Stand up for the leggings. Stand up for the leggings is life klan. It's not a fad, it's a way of lyf.. mmh' BE COMPLETED way LEAVE. r. iri. tfr" l brake: Stl te leggings School Rules rebel teens girls White girls
x

Stand up for the leggings

Stand up for the leggings. Stand up for the leggings is life klan. It's not a fad, it's a way of lyf.. mmh' BE COMPLETED way LEAVE. r. iri. tfr" l brake: Stl te

Stand up for the leggings is life klan. It's not a fad, it's a way of lyf.

mmh' BE COMPLETED way LEAVE.
r. iri. tfr" l brake: Stl tel Rin? gt) ipqs
...
  • Recommend tagsx
+776
Views: 30373
Favorited: 39
Submitted: 06/11/2014
Share On Facebook
Add to favorites Subscribe to topanga submit to reddit

Comments(148):

[ 148 comments ]
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
+100
#27 - eddymolly ONLINE (06/11/2014) [-]
To be fair, some people really shouldn't wear leggings
0
#119 to #118 - seventucker has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #114 to #27 - playerdous (06/12/2014) [-]
This is fine, its bad when the ass looks like cottage cheese
User avatar #34 to #27 - dubious (06/11/2014) [-]
I actually like that though, for some reason i just can't get enough booty
User avatar #38 to #34 - brothergrimm (06/11/2014) [-]
Ass men assemble!
User avatar #105 to #34 - darkoblivion (06/12/2014) [-]
in here booty...booty is more important than food
User avatar #116 to #105 - plasticcup ONLINE (06/12/2014) [-]
Booty is more important than water.
User avatar #146 to #105 - dubious (06/12/2014) [-]
the booty is almighty, it compels me
User avatar #5 - syntheticdoll ONLINE (06/11/2014) [-]
I don't have a problem with leggings as long as not morbidly fat girls are wearing it or they are transparent.
#63 to #5 - anon (06/12/2014) [-]
You can not look at people's asses in leggings if they don't please you?
Why should other people change their clothing habits based on your preferences?
User avatar #129 to #63 - syntheticdoll ONLINE (06/12/2014) [-]
I usually don't have problem with people wearing whaever they want, but when it comes to dressing to body shape... I mean it's just plain disgousting when some woman who weights at least 200lbs walks around in a short top and little short so you can clearly see all her fat rolls free and outside. I just don't understand why do they do it. i mean it makes them look stupid and unattractive. One of my teacher's wife is pretty chubby but she accepts it and lokes really pretty because she dresses for her body shape.
User avatar #15 to #5 - captnnorway (06/11/2014) [-]
You know, school can't say "Thin girls can wear leggings, but fat whales and fags can't" so in order to spare us from sights like that, we have to sacrifice seeing lean girls in leggings.

Actually I live in Norway and everyone can wear whatever, but I thought I'd justify it at least.
User avatar #28 to #15 - syntheticdoll ONLINE (06/11/2014) [-]
"Everyone please dress accordingly to body shape"
Once a girl went to school in light colored leggings and ther color exactly looked like she wore some extremely transparent gray leggings.
User avatar #7 to #5 - unusualember (06/11/2014) [-]
I have a problem with people wearing them as pants. IDK, I just think they look better with shorts or a skirt.
User avatar #11 - TheHutchie (06/11/2014) [-]
I absolutely hate it when teachers pull this **** .

I was once kept out of English, a class I was desperately trying to pass at higher level, for a full 2 hour lesson because I turned up to school having forgotten my shirt.

I had a T-shirt underneath, so I took off the smart shirt to brush my teeth, and then put on my jacket and left. Didn't realise.

Now I was never that big on uniform (Ties were mandatory, but I only wore mine when a teacher told me to, then took it off immediately once they were out of sight) but after that day I learned to despite it in all its forms.
User avatar #43 to #11 - fuckallthelobsters (06/12/2014) [-]
my old assistant principal hated me so much that she would put me in iss for **** like having shoes that were black and white instead of black or white. she was such a cunt.
#31 to #11 - anon (06/11/2014) [-]
You're so cool hating uniforms.
User avatar #53 to #31 - TheHutchie (06/12/2014) [-]
I'd have no problems with uniforms if idiot teachers didn't prioritise them over kids getting an actual education.

Get over yourself, anon.
User avatar #25 to #11 - timmylickens (06/11/2014) [-]
I got an isolation for forgetting my tie...
User avatar #14 to #11 - gibroner (06/11/2014) [-]
god I feel you there once I was literally one minute late for a class I got i the teacher hadn't even started the lesson yet but he made me go to the office and do all the bull **** because I wasn't on time to class so ended up missing the first 20 minutes when I would've otherwise missed none
User avatar #51 to #14 - nintendolover (06/12/2014) [-]
Jesus Christ. That sounds infuriating. Never had to deal with something like this luckily.
#69 to #14 - anon (06/12/2014) [-]
I got suspended for making a picture with jesus and a doge over the face.
User avatar #113 to #69 - meganinja (06/12/2014) [-]
That's what you get.
#1 - gayname (06/11/2014) [-]
User avatar #70 - slendermanspenis (06/12/2014) [-]
You know what? I don't care if anybody likes this or not I honestly don't mind the look of leggings but some people have to know that leggings are NOT pants. They're meant to be worn under dresses. This little **** wouldn't be out of class and not getting education if she stuck with the rules of the school. So, she's complaining that they are stupid for sending her out because of something she wore? Well maybe if she didn't wear it in the first place it wouldn't of happened. In my highschool we weren't allowed to wear; sneakers, white socks, T-shirts, jeans, piercings, make-up we werent even allowed to dye our hair because it looks unprofessional. They want to set an example.
User avatar #77 to #70 - zekeon (06/12/2014) [-]
Your school sounds like a no fun zone.
User avatar #95 to #77 - slendermanspenis (06/12/2014) [-]
It is a no fun zone.
#79 to #77 - anon (06/12/2014) [-]
Because schools are playhouses and not learning centers.
User avatar #80 to #79 - zekeon (06/12/2014) [-]
Learning centers for children.
User avatar #90 to #80 - ragingbrony (06/12/2014) [-]
What if college?
User avatar #91 to #90 - zekeon (06/12/2014) [-]
College is for legal adults.
User avatar #92 to #91 - zekeon (06/12/2014) [-]
That said, most people seem to have more actual fun in college than in high school.
User avatar #108 to #92 - playerdous (06/12/2014) [-]
We're making up for the no-fun zone.
#81 to #80 - anon (06/12/2014) [-]
Point being?
User avatar #83 to #81 - zekeon (06/12/2014) [-]
Point being that there is a distinct difference between children and adults, even an idiot can understand that.
#86 to #83 - anon (06/12/2014) [-]
I'm aware of that, i'm just not sure how it pertains to the conversation, just because they are kids doesn't mean the focus shouldn't be on learning. Kids are at school to learn, not have fun.
User avatar #89 to #86 - zekeon (06/12/2014) [-]
So you're saying children can never have the chance to have fun at all ever while in school, and naturally grow up seeing school as a chore? The younger a child is the less likely they are to be able to even force themselves to pay attention if the subject matter doesn't interest them in some way. That's speaking mainly for 15 & below but the point stands even into high school that most kids are more likely to skip out if the school allows no freedom of expression.

Attendance is always better. That said, the system is pretty ****** anyway and there's no way to make it work for everyone.
#97 to #89 - anon (06/12/2014) [-]
No i'm not saying schools can't ever be fun, i'm saying to recognize the focus is on learning, not having a good time. If the lessons provide that as a secondary effect, ******* awesome. Wearing leggings tight enough to see their twinkle cave isn't essential, what is essential would be learning there is a time and place to wear certain clothing.
User avatar #98 to #97 - zekeon (06/12/2014) [-]
Take this moment to realize that I never implied that schools should be focused on fun or the wants of the students. Simply that making an effort to suck any possible enjoyment out of the experience is counter productive.
#101 to #98 - anon (06/12/2014) [-]
A dress code is hardly sucking all the fun out of school. I don't know about you but I can still joke with friends, have and exciting lesson, and in general have a great time regardless of whether i'm wearing a uniform of a wife beater and sweat pants. As I said before teaching kids to dress a certain way is educational, and because it is educational it takes priority over fun.
#44 - kolocktos (06/12/2014) [-]
Actually, I don't think it's unreasonable for schools to require kids to dress modestly for class. When I was in high school, the dress code forbade leggings/yoga pants and short shorts for girls and sweats and athletic shorts for boys. There were requirements of tops and t-shirts as well, but I won't go into that. Like all the kids there, I hated the dress code, but looking back, it subtly instilled an understanding for how to make a first impression, and how to present yourself in a mature and professional fashion. Leggings are great wear for athletics, or a lazy day around town or at home, but not great if your going somewhere where you need to make a good impression, like work.
There's a lot people can tell about you from your appearance inb4 buttmad what follows are the automatic thoughts pretty much everyone has when they see these
Some things take time to fix:
>bad acne= hygiene issues
>fat=lazy/unmotivated/lack of self control
>athletic=motivated/dedicated/good self control
Others are pretty easy
>clean shaven or well groomed facial hair=conscientious/pays attention to detail
>good posture=not a pushover/assertive
And especially
>dressed for the occasion=respectful/mature instead of slovenly/childish
Why shouldn't kids have some menial requirement like "at least wear nice hole-less jeans, capris or a skirt" in the place where they are being taught what they'll need in the future? Dress codes aren't oppressive in any way shape or form, and in my opinion, this girl comes off as more of a snot than some sort of rebellious victim.
User avatar #103 to #44 - darkoblivion (06/12/2014) [-]
ever been around for a retarded change to a dress code?
User avatar #107 to #103 - kolocktos (06/12/2014) [-]
My school banned sweats and gym shorts in my sophomore year, then yogas the following one. I thought they were retarded when I was a high schooler.
User avatar #109 to #107 - darkoblivion (06/12/2014) [-]
in my high schoo, and this is what my teacher told me, the removed black as an acceptable pants color because teachers couldn't tell the difference between navy blue and black pants sometimes. both colors were acceptable anyway.
#111 to #109 - kolocktos (06/12/2014) [-]
That's pretty retarded to me now. I can't even begin to defend that one.
User avatar #112 to #111 - darkoblivion (06/12/2014) [-]
it's the only explanation i was given so all i have is the explanation that made me rage
#74 to #44 - anon (06/12/2014) [-]
lol. I have horrible acne. Tried everything. Washing face, changing diet, medications, dermatologist. Can't get rid of it. I must be a dirty person from the inside.
User avatar #94 to #74 - kolocktos (06/12/2014) [-]
When I was in my teens, I had pretty bad acne too. Never got medicine for it, but creams, daily showers, low fat/sugar diets and changing clothes twice a day or pillow cases weekly got rid of it. When I turned 19, it finally faded away. Some people lose it at 16, others at 25, most between then. Most likely, yours will vanish with age. However, most people with bad acne have it because they don't take proper care of themselves. The exception does not make the rule.
User avatar #123 to #94 - cumbersome (06/12/2014) [-]
Thats not true, it has nothing to do with that if its real acne and not just superficial zits, and even then it doesnt always apply
User avatar #125 to #123 - kolocktos (06/12/2014) [-]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acne_vulgaris
>For most people, acne diminishes over time and tends to disappear – or at the very least decreases – by age 25.[16] There is, however, no way to predict how long it will take to disappear entirely, and some individuals will carry this condition well into their thirties, forties, and beyond.[17]
User avatar #62 to #44 - desacabose (06/12/2014) [-]
tan, wearing a ripped t shirt, beating up someone in the locker room, calling me a whore, smells like hairspray, turned sideways hat = perfect man, would bang
User avatar #64 - hotsaws (06/12/2014) [-]
What ******** rules schools enforce. Students at my highschool wore spaghetti straps, crop tops, shorts that showed the moose-knuckle and socks with bright weed leaves printed on them, up to their knees. BUT GOD FORBID YOU WEAR A ******* HAT, RIGHT? NONE of this is allowed but I get my Kermit hat taken after forgetting to take it off before school even starts and they don't say **** on booty shorts and flip flops?
#4 - anon (06/11/2014) [-]
This seems like something you'd have to do in third grade, not in tenth. You're two years out from graduation and you have to fill out 'think sheets?' This teacher needs to be reminded of the age group they're supposed to be teaching.
User avatar #9 to #4 - romdomcom (06/11/2014) [-]
Some employers will make you do something like this.
#33 - professorfj (06/11/2014) [-]
User avatar #120 to #33 - kinginyellow (06/12/2014) [-]
When the guys are running around in shirts so baggy they're borderline showing the guy's nipples, I cal it discrimination. My school was ******* awful for letting guys get away with stuff the girls weren't, and calling it fair. The problem is so much emphasis on the girls and none on what the guys where, and they do wear pretty disrespectful clothing like baggy pants that show off boxers or the loose wifebeaters that might as well by a cloth around their midriff
#40 to #33 - angelusprimus (06/11/2014) [-]
No one is talking about discrimination here.
What this is talking about is stupid implementation of a rule.
#65 to #33 - anon (06/12/2014) [-]
in the summer when it gets hot it forbids women to wear tank tops, shorts, and sometimes even t shirts
User avatar #115 to #65 - tubbymeatball (06/12/2014) [-]
I've never heard of anybody not being able to wear shorts or t-shirts
User avatar #39 to #33 - skorve (06/11/2014) [-]
The question isn't whether or not it's discrimination. The point is whether or not caring about leggings enough to keep a student out of class is really worth it.
#67 to #33 - professorfj (06/12/2014) [-]
MFW I upset people's feelings
#36 to #33 - anon (06/11/2014) [-]
they have sweat pants out there that are just as tight as leggings... but because they're sweat pants no one bothers. I've seen teachers kick kids out of class for wearing a hat. That's stupid, like the hat is really distracting people. And what about spaghetti strap shirts? Have you ever heard a guy say "daaaaamn look at the shoulders on that bitch"? Some of the rules are just kinda dumb.
#61 to #36 - fredgregory (06/12/2014) [-]
I dont know man I am the kind of person who likes nice shoulders and pronounced clavicle
User avatar #48 - charagrin (06/12/2014) [-]
BS like this bothers me. A school, company, home, or anything else can have whatever rules they want to and if you don't like it you can leave. It doesn't matter how stupid or arbitrary the rule is, if you don't like it, leave. And if you can't leave because it is the only whatever in your area, then tough luck. Follow it or **** off.

This is not an attack on anyone, I just find it stupid that people think they can dictate the rules and regulations of something they do not own or have any control over. Especially schools, granted schools aren't perfect, but they have such rules they enforce to teach you how to behave in modern society. How long do you think you will hold down a job as a nurse, doctor, cop, infantryman, or whatever if you "want to wear your own clothes" to work?
User avatar #73 to #48 - tacticulbacon (06/12/2014) [-]
Private schools have that option because students choose to go their. Public schools, however, are the only source for education for many people. Some people living in the countryside only have one school that is close to where they live, so they would be stuck with that school. Imagine if the only school you could go to made you wear a swastika.

Public schools are paid for by taxdollars and therefore are for the public. They should not have ******** rules like this.
#75 to #73 - anon (06/12/2014) [-]
Because a swastika is equal to telling women not to dress in a way that shows off your vagina flaps.
User avatar #76 to #73 - charagrin (06/12/2014) [-]
Yes, yes they should. A school not only teaches you the subjects, but some few life skills as well. You can't bully, you can't disciminate or commit hate crimes, and you can't wear whatever you want during work hours just because you want to. School is where you go before you become an adult, and it is there that you gain the experiences that shape who you will be as an adult. You are not the boss, you are the student. Sit down, shut up, and learn.
User avatar #110 to #73 - playerdous (06/12/2014) [-]
Eh, no.
******** rules are things like water fountains for whites and garden hoses seperate water fountains for blacks.
Dressing for success is what schools try to teach you know teach, as in the thing you're there for you
User avatar #104 to #48 - whatugawkinat (06/12/2014) [-]
I find it stupid that schools, businesses or anywhere else can make rules completely unrelated to the purpose of the institution. Most things in society deemed "unfit" or "improper" are a result of outdated views/beliefs of society or the personal views of an individual with authority. Society itself is shifting and irrelevant issues such as clothing, language and the like are slowly becoming less of a "problem". Can you really say that wearing a form of pants someone deemed "not proper" should be punishable? We all know that breaking a rule or law because one simply wishes to or sees it as irrelevant is asking for trouble...because of course, any rule or law should be for the safety or well being of an individual or others, but some so called rules should be laughed at and broken repeatedly until change is made. Rules and laws that are issued by no other means than safety, security and well being of a people are not rules and laws, they are opinions.
#122 to #104 - anon (06/12/2014) [-]
your*
#121 to #104 - anon (06/12/2014) [-]
Yes it should be punishable in a business or school, in the same way if you dressed like that at work you would be punished. I'd say it is for the well being of the people teaching kids that certain outfits aren't appropriate for every occasion, like it or not dressing a certain way is going to impact your life immensely, if you go into a workplace with yoga pants and you're not a yoga pants model, you're ass is going to get fired.
User avatar #124 to #121 - whatugawkinat (06/12/2014) [-]
That is entirely the point I'm trying to make. As long as you do your job right, or do well in school... clothing should not matter. Why should something as irrelevant to an occasion as clothing/appearance affect how people view you. There's a fine line between looking professional and looking a certain way in accordance to views and guidelines that do not affect the profession or occasion.

Wearing appropriate attire for the job is one thing we can all agree on, but to punish someone for dressing in a way that in no way hinders their or anyone else in their ability to learn or perform a job is unnecessary and a waste. We all know that appearance affects how people see us, but don't you think that needs to be changed?
#127 to #124 - anon (06/12/2014) [-]
If you see a cum stained bum in the window of a store stacking clothes, and a woman in a blouse and a skirt stacking clothes in another, which would you rather go into? It really doesn't matter how good the bum looking guy is at his job, he might be the owner of 1200 businesses, appearances matter.

People judge based on appearances, that is never going to change. In an ideal world, yes everyone could dress how they wanted and everybody would be given the benefit of the doubt. But this is the real world, and chances are that cum stained bum makes people not want to shop at that store, and you ******* know it.
User avatar #135 to #127 - whatugawkinat (06/12/2014) [-]
I mentioned that dress and appearance in accordance to the job matters. A "cum stained bum" would clearly not be classified as work appropriate. Now if I saw an individual in a store stocking, pricing or even managing who was wearing clean shorts and a clean tank top with piercings I would like to think nobody would bat an eye. There are far too many judgemental bastards out there who look entirely on ones' outward appearance (not talking about being dirty or slutty...just in general) and I think that is a problem. FYI, I'm in no way being aggressive or in any way trying to be hurtful. I agree with your point to an extent, but this is yet another black and white subject that I feel should be pushed gently into the grey area. Clothing and appearance matters, but I believe most people take it to far as to judge a person's morals and heart or make laws and rules punishable by unreasonable means. I just like a good debate and to see other peoples views, hope I didn't come off as a troll/asshole.
#141 to #135 - anon (06/12/2014) [-]
I'm not saying it's good people judge on looks alone, if everyone could wear whatever they wanted and nobody gave a **** that would be fantastic. But people do, and people expect others to judge you if they give you a job or you attend their school.
User avatar #6 - therealtjthemedic (06/11/2014) [-]
Woah, what a badass. Breaking rules, how edgy.
User avatar #60 to #6 - jukuku (06/12/2014) [-]
Seems reasonable to me. She was removed from class because of her clothing. That's pretty pathetic, if the teacher is that turned on he can fap or quit.

Or **** her
+137
#8 to #6 - comradewinter ONLINE (06/11/2014) [-]
To be fair, it's a stupid rule. Leggings are not a problem anywhere else in the world, so why bother?
User avatar #12 to #8 - nicoquitemad (06/11/2014) [-]
Because it's a rule. A stupid rule which should be removed, but still a rule. If you break one, why not break them all? I'm not sure how much I agree with my own statement here.
#30 to #12 - anon (06/11/2014) [-]
Because not all rules are stupid rules.
#13 to #12 - comradewinter ONLINE (06/11/2014) [-]
There's a rule for next year that will enforce absolutely no smoking while attending school, even for students that are 18 years or older. This includes the way to school (both to and from), during breaks, excursions, and any other thinkable time related to school, although most of the time spent here is not even on school grounds. Absolutely every student, teacher, and other people I've met think this is right. Teachers in my classes have laughed at the idea, and stating that they won't give a **** . People will still break the rules, but the idea is so stupid nobody will enforce it. Hitting another classmate is also breaking the rules, but that is enforced for a good reason.

TL;DR: If the rules are stupid, they are best ignored.
User avatar #16 to #13 - nicoquitemad (06/11/2014) [-]
The to and from school part is stupid. They can't enforce it, and it's an invasion of privacy, but I generally think not smoking on school grounds is a good idea. It reduces the damage done to others, just like the hitting rule. I don't get dress codes, they're idiotic, but rules are put in place for a reason, and learning to go by them helps some kids learn to obey the law.
User avatar #21 to #16 - Shramin (06/11/2014) [-]
If there are uniforms involved they can enforce it, but if the students are hiding their uniforms they cannot.
User avatar #22 to #21 - nicoquitemad (06/11/2014) [-]
But it should be a question of whether the uniform rule is a useless rule or not. And I'm not talking "it'll stop them turning into sluts", I'm talking based on scientific proof or something proper.
User avatar #23 to #22 - Shramin (06/11/2014) [-]
The no smoking rules are less likely to be about people smoking and more likely be to reflect on the visual representation of the school.

Dress codes are there on Moral reasons decided by whether the school is a deep believer of the bible or not.
User avatar #24 to #23 - nicoquitemad (06/11/2014) [-]
I get the biblical thing, but it's kind of ******** to make rules that may make the class environment worse because of kids attitudes just to make the school look better from the outside.
User avatar #35 to #24 - Shramin (06/11/2014) [-]
Schools are there to teach you how to behave in the world, Smoking in a uniform for a company represents the company, that same way of thinking also applies to schools.
#17 to #16 - comradewinter ONLINE (06/11/2014) [-]
It has always been illegal to smoke on school grounds. But people have still left the grounds to smoke during breaks. Now they claim monopoly on the students' actions while their time has some connection to school. So yes, everyone sees it as an invasion of privacy, and nobody protests because everyone knows it won't be enforced.

And really, wearing leggings don't help you learn to obey the law. On the contrary, stupid laws make people resent them. If you want people to respect rules, make them understand why they are in place. Telling students to blindly follow the ideas of some beaurocrat doesn't make for good decisionmaking in the future.
User avatar #18 to #17 - nicoquitemad (06/11/2014) [-]
I agree, however, I don't think that school administration should just be allowed to make these stupid rules or rules that wont be enforced anyway. If they aren't necessary, they're just filler.

It should be possible for students to influence school rules like these or something.
#19 to #18 - comradewinter ONLINE (06/11/2014) [-]
They make them to set an example, nothing more. They think students will be scared of breaking rules.
User avatar #20 to #19 - nicoquitemad (06/11/2014) [-]
And some are, and it creates unnecessary tension and **** .
User avatar #54 to #12 - altairibnlaahad (06/12/2014) [-]
Well, I didn't wear my seatbelt, why not kill somebody while I'm at it?
User avatar #55 to #54 - nicoquitemad (06/12/2014) [-]
That's not a school rule, that's a law for your own. And you're an adult I assume. It's not like it's a rule put there to teach you to follow rules or the importance of laws.
User avatar #68 to #55 - psykobear (06/12/2014) [-]
It used to be a rule for blacks to not drink from the white fountain.
Albeit it is an extreme example compared to something as trivial as leggings, it proves my point nonetheless. If everyone follows stupid rules that are known to exist for no good reason, they will never change. Money and resources are wasted enforcing these rules.
User avatar #147 to #68 - nicoquitemad (06/12/2014) [-]
That's why I'm saying there needs to be a system to change stupid rules, but it appears that protest and rulebreaking is the most effective methods, so as long as people don't get hurt, that's what ought to continue.
User avatar #56 to #55 - altairibnlaahad (06/12/2014) [-]
It's still comparable, just scaled up. A lot. I'm not big on the logic of "follow the rule because it's there." I'm not saying deliberately break the rule because you don't agree with it, but it shouldn't just be followed "because I told you to."
User avatar #57 to #56 - nicoquitemad (06/12/2014) [-]
Agreed. I disagree with teachers making unnecessary rules like these because it should be clear that you should follow rules because they're generally there to help you and others.
User avatar #71 to #12 - thebaseballexpert (06/12/2014) [-]
well, you're right.. until it is not a rule, you still need to follow it, regardless of how pointless the rule is. IMO, leggings are supposed to be worn under pants or shorts, not in lieu of, like the student probably was.
#41 to #12 - angelusprimus (06/11/2014) [-]
I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do. I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.
Robert A. Heinlein

That's why you break stupid rules, but follow the ones that are tolerable. Because you are not an dumb animal, you are a human being that has a moral compass and can chose which rules are sensible and which are not.
User avatar #45 to #41 - nicoquitemad (06/12/2014) [-]
I don't think there are a lot of people who wouldn't agree with that quote. I still think it would be better to remove stupid rules instead of breaking them though.
#46 to #45 - angelusprimus (06/12/2014) [-]
Yes, but to remove the stupid rule, first you have to have someone stand up and say "this is ******** , I'm not doing this."
It can be as big as a russian general saying "No, I won't order my troops to shoot at civilians just because they are protesting." or as small as tired, old, black woman saying "I'm tired, my feet hurt, I'm sitting in FRONT of the bus."
Society prefers status quo, and only after someone breaks the rule and points out how wrong it is, will society move and change it.
User avatar #47 to #46 - nicoquitemad (06/12/2014) [-]
This is true. I have felt like this should not be the case in a school system, that a system to attempt skipping this step ought to exist, but maybe I am wrong.
#49 to #47 - angelusprimus (06/12/2014) [-]
Only way to change a stupid rule in school is to get enough parents to give a crap and complain.
to do that you have to create a stir.
User avatar #50 to #49 - nicoquitemad (06/12/2014) [-]
Imagine a school where kids directly influenced the rules without going through their parents. Imagine all the ways that could go wrong, holy shiet.
User avatar #128 to #8 - marcalo (06/12/2014) [-]
But it's a simple school rule. It can be followed. Some people just like to be stubborn.
#106 to #8 - reguy (06/12/2014) [-]
i can honestly see why, because it pretty much is just another layer of thick skin, leaving almost nothing to the imagination...especially with some colors. so it can be considered indecent and "distracting" nonetheless, to other kids with raging hormones. i love em just as much as the next guy, but i do see a point in why they wouldnt be allowed in school and how they would be a "distraction". especially nowa days when kids in 6th grade are shootin up in the locker rooms and pimpin hoes down by the track.
#99 - turbomexico (06/12/2014) [-]
#66 - anon (06/12/2014) [-]
i got banned for wearing a t shirt once because the thingies on the back of my bra showed through the shirt
#52 - anon (06/12/2014) [-]
but what if she was a fat ass?
#42 - legendarysnarf (06/11/2014) [-]
there is really two sides to this idk about you but when i was in high school any girl that walked past me wearing leggings got a nice long ass-stare. it can be viewed as a distraction to teenage boys. but then again their legs are completely covered and showing no skin (which was the main thing with my highschool (short skirts or spagetti straps ect))
#3 - slackerbro (06/11/2014) [-]
You might want to black out the people's names and signatures.
#37 - bakinboy ONLINE (06/11/2014) [-]
i dont do it for me, i do it   
for the booty
i dont do it for me, i do it
for the booty
#29 - micekill (06/11/2014) [-]
leggings are ugly anyways, why do girls think the are fashionable?
the only thing they do is make pre-teens horny
#26 - zeedeveel (06/11/2014) [-]
Suspended for two weeks for wearing this.
User avatar #10 - frenzyhero (06/11/2014) [-]
Just **** already
[ 148 comments ]
 Friends (0)