knees, fawning over fhow faaaaabulous they are.  Whether unlawful or not, any action that casts homosexuals in anythign less than a positively glowing light is met with shrill protests that would just get on ya bloody nerves.   If you could avoid having a busload of screaming queers picketing outside your office, merely for exercising your right to live according to your beliefs, you'd take it, right? I mean, it's not exactly a secret that christianity doesn't condone homosexuality, is it?  It wouldn't take a genius to realise they're not exactly going to encourage a student to flout the very foundations of their teachings. But would it really have hurt to allow ONE student, from a group of, roughly, 40 or 50 a little slack for ONE function??? What did they expect, that EVERY girl in the 'next' Yr 11 class would want to bring a female partner to the next Yr 11 formal??? Seriously, shouldn't they either bend to current attitudes, or at least state publically they they won't?? It seems to be a fairly isolated case.....what would the school do about a girl who, while being heterosexual, didn't know any boy well enough to invite to the dance?? Ban her too???

I read in one version of the artcile that 'about half' of the girls didn't bring any partner at all.  But that'd be too easy....

... wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 10:43am:

LOL...yes, because 16 year old boys or girls are sooo worldly, wise and mature aren't they?

16 year old boys or girls would know if they are gay or not.

ask a gay person when they realised they were gay and it's usually before they even hit puberty.

what_katy_did wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 4:34pm:

... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 10:43am: LOL...yes, because 16 year old boys or girls are sooo worldly, wise and mature aren't they? 16 year old boys or girls would know if they are gay or not. ask a gay person when they realised they were gay and it's usually before they even hit puberty.

I can't argue with that, but many aren't sure at age 16 either.

... wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 4:39pm:

what_katy_did wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 4:34pm: ... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 10:43am: LOL...yes, because 16 year old boys or girls are sooo worldly, wise and mature aren't they? 16 year old boys or girls would know if they are gay or not. ask a gay person when they realised they were gay and it's usually before they even hit puberty. I can't argue with that, but many aren't sure at age 16 either.

so if a young person 'isn't sure', then they aren't sure.

i'm not 'sure' what that actually has to do with this situation, where the girl seems pretty sure to me.

But apart from all that, I have to mention that Chris Lily classic 'Summer Heights High' - if any of you haven't seen it, find the 'school formal' episode on U-tube - the main character Jaime decides it would be 'hot' to take a lesbian to the formal...  pretty funny even if it is poking fun at a serious topic.

what_katy_did wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 4:47pm:

... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 4:39pm: what_katy_did wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 4:34pm: ... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 10:43am: LOL...yes, because 16 year old boys or girls are sooo worldly, wise and mature aren't they? 16 year old boys or girls would know if they are gay or not. ask a gay person when they realised they were gay and it's usually before they even hit puberty. I can't argue with that, but many aren't sure at age 16 either. so if a young person 'isn't sure', then they aren't sure. i'm not 'sure' what that actually has to do with this situation, where the girl seems pretty sure to me. But apart from all that, I have to mention that Chris Lily classic 'Summer Heights High' - if any of you haven't seen it, find the 'school formal' episode on U-tube - the main character Jaime decides it would be 'hot' to take a lesbian to the formal...  pretty funny even if it is poking fun at a serious topic.

Doesn't matter anyway - this isn't about whether she is or isn't a lezza - this is about children learning that you sometimes have to play by the rules, even if it doesn't go your way.  
Having a sook might work on daddy dearest, but ya can't win 'em all.

... wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 4:58pm:

Doesn't matter anyway - this isn't about whether she is or isn't a lezza - this is about children learning that you sometimes have to play by the rules, even if it doesn't go your way.   Having a sook might work on daddy dearest, but ya can't win 'em all.

or, it may teach her that it takes courage to stand up and fight when you believe that people are being treated unjustly, even when it's likely that you may be ridiculed for your efforts?

what_katy_did wrote on Nov 12^th, 2010 at 5:09pm:

... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 4:58pm: or, it may teach her that it takes courage to stand up and fight when you believe that people are being treated unjustly, even when it's likely that you may be ridiculed for your efforts? Yeah Maybe. 'snot the way I see it, but I can dig it. Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by bobbythebat1 on Nov 12th, 2010 at 10:18pm I've enjoyed this thread about those two little carpet munchers. May they munch on and find much happiness.  ;D Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by Soren on Nov 12th, 2010 at 11:10pm what_katy_did wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 5:09pm: ... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 4:58pm: or, it may teach her that it takes courage to stand up and fight when you believe that people are being treated unjustly, even when it's likely that you may be ridiculed for your efforts? It is not unjust to say to a girl of 17: "You have a girlfriend??  And you 'believe' in your right to have a girlfriend?? Don't be such a poseur, love, you are being ridiculous. Find something worthwhile to fight for if you want to make this a better world. Fighting for the right to pussy for 17 year old girls ain't it. That's a trashy, lame-o, cowarly copout.  What next? Tattoos?? Nose piercing? Watching Australian Idol while squeezing your pimples? ' Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by what_katy_did on Nov 13th, 2010 at 1:31am Soren wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 11:10pm: what_katy_did wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 5:09pm: ... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 4:58pm: It is not unjust to say to a girl of 17: "You have a girlfriend??  And you 'believe' in your right to have a girlfriend?? Don't be such a poseur, love, you are being ridiculous. Find something worthwhile to fight for if you want to make this a better world. Fighting for the right to pussy for 17 year old girls ain't it. That's a trashy, lame-o, cowarly copout.  What next? Tattoos?? Nose piercing? Watching Australian Idol while squeezing your pimples? ' see previous post :) Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by Soren on Nov 13th, 2010 at 8:44am Indeed - "you guarantee me it's cool? - lesbian issue solved, let's move on to dresses."  The 'fighting for your beliefs' bit is just an afterthought to frighten the sniggerers into silence. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWBxFG3UZoI Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by aussiefree2ride on Nov 13th, 2010 at 12:15pm what_katy_did wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 5:09pm: ... wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 4:58pm: or, it may teach her that it takes courage to stand up and fight when you believe that people are being treated unjustly, even when it's likely that you may be ridiculed for your efforts? These brats need to first learn the difference between gutsy fighting, and self centred sooky sulking.  They also need to learn when not to be precious little Prima Donnas.  Would anyone here give either of these soggy little powder puffs a job.  They`d be howling and squealing at the injustice of the first little thing that didn`t suit them. This particular brand of attention seeking brings to mind, the story about the clowns who were calling ambulances for trivial scratches and paper cuts. Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by what_katy_did on Nov 14th, 2010 at 7:15am aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 13th, 2010 at 12:15pm: This particular brand of attention seeking brings to mind, the story about the clowns who were calling ambulances for trivial scratches and paper cuts. how so?  how does a girl fighting for the right to take her girlfriend to the prom compare to frivilous use of emergency services that could result in someone else losing a life? Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by pansi1951 on Nov 14th, 2010 at 8:48am I can't work out why they would enrol in a Christian school, then whine about Christian principles. The same as someone turning up to a mosque and complain about not being allowed to masturbate. The girls need to change schools, perhaps a NON religious one would be more suitable. About our school........ "Ivanhoe Girls' aims to provide the best learning and teaching which, underpinned by the Christian philosophy," Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by aussiefree2ride on Nov 14th, 2010 at 9:15am what_katy_did wrote on Nov 14th, 2010 at 7:15am: aussiefree2ride wrote on Nov 13th, 2010 at 12:15pm: This particular brand of attention seeking brings to mind, the story about the clowns who were calling ambulances for trivial scratches and paper cuts. how so?  how does a girl fighting for the right to take her girlfriend to the prom compare to frivilous use of emergency services that could result in someone else losing a life? Fighting?  Fighting involves effort, and pain, this is "fighting" in the same league as fembos call nagging someone "challenging them", conjuring up images of heroic combatants charging, thrusting, slashing, fighting selflessly to the death, rather than some silly old whining bag trying to talk a bloke into hanging himself. These silly little brats need to wake up to themselves, and learn to live in the softest country in the history of the world. Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by Equitist on Nov 14th, 2010 at 11:41am what_katy_did wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 7:18am: ... wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 4:57pm: Equitist wrote on Nov 11th, 2010 at 4:19pm: Apparently, the year 11 girl Hannah did not break any documented school rules - and she was not suspended or expelled, rather she is being withdrawn from the school due to parental concern over targeted discrimination... If anything, it would seem that the school's Principal has been making up special discriminatory rules around that particular girl's case as it went along... It has been claimed, that a Yr 10 boy (who cannot be a student at the all-girls school and cannot therefore be a fee-paying student) was ultimately permitted to attend that Formal as a 'guest' of another Yr 11 girl... However, the girl Hannah's Yr 10 girlfriend is/was a fee-paying student at the school... So, if that claim is true, then the school ought to be in deep shyte - especially if girl Hannah was (as has been alleged) the only student who was asked to provide details of the age of her intended Formal 'guest'... You'd think if that was true, then the EOC would have made a ruling against the school pretty quick smart?  But they havent..... Wrong.  This is the reason it was dismissed: ANTI-DISCRIMINATION ACT 1977 - SECT 49ZO Education 49ZO Education (1) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a person on the ground of homosexuality: (a) by refusing or failing to accept the person’s application for admission as a student, or (b) in the terms on which it is prepared to admit the person as a student. (2) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a student on the ground of homosexuality: (a) by denying the student access, or limiting the student’s access, to any benefit provided by the educational authority, or (b) by expelling the student or subjecting the student to any other detriment. (3) Nothing in this section applies to or in respect of a private educational authority. Sorry, folks, to dredge up a post from the middle of the thread, but I've been offline for a couple of days... I'm not sure that the case was "dismissed" per se - because the parties were sent into mediation (which appears to be the preferred method for all Commissions and Ombudsman organisations - as they do not wish to set a legal precedent by imposing a decision, rather they tend to guide the parties on the basis of their likely decision)... As I basically said the other day, I reckon that the Commission ought to automatically prosecute clear acts of institutional discrimination - because an act of wanton discrimination ought not be swept under a bureaucratic carpet... If mediation is to be utilised, then it should only be limited to negotiating the bases of the future relationship betwixt the parties... Anyways, from where I'm sitting, this seems to be an anomaly in the Anti-Discrimination Act - which generally focuses on the inherent nature and effect of acts of discrimination rather than on the rights of the perpetrator... After all, a private commercial organisation is not normally exempt from discrimination against homosexuals just because it is a 'private' organisation... What's worse, IM(not-so)HO, is that so-called 'private' schools receive substantial public funding and are therefore not entirely 'private'... I'd also suggest that we Aussies ought to be careful not to support discrimination by one particular private institution, since that paves the way for future discrimination by other private institutions... Either way, the school at issue ought not be excused for its targeted and sustained maltreatment of these vulnerable girls... As things stand, injustice has been allowed to prevail - and this serves the best overall interests of neither the complainant/s nor the broader community... Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by Equitist on Nov 14th, 2010 at 11:59am Bobby. wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 12:14pm: This whole thrtead is getting rather silly. The girls need practice in dealing with males. They will have plenty of time for their carpet munching activities for the rest of their lives. They should have gone to the function & picked a male partner. Sorry, Bobby, but that is a ludicrous argument... Either way, I reckon that private schools ought to be providing better examples for promoting self-esteem and valuing differences - as well as demonstrating principled rule making, management, conflict resolution and public relations... Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by Verge on Nov 14th, 2010 at 12:31pm It worries me more that people are not recognising the rights of a private institution to be free to applies rules within itself that it wants. When you join private institutions, you are agreeing to abide by their rules.  Its not a matter of joining them and then changing them to suit you. I see it no different from a forum.  When you join, you do so agreeing to their rules. In principle this is no different. The beautiful part about it is since it is private, if you dont like it you are free to leave.   Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by bobbythebat1 on Nov 14th, 2010 at 12:37pm Equitist wrote on Nov 14th, 2010 at 11:59am: Bobby. wrote on Nov 12th, 2010 at 12:14pm: This whole thrtead is getting rather silly. The girls need practice in dealing with males. They will have plenty of time for their carpet munching activities for the rest of their lives. They should have gone to the function & picked a male partner. Sorry, Bobby, but that is a ludicrous argument... Either way, I reckon that private schools ought to be providing better examples for promoting self-esteem and valuing differences - as well as demonstrating principled rule making, management, conflict resolution and public relations... No it's not - why? You are supposed to go to school to get an education - that means a lot more than the 3Rs. Personal development must be learned also. This includes how to socialise with members of the opposite sex - even how to walk properly - which dance can teach. Life is not about doing anything you want - especially for school age kids. I have spoken to kids out of school & some lack social skills & any ability to hold a conversation. They can't even walk properly - some don't know how to swim, dance & do many other normal tasks. Those girls need a good kick in the backside. Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by Amadd on Nov 14th, 2010 at 1:05pm From what I saw, the two girls were/are quite attractive and not your stereotypical dyke. In which case, they should be encouraged to like males  ;) Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by Imperium of the Rising Sun on Nov 14th, 2010 at 1:09pm Lesbians are faking it anyway. Like I actually think that these girls are sincere about their sexuality. Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by Equitist on Nov 14th, 2010 at 1:22pm Verge wrote on Nov 14th, 2010 at 12:31pm: It worries me more that people are not recognising the rights of a private institution to be free to applies rules within itself that it wants. When you join private institutions, you are agreeing to abide by their rules.  Its not a matter of joining them and then changing them to suit you. I see it no different from a forum.  When you join, you do so agreeing to their rules. In principle this is no different. The beautiful part about it is since it is private, if you dont like it you are free to leave.   Notwithstanding that the rules were not explicit and that the Principal has been inconsistent in applying her adhoc rules... Careful, Verge - that interpretation sets a dangerous precedent... Imagine if Xtian and/or Muslim schools suddenly imposed adhoc rules based upon the selectively-literal some of the more extreme teachings of their holy books - including those parts which advocate physical violence to discipline children and women or against other faiths !? Should such institutions really be allowed to become unfettered laws unto themselves!? Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by Imperium of the Rising Sun on Nov 14th, 2010 at 1:31pm Why do you use so many .... when you type... Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by Amadd on Nov 14th, 2010 at 1:40pm Quote: Lesbians are faking it anyway. Like I actually think that these girls are sincere about their sexuality. Do you think they may just be trying to create a scene? I heard one of the girls saying that being lesbian is her choice, which made me question her "choice" of words. Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by Equitist on Nov 14th, 2010 at 1:42pm Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 14th, 2010 at 8:48am: I can't work out why they would enrol in a Christian school, then whine about Christian principles I agree - but very few parents would be able to predict or control the way their child's  sexuality will develop... To be fair, even fewer would be willing and/or able to predict (much less accept), at around the time of choosing a high school that their 10-12 YO child will attend, that their child may decide/discover that they are not heterosexual at around age 15-18... Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by Imperium of the Rising Sun on Nov 14th, 2010 at 1:42pm Saying that you're bi or lesbian seems to be really common for teenage girls now. They usually get over it when they grow a little older. Lots of women seem to have bisexual tendencies. Most are a few drinks away from making out with their best friend. Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by Equitist on Nov 14th, 2010 at 1:51pm JC Denton wrote on Nov 14th, 2010 at 1:42pm: Saying that you're bi or lesbian seems to be really common for teenage girls now. They usually get over it when they grow a little older. Lots of women seem to have bisexual tendencies. Most are a few drinks away from making out with their best friend. LOL...are you sure you aren't projecting some of your own fantasies, Imp!? Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by Imperium of the Rising Sun on Nov 14th, 2010 at 1:52pm Nah, it's true. Lesbians, and I mean real lesbians, don't turn me on anyway. They're usually disgusting and hate men. Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by Equitist on Nov 14th, 2010 at 1:55pm JC Denton wrote on Nov 14th, 2010 at 1:52pm: Nah, it's true. Who else thinks so? Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by Imperium of the Rising Sun on Nov 14th, 2010 at 1:58pm Equitist wrote on Nov 14th, 2010 at 1:55pm: JC Denton wrote on Nov 14th, 2010 at 1:52pm: Nah, it's true. Who else thinks so? Scientific sources. http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Bisexuality Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by Equitist on Nov 14th, 2010 at 2:05pm On the subject of private schools purportedly being exempt from anti-discrimination laws: I found something online the other day about a case of an Ivanhoe school seeking some type of exemption for positively discriminating in favour of enrolling girls to balance out their disproportionately male student population... I presume it was the primary feeder school - but I'm posting from my mobile ATM, so I can't easily search the internet to post links... Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by pansi1951 on Nov 14th, 2010 at 2:17pm JC Denton wrote on Nov 14th, 2010 at 1:42pm: Saying that you're bi or lesbian seems to be really common for teenage girls now. They usually get over it when they grow a little older. Lots of women seem to have bisexual tendencies. Most are a few drinks away from making out with their best friend. So I've noticed. The teenage boys think it's cool to have a boyfriend too. I'm sure most of them will end up with the opposite sex when they grow up a bit. It might be a fashion thing, or the last frontier of rebelliousness. Ciggies, alcohol and tattoos are all socially accepted now, so the next best thing is to have a same sex partner.....look at me, I'm out there and proud of it, what ya gunna do about it? Much like the friend on the dogs leash, but they won't drag them around forever, they get over it. Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by Soren on Nov 14th, 2010 at 3:39pm Equitist wrote on Nov 14th, 2010 at 1:22pm: Verge wrote on Nov 14th, 2010 at 12:31pm: It worries me more that people are not recognising the rights of a private institution to be free to applies rules within itself that it wants. When you join private institutions, you are agreeing to abide by their rules.  Its not a matter of joining them and then changing them to suit you. I see it no different from a forum.  When you join, you do so agreeing to their rules. In principle this is no different. The beautiful part about it is since it is private, if you dont like it you are free to leave.   Notwithstanding that the rules were not explicit and that the Principal has been inconsistent in applying her adhoc rules... Careful, Verge - that interpretation sets a dangerous precedent... Imagine if Xtian and/or Muslim schools suddenly imposed adhoc rules based upon the selectively-literal some of the more extreme teachings of their holy books - including those parts which advocate physical violence to discipline children and women or against other faiths !? Should such institutions really be allowed to become unfettered laws unto themselves!? It is people like you who give adulthood a bad name. I am positive that no school rules state that you cannot bring your pet goat Sylvia (look it up)  to the school formal. Will you then argue that because the rules don't spell it out you have no obligation to make yourself aware of the customs and expections for the event? Self-styled 'free thinkers' like you are really  the worst sticklers for the minutea of black letter rules. Every day you strive to re-live your best days, your glory days, as the milk monitor. Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by aussiefree2ride on Nov 14th, 2010 at 6:39pm We`ll be able to claim some degree of maturity as a society while this type of story remains a bit of a novel loon show.  After all, silly little brats will always be silly little brats, although most do morph into silly older, wrinkly brats given time. Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by chicken_lipsforme on Nov 16th, 2010 at 8:25am Who cares, the stories a dud rubber. Title: Re:  No room for girlfriends at Ivanhoe Girls' dance Post by WESLEY.PIPES on Nov 16th, 2010 at 10:19am Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 14th, 2010 at 2:17pm: JC Denton wrote on Nov 14th, 2010 at 1:42pm: Saying that you're bi or lesbian seems to be really common for teenage girls now. They usually get over it when they grow a little older. Lots of women seem to have bisexual tendencies. Most are a few drinks away from making out with their best friend. So I've noticed. The teenage boys think it's cool to have a boyfriend too. I'm sure most of them will end up with the opposite sex when they grow up a bit. It might be a fashion thing, or the last frontier of rebelliousness. Ciggies, alcohol and tattoos are all socially accepted now, so the next best thing is to have a same sex partner.....look at me, I'm out there and proud of it, what ya gunna do about it? Much like the friend on the dogs leash, but they won't drag them around forever, they get over it. I doubt that very much. Australian Politics Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.5.2! YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2026. All Rights Reserved.