Live data from Hacker News

Cheerleader’s Snapchat rant leads to ‘momentous’ Supreme Court case on speech

washingtonpost.com

311–320 of 474 posts

Re: Cheerleader’s Snapchat rant leads to ‘momentous’ Supreme Court case on speech

#311

I don't think schools should get involved in off campus speech or activities. However, we are seeing more and more of it. This case isn't even that extreme compared to others. There are people being suspended from actual school for non-threatening photos with guns or even just liking a photo of a gun. On the other hand, I don't see the problem with cutting a student from an extracurricular for actions that contradict…

> I don't see the problem with cutting a student from an extracurricular for actions that contradict its intended purpose or standards.

"Sometimes I doubt your commitment to Sparkle Motion."

Re: Cheerleader’s Snapchat rant leads to ‘momentous’ Supreme Court case on speech

#312
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would reply that the adults in that case should demonstrate their own character by recognizing that teenagers are humans with emotions¹ who get frustrated and make mistakes. And that a mistake that doesn't really harm anyone (an F said in conversation with a friend) merits a discussion in the worst, not a dismissal dropped like a bomb. --- ¹Maybe even more so than the adults.

Having worked in several youth organizations and youth sports for the past 30 years, I bet what actually happened is this kid has been "problematic", the adults have been trying to do right by the kid, and this was the final straw. I've seen that happen. The act resulting in a kid getting dismissed from an activity in and of itself isn't egregious when considered in isolation. It's all the other stuff going on preced…

This is why the phrase "problematic" is useless and should be removed from the human vocabulary. Are you suggesting the teenager was difficult to deal with - or actively breaking rules? Was she being a bully or just not fitting in well?

You can't just label someone "problematic" and get rid of them for a minor infraction without having to support that label with something meaningful - otherwise the behavior is arbitrary.

Re: Cheerleader’s Snapchat rant leads to ‘momentous’ Supreme Court case on speech

#314

Anyone else find it ridiculously coy that the Washington Post censors the word "fuck" in the quote that is the crux of the case. I'm sure the readers are all adults who can handle them accurately reporting the quote. Kids aren't reading the Washington Post Courts & Law section.

We were asked to read this article this morning in US Government actually!

Re: Cheerleader’s Snapchat rant leads to ‘momentous’ Supreme Court case on speech

#315

I don't think schools should get involved in off campus speech or activities. However, we are seeing more and more of it. This case isn't even that extreme compared to others. There are people being suspended from actual school for non-threatening photos with guns or even just liking a photo of a gun. On the other hand, I don't see the problem with cutting a student from an extracurricular for actions that contradict…

Sports or Extra Curricular Activities come with additional responsibilities than simply attending school. When you participate in these activities you become a representative of the school. In a simple example this is why most sports teams ( used to ) wear ties and or slacks on game day.

The community and the school views you as an extension of the school's pride and standards. You sign a contract to this affect when you join the activity.

Cheerleading has a unique set of requirements beyond other programs. In some schools the student body votes for the cheer squad, in others the ASB council does. Sometimes they are members of the ASB council. In some schools that are actually considered a sport ( inside joke for other who have been involved in cheer, and yes it is one of if not the toughest sport ).

This makes the contract a Cheerleader signs a bit different than other activities. The contracts do become a bit vague. However, sending out an instagram as the one in this instance would certainly fail the criteria for most cheer contracts.

Activities outside of school typically prohibited by most activity contracts include drinking, attending parties where illegal activities are occurring, being arrested, disparaging your team or opponent, bullying any member of the student body, etc.

My two cents, the severity of the punishment is the problem. I believe the penalty outweighed the violation. A single game suspension and an apology would have been a better teachable response. Instead they created a crisis where one did not exist.

Re: Cheerleader’s Snapchat rant leads to ‘momentous’ Supreme Court case on speech

#317
post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I know I would have been benched or cut if I talked about throwing a game or not trying my hardest and those statements Do you think you'd get a years suspension as a 14 year old if you'd said "fuck this team" to a friend after losing a match? And do you really think that would have been an appropriate response? You can't compare her venting to threats of throwing games or intentionally under-performing.

Yeah, if I said that, I could see myself being cut for that season (year). I think that could be appropriate depending on the circumstances. To make it similar to this case, it wouldn't just be a friend who heard it, it would be the majority of that school. In which case, I can see that as reasonable. "You can't compare her venting to threats of throwing games or intentionally under-performing." You seem to be missin…

She was 14. It’s unreasonable to expect a 14 yo to always represent an organization. Hell, almost no adults ever do that.

Re: Cheerleader’s Snapchat rant leads to ‘momentous’ Supreme Court case on speech

#318
post #80

Why the fuck did anyone at that school even care what a 14 year old said? That is not normal behavior for adults. At that age I could've exclaimed something along those lines to my teacher's face and they'd just have laughed at me and asked me to calm down. If I pulled that at work I'd be asked whether everything is alright. Apparently nowadays the appropriate response to a child throwing a tantrum or having a mental…

[flagged]

D_wnv_te ratio here is a decent indicator of the proportion of readers who are out of touch with the experience of being a teenager in an environment run by administrators who are violently hellbent on making sure no one is allowed to do anything they did as teenagers.

Either you get it or you don't, but I'm not sorry for using HN's "B-word". Before you click the button, do some introspection.

Re: Cheerleader’s Snapchat rant leads to ‘momentous’ Supreme Court case on speech

#319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you have to "turn a blind eye". It's not a zero-sum game. But it does mean you have to engage with people. Shunning would be the opposite of that. The best modern-day example of how we should all live is probably Daryl Davis... "It's when the talking ceases that the ground becomes fertile for violence. If you spend five minutes with your worst enemy — it doesn't have to be about race, it could be about…

I think what you're trying to say is that compassion is a more effective tool for bringing people back into the fold of widely accepted facts and norms, and you offer Daryl Davis as an example. I hear what you're saying, but I think Daryl Davis is an inexplicable exception, not the rule. I think most people know someone that has held onto truly shocking beliefs for decades, and hasn't responded to reason or compassio…

> bringing people back into the fold of widely accepted facts and norms

> held onto truly shocking beliefs

Can you see the extreme subjectivity in your comments? Why should your opinion of what's a norm or shocking be the ultimate judge? What if its your ideas which are actually shocking and violate the norms? For example, you should believe in a god because that's normal and if you're an exception, you need to be brought back into the fold of believers.

Re: Cheerleader’s Snapchat rant leads to ‘momentous’ Supreme Court case on speech

#320
post #288
post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But is it really only jerks? I've seen attempts to get people cancelled for what they've posted on social media over 10 years ago. Sometimes cancellation happens over allegations that are later proven to be false. There was a TED talk once about a woman who found out she was fired after getting off an airplane because she posted an insensitive joke. Was she wrong for doing that? Probably. Should she have been fired o…

For those not familiar with the lady he's referring to, her name is Justine Sacco. She was a senior director of corporate communications, and this (among several tweets making fun of people or places) is the one that presumably got her fires: “Going to Africa. Hope I don’t get AIDS. Just kidding. I’m white!” Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/15/magazine/how-one-stupid-t...

In case it isn't obvious, she's making a joke on racist stereotypes. Edit: definitely read the article, it's quite good.
Post reply on HN