"I can see how you might see that as a contradiction according to your worldview."

I am not. I openly and initially said the school handled it poorly. But that doesn't mean I disagree with the need for the dress code. As long as it is applied to all. I also said it is easier to apply to boys than girls. Boys don't typically wear skirts (I mean, sometimes when the weather is nice, but still). Boys…

Can we not with the 'rape culture'? If you want to say that crime is a problem, that society has been unfairly tipped in favor of men for too long, that's fine. But calling it a 'rape culture' is just flat-out wrong. Why not call it a culture that glorifies violent crime? That's more accurate. No, as a man I'm…

I... don't agree.

CNN is just as bad. Oh ye gods, what I wouldn't give for some old-school news reporting instead of even what they present. No, I never said CNN was any kind of a paragon of anything, least of all balanced or objective reporting.

No, I don't. Overall, I agree with you.

"Your assumption that we can't step outside this one location and listen to other voices is arrogant."

That's the second reference to how I must be a blast at parties. Is there a party metric I can reference? :-)

Did you go to this girl's school, or do you otherwise have a copy of their manual handy where you can point out their exact language? Because unless you do, your point isn't really relevant.

Well, when you spend all that time on the ground looking at the trees, you're bound to get lost.

I have come to a place where 100 people say I have a problem with my perception, until I step out of that group into a much larger one that say I'm fine. We can do this in circles. If you don't agree, you don't and that's fine. But I stand by my metaphor.

SO many reasons!

"Sorry I don't buy into your idea that everybody other than yourself is intelligent enough to understand nuance and that we all have to constantly abide by some irrelevant form of stoic "objectivity"."

So you equate having a meeting room with a bunch of like-minded people to having a dialog that promotes a cause. I don't.

Don't we all? :) I'd never admit that to my kid, though.

"This is a blog, not a paper."

You can find solidarity, espouse views, and present your sociological evidence without resorting to polarized editorializing. When you do that, you do yourself a disservice. A great one. Because you really only leave open two possibilities: those who agree with you will agree with you vehemently, and those who…

Very much so. But is this really a case of her rights being violated? There is a dress code. If the dress code is established and written, and she violated the dress code, this isn't about her rights being violated. This is about her not liking the rules. She chose to defy them, and is unhappy with the consequences.

I wore a uniform, yes. And no, it isn't the same. Do you think military dress code is also asinine? Polished boots to a high shine, shirt and pants aligned perfectly, the right posture?

Fair enough. If you are a blog, you are a blog. And yet, "Gawker is a blog founded by Nick Denton and Elizabeth Spiers and based in New York City that bills itself as "the source for daily Manhattan media news and gossip". It focuses on celebrities and the media industry." (Source: Wikipedia)