Social Justice Warriors Thread

[BjornP]

The Danish Flag Code says that their flag is not to be flown after sunset, yet here we see a Danish flag on display after sunset,



Two hours late to the meeting, I might add.

Shaking my head at you nords.

No flag is "flown" in that picture.

Anyway, I was not "arguing for" whatever "side" you think I support in America. Excatly like the SJWs, you are simply one of those increasing number of Americans who deliberately look so hard for things to be offended about, that you will always find it. Much like those who can find "racism" in everything.

Logically, I assumed that you looked at those school rules and "found" something that was never there.

In the photo you posted it does simply say "US flag", after all. Could easily interpret that as "not allowed to wear US flag". Have they been asked if that’s their meaning?

And you're either lying or a complete idiot if you read that and thought it means no one is allowed to wear clothing with a flag on it.

I appear to just have some common sense versus flying into auto-offended mode. Look what a bit more of searching uncovered:

https://www.ajc.com/news/education/metr ... pUxFDsAPM/

Aug 04, 2017 *cough*

Roseville High School officials said in a Facebook post that the reference to the U.S. flag in the dress code was an error, and should have read, "Flags shall not be worn in demeaning manner."

School officials said that they "would never ban the appropriate display of the American flag," and that the school has a long history of working with patriotic groups like the VFW.

But hey, Okee Social Justice Warrior, you go on continuing to be outraged... I'm sure something new and terribly, terribly offensive to your dandelion sensibilities is juuuust around the corner. If it makes you offended like a little princess, it surely can't be wrong, and surely it can't be you who didn't research a story before lapping up the outrage like a fat guy in a tub of mayo. It must be the white man's fa... oh, sorry, mistook you for those other perpetually offended guys again. Wonder how that keeps happening?

[Montegriffo]

Waits for StA to ad hom attack Bjorn's source for this non-story too...

[Speaker to Animals]

It's obviously bullshit.

Come on, guys. Be honest.

If they instead said something like "LGBT messages", you'd get all butthurt about it. Then like a week later, when some administer is like -- oh, my bad! It was just a typo and we meant "no disparaging messages about LGBT issues!" -- you'd be equally unimpressed.

At least be honest for fuck sake.

[Okeefenokee]

And you know he knows it's bullshit.

The following are prohibited:

US Flag

Oh no, we never meant the flag was prohibited. When we said the flag was prohibited, we meant you have to respect the flag.

You're putting on a good show.

[BjornP]

It's obviously bullshit.

Come on, guys. Be honest.

If they instead said something like "LGBT messages", you'd get all butthurt about it. Then like a week later, when some administer is like -- oh, my bad! It was just a typo and we meant "no disparaging messages about LGBT issues!" -- you'd be equally unimpressed.

At least be honest for fuck sake.

I wouldn't, because I'm not principly opposed to elementary schools banning items of clothing with messages on them. Not that I see the resemblance of the two cases. The proper comparison would be: "LGBT flag" --> you assuming I'd be outraged --> school "correcting" that it meant people couldn't wear the flag as garment. I'd be absolutely OK with any school banning the wearing of flags... unless you know how to drape a proper toga, it would fall off. If they corrected it, I'd assume that some parents called the school to act like morons needing something to be offended about.

So, it is possible that they really meant a ban on all depictions of the US flag. It is. The possibility exists. It's just an unproven one, based on literally no evidence. If there was evidence that the person who wrote that or was in charge was one of them. But simply applying Occam's Razor to the story, without making several assumptions that the school is part of the giant Secret Leftist Socialists Soviet Union of America, then nope...

Unless of course you provide, at least circumstantial evidence relating to this particular school that would indicate that they'd really mean what you think they mean.

[Montegriffo]

@trech (if you are reading this)
It makes no difference whatsoever when you link to the truth of this story. They continue to express themselves as victims of an SJW plot to destroy patriotism.
Oh well, you tried...

[BjornP]

Wait, trech is not just reading but also encourages you to post things he'd wish he'd post? Then why not just openly embrace the hopelessness of posting without expectation of persuasion and post his thoughts?

[Okeefenokee]

@trech (if you are reading this)
It makes no difference whatsoever when you link to the truth of this story. They continue to express themselves as victims of an SJW plot to destroy patriotism.
Oh well, you tried...

Oh fucking get off it, liar. The fuckers got caught and they lied to cover their asses.

The school says this letter was sent out in error and that the school dress code does not ban the American flag.

According to Assistant Superintendent: Peter Hedemark, the dress code actually reads that the flag shouldn't be worn in a demeaning manner. This is the statement the school posted to Facebook:

"We apologize for the misunderstanding about the informational booklet that was mailed out this week. This booklet was a condensed version of several district and building policies. Regarding our dress code at Roseville High School, the specific language about the American flag states that it shall not be "worn in a demeaning manner." We encourage proud, appropriate, displays of our nation's flag. We will clear up the language in future publications."

Here's how it reads on the letter:

A Student's Dress Should Not Interfere With The Learning Environment.

The Following Are Prohibited:

Tank Tops/Muscle Shirts
Spaghetti Straps
Bare Midriff Tops
Spandex/Underwear As Outerwear
Inappropriate Slogans And Emblems
Pajamas
Slippers
Sagging Pants
See-Through Clothing
Sunglasses
Hats Or Head Gear
U.S. Flag
Low Cut Shirts
Exposed Undergarments
Bandanas

[Okeefenokee]

It's obviously bullshit.

Come on, guys. Be honest.

If they instead said something like "LGBT messages", you'd get all butthurt about it. Then like a week later, when some administer is like -- oh, my bad! It was just a typo and we meant "no disparaging messages about LGBT issues!" -- you'd be equally unimpressed.

At least be honest for fuck sake.

I wouldn't, because I'm not principly opposed to elementary schools banning items of clothing with messages on them. Not that I see the resemblance of the two cases. The proper comparison would be: "LGBT flag" --> you assuming I'd be outraged --> school "correcting" that it meant people couldn't wear the flag as garment. I'd be absolutely OK with any school banning the wearing of flags... unless you know how to drape a proper toga, it would fall off. If they corrected it, I'd assume that some parents called the school to act like morons needing something to be offended about.

So, it is possible that they really meant a ban on all depictions of the US flag. It is. The possibility exists. It's just an unproven one, based on literally no evidence. If there was evidence that the person who wrote that or was in charge was one of them. But simply applying Occam's Razor to the story, without making several assumptions that the school is part of the giant Secret Leftist Socialists Soviet Union of America, then nope...

Unless of course you provide, at least circumstantial evidence relating to this particular school that would indicate that they'd really mean what you think they mean.

WTF? The simplest explanation is that they did what other schools have already done. Ban the US flag.

Today, the Ninth Circuit affirmed a decision by a lower federal court in San Francisco that upheld a school district’s ban on the wearing of American flag shirts on a California high school campus in 2010 during Cinco de Mayo (May 5th)—a Mexican holiday.

A South Carolina high school has come under social-media fire the past few days for its decision to ban the American flag at a recent football game.

The school’s principal believed flags at Friday’s game could be used to taunt the opposing team, which was from a predominantly Hispanic community.

School officials say it wasn't their intention to ban use of the flag but, instead, to limit how students included it based on flag code.

[Okeefenokee]

just a misunderstanding. we meant something completely different than what we actually said. we're not liars or anything.