http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/03/hats-head-dresses-and-public-schools/ now with extra source Sun, 22 Nov 2009 10:00:38 +1100 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/03/hats-head-dresses-and-public-schools/#comment-15917 B. Perm Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-15917 I don't think the decision to wear religious headwear is normally made by the child. So what you're really comparing is the religious sensitivity of an [often marginalised] religious or ethnic group of people with the aesthetically sensitive individual child. Which, in my opinion, is ridiculous. I don’t think the decision to wear religious headwear is normally made by the child. So what you’re really comparing is the religious sensitivity of an [often marginalised] religious or ethnic group of people with the aesthetically sensitive individual child. Which, in my opinion, is ridiculous.

]]> http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/03/hats-head-dresses-and-public-schools/#comment-15918 dermot Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-15918 concerned citizen is that a code word for underemployed busy body? concerned citizen is that a code word for underemployed busy body?

]]> http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/03/hats-head-dresses-and-public-schools/#comment-15919 sandy Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-15919 B.Perm, <br />You might be right, but I think the point is that it isn't logically any MORE ridiculous to indulge the aesthetically sensitive than it is to indulge the religiously sensitive. One in, all in. B.Perm,
You might be right, but I think the point is that it isn’t logically any MORE ridiculous to indulge the aesthetically sensitive than it is to indulge the religiously sensitive. One in, all in.

]]> http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/03/hats-head-dresses-and-public-schools/#comment-15920 Lucy Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-15920 No. If someone had an objection based on "inquiry, evidence or argument" - eg, compelling scientific evidence that maroon hats are harmul to one's health - I daresay the good folk at Ormiston college would oblige. An individual's aesthetic judgment does not amount to evidence. We do however privilege religious objections over aesthetic ones - which is likewise a dubious policy. No. If someone had an objection based on “inquiry, evidence or argument” - eg, compelling scientific evidence that maroon hats are harmul to one’s health - I daresay the good folk at Ormiston college would oblige. An individual’s aesthetic judgment does not amount to evidence. We do however privilege religious objections over aesthetic ones - which is likewise a dubious policy.

]]> http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/03/hats-head-dresses-and-public-schools/#comment-15921 Richard Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-15921 BP, <br />stop just saying ridiculous as though it's self evident.<br />Try to explain what it is about religious sensitivities, marginal or not, that deserves special respect without just saying because they're religious or marginalised. BP,
stop just saying ridiculous as though it’s self evident.
Try to explain what it is about religious sensitivities, marginal or not, that deserves special respect without just saying because they’re religious or marginalised.

]]> http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/03/hats-head-dresses-and-public-schools/#comment-15922 B. Perm Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-15922 The sensitivities of a religious group are the residual effects of the collective wisdom of the group, having evolved over several hundreds of years. If anything, they represent a deference to the group rather than the individual. Which in some ways mirrors the role of the standard education process of schooling. In short, it trains us to live in society. To turn this on its head and claim that the aesthetic sensibilities of the individual should have precedence or is in some way equivalent to a religious sensitivity seems (to me) to undermine this training process. The sensitivities of a religious group are the residual effects of the collective wisdom of the group, having evolved over several hundreds of years. If anything, they represent a deference to the group rather than the individual. Which in some ways mirrors the role of the standard education process of schooling. In short, it trains us to live in society. To turn this on its head and claim that the aesthetic sensibilities of the individual should have precedence or is in some way equivalent to a religious sensitivity seems (to me) to undermine this training process.

]]>