How would you feel if this was your child?

Question

Say you have a 6 year old daughter who goes to a private school. At this school the girls have to wear skirts. One day on the playground a little boy who is a couple of years older than you daughter comes up and flips her skirt in the air showing everyone her panties. Your daughter turns around and punches the little boy in the face and then they both run to the teacher.

After talking to the teacher both children get sent to the principal's office. The principal suspends your daughter for 3 threes and sends her home immediately. After sending the boy to the nurse to be check out he allows the boy to go back to class.

Would you say the Principal is right is his decision? If not, would you consider this discrimination?

Any thoughts are welcome.

Answer 1

Well coming from a private school where this kind of stuff went on all the time with kids... I never heard of a boy actually pulling down a girl's skirt, but I'm sure it's happened... I could tell you what would happen.

Neither kid would get in trouble with the school (they're way to young to be suspended or charged with sexual harassment... are you kidding me? An 8 year old boy with sexual harassment?! He doesn't even know what s*x is!) but both their parents would be told about what happened, which is usually enough at that age. If it happened again, they would probably be given one more warning (but would be placed in timeout), and the third time it happened they would both be suspended.

The boy shouldn't have done anything to her, and the girl should have gone straight to the teacher if something like this happened.

Answer 2

The little boy should be be talked to.  He needs to understand what he did was wrong.  The little girl, likewise, though defending herself, should also understand there are alternatives besides hitting.

Both of them are on the wrong course and for the long run,

need to be corrected.  Of course, since they are kids, the death penalty is not warranted.  

Answer 3

What the boy did qualifies as sexual harassment.  Most, if not all schools, have a policy regarding it (if they don't they really need to enact one).  This is no type of message that should be projected towards young children.

I'd be furious as the girl's parent and probably enroll her in a different school as soon as possible.

EDIT:

To all the people who say an 8-year-old doesn't know about sexual harassment...

At that age, children SHOULD know that certain parts of the body are private and that girls and boys are different.  These days, through poor parenting or whatever, a good portion of kids in the second and third grades  know perfectly well exactly what s*x is.  Some girls are even entering puberty at age 8 (I know the girl in the question was 6, but I thought that might give some perspective.)

Answer 4

Dude, you have waaaay too much time on your hands.  Not to be rude, but, you realize that kids are kids and they're going to do stupid things.  You know how it is though - whoever throws the first punch....

Answer 5

Sue for sexual harassment.

Answer 6

I would talk to the principal, asking hir to punish the boy as well - if not, I'd send my girl to a different school.

I'm really not sure what I'd say to the girl. She should be taught not to take that sort of c**p from boys (she shouldn't be expected to just start crying or scream for the teacher), and a punch might be the only way to show a small boy that girls are worthy of respect too. It's probably what he'd get from one of his peers.

On the other hand, you don't want your kid to think violence is okay... no, I don't know.

Answer 7

Cut the kids some slack, they're first graders, for cryin out loud!  But, they both deserve some sort of punishment so they don't end up in jail when they get older, him for sexual assault and her for physical assault.

Answer 8

I have a hard time believing a girl would be suspended 3 days for hitting a boy for any kind of provocation, but let's assume it does happen.

The girl should be punished.  Three day suspension is a little too much in my opinion.  The boy should be punished as well.  I'd say send them both home for the day if possible, or if not, to the in-school suspension place.

The reverse of the situation is something I could actually see happening.  Let's face it, boys hitting girls is still much, much worse to most people than girls hitting boys, no matter how we act on here.  People need to leave GWS every now and then.

By the way, where are all these schools with nurses?  I never had one in any of my schools.

Sexual harassment for an 8-year old?  No wonder our society is going to c**p.  Yes, he needs to be taught this isn't right, but get real people.

Indigo- I got touched inappropriately by a girl once when we were pretty young.  It was uncomfortable to be sure, but I don't think it's nearly the same thing as it would be when adults do it.  Not to mention the fact that there would've been laughter if somebody had mentioned trying to punish a 7-year old girl for sexual harassment (I think we were about that age, maybe a bit younger).

Shoot, we might as well put my old neighbor across the street on the s*x offender registry because she kissed me when I was 4 and she was 5 and I didn't want it.

Answer 9

Touching another person without permission is assault- both of them are guilty of the same offense.   They should both get the same punishment.  

Answer 10

They both did wrong, they both should have gotten punished. Some people seem to think that the boys punishment was already handed to him by the girl, if that was the case, shouldn't her punishment already have been handed to her by the boy when he lifted her skirt? That's kiddie politics. Like Bryan, in the real world I would have been a little proud of her for not taking sh*t when it comes to that kind of thing. Had he called her a name or did something in another way of not touching her and she hit him then I would be upset with her, but hey he touched her.

Answer 11

I think you just described dsds's childhood.

Answer 12

The girl shouldn't have gotten the harder punishment. They were just little kids and they both should have been equally handled.

As for this being reversed, I still hold the same stand.

Answer 13

I would not call it descrimination I would call it stupidity on the part of the principal. First of all I would be glad that my daughter stood up for herself and reacted when any boy treated her as a piece of property. Although as my child she would know that there are always consequences for her actions and even though the school may suspend her for the common rule of " ZERO TOLERANCE" she would EVER get in trouble for honestly defending herself. Secondly, the boy has in fact been harmed (if it were my child a broken nose would be likely) but he should still face consequences of sexual harrassment and on those grounds you would have a case against the boy. The school should have strict guidlines against this behavior and the school is at fault for stupidity. The child could be found guilty of sexual harassment and the school for failure to follow procedure which most school districts have this type of thing in writing.

Answer 14

um... 1) the parents pay for the little girl to go to a private school, so they should be aware of the dress code.

2) kids will be kids, but the little girl did inflict more physical harm then the little boy, so her repercussion should be more strict. Although I feel the little boy should have had a slightly harsher punishment, but being a private school, it probably came down to who his parents are...    

Answer 15

I would be disappointed in my child for fighting, boy or girl. Both of them should have been punished equally, her for hitting, him for starting it.

Answer 16

Working in the teaching industry, I can say that this would be taken seriously.  In Australia, given your scenario, it would more likely be the boy who is sent home, with urgent calls to the parents for him to be counselled.  If the genders were reversed, it probably would still be the boy who is treated poorly: the girl would be excused for being silly, and the boy would be censured for the violent response.

When it comes to children hitting one another, and despite official regulations that state gender as being irrelevant, any boy who hits a girl for any reason is likely to see his parents at the Principal's office and there would be demands for counselling of the boy.

Answer 17

Id say it was wrong for the little girl to be suspended. If i was her mother id be PO'ed.

No matter who did what both children should have been given a stern talking to, talk with their parents and teach the kids why their actions were wrong.

Though i think the girl was right to hit the boy. Any guy tried that on me and id kick his ... well you know.

Answer 18

The boy should of been punished BUT the girl did more harm. There is no justification for hitting someone if they didn't hit you first. She was not in any danger and their was no physical harm done.

"Embarrassment" does not give you the right to strike someone. STILL, the boy didn't have the right to touch her clothing either.

I think he should of been punish more than he was but less than the girl.

Answer 19

Whatever happened to; <Looking sternly at them both; speaking to the boy first, then the girl> "You don't look up girls' skirts! Now for you young lady punching him in the eye was not right; both of you march back to class and if it happens again I'll call in your parents.  Am I clear?"

Answer 20

I agree with you that this is unfair, but not to quite the extent I feel you do.

I'm a great guy and even I did that when once when I was a little boy.

I don't think the boy should have been punished outside of clearly letting him know what he did was unacceptable, but your daughter being suspended for three days is just a tad excessive.

Answer 21

I wouldn't send my daughter to a private school in the first place, private school kids are all soft.

I think it all sounds a bit excessive really. Six year olds do goofy stuff, because they are six. Gods sake, let kids be  kids and pull each others skirts up and punch each other till the cows come home, no need for suspending anyone.

Answer 22

They both deserve punishment, but the boy should have been suspended also for showing her panties to everyone.

The principal probably thought "oh he's just a kid.what does he know about sexual stuff."...but he should be taught that this is not appropriate.  

Answer 23

Hopefully I raise my children better then that... but if not lets see... Either scenario won't work they both deserve to be punished; the hitter more severly but the pantser needs to be punished as well with detention or garbage pick up; I don't know what they do now for punishments.  

The real question is are boys still pulling up girls skirts to see underpants?  Could someone do a study to find out why?  I hated that when I was a little girl and chose to stop wearing dresses and skirts altogether.  It was really disappointing for my mother because she liked me all girly.  I was angry at being treated that way and fought back a lot.  

Answer 24

where did the girl learned to punch ?? from the parents ?

shame on you !

as per "sexual harassment " this is most ridiculous ever- kids are kids and they play this way- by teasing the girls. if you paranoid of you daughters pant shown, tell her to wear the long skirts or trousers!

Answer 25

What are they teaching them?  It's not ok to hit but it IS ok to rip people's clothes off and embarrass them? (edit: I'm talking about future behavior here.)

While I do not condone violence, remember that these are children, barely above the age where they would throw a temper tantrum if you took their favorite toy away.  Both should be punished to teach them what is acceptable behavior and what isn't.  And while pulling down a skirt is less painful than hitting someone, it's equally unacceptable.

Answer 26

Tell both of them they were wrong and give them a smack on the head, they are kids FFS! and as for the poster who said "sexual harrasment" I hope you never breed!

Answer 27

If I were the principal, I would be fair and give both children the same punishment, but not let the boy go back to class. Or I would make it worse for the little girl, but not let the boy get off that easy.

The boy did something extremely inappropriate, but the girl did not handle it the way she should have.

Neither child was right, but they both should have been punished for their wrong-doings.

Answer 28

Any school that requires that girls where skirts is questionable in my mind anyway, so I wouldn't be surprised.  

Answer 29

Well to be honest I don't believe the first scenario.

I can believe the other, in terms of the punishments.

Its not that it isn't possible - it just seems very unlikely.

For either - this being a first offence, I think suspension is a bit much.

I also consider disciplining the defending party is unreasonable. They might have hit - but its the others fault. If they went over board then yes they should be - but a singluar hit is not over the top.

Why -

A person should have a right to defense. To punish them is to teach them thats not allowed. There is a differene between defense and loosing it.

A person shouldnt be out to violate or humilate another. That should be punished.

@the fools that think one event is harrasment - wow. one event is one event it takes more than that to qualify. Two they are kids prove they know its wrong, to be tried or to dish punishments out of that meter I understand that they have to understand it. They probably dont know of 'sexual' in any context - let alone understand sexual urge to be guilty of it.

Answer 30

Kids that age don't know what constitutes sexual harassment, so I wouldn't punish the boy too harshly. After this he should definitely be given a talking-to about it, and withdrawal of some sort of privilege.

Answer 31

Either both the kids should have been suspended, or neither.

Both of them behaved badly and need to have some attention to that, but by suspending one only you send the message to everyone else 'what the other kid did was OK', when clearly, it wasn't.

Yes, kids will be kids but the idea is when they do they wrong thing they get trained out of it and into becoming adults who don't do those things.

Also, this is how a lot of lawsuits start.

People take disciplinary actions that are manifestly unfair, parents feel aggrieved for their kid to be treated like a villain when there was provocation involved, and next thing you know, they're suing.

Both, or neither.

If the situation was reversed, the it should be neither, or both.

Cheers :-)