Middle School ordered to tear down brand new bleachers

The old phrase is the law is an ass, but in this case I don't mind. There was an easy solution, upgrade the girls? The sports are, by law, required to try and stay equal.

The parents of the softball team girls should have raised the money. The school didn't pay for the bleachers at the boys field the parents raised money to do it.

Exactly, our boosters in school raised money for our uniforms to school trips. Boosters would have us selling oranges, candy, car washes, and they were just as active in selling the same. They recognize the school can't afford everything and try to help out and support students many a time who are not even related to them. One teams booster can't be expected to raise money for the whole school, its not fair to punish those parents who are trying to do good. But alas it has come to that, soon boosters will be outlawed by schools when they are not being sexist, racist or anything else but supporting their children or team.
 

So, why have something nice a shiny new for the boys, but not for the girls? Either you upgrade both sets, or none.

The school had nothing to do with it, each team has what is known as boosters involved also known as parents. The baseball team parents or boosters raised money for the upgrades for the sign and the seats, the softball team booster club did not. It is quite ordinary.

Boosters spend money they raised through car washes, bake sales, candy sales, etc. on different items. The softball team ( girls) may have chosen to go on a trip or upgrade uniforms or buy team jackets or who knows, it is all dependent on what the team wishes they need or votes for. The school did not pay for this. Each team has their own boosters/parents organizations.
 

So, why have something nice a shiny new for the boys, but not for the girls? Either you upgrade both sets, or none.

Did you miss the part that they were purchased and installed by the people that use them, not the school, not with public funds.
 
QM has it wrong, and Flopper and others have it right.

FOX News did not accurately report the story.
 
Anytime you see stories like this that come out of Fox News, you have to go to the source documents to learn the truth. In this case, it's a letter from the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS, REGION XV dated Oct 13, 1913. The letter addresses a complaint that alleged that the District is denying equal athletic opportunity to female students at Plymouth High School (the School) because it does not provide the girls’ high school softball team with locker rooms and practice and competitive facilities that are equivalent to those provided to the boys’ baseball team.

The OCR investigated the complaint but made no recommendation or ruling. The district however agreed that some changes listed in the complaint were needed.

According to investigation report, the bleacher in question is a portable stand on the freshmen softball field. It allows for a seating capacity of 25 people although the picture of the bleacher is shot with a wide area lens to make it appear much larger.

The district decided to renovate the freshmen softball field which included moving the portable bleachers not tearing them down.

As is often the case when Fox News investigate the big bad federal government attacking local communities, the facts simply don't support the Fox News story.

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/investigations/more/15131020-a.pdf

Let me get this straight, you think a preliminary report issued by the OCR somehow trumps a story written 5 months after said preliminary report simply because you think a local station is part of the vast right wing conspiracy? Does your brain ever consider the possibility that the government is wrong?

By the way, the story is actually a pretty big deal on sports blogs. I am sure someone would have pointed out it was fake my now, if it actually was.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/highs...superior-to-softball-bleachers-210604955.html
The story is not a fake. It's just a misrepresentation of the facts. The OCR did not require that the school tear down the seating on the boys ball field. Before the final OCR report was even completed the school realized it screwed up and was in violation of the law. They voluntarily agreed to revamp the facilities to provide equivalent facilities for the girls. There was no legal action taken by the OCR. The article ignores the main issues which was the locker rooms, playing fields, and scoreboard and concentrated on the tearing down of some newly built seating on the boys ball field claiming that the OCR forced the school to do so when it was really the schools decision.
 
Last edited:
Anytime you see stories like this that come out of Fox News, you have to go to the source documents to learn the truth. In this case, it's a letter from the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS, REGION XV dated Oct 13, 1913. The letter addresses a complaint that alleged that the District is denying equal athletic opportunity to female students at Plymouth High School (the School) because it does not provide the girls’ high school softball team with locker rooms and practice and competitive facilities that are equivalent to those provided to the boys’ baseball team.

The OCR investigated the complaint but made no recommendation or ruling. The district however agreed that some changes listed in the complaint were needed.

According to investigation report, the bleacher in question is a portable stand on the freshmen softball field. It allows for a seating capacity of 25 people although the picture of the bleacher is shot with a wide area lens to make it appear much larger.

The district decided to renovate the freshmen softball field which included moving the portable bleachers not tearing them down.

As is often the case when Fox News investigate the big bad federal government attacking local communities, the facts simply don't support the Fox News story.

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/investigations/more/15131020-a.pdf

Let me get this straight, you think a preliminary report issued by the OCR somehow trumps a story written 5 months after said preliminary report simply because you think a local station is part of the vast right wing conspiracy? Does your brain ever consider the possibility that the government is wrong?

By the way, the story is actually a pretty big deal on sports blogs. I am sure someone would have pointed out it was fake my now, if it actually was.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/highs...superior-to-softball-bleachers-210604955.html
The story is not a fake. It's just a misrepresentation of the facts. The OCR did not require that the school tear down the seating on the boys ball field. Before the final OCR report was even completed the school realized it screwed up and was in violation of the law. They voluntarily agreed to revamp the facilities to provide equivalent facilities for the girls. There was no legal action taken by the OCR. The article ignores the main issues which was the locker rooms, playing fields, and scoreboard and concentrated on the tearing down the some newly built seating on the boys ball field claiming that the OCR forced the school to do so when it was really the schools decision.

Let me see if I can explain this to you. I doubt it, but it is possible that you are capable of admitting you made a mistake.

The letter you found was dated 31 Oct 2013, and referred to a complaint that was filed on 19 Oct 2013. I know you have a problem with simple math, so I will point out that is a period of 12 days. There is no fucking way that anyone who is honest can claim that 12 days is enough time for the government to investigate anything and reach a conclusion. In fact, your letter actually says that it should not be relied upon, cited, or construed as a formal statement of OCR policy.

The fact that you are attempting to do so makes you the one misrepresenting the facts. Unfortunately, for you, I can actually read.
 
QM has it wrong, and Flopper and others have it right.

FOX News did not accurately report the story.

If flipper actually has it right then he has it wrong because his letter actually contradicts what he is saying.

I guess that means that I have it right.
 

So, why have something nice a shiny new for the boys, but not for the girls? Either you upgrade both sets, or none.

The boys and the girls have the exact same facilities, the only difference is that one field had better seats to enable the spectators to see the game. The solution to that is to allow the girls to use the same field, not force the boys to go backwards.
 

Check this out..
This is a High school in north central NC. This county is so small, it has just one high school.
Yet, the people willfully support the girl's softball program. Scroll down and check out the photos of the facilities.
BTW, the girl's field is far better than the baseball field, but no one in Taylorsville would ever say a word.
BTW, my friend's next door neighbor's daughter is the first girl mentioned in the bios.
Anyway, there is no Title IX bitching here. Small town...If someone did complain, they'd be ostracized and probably would have strange things go wrong with their house and cars.
Alexander Fastpitch Taylorsville, NC
 
If I were on the local school board or an administrator I would say "yes we will comply"...And then don't do anything..
What are the feds going to do, send in armed troops?
Fuck 'em....It's time for people to stand up against this tyranny.
 
How many highschool bleachers could America have bought with the $4t squandered on Iraq over lies?
 
The old phrase is the law is an ass, but in this case I don't mind. There was an easy solution, upgrade the girls? The sports are, by law, required to try and stay equal.

Who said anything about "sports required to try and stay equal"?
First, where did you learn to write? It's not ""try and". It is "try to..."
Second, the bleachers were funded privately. Money raised by parents of the students which pay on the baseball team..
If the parents of the girls who play softball wanted new bleachers, thney should have done the same thing....Then again, why spend the money on stands that will be occupied by so very few?
Your argument is a FAIL...A knee jerk liberal fail.
 
Seems stupid. Why not use the same field for boys and girls games unless they are going on simultaneously?

Girls softball pitches from 40 ft. That bases are 60 ft apart.
Boys baseball pitches from 60'6" and the bases are 90 ft apart.
Softball is typically played on a "skin" infield ( no grass)
Baseball is played on a full grass infield.
Girls softball games are typically played in daylight....Most high schools have two teams or even three. The underclassmen games are played first. The Varsity plays under the lights.
 
CaféAuLait;8847055 said:
Anytime you see stories like this that come out of Fox News, you have to go to the source documents to learn the truth. In this case, it's a letter from the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS, REGION XV dated Oct 13, 1913. The letter addresses a complaint that alleged that the District is denying equal athletic opportunity to female students at Plymouth High School (the School) because it does not provide the girls’ high school softball team with locker rooms and practice and competitive facilities that are equivalent to those provided to the boys’ baseball team.

The OCR investigated the complaint but made no recommendation or ruling. The district however agreed that some changes listed in the complaint were needed.

According to investigation report, the bleacher in question is a portable stand on the freshmen softball field. It allows for a seating capacity of 25 people although the picture of the bleacher is shot with a wide area lens to make it appear much larger.

The district decided to renovate the freshmen softball field which included moving the portable bleachers not tearing them down.

As is often the case when Fox News investigate the big bad federal government attacking local communities, the facts simply don't support the Fox News story.

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/investigations/more/15131020-a.pdf

Actually, it was not a portable bleacher, it was an elevated deck made of bricks and mortar with black plastic fold down seats. The one in the photo is a standard set of bleachers, the one which was ordered removed was not. There were two issues with it. First, it was not handicap accessible, as most standard bleachers I've ever seen are not and secondly the other field did not have one. In your link it goes onto say the school needed to assure each set of "team boosters' ( parents) did things equally for each team. So the school would have to make sure one set of parents did not do something which was not as 'equal' as the other. Its in your link and if you watch the video you can see the different bleachers which are being torn down and stored, so I guess technically you are correct the are moving them to storage, but the are being torn down, the bricks are being removed and the seating is being removed and put into storage. Something the parents did so they could see unobstructed.

Therefore the school must assure if one teams boosters are raising X amount of dollars for a project the school must assure the any other teams boosters are doing the same.
You're right, the black fold down seats are in the boys field and the bleachers are in the girls field. However, the OCR did not require the district to remove the fold down seats. This was a district decision just as it was a district decision to allow enhanced seating on the boys field while maintaining bleachers on the girls field.

From the OCR report it appears that seating was not the focal point of the complaint but rather the fields, the locker rooms, and score board. The district or the school is clearly at fault in allowing the sports facilities for boys to be upgrade without addressing the facilities for the girls. The district should have upgraded the facilities for the girls.

What the story does not mention was whether or not the softball stands were even in need of an upgrade.
I love it when you libs throw around "should have"....
 
CaféAuLait;8848755 said:
The old phrase is the law is an ass, but in this case I don't mind. There was an easy solution, upgrade the girls? The sports are, by law, required to try and stay equal.

The parents of the softball team girls should have raised the money. The school didn't pay for the bleachers at the boys field the parents raised money to do it.

Exactly, our boosters in school raised money for our uniforms to school trips. Boosters would have us selling oranges, candy, car washes, and they were just as active in selling the same. They recognize the school can't afford everything and try to help out and support students many a time who are not even related to them. One teams booster can't be expected to raise money for the whole school, its not fair to punish those parents who are trying to do good. But alas it has come to that, soon boosters will be outlawed by schools when they are not being sexist, racist or anything else but supporting their children or team.

They tried that shit here. My wife and I, her more than I, did the fundraising stuff and we helped our son with his share. Then some fucking do-gooder assholes from the other end of the state decided to do this study on parental involvement and fund raising in more "affluent" ( their term) areas of the state. The study concluded that the best way to "equalize" or make fair this process was to mandate raised funds be distributed equally across the entire district. There was to be a discussion by the County School Board on this....Over 300 parents showed up. Not one of the parents who spoke had anything nice to say about the study. A few told the school board members that if they even thought about putting the idea on the agenda, they could consider it political suicide.
 

So, why have something nice a shiny new for the boys, but not for the girls? Either you upgrade both sets, or none.

That hat looks as stupid as your inane comment.
You would have a point in your pointless little world among the "roos" there sweet lumps....
That is, if the stands were part of the normal school funding through taxation.
These stands were paid with private donations. Get it, genius?
That's the way the law works.
The entire issue here is not the school removing the structure. It is government overstepping its authority.
 
CaféAuLait;8848921 said:

So, why have something nice a shiny new for the boys, but not for the girls? Either you upgrade both sets, or none.

The school had nothing to do with it, each team has what is known as boosters involved also known as parents. The baseball team parents or boosters raised money for the upgrades for the sign and the seats, the softball team booster club did not. It is quite ordinary.

Boosters spend money they raised through car washes, bake sales, candy sales, etc. on different items. The softball team ( girls) may have chosen to go on a trip or upgrade uniforms or buy team jackets or who knows, it is all dependent on what the team wishes they need or votes for. The school did not pay for this. Each team has their own boosters/parents organizations.

I would not bother trying to explain this to the woman in the Dr Suess hat. She's another room temperature IQ lib.....
 

Forum List

Back
Top