Analytical Option 2: Holden’s Conversation with Sunny Holden Caulfield finds himself in many difficult situations in The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salligner, situations that a sixteen-year old normally wouldn't find themselves in. After Holden is kicked out of Pencey, he fend for himself in New York to keep the news from his parents. Holden rents a room at the Edmont Hotel for a few nights and encounters a man named Maurice, a pimp, in the elevator. At this time, Holden is “so depressed I can’t even think” (102), he says the decision is against all his “principles” (102), but in a state of loneliness, drunkenness, and teenage horniness, Holden agrees to purchase a prostitute for a quick “throw”. A woman named Sunny knocks on Holden’s door,
Sean, wearing a plain red t-shirt, gray beanie, and kaki’s made his way up to the front of the room to ask the teacher, my mentor, about how to insert the photos into the program he was using to design the yearbook. The teacher turned to Sean and took notice of the beanie he was wearing and asked him to remove it from his head and put it away without explanation as to why it was against dress code. Sean removed his hat, but set it on the table rather than putting it away with his belongings. The teacher took notice but didn’t push the issue any further, seemingly content that the hat was removed from his head. I continued to sit quietly and take note of the observation, curious as to if the teacher would revisit the student on his compliance,
In 1965, a group of students who wore a black band on their arm to protest the war in Vietnam. The faculty in the school requested them to remove the band and when they refused, the district suspended the students. When they took the case to Supreme Court and they sided with the students stating students and teachers cannot "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate. " The court did not grant the a right to “unlimited” self expression and said that if the expression of the student does not disrupt others in school, it can be done, worn, or followed through with in any way that can be done in that manner.
In the past students did not know the guidelines of what they could say at school,but the students at Des Moines brought attention to the rights of every student at school(Blacher 10). Things changed in the 1960's many students wore black armbands to school as a way of protesting the Vietnam War (Blacher 11).The Des Moines school banned them from wearing their armbands(“Case summary:Tinker”1). Mary Beth and John Tinker believed it was their constitutional right to be able to express how they feel(“Case summary:Tinker”1). They decided to take their case to the courts. case went all the way to the supreme court(“Case summary:Tinker”1).
Peter’s personal interaction of his political speech does not need to be taken into consideration. Here case law supports the school’s preemptive measures because the flag could be interpreted in a racial way that can cause a foreseeable issue. Adding to this, the second case, Scott v. School Board (2003), argued in the 11th circuit court that one cannot ban political speech if there is no prior recording of significant issues with this speech. However, it was found that even a single instance of racial problems or significant racial tension is grounds to claim a reasonable forecast of problems. Again, the ruling is relevant to the 7th circuit court because the arguments still bring up valid points that could
In 1965 three students, John F. Tinker- 15 years old, Christopher Eckhardt- 16 years old, Mary Beth Tinker- 13-year-old, were suspend for wearing black armbands that supported hostilities in Vietnam and a truce. These three teens attended school through the Des Moines Independent School District. Parents of these student stood up and claimed a violation of their First Amendment right of freedom of speech. The armbands were an agreed about activity by a group of adult and students that meet in early December.
This type of setting has the right to govern students to provide for a peaceful non-threatening learning environment as outlined in the student handbook. Students all get handbooks outlining the appearal and behavior expected while participating in school. Clothing that is appropriate can include for holidays and special groups as long as no negative words or pictures prevail such as cuss words or vulgar body parts. This is allowed to ensure students can express themselves in a calm and unalarming way. These are those symbols representing freedom of speech in the First Amendment.
First amendment rights can be restricted within the school to protect the greater good of all students, as seen in Powe v. Miles (1968). Typically the school protects against speech or symbols that could be disruptive, distractive, profane, or encourage violence so that they can be proactive by avoiding any possible disruption that could be caused by the shirt. B. An 18 year old college student would have the most protection out of all three people while wearing the tee shirt. Although the tee shirt is offensive, it’s still protected under the first amendment
Dress code rules teach students that their individuality is not important in addition to discouraging creativity. Some schools have even gone as far as digitally altering school pictures to raise necklines and add sleeves to female’s shirts (Orenstein 2). In a school environment, dress code rules impose on students’ rights to free speech, require extreme difficulty to enforce equally, and suppress students’ individuality and freedom. In today 's Society men and women all over the country are challenging their schools’ dress code rules and their constitutionality (“Taking on School Dress Codes: Teen Rebels With a Cause” 1).
Not only did a teacher write her up, but she had to go the nurse’s office, change clothes, and wear a baggy, bright shirt that said “dress code violator.” Natalie refused to wear the shirt and when she asked why she couldn’t wear what she had on since according to the rules, she wasn’t violating anything, the nurse answered like any other worker in an American school: “the yoga pants are too tight and revealing, and we just don’t want any distractions.” Ever since Natalie’s dress code violation, her school banned yoga pants and leggings. You would think these are made up stories, but these are actual school situations that have made headlines on news articles. Hillary Clinton once said, ‘human rights are women’s rights and women’s rights are human rights.
I don’t see that as right.” This student got suspended because the school was retaliating over the fact that he wore a flag. Even though it was his right to wear that flag he still got in trouble, that means that his freedom right was being violated. A senior from the same school said, “I’m from a biker family. That flag has shown up all around my life, and bikers took it in because it showed them freedom.”
Chris McCandless was in his early 20’s, he was the kind of that guy that wanted to learn and experience life without all of the material things. He wanted to be independent from his parents and friends so Chris did something that would be insane for most of us humans but to him, it wasn’t. He went into the wild of Alaska for months, in fact, McCandless even thought he could make it out alive at the end of his journey. As a matter of fact, he was known as being a risk taker and enjoyed being out and about in the nature side of the world. Many would believe that Chris McCandless went into the wild to purposely kill himself; however, I myself believe that McCandless did not do it purposely.
Recently there has been a lot of allocution about guns. Some people want to abolish guns, some people want to consolidate the processes of obtaining them, some people want to make it easier, some believe guns should be obscured, some believe they should be allowed to carry openly. It doesn’t matter what you believe the topic is a never-ending discussion. There is one topic that has the state of Texas going crazy. It’s about whether students should be allowed to carry guns on campus.
Does the dress code bring more harm to the community than benefits? In recent studies, by the National Center for Education Statistics, more than half of the schools in the United States supplemented the dress code in their education (“Should Schools Have Dress Codes?” 1). As a result, complaints, made by students and parents alike, are seen more commonly in the courts. Charles Haynes, a First Amendment Center scholar, anticipates these cases, will be won by the students and parents because, it is crucial for students to express themselves to prepare them for society (Haynes 1). The dress code negatively impacts students by stopping them from finding their identities and diverting attention from individuality, threatening their futures.
Many times a student has gone to trial to debate whether or not they can express themselves with their clothing, the courts would often win, claiming that a certain type of style does not convey a message. In fact, “The Supreme Court decided that for protestors, authorities had to show that the speech ‘materially and substantially’ went against the the school discipline order to ban student speech”. Much like the principles at school, the Courts believed that dress codes were used to help students, not distract them. However, as much as principles believe that school