×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Elementary School Bans Students From Touching Each Other

timothy posted about 5 months ago | from the this-one-is-about-your-rights-offline dept.

Canada 336

theshowmecanuck writes "A school in British Columbia (the province that now even California can call flakey) has just banned elementary school students from touching each other during recess. You know, one of those times for play and more importantly learning how to socialize (which itself includes touching). CTV News reports: 'A ban on touching during recess at a B.C. elementary school has shocked parents, who call the new no-touch policy "ridiculous." For most kids, recess is a chance to run around and goof-off with their friends, but a new ban on touching at a school in Aldergrove could put a damper on playtime. School administrators at Coghlan Fundamental Elementary School in B.C. have banned kindergarten students from touching each other during recess.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

336 comments

All I can say to that is... (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360113)

who?

what about freeze tag? (5, Funny)

cortcomp (2798707) | about 5 months ago | (#45360127)

How do you know who's "it"?

Re:what about freeze tag? (4, Funny)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 5 months ago | (#45360171)

Simple! The much safer alternative is shooting rubber bands off your fingers at other players instead :-D

Re:what about freeze tag? (5, Funny)

cortcomp (2798707) | about 5 months ago | (#45360231)

"You can't touch anyone, but feel free to shoot rubber bands at them AS LONG AS THE RUBBER BAND ISN'T TOUCHING THEM BEFORE LEAVING YOUR FINGER! THEN YOU'RE TOUCHING THEM! Refer to chart in appendix C for minimum rubber band engagement distances." This will also end the age old game of "Stop hitting yourself! Stop hitting yourself!"

Re:what about freeze tag? (3)

Phezult (729465) | about 5 months ago | (#45360289)

That would be a gun like action, and is (or will be) more severely punished than touching. Suspension? SWAT team!

Re:what about freeze tag? (4, Insightful)

WarJolt (990309) | about 5 months ago | (#45360547)

It's no joke. A 8 year old kid named Jordan Bennett was suspended in a florida school for that.

Re: what about freeze tag? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360601)

Only in 'murica.

Re:what about freeze tag? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360639)

It's no joke. A 8 year old kid named Jordan Bennett was suspended in a florida school for that.

Is Florida another Canadian province?

Re: what about freeze tag? (4, Funny)

jd2112 (1535857) | about 5 months ago | (#45360817)

As much as we would like to pass off Florida as a Canadian province most non-Americans arent bad enough at geography to fall for it.

Re:what about freeze tag? (2)

tinkerton (199273) | about 5 months ago | (#45360655)

As long as the bullet has completely left the gun before hitting the kid shooting is not touching so it's ok.

Re:what about freeze tag? (2)

ottothecow (600101) | about 5 months ago | (#45360331)

Teaches everybody how to inform on their peers to the authorities for their own personal advantage.

"TAG, You're it."

"TEACHER!!!!!"

OMFG .... (0)

MondoGordo (2277808) | about 5 months ago | (#45360129)

average IQ in Canada just hit one !

Re:OMFG .... (1)

i kan reed (749298) | about 5 months ago | (#45360195)

average IQ in Canada just hit one...

...hundred. Definitionally.

Re:OMFG .... (1)

sideslash (1865434) | about 5 months ago | (#45360439)

So you're claiming that the average intelligence of Canadians is identical to the average intelligence of all people in the world? That seems unlikely.

Re:OMFG .... (2)

i kan reed (749298) | about 5 months ago | (#45360465)

Usually you normalize IQ tests to an appropriate population taking the test.

Re:OMFG .... (1)

sideslash (1865434) | about 5 months ago | (#45360593)

Undoubtedly. And when someone uses the phrase "the average intelligence of Canadians" the implied frame of reference would include IQ test takers in other countries.

(Let's argue about this for hours.)

The Type (1, Insightful)

sycodon (149926) | about 5 months ago | (#45360139)

You all the type of people the Administrators are.

They are the ones who were never picked in PE.
They are the ones who never had a date to the dance.
They are the ones who excelled in class and failed in life.

But they found their niche in life where they could be successful...

Fucking up our kids for life.

Re:The Type (4, Interesting)

Pope (17780) | about 5 months ago | (#45360243)

Somewhere behind all this is some whack-job parent's bitching.

Re:The Type (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360489)

Exactly. They don't come up with this crap on their own, even though there are paranoid conspiracy nuts who think school administrators just live for coming up with weird and restrictive regulations, the truth is, every time there is some weird and restrictive new regulation put in place that makes people shake their heads and ask "Why would anyone have that rule?", there is some idiot out there who demonstrated that it was necessary.

In the case of elementary schools, it's almost always because an irresponsible parent who should never have been allowed to have children went on a screaming lawyer fit because their "darling angel" was pushing others around (as is their right!) when some other kid pushed them back (how dare they! Imma sue the kid, their parents, and the school!) resulting in lawsuits that should never have happened, and new rules that should never have been needed in order to placate the moron. The same moron who will still encourage their kid to be a bully and push other kids around, 'cause those rule things only apply to other people, and who will try to sue the school again when their kid gets suspended for breaking the rule they forced into existence.

Why no, I'm not bitter at all from having watched this happen over and over. (Alright, yeah, I am.)

Re:The Type (2)

davydagger (2566757) | about 5 months ago | (#45360787)

>even though there are paranoid conspiracy nuts who think school administrators just live for coming up with weird and restrictive regulations

I used to think this in high school, after all none really seemed that bright.

later on in life, I just found they were playing dumb just to fool the students, silly me

Re:The Type (1)

pr0fessor (1940368) | about 5 months ago | (#45360423)

I was never picked last in PE {I played all the school sports}
I always had a date.
Excelled in class.

Most of the teachers I know don't fit your description {I did however leave education because computer pay more so..}

if you RTA it's a response to an increase in injuries on the playground

Re:The Type (1)

Njovich (553857) | about 5 months ago | (#45360473)

I know a bunch of teachers and school administrators. None of them are described by those points, so I wonder what you are going on about?

Also 'failing in life' are usually the people with some dates and crappy grades.

Re:The Type (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about 5 months ago | (#45360671)

My sister an administrator, herself. I'd hardly say performing a job function that actually matters while taking home over $50,000/y qualifies as "failing in life."

Re:The Type (1)

InfiniteLoopCounter (1355173) | about 5 months ago | (#45360551)

You all the type of people the Administrators are.

They are the ones who were never picked in PE.

Tick

They are the ones who never had a date to the dance.

Well... some of them you'd think might have looked pretty good in the past, but yeah -- tick

They are the ones who excelled in class...

You've clearly never worked at a school before.

Re:The Type (1)

TheCarp (96830) | about 5 months ago | (#45360717)

Nah those first couple were actually me (failed at life is pretty subjective, and I don't think so, shit today is my 5th wedding anniversary) and I would never make such a stupid rule.

I suspect it goes a bit the other way....they are the people who saw kids being picked on, and wanted to do something, but didn't speak up. Or they are former bullies who feel so much guilt over what they did that they feel some need to "make up for it". (and I know that happens, when I met the bully from school years later, the guy hugged me and started crying)

Feminization of childhood (1)

SteveFoerster (136027) | about 5 months ago | (#45360751)

I think it's more that (other than janitors) men have more or less disappeared from most elementary schools in the last generation. There's a strong emphasis on protecting, and not at all one on letting kids learn "the hard way" from mistakes. Everything is supposed to be cooperative, and nothing is supposed to be competitive. There's a place for that, sure, but when that's the only ethos then things are seriously out of balance.

Awesome (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360777)

Kids are little heathens using too many of Earth's resources. I applaud anyone who can fuck them up.

Tag, you're it! (the kid in detention) (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360153)

Many games in recess involve at least some form of physical contact. How are kids going to play tag?

Re:Tag, you're it! (the kid in detention) (1)

durrr (1316311) | about 5 months ago | (#45360263)

Just teach your kids to touch that other one while yelling "you can't touch me back or I tell the teachers!"

And then teach them Newton III to use in defence if the teachers are cunts("well your honor, technically we both touched eachother at the same time")

Re:Tag, you're it! (the kid in detention) (1)

jandrese (485) | about 5 months ago | (#45360303)

I have to wonder if the kind of school that bans touching hasn't already banned most children's games like Tag. We can't have kids roughhousing on school grounds, they might get hurt!

Re:Tag, you're it! (the kid in detention) (1)

roc97007 (608802) | about 5 months ago | (#45360457)

Many games in recess involve at least some form of physical contact. How are kids going to play tag?

Throw rocks instead. Whack! "You're it."

Re:Tag, you're it! (the kid in detention) (2)

jimbolauski (882977) | about 5 months ago | (#45360681)

Not just tag just about every sport has come contact. Singles tennis, badminton, and dodge ball are the only games kids could play, I have a feeling the administrator's kids would get more then a few bloody noses from dodge ball.

Re:Tag, you're it! (the kid in detention) (1)

MiniMike (234881) | about 5 months ago | (#45360857)

Tag is against the rules at the elementary school my kids go to. Which means the kids play tag until a teacher starts paying attention, so they still actually do get to play quite a bit of tag.

Three Sea Shells (4, Insightful)

SirDrinksAlot (226001) | about 5 months ago | (#45360175)

Now instead of Raffee they'll be listening to jingles and learning how to use the 3 Sea Shells.

Demolition Man's setting was too far south obviously.

Good news! (5, Funny)

smooth wombat (796938) | about 5 months ago | (#45360219)

have banned kindergarten students from touching each other during recess.

But touching themselves is still allowed. Huzzah!

Re:Good news! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360319)

At least the cooties will be contained

Re:Good news! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360605)

Teachers touching students is also still allowed.

Re:Good news! (1)

cold fjord (826450) | about 5 months ago | (#45360693)

But touching themselves is still allowed. Huzzah!

Allowed? Try taught and encouraged.

Re:Good news! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360865)

I have a feeling there is more to this story.

USA vs. Canada (3, Funny)

istartedi (132515) | about 5 months ago | (#45360221)

Contest to see who can be the most ridiculous. "Tag! You're it."

Re:USA vs. Canada (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360587)

Contest to see who can be the most ridiculous. "Tag! You're it."

Hey! No touching!

Re:USA vs. Canada (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360615)

No touching!

Re:USA vs. Canada (1)

Minwee (522556) | about 5 months ago | (#45360741)

I know I have heard this before [snpp.com]...

"You're it."
"Now you are the one who is it."
"Understood."

"Well, I've got to hand it to you, Seymour: this no touching policy has created the perfect distraction-free environment, thus preparing the children for permanent positions in tomorrow's mills and processing facilities. Hah!

"Best of all, with less than a minute to go before I leave, absolutely nothing has gone wrong --"

This sounds like a really bad idea (4, Insightful)

MAXOMENOS (9802) | about 5 months ago | (#45360227)

Are they trying to create an entire class of socially maladjusted kids? Because that sounds like exactly what they're doing. It's not like you can easily learn the subtleties of touch later on in life. Even a year gap can get you labeled a creep and carry nasty, debilitating consequences for decades.

Re:This sounds like a really bad idea (2)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about 5 months ago | (#45360419)

It's not like you can easily learn the subtleties of touch later on in life.

"The subtleties of touch" sounds like a feminist Leisure Suit Larry sequel.

Re:This sounds like a really bad idea (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360595)

They're not trying to create an entire class of socially maladjusted kids, they're trying to save themselves from being sued again by the already existing and grown up class of socially maladjusted kids (who never grew up, but had kids of their own anyways). These rules are almost always a reaction to a screaming nutjob parent overreacting to their brat getting pushed/hurt back after they attacked some other kid. On the rare occasions that they aren't, they're a reaction to a screaming nutjob parent who's kid got pushed/hurt without having pushed/hurt someone else first.

Re:This sounds like a really bad idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360603)

Even a year gap can get you labeled a creep and carry nasty, debilitating consequences for decades.

You're telling me :/

Re:This sounds like a really bad idea (1)

J'raxis (248192) | about 5 months ago | (#45360625)

Are they trying to create an entire class of socially maladjusted kids?

Yes [johntaylorgatto.com].

Re:This sounds like a really bad idea (1)

roc97007 (608802) | about 5 months ago | (#45360629)

Are they trying to create an entire class of socially maladjusted kids? Because that sounds like exactly what they're doing. It's not like you can easily learn the subtleties of touch later on in life. Even a year gap can get you labeled a creep and carry nasty, debilitating consequences for decades.

Agreed. I think another poster had it right -- the creepy, antisocial kids we grew up with all became school administrators.

I saw this in the news a few days ago. (5, Insightful)

mark-t (151149) | about 5 months ago | (#45360273)

Parents are upset about it.

It's an overreactionary policy by the school, nothing more.

If my kid were in that school, I'd tell them to ignore the rule, and tell the teacher or principal that reprimands them that their dad told them to ignore it because they thought it was stupid.

Re:I saw this in the news a few days ago. (1)

cold fjord (826450) | about 5 months ago | (#45360585)

Challenging the power of petty bureaucrats will likely get you a visit from Child Protective Services. They are more likely to take your children than admit the rule is stupid.

Re:I saw this in the news a few days ago. (2)

mark-t (151149) | about 5 months ago | (#45360659)

Child Protective Services would have no interest in the matter... this is a rule in a particular school, not something that is actually required by law.

Re:I saw this in the news a few days ago. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360823)

Challenging the power of petty bureaucrats will likely get you a visit from Child Protective Services. They are more likely to take your children than admit the rule is stupid.

How are they going to take the children away if they're not allowed to touch the kids?

Or are you saying adults are allowed to touch kids in Canada? (That sounds so wrong...)

Re:I saw this in the news a few days ago. (1)

mark-t (151149) | about 5 months ago | (#45360851)

Actually, this particular school is saying that elementary kids are not allowed to touch eachother.

Re:I saw this in the news a few days ago. (2)

tompaulco (629533) | about 5 months ago | (#45360599)

It's an overreactionary policy by the school, nothing more.

Undoubtedly an overreaction due to some hoverparent threatening to sue the school. I think this is a case where they should tell the parent to take their child to another school or to homeschool.

Re:I saw this in the news a few days ago. (2)

Princeofcups (150855) | about 5 months ago | (#45360831)

Undoubtedly an overreaction due to some hoverparent threatening to sue the school. I think this is a case where they should tell the parent to take their child to another school or to homeschool.

Homeschooling by idiotic parents is tantamount to child abuse. OK, that describes most home schooling.

Re:I saw this in the news a few days ago. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360651)

I have done exactly this with my children. There is a particular subset of the rules at their high school, of all places that, I have told them if a teacher or the principal, oh wait, she's called a dean now, give her grief, to pick up a phone and say, "Call my dad. He told me that if you had a problem with this to call him so he could tell you what he thought of the policy and what he told me I should tell you to do with it."

So far my oldest has only had to do this one time over something that the school considered a "costume".

Next up? A ban on not touching each other. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360281)

"What are you doing?"

"Not touching you."

"Stop it!"

"Still not touching you..."

"Teacher!!!! Tell Bobby to stop not touching me!!!"

Slashdot: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360291)

News for nerds. Stuff that matters.

Re:Slashdot: (3, Funny)

roc97007 (608802) | about 5 months ago | (#45360613)

News for nerds. Stuff that matters.

I think that not touching anyone is very germane to nerds.

Re:Slashdot: (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360661)

I think that not touching anyone is very germane to nerds.

Yes but not by choice.

Patty Cake (2)

Saethan (2725367) | about 5 months ago | (#45360335)

Pat-a-Cake Pat-a-Cake, Baker's Man... "You're suspended!"

As a British Columbian... (3, Informative)

Capt.DrumkenBum (1173011) | about 5 months ago | (#45360399)

I would like to say this is one of the stupidest ideas I have ever heard.
Sadly it isn't even in the top 10. So i will just say that whoever came up with this idea is a moron.

So are they going to allow range weapons again? (1)

CQDX (2720013) | about 5 months ago | (#45360405)

I'm trying to be a good Dad and teach my kid to bully his classmates but it's getting harder and harder...

To quote the national anthem of Canada... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360417)

O Canada!

It's a good start but not enough. (5, Insightful)

aevan (903814) | about 5 months ago | (#45360429)

Children could still sneak out of sight and have body contact. They could 'trip' and fall into each other (faking it, the little bastards-my nephew loves faking falls). This is a start, but clearly falls short of its goals.

What's needed here is a way to keep them contained and safe, both for their own good and the good of the other children. Perhaps a start could be a resistance device fitted on the ankles to limit their speed (after all, high speed injuries are more dangerous). Maybe similar ones for the arms to prevent flailing arms injuring other people, or accidentally throwing objects at each other. I was originally going to propose having it by the forearms, but that still leaves elbows as threats - so instead have an entire jacket purposed for this effect. It could double as a uniform for ease of identification of students, maybe in a bright recognisable colour in case they wander off.

Once the children are properly protected, you then need to move onto securing the environment. Additional padding for those inescapable falls, having all objects edges rounded and no sharp objects around, would be a good use of taxpayer money for classroom renovation. Only then can we ensure they are properly cared for and educated, to grow up into strong, well-adjusted, outstanding members of the administration. It's a miracle we every survived this far as a race without these critical safe-guards, but not one we should take for granted.

Re:It's a good start but not enough. (2)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about 5 months ago | (#45360649)

> They could 'trip' and fall into each other (faking...)

Nah, I tried that at work with a secretary and got into even worse trouble.

Teacher!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360483)

He's touching me!
He's touching me!
He's touching me!
He's touching me!
Make him stop!

Re:Teacher!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360571)

He's touching me!
He's touching me!
He's touching me!
He's touching me!
Make him stop!

The schools newest teacher, Mr. Hammer, to the rescue!

Can't touch this!

Next on the Agenda (2)

meerling (1487879) | about 5 months ago | (#45360505)

All children will be issued a polymer bubble that they must use when at school. Exiting your bubble is not allowed, without express permission of a teacher, the school nurse, and either the principle or vice principle. To insure that sufficient physical activity is performed, once an hour at the sound of the buzzer, the students will roll out to the P.E. field and run laps. To aid in the proper identification of each student, they will be issued a school jersey with an individualized number in large clear writing. The student that finishes first on each run will be allowed first drink at the giant water bottle. Parents are encouraged to participate by watching these 'races' and encouraging their favorites and partaking of our Parimutuel betting. We are currently working to secure a deal with several sports channels for broadcasting of these activities. All of which are expected to aid in our fund raising, and as such, will reduce the need for our bake sales down to only 3 per year.
Thank you, and please support our school.

Canada? WTF? (1)

bussdriver (620565) | about 5 months ago | (#45360703)

There has to be somebody from the USA involved... Are they sick of all the stupid headlines never talking about Canadian idiots?

Perhaps this is more clever - a way to ban everything normal and then SELECTIVELY apply the rules - copying what is done with US law.

hearty handshake (1)

intermodal (534361) | about 5 months ago | (#45360517)

Whoever came up with this policy should get a good firm handshake. And then we can fire the sorry hypocrite.

Touch Touch Touch (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360583)

To the tune of "I Touch Myself":

[choras]

I don't want
Anybody else
When I think about me
I touch myself

OOOooohhhhh

I don't want
Anybody else
Oh no Oh no Oh no OOOOOooooohhhh :D

Then in Washington D.C. The Grease Man plays the track of the girl with her "Radio Man".

Mmmm mmm mmmm .... Radio Man.

Mmmm mmm mmm mmm ... Radio Man.

Mmm mmm mmm uuuuuuuuuu Ooooooohhhhhh .... Radio Man! 3 :D

revolt (4, Interesting)

roc97007 (608802) | about 5 months ago | (#45360589)

When my daughter was in high school, the school district announced at one point that they were going to ban all public displays of affection, no matter how casual. It became known as the "no-hugging rule".

Although I don't know what the reaction was at other schools, at my daughter's school "hug-ins" and hugging sessions were organized via facebook and texting. Kids would have massive group hugs during recess, designated "hug monitors" would hug everyone who went by in the hallway, (daughter was one such) and hugging became the common greeting. A few days into it I asked daughter how it was going. She said the principal had made an announcement that they were not going to adopt that particular guideline.

Point is, change can be wrought, even by children. If all (or most) of the kids held hands at every recess on every day, what could the authorities do? Suspend the entire school?

This kind of thing only continues when the people don't stand up to it.

Too many lawyer-minded people ... (1)

giampy (592646) | about 5 months ago | (#45360607)

I think there are way too many lawyers and like-minded people who try to solve things be throwing regulations at them without even trying to understand the consequences.

I'm all for smart regulations that try to regulate systems optimally, but this is way too much, far beyond worrysome and not even funny !!

Just replace the Pledge of Alligance (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about 5 months ago | (#45360669)

Instead of the Pledge of Alligance to the striped colored cloth on a stick, student could act and sing Divinyl's 1991 video.

"..when I think about you, I touch myself...."

priceless (1)

fluffythedestroyer (2586259) | about 5 months ago | (#45360725)

I can already imagine the face on parents or adults face when the school admin says out loud "It's ok now, its fixed, you can all touch yourselves".... naughty toughts incoming lmao

Judgmental much? (1)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | about 5 months ago | (#45360737)

A school in British Columbia (the province that now even California can call flakey)

Not very Canadian of you - eh?

Fabian conditioning projects (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360809)

These stories that you read are not isolated, nor are they down to 'over-zealous' individuals. In the UK, the equivalent are schools fingerprinting the kids, schools putting cameras in the bathrooms and changing rooms, and schools running un-announced exercises, like fake shootings, fake hostage takings, and fake UFO crashes (yes, really).

In the UK, these projects occur in locations where the social-economic power of the parents is low, and the people running their kids' schools have ZERO connection or empathy with with people of the locality. In the UK, the organisation COMMON PURPOSE targets as many middle manage types as possible, and identifies those individuals depraved and stupid enough to be willing to implement such projects in their own schools.

So, you get head teachers BANNING parents from taking photos/videos at their children's school plays (and YET, when the press questions officials from the education department, they DENY any such policy is appropriate or reasonable). While people attempting to find ANY official documentation from government departments encouraging such behaviour by head teachers have ZERO success, the heads engaging in such projects NEVER suffer censure or dismissal, and the number of examples of such behaviour in schools in the UK and USA grows exponentially each year.

Dirty little shills will now down-vote this comment, and reply that any suggestion that increasing waves of abusive behaviour in schools is in any way co-ordinated is the thinking of 'conspiracy idiots'. These dirty shills will tell you that if you cannot find official government publications detailing the promotion of such projects, that means the events themselves are nothing but coincidence- just like these dirty little shills told you a few years back that rumours of full surveillance NSA spying were the ravings of deluded tin-foil hat wearing fools.

Of course, for every head teacher they persuade to implement a "no touch" policy, another 20 will have responded with horror when they were 'tapped' to see if they would go along with a similar scheme. It doesn't matter. The Fabians KNOW you normalise obscenities like this wave by wave. After the first wave, cretins within socially 'weak' communities will start asking why the same policies are not active in THEIR schools. The first time a little girl is bullied by a little boy, plenty of parents will say "this wouldn't have happened if WE had a no-touch policy as well".

Those opposing such horrors will be depicted as "pro-bullying" in wave 2, and wave 2 will convert far more schools than wave one.

These societal changes are arranged at the highest levels, by the star chambers that really rule over you. In the UK, for instance, a star chamber project to raise the school leaving age to 18, as a path to a 21st Century form of compulsory conscription (national service), is currently in its penultimate stage. The project began BEFORE the time of Tony Blair (unknown to as good as 100% of UK citizens) and was NEVER a voting issue at any UK election. Blair fast-tracked the project, putting a particularly VILE individual in charge, David Blunkett. Unbeknown to 99.9% of the British public, Blunkett still heads the body overseeing the project, even though Blunkett is known as a 'Labour' politician, and Britain has had an apparent Liberal/Conservative government for years now.

Blunkett's body is a star chamber creation, and cannot be effected by any current public facing parliamentary action. In another year or so, 18 will be the legal school leaving age, and the inability of parents to coerce unwilling young adults to attend school (along with claimed high unemployment figures amongst young people) will be the official excuse to introduce national service- the fabian goal all along. The UK model of 21st Century conscription will be exported to the USA and West Europe.

Blair's people have only to recruit the support of a tiny number of current heads working in British and American schools to guarantee a long term effect in social engineering. This they have done easily. The projects proceed a little differently in the USA than in the UK because of cultural differences, but the goals are identical.

The submitter is an idiot (1)

Jailbrekr (73837) | about 5 months ago | (#45360811)

One school out of one thousand and nineteen does something stupid, so the OP automatically tars and feathers the entire province? So how exactly does that work?

Leftists are really retarded. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45360833)

Leftists are really retarded. I hope they get banned soon. And then hanged.

This is Canada (1)

PPH (736903) | about 5 months ago | (#45360859)

When they grow up, these kids will be moving out into the northern woods to live in a cabin with no company other than their trusty malamute and the neighborhood moose. So getting them used to no human contact might be a good idea.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...