Racy photo banned from yearbook

[HYHYBT]

To me, the key point remains whether she was told the picture was unacceptable (and what changes would be necessary to make it acceptable) in time to do a replacement and get it included.

Our senior pictures were the same boring head-and-shoulders as every other year... except we had to put on these weird one-piece-front-half-of-the-top-of-a-tux things for them. I don't even remember what the girls' pictures were like; I don't think I've seen the book since shortly after graduation. But I remember getting the picture made.

[AdminAssistant]

Usually when people go to an outside photographer like this, they have a bunch of pictures taken. I know I did. I probably had....10 separate outfits/locations spread over 2 sessions. People also start getting their pictures made at the end of their junior year (when most people are 17, thus my previous questions about the photographer). No reason she wouldn't have had time to pick a different picture and have it submitted. And, as others have said, common sense might come in handy here as well.

[tropicsgoddess]

It's pretty racy for a student yearbook photo, IMO. Maybe some editing should be done to make it less racy or have them redo the shot that's tasteful and put that on the yearbook. If she wants to be racy, leave that off the yearbook.

[blas87]

I agree with Admin.

I had 30something pictures taken, multiple outfits and 2 locations (the local park/flower garden/zoo with my dog and the studio itself). I didn't submit any pictures to the yearbook, though, because I hated that school and just about everyone there and didn't want anyone to be able to look at my picture and wonder whatever happened to me, because I sure as hell wasn't spending that much money to wonder whatever happened to all those dumb hicks and pregnant girls.

[Evandril]

When my son had his yearbook picture taken, a shirt and tie were manditory, and similar rules were in place for females.

[Greenday]

When my son had his yearbook picture taken, a shirt and tie were manditory, and similar rules were in place for females.

We had to wear suits. Women had to dress nicely too.

Maybe it's the school's fault for not saying, "Dress appropriately" but one would easily think that would be obvious. Being topless in a picture is not appropriate.

[RedRoseSpiral]

Just saw on my local news that the girls mother spent $600 to take out a two page add in the back so her precious' picture will be in the yearbook.

[Sleepwalker]

I wanted to be anti school administration here, but... jesus, it looks like the opening sequence of a barely legal porn. That's just tacky, Mom.

[lupo pazzesco]

Apparently mom and daughter decided to go to the Today show when the second picture they submitted to replace the first was also refused as inappropriate. (second photo is further down, right hand side of the article). Apparently a skintight barely there, strapless minidress is still "artistic" according to teen and mom. But yeah, holy crap, THAT is not yearbook appropriate.

Linky

ETA: the mom? Apparently she was initially against the photo, but now is "seeing it through her daughter's eyes" It's "artistic and stunning".

They're also considering legal action against the school board, whom they believe is strongarming the yearbook staff, who refused to print the photo. She's paying out of pocket for an ad in the back, and is wanting to know why, if the photo is being allowed in the yearbook, can't it just be her senior picture. Well, she's paying to put herself in there, and her senior pic is inappropriate as a senior pic.

[Andara Bledin]

Regarding the question of rules regarding bio photos in the yearbook, from an article at the NY Daily News:

Durango High School editors decided to drop the portrait last week and school administrators say they have a policy stipulating that students must have their chests, backs and abdomens fully covered in all yearbook photos.

Another article at What's On Ningbo includes a comment from Spies stating that she was told it was rejected because her attire in the photo violated the school's dress code. It goes on to state that despite the fact that she knows the outfit violated the school dress code, she and her mother argue that until the school creates a formal policy about yearbook photos, it cannot reject hers.

So she seems to think that the school's dress code is somehow irrelevant when dealing with the yearbook.

Also, it's interesting that she and her mother now insist that the administration is to blame. Because if the administration didn't step in and nix the photo, that would mean that their chance for a payout is gone.

^-.-^

[HYHYBT]

It's not at all obvious that the school dress code would automatically cover photos. One thing that's inconsistent here: if the photo is inappropriate to be included in the yearbook, then it's inappropriate to be included, period. Including paid space.

[lordlundar]

Apparently mom and daughter decided to go to the Today show when the second picture they submitted to replace the first was also refused as inappropriate. (second photo is further down, right hand side of the article). Apparently a skintight barely there, strapless minidress is still "artistic" according to teen and mom. But yeah, holy crap, THAT is not yearbook appropriate.

Linky

So she went from "slut" to "tramp".

[Greenday]

It's not at all obvious that the school dress code would automatically cover photos. One thing that's inconsistent here: if the photo is inappropriate to be included in the yearbook, then it's inappropriate to be included, period. Including paid space.

You're right, neither picture should be in it at all.

[Eisa]

It's not at all obvious that the school dress code would automatically cover photos. One thing that's inconsistent here: if the photo is inappropriate to be included in the yearbook, then it's inappropriate to be included, period. Including paid space.

I would still assume the school dress code did. However, you're right. I don't see how it's inappropriate to be her senior picture, yet can still be included in the yearbook itself as an ad. It's either completely inappropriate or it's fine. None of this..."you can pay to have it in, but you can't have your senior photo be it."

[fireheart17]

She's paying out of pocket for an ad in the back, and is wanting to know why, if the photo is being allowed in the yearbook, can't it just be her senior picture. Well, she's paying to put herself in there, and her senior pic is inappropriate as a senior pic.

I really do have to wonder what that particular ad will involve:

"Look at my kid, my kid is amazing,
Give her a lick-she tastes just like raisin..."

WARNING: that video is NOT SAFE FOR WORK and it also loops.

Or will it be "Sluts anonymous-we help your teenage kid look just like a slut, all the men will be after her!"