Group Demands Censored Gay Kiss Photo Be Redistributed In Yearbook- Page 2

[RobbO]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 12:44pm

[AnnaK<3LMIP]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 12:45pm

I think every school charges a good 90 dollars for their yearbooks. I only meant that freshmen and over were able to buy them. In my school, freshmen, sophomores, juniors, and seniors buy them. I won't until I'm a senior, but I know a lot of fresmen who do. I'm only assuming it's the same for them.

[ErikJ972]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 12:46pm

Alot of kids in the school can't afford yearbooks that aren't thier own unfortunately.

[mejusthavingfun]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 12:50pm

17 is kids and it's not about age. It's the fact that this is a public school and US tax dollars are paying for it to be there. School is for learning. The administration is in place to make sure that money is not mispent and things like this never happen. There is a 30% dropout rate in this country and an 80% literacy rate. Why even open the door for this kind of thing?

That article mentioned on the opposite page was a hetero couple with a hand on someones lap. I sure hope this suit cleans that school up, what a mess.

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 12:55pm

At my school, ANYONE kissing (gay or straight) would not have made the yearbook. Hugging, yes. kissing, no!

[RobbO]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 12:58pm

how about frottage?

[mattonstage]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 12:58pm

If he had him in some choke-hold or some other mildly violent act I bet no one would have a problem with it, but showing love for someone is forbidden. I will never for the life of me understand why violence is more accepted than love.

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 1:25pm

ethically speaking kids kissing? I know they are paying but really, you should see all the restrictions for children to appear in print.

The article clearly says he's 18. His boyfriend is 19. They're not children.

If they were going to do this, they should have refunded him his $150 for destroying his page. Black magic marker? Yeah, that won't stain and create a mess. They should refund the people who bought the opposite page and the back page as well, because lord knows their pages were messed up as well.

I was on yearbook in high school. The staff adviser and administration saw and approved each and every page before it went to print. Apparently not a single one of them had a problem with the picture in this school.

[JerseyGirl2]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 1:37pm

UPDATE:

Trenton, New Jersey) The Newark School District Monday said that it had made a mistake when it censored a photograph of a gay kiss in the 2007 yearbook at East Side High School.

In a statement the district said that Superintendent Marion A. Bolden has apologized student Andre Jackson, 18, and would reissue an ``un-redacted version' of the yearbook to any student at the school who wants one.

"Superintendent Marion A. Bolden personally apologizes to Mr. Jackson and regrets and embarrassment and unwanted attention the matter has brought to him,' according to the statement.

But the district's explanation for censoring the picture of Jackson kissing boyfriend David Escobales,19, has left some people unsatisfied.

"The decision was based, in part, on misinformation that Mr. Jackson was not one of our students and our review simply focused on the suggestive nature of the photograph,' the district said in its statement.

[JerseyGirl2]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 1:41pm

So, now students can get a new book without the pic blacked out. Surely school is out at this point. Any signatures the students collected are in the original book. If someone had defaced the yearbook I had paid for, I would have thrown a POO fit.

[mejusthavingfun]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 1:44pm

I don't care how old they were. They are in highschool and it is a different world in those confines. (Though apparently not that district) It's not just about the students involved either, there are many other kids who will buy or have access to these.

I'm simply amazed this is permissible.

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 1:56pm

"On the page immediately opposite Mr. Jackson’s, a young man and a young woman kiss on a couch, his hand on her leg as she sits on his lap."

That wasn't blacked out. If this was permissible, why wouldn't the gay kiss be as well?

[RobbO]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 2:00pm

prolly because it was obvious to administrators that the boy and girl in THAT photo were from the school. duh!

[SorryGrateful]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 2:02pm

For once, I actually agree with mejusthavingfun. I don't think photos of that nature belong in a yearbook. I wouldn't want to see that of any couple, gay or straight, if it were my book. I'm surprised the board allows photos of physical intimacy, shall we say, to be in the book. However, I think this is a clear case of a double standard and it's silliness.

[colleen_lee]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 2:10pm

mejust, you're arguing an entirely irrelevant point. The debate isn't whether or not kissing should be permitted in the book, the school board has already chosen their stance on that issue. The problem is the discrimination that they're practicing within that stance. Had they chosen to scribble out all the pictures of couples kissing, we likely wouldn't even be discussing this right now, instead they excluded the homosexual couple while allowing the hetero pictures to remain. THAT is the issue.

It's all or nothing.

Updated On: 6/25/07 at 02:10 PM

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 3:04pm

"The Newark School District Monday said that it had made a mistake when it censored a photograph of a gay kiss in the 2007 yearbook at East Side High School. "

Yes, it was a HUGE mistake when the principle gave them the markers to black out the picture.

Another case of back-peddling.

Why is it that these people think they can get away with breaking the law, but it doesn't really matter until the story ends up on the news? THEN, they've made a mistake.


This country is going right in the toilet.

[Evan Almighty]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 3:09pm

Do you think if enough Americans move to say, England, that England will become more American?

I think we should at least try.

[jimnysf]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 3:11pm

"The decision was based, in part, on misinformation that Mr. Jackson was not one of our students and our review simply focused on the suggestive nature of the photograph,' the district said in its statement.

LOL! Are they saying they don't even know who is or isn't a student there? I still say the adults should be fired!

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 3:14pm

They are doing the backstroke in a BIG way.


Sorta like HDTV when he posts.

[mejusthavingfun]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 3:28pm

I'm not missing the point Colleen. You're missing my point. I fully understand the discrimination. I understand how despicable that is.... but guess what? That principal or whatever she is was wrong before she made that judgment. It's a yearbook. I'm only 29 and I think it's quite strange to allow any of it. Her allowance of any kind of touching, kissing or any of that (PG 13 stuff) trumps her decision to discriminate. She needs to be let go and made an example of.

I can't believe there isn't more shock over this. It's that can't see the forest for the trees thing. Letting this woman off is a huge disservice to that community. She' obliviously not fit to make any educated decisions IMHO. People could probably sue for all kinds of things. This is a public institution. It would not have even been an issue had that woman had any sense at all.

It makes me believe we have children running schools. Am I the only one that did a double take on this?

[madbrian]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 3:35pm

I feel like an old fuddy duddy, but I don't believe photos like that belong in a HS yearbook, irrespective of the couple.

[artscallion]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 4:12pm

I think it's sad that we live in a country where a KISS (gay or straight) can be considered offensive. It's a kiss! It's a positive expression of love or affection. It's not worthy of being scratched out of a book. It's not risqué or racy or any of the other negative adjectives puritanical people like to attach to it.

What that principal did was attach shame to something as beautiful as that kiss. And removing all the kisses is not the answer. That would only serve to attach shame to them as well. Kissing is not something to hide!

And these are young adults. And they're the ones doing the kissing. So who are we trying to hide it from? The adults, maybe?

Yes, this is a school and they are there to learn. So explain to me how a picture of a kiss in a yearbook in any way stops anyone from learning.

[doodlenyc]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 4:23pm

Since when do teenagers not kiss?

[mejusthavingfun]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 4:25pm

Well I can tell you any tax dollar spent even reviewing said pictures by an administrative team is a wasted tax dollar.

Have you been to a High School lately? These cases about freedom of speech and expression in public schools around the country are appalling. Look at the news coverage with something like this. Do you know the statistics? Only 80% of our population can read. 30% percent drop out rate.

60% of the black and Latino population quit school before graduation. You know there are countries like Barbados with 99% literacy levels. Do you know there are poor black there too,,, they can read though.

Every person in this country has a right to an education. There are entire school districts where students are discriminated against because of the color of their skin. They don't have text books or qualified teachers. Do they get in the NY Times? Is there public outrage?

Why does something like this even matter when you look at those nubmers. Kissing? These are children. This has no place in school at all. Call me old fashioned.

[colleen_lee]

Posted: 6/25/07 at 4:27pm

What do those statistics have to do with kissing?

Teenagers have been kissing since the beginning of time. This isn't something new.