Talk:Six year old suspended for sexual harassment
Add topicTitle
[edit]The title I put back up is the best one that has been issued to this article so far. Previsous title: Sexual harassment in the first grade, is a BAD title. This is a news article, not a book. Jason Safoutin 13:10, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
I had changed the title to make it simpler and concise. Also to grab attention which is the point of a headline. Someone had changed the title making it too long.--Tjkphilosofe 10:52, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
What are we coming to
[edit]When I read this story, that was the first thing that came to mind. I had to publish the article.
What do you think ? Have we lost our minds ?--Tjkphilosofe 13:52, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
We can define sexual harassment as "Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature." I don't think there was any sexual intent in that first-grader's mind. This is just ridiculous...--Motoma
- Indeed it is ridiculous. Not only this, but if you think about it for a moment, this is pretty much saying the pedophile activists have been right all along: children make sexual overtures. I think you should all think very carefully and hard about what this story is implying. - Ta bu shi da yu 09:30, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
Does the little boys and girls of all epochs and places never played "mum&dad", "doctor" or anything alike ? It seems as if it's the first time this kind of thing happened to the point they order an investigation. Such rubbish.83.214.23.85 00:46, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
What's the big deal?
[edit]Sorry, MrM. but I started this before you did your quote.
Why is this stranger or less acceptable than babies being on a no-fly list? Or high school kids who demonstrated at the Republican National Convention being on a no-fly list? Or killing tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians because their leader had non-existant WMDs? and justifying it because less than 3,000 of our civilians were killed by other terrorists? Or bringing "democracy to the middle east" and then wanting to "isolate" Lebanon when they democratically elect the wrong party? or bombing Iran because they have "nuclear ambitions" and saying squat about Israel's atomic bombs? GET OVER IT ! THIS IS THE FUTURE ! good grief; the kid's lucky he's not in an american jail; yet. Neutralizer 01:30, 12 February 2006 (UTC)