NOW THAT'S FUNNY
A Rhode Island school district has cancelled a father-daughter dance because a single mother complained that her daughter did not have a father figure to take her.
They’ve also cancelled recess, because one kid hates kick ball.
As reported on Yahoo! Shine, the mother filed a complaint with the Rhode Island branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, which led to the Cranston School District cancelling the event. There are gender discrimination laws on both the federal and state levels, and the federal laws allow exemptions for events like father-daughter dances. The state laws of Rhode Island have no such exemptions in their books.
This has led to an outpouring of outrage among the residents of Cranston. The phones at the Town Hall were ringing off the hook. The Los Angeles Times reported that ACLU sneered at all the emotion and had this reaction:
"The controversy that has suddenly arisen in a political campaign over father-daughter dances in Cranston is old news -- the matter was amicably resolved with school officials over four months ago. And it was resolved for a simple reason: the school district recognized that in the 21st Century, public schools have no business fostering the notion that girls prefer to go to formal dances while boys prefer baseball games.”
I’m confused … was it cancelled because it was unfair the little girl had no father figure? Or was it cancelled because we can’t assume all girls love dances? Because if that’s the case, why not just have a father-daughter taffy pull? Both genders love taffy, right?
Of course, the girl would still not have a father figure to take her to the taffy pull. In fact, a diabetic kid would probably file a complaint that the school was not being insulin friendly.
The ACLU went on to say,
“The time has long since passed for public school resources to encourage stereotyping from the days of Ozzie and Harriet. Not every girl today is interested in growing up to be Cinderella -- not even in Cranston. In fact, one of them might make a great major league baseball player someday.”
Whoa, whoa! What kind of a crack is that … “not even in Cranston”? Are they showing a Cranston bias? Do they consider themselves to be morally superior to Cranston residents simply because of a few girls might want to be Cinderella for Halloween? How about that condescending remark about girls ... “one of them might make a great major league player someday”? SOMEDAY? Did they watch the Olympics? Women were major league athletes and medal winners across the all events this year … not someday.
Sounds to me like the ACLU might be the ones stuck in the 1950s.