School teaches kids to be wusses

As the media's cover-up of school uniform sweatshop abuses continues, I had an epiphany a few days ago about what's going on here.

It actually reinforced what I'd long known: American schools raise wimps so they can oppress them more easily. But this story lays bare a more specific aspect of this ongoing scandal.

In East Hartford, Connecticut, a group of right-wing parents has lobbied in favor of mandatory student uniforms. Naturally, a school committee buckled under by urging uniforms, but the committee's excuses for it reveal something very sinister.

Some educrat said the school needs uniforms because of impoverished students being teased for not being able to afford the snazziest clothes.

Sounds to me like that's the school's fault for not doing anything about serial bullies. If East Hartford has been the site of extravaganza bullying, maybe the schools started punishing the victims if they fought back. Neutralized students are weak students, and are also less likely to fight back against right-wing tyranny like uniforms.

I think this was intentional on the part of the school system. In fact, I know it was.

Thirty years ago, if a kid got picked on at school for not having much money, they'd likely march right up to the aggressor and clock them right in the teeth. Problem solved. I remember TV shows from the '70s in which this very thing happened.

These days, the victim is taught to sit back and take it. Victims are punished if they fight back - because fighting back would violate bullies' True Free Speach Now (tm).

Many folks say that a disarmed public is a weak public. OK, I get it now. Sometimes it's a hard lesson learned. Similarly, a student who can't fight is a weakened student.

It's now clear that one of the main reasons schools teach kids not to fight is just so they have an excuse to implement uniforms - thereby leading to even more control. This story proves it.

To add more injury to injury, the East Hartford school system says that if uniforms are made mandatory, it doesn't have money to buy uniforms for students who can't afford them. Oops, there goes their false claim that uniforms help the poor.

There's other factors here, one of which is that the media (the same media that clearly supports uniforms) keeps accepting ads for expensive, stylish kids' clothes. How can the media support uniforms for supposedly eliminating competition for the hippest clothes, while it carries ads for such clothes? A bit hypocritical, don't you think?

We should call on the media to stop accepting such advertising.

(Source: http://www.courant.com/news/education/hc-ehddress1211.artdec11,0,5874329.story)