Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

MineralMan

(146,262 posts)
Sun Jun 1, 2014, 01:40 PM Jun 2014

Utah Girls Have No Right to Bare Arms

http://www.takepart.com/article/2014/05/29/utah-high-school-photoshopped-clothes-girls-pictures-yearbook

This Utah High School Photoshopped Clothes Onto Girls' Yearbook Pictures


Here’s a heartening message for America’s teen girls: If a high school’s administrators don’t think her bare arms or shirt neckline is modest enough, they might add fabric to her clothing and cover her up with the magic of Photoshop. At least, that is the way officials at Wasatch High School in Heber City, Utah, handle outfits they deemed inappropriate. The school, which is about 45 minutes southeast of Salt Lake City, has come under fire for digitally altering the photos of some of its female students so that less of their skin is exposed.

“I just started flipping through and noticed that mine was edited, that my shirt was pulled up farther,” sophomore Shelby Baum told the local Fox affiliate, KSTU. “They didn’t tell you before they edited it. They didn’t give you an option to fix it—so you look funny in your yearbook picture.”

Along with raised necklines, shirts without sleeves and tank tops are off limits: Apparently a girl’s bare shoulder is now immodest. (Ahem, if you’ve purchased a sleeveless, floor-length maxi dress, shame on you—you don’t meet Wasatch’s dress code.) The school claims that the teens knew the dress code and were warned that if they didn’t meet the clothing standard, their pictures would be altered.

What makes the alterations particularly bizarre, and leads students to see the Photoshopping as doubly unfair, is that the school is inconsistent in its changes. In one instance, two girls wear sleeveless tops that pretty much look the same, but only one of them receives Photoshopped sleeves.


More at link...

I thought the Second Amendment protected these rights. What do I know?
8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Igel

(35,282 posts)
1. My school would object on two grounds.
Sun Jun 1, 2014, 02:12 PM
Jun 2014

1. Bra strap is showing. No underwear to be visible. Male or female. Yes, that includes wearing a bra or boxes over other clothing. The key morpheme in "underwear" is "under." That may be the difference between the two pictures. (The writer is in no mood to engage in an exercise in good will--the person knows what's going on already, wants to be indignant or be seen displaying indignation, so what need is there for evidence that could falsify the claim and ruin a perfectly satisfying rant?)

2. Strap is too probably narrow, although that's a tougher call because it's close. There's a minimum strap width like there's a minimum skirt length and leg length for shorts. Sleeveless is fine for girls, bare midriff isn't. (Guys can't wear tank tops.)

A quote from the dress code--such things are typically in the student handbook--would have been nice. Instead we just get what somebody arguing against the school says the school's dress code is. Straw man? Perhaps, perhaps not. Not worth the time to do the writer's job.

MineralMan

(146,262 posts)
4. I'm not really down with school dress codes.
Sun Jun 1, 2014, 03:39 PM
Jun 2014

Besides, according to this and other stories, the editors of the yearbook were selective with the photos they altered.

MineralMan

(146,262 posts)
3. I don't know. Probably not.
Sun Jun 1, 2014, 03:35 PM
Jun 2014

Apparently, though, the school's yearbook editors were selective in whose pictures they Photoshopped.

LadyHawkAZ

(6,199 posts)
7. The Trib had a shot of one boy with a "You Suck" T-shirt visible
Sun Jun 1, 2014, 03:57 PM
Jun 2014

That was the official photo, mind you. There were also student snapshots published of boys with open shirts or shirts off.

http://www.sltrib.com/csp/cms/sites/sltrib/pages/slidegallery.csp?cid=58002926

Remember, this is Utah.

jmowreader

(50,533 posts)
8. I'd be more pissed about the seven-pixel Gaussian blur they put on that picture
Sun Jun 1, 2014, 04:56 PM
Jun 2014

Next question: what the fuck is going on with those bra straps? If she's a senior she paid good money to have these photos made; someone at the studio should have checked her for wardrobe malfunctions before the session started. If she's an underclassman, shouldn't a woman teacher be assigned to check the girls for this before they go in front of the camera?

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Utah Girls Have No Right ...