The Osakis School Board, in Osakis, Minnesota, has suggested a new rule for their upcoming prom in April. The original “rule of thumb” prom dress code was described as “to wear what they would feel comfortable wearing to church.” This is a public High School. Despite that, not every single person goes to church, or might not have ever attended church. I would not save my money all year, for a night, to only wear something I could wear every week. 

Here are some ideal examples for church-wear, and apparently appropriate prom attire as well:

This new suggestion is requiring every girl who is planning to attend this year’s prom to submit a photo of them wearing their chosen dress to their school’s prom advisor. Photo submissions of boys are not required. This has recently been approved by the school board and will be required.

Another thing that is not required is entrance into the prom dance. After one has spent the $80 on a ticket, $100 on the dress of their dreams, around $100 on hair and makeup, and another $50 on their nails, these girls still can be turned away at the door if their dress does not meet the dress code. Board member Monica Klimek stated, “We have a right to not allow entrance to the prom.”

A statement about the dress code requirements was passed out to all 11th and 12th graders in the Osakis High School. The statement said:

“Appropriate attire is required since prom is an official, formal school event…Ladies, an acceptable prom dress is one that you would feel comfortable wearing to a formal event at school…Length of dresses must be lower than the fingertips when arms are held straight down at sides. Tennis shoes, sunglasses and baseball caps are not formal attire and are not acceptable.”

The letter does address dress code suggestions for the attending “gentlemen.” Suggestions include: dress pants, dress shirt, sports coat and tie, tuxedo, accompanied by dress socks and shoes. The letter concludes by saying, “Prom is a privilege and not a right.” Students must sign and return the letter.

The reason behind these requirements for the girls is due to an attempt to prevent “embarrassment” according to the Osakis School board.

However, who are they to declare if one is embarrassed by what they wear?

If another goal, in declaring this dress code, was to prevent any unwanted attention, or advancements, from the “gentlemen” attending, why not teach them how to be a gentleman?

Don’t restrict a girl’s freedom to express herself through what she wears. It’s 2017 and as far as I’m concerned, girls have been told what not to wear for years. Onlookers have been blaming their wardrobe for what happens to them, but I have never heard of clothes that say “please come and make me feel embarrassed and violated.”

Young women should have the freedom to wear what THEY feel comfortable in: sneakers, an elaborate dress, sweats, etc. No young women should feel a backlash for wanting to feel extra special for a night.

On Friday, January 27th (Holocaust Memorial Day), President Donald Trump signed an executive order banning all entry into the U.S. from seven Muslim-majority countries. This ban included U.S. citizens who had left the country to visit family, as well as desperate refugees who had finally finished the arduous vetting process only to be turned away.

The countries affected are: Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, and Iran. Notably excluded are: Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. The countries in the second group were where the majority of the 9/11 terrorists originated from which is interesting due to the fact that the ban is supposedly meant to keep terrorism out. Also notable, the excluded countries happen to be where the president has profitable businesses.

Protests broke out at airports, starting at JFK in New York City, and where people had been detained across the country, shortly after the order was signed. A New York judge, however, signed what is called a habeas corpus petition, the day after the ban was announced, deeming the detainments unconstitutional.

Trump’s acting Attorney General, Sally Yates, also refused to enforce the ban. Part of the Attorney General’s job is to stand up to the president if he or she believes his decisions are unlawful. She was immediately fired and replaced.

Recently, many tech companies, including Apple, Facebook, Google, Uber, and others, have united to take legal action against Trump’s ban, as the executive order makes it more difficult for them to recruit, hire, and continue to employ “some of the world’s best employees.” In the brief they submitted it states: “The Order represents a significant departure from the principles of fairness and predictability that have governed the immigration system of the United States for more than fifty years.” 

The Statue of Liberty has a plague on its base. It reads, “Bring me your poor, your tired, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.” America was founded by immigrants, on the principles of freedom and equality for all.

Many, many students here at Highland Park are immigrants, or the children or grandchildren of immigrants. In times like these that are scary and turbulent, when the future is uncertain, we need to stand together with our friends and show that they are safe and welcome in our school.

This year in America, and in the years to follow, the country will experience significant change, courtesy of President Donald J. Trump’s appointed committee and overall goals for the future. So far, President Trump has already fast tracked the act of repealing ObamaCare, and has provided a plan for “the wall” that will be placed on the border of Mexico and the United States. However, despite these many changes, one thing that can be guaranteed to have little to no change will be American education.

President Trump appointed Betsy DeVos,

an American businesswoman, philanthropist, and education activist, specifically education that is provided from Catholic private schools, to be his secretary of education. However, her lifetime of higher-class education did not prepare her for the questions she was asked by the senators during her confirmation hearing.

One of the first questions she was asked, by Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, regarded guns in schools. He asked Ms. DeVos, “Do you think that guns have any place in, or around, schools?” DeVos responded that it should be left up to the locals, and individual states to decide on that.

Following a visibly distressed and confused look from Senator Murphy, DeVos continued by saying, “I think the underlying question is…” only to be cut off by Senator Murphy, “You can’t say definitively today that guns shouldn’t be in schools?”

Guns and gun-safety have been discussed for years, but it is widely known that Senator Murphy is strongly against weaponry in schools following the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting in Newtown, Connecticut.

DeVos referred back to Wapiti, Wyoming to reinforce her position. “I think probably there, I would imagine that there is probably a gun in the school to protect from potential grizzlies.” The Daily Show contacted a school in Wapiti asking if they do hold guns within the school, and if they intend, or have ever used the weapon for grizzly bear attacks. They responded that they do not have a gun, and they have never encountered a grizzly bear. They did say that if such a situation were to arise, they have a fence around the perimeter of the school.

Senator Al Franken asked DeVos if students should be measured by grade-level proficiency or yearly progress, and DeVos responded, “If I’m understanding your question correctly, around proficiency, I would also correlate it to competency and mastery, so that you, each student, is measured according to the advancement that they’re making in each subject area.” Senator Franken, trying hard to follow her statement interrupted her, correcting her train of thought, stating that she is talking about growth. “That’s growth. That’s not proficiency. So in other words, the growth they’re making isn’t growth. The proficiency is an arbitrary standard.”

Senator Franken did his best to clarify his question stating, “I’m talking about the debate between proficiency and growth, what you’re thoughts are.” After Devos asked for further clarification, the senator informed DeVos that “this is a subject that has been debated in the education community for years, and it surprises me that you don’t know this issue.” That’s our proposed secretary of education.  

Ms. Devos was asked multiple questions, and in response to many, if not all, she fumbled on her words, stuttered, and shocked the senators with her responses. One of her responses was about aid for mentally disabled students and whether or not funding for the teachers should be repealed. DeVos insisted that decision be left up to the specific state’s budget.

Ms. DeVos is unsupportive, and arguably, unaware of longstanding policies and functions that are in relationship to the department of education, specifically in respect to special education and for-profit universities. Our possible new secretary of education has had absolutely no experience with student loans such as FAFSA, something that is relied on by millions of students. She basically has no experience with education, educational terms, how academic success should be assessed, or simple-minded safety measures.

“Rest In Peace” future generations of America.