6 Year Old Suspended for Sexual Harassment

[schplurg]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,184261,00.html

BROCKTON, Mass. — A first grader was suspended for three days after school officials said he sexually harassed a girl in his class by allegedly putting two fingers inside the girl's waistband while she sat on the floor in front of him.

The boy's mother, Berthena Dorinvil, said she "screamed" about last week's suspension from Downey Elementary School, and added her son doesn't know what sexual harassment is.

"He doesn't know those things," she told The Enterprise of Brockton. "He's only 6 years old."
Sexual harrassment? Not much info in the story, but even if a six year old grabbed a classmates butt I would think it a mighty big stretch to find any kind of sexual intent in it.

Supposing it was "sexual" in nature, shouldn't the charge be some sort of sexual assault?

Wouldn't "inappropriate touching" be good enough? Do we need the sexual connotation? What are these people thinking?

[epepke]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,184261,00.html

Sexual harrassment? Not much info in the story, but even if a six year old grabbed a classmates butt I would think it a mighty big stretch to find any kind of sexual intent in it.

Supposing it was "sexual" in nature, shouldn't the charge be some sort of sexual assault?

Wouldn't "inappropriate touching" be good enough? Do we need the sexual connotation? What are these people thinking?

Well, gay males keep telling me that they always knew they were gay. I have clear memories from six years old, so presumably, sexual orientation dates from before six.

(I'm not defending the action, just drawing attention to an issue.)

[The Fool]

This is all based on the statements of the suspended childs mother. The school has (rightly) refused to discuss the details of a 6 year old child with a newspaper reporter..

so who the hell knows what may have actually happened or if any of the things described by the mother have any truth behind them...

[schplurg]

This is all based on the statements of the suspended childs mother. The school has (rightly) refused to discuss the details of a 6 year old child with a newspaper reporter.. Says who? From the article, and my quote in the OP:

A first grader was suspended for three days after school officials said he sexually harassed a girl in his class by allegedly putting two fingers inside the girl's waistband while she sat on the floor in front of him. Fool, this sentence is not a quote from the mother. The story says "school officials said", it does not say "mother alleges..."

Also...

School officials declined comment to The Enterprise This story is from AP, not The Enterprise. Some of her quotes were made to an Enterprise reporter in an interview.

"They would have not suspended the child without doing an investigation," said spokeswoman Cynthia McNally. Spokeswoman for whom, I wonder?

As far as 6 year olds having sexual intent in situations such as this, let's say it's possible. Should any unwanted contact made between a boy and a girl at such an age be considered sexual and be punishable as such? Let's say the description of what occurred is true, that he grabbed her waistband with 2 fingers. Isn't this a bit of an overreaction (barring any special circumstances such as the boy displaying some extreme "sexually oriented beahavior problems" in the past)?

This case isn't that surprising to me. We've had 10 year olds suspended or expelled for bringing aspirin to class. It's the added "sexual" aspect of this case that bothers me.

[TragicMonkey]

Is this story covered anywhere by anyone other than Fox News? Not that they aren't completely fair and balanced, of course. Perish the thought!

[epepke]

Is this story covered anywhere by anyone other than Fox News? Not that they aren't completely fair and balanced, of course. Perish the thought!

I wondered about that, too, but it's on ABC news: http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=1591633

[SixSixSix]

Is there a euphemism I'm missing here? This doesn't sound substantially different from sticking pig tails in ink wells, or playing "kiss chasey".

Though I suppose in this modern society those would be considered sexual harrassment as well. Sigh.

[CFLarsen]

Is there a euphemism I'm missing here? This doesn't sound substantially different from sticking pig tails in ink wells, or playing "kiss chasey".

Though I suppose in this modern society those would be considered sexual harrassment as well. Sigh.

Ever played "Doctor"?

ETA: I meant: As a kid? :D

[El Greco]

Ever played "Doctor"?

ETA: I meant: As a kid? :D

I did, but I was so freaking idiot that I wasn't playing the gynecologist but the radiologist.

[SixSixSix]

Ever played "Doctor"?

ETA: I meant: As a kid? :D
:)

Of course, but at that age I'm not sure there was anything sexual about it. I realise that there has been some considerable psychological research into children's sexuality, and I do not mean to imply that it's all bollocks, but I'm sure I'm not the only boy here that tried to avoid "girl germs" when I was littler.

[NeilC]

Kids sometimes do sexual things at young ages. You just tell them what is and isn't appropriate and move on. You don't expel them, prosecute them, label them perverts or god forbid, let them within 100 miles of a child psychologist/social worker.

Christ, if people aren't medicalising life then they are legalising it.

[CFLarsen]

My point is: Today, that would be regarded as sexual harassment of a far worse kind than what this kid did.

[NeilC]

I agree. It points to a ******-up set of values don't you think. I remember when I was about 7 a girl I used to play with made me dress up, wear my dads aftershave and go into her garden shed so she could kiss me. I had no idea why. Hasn't scarred me but today it would be "inappropriate behaviour".

Having said that I do get sexual thoughts about lawn-mowers.

[BPSCG]

Life imitates South Park (http://www.spscriptorium.com/Season3/E306script.htm):

"Did you know that when one little panda pulls on another little panda's underwear, that's sexual harassment? That makes me a sa-a-a-a-ad panda."
-- Petey, the Sexual Harassment Panda

[Beerina]

I'll bet the girl whose pants were pulled out a bit probably suffered more psychological damage from the big f****** stink the adults made than from the activity itself, which, of course, offered mathematically zero damage to her psyche.

And the other little kid, they just made him destined for a lifelong spot warming a psychiatrist's chair. Giving him some idea that he's done a terrible, terrible evil at such an early age.

I don't want to be in the same species as some of you people.

[TragicMonkey]

Kids sometimes do sexual things at young ages. You just tell them what is and isn't appropriate and move on. You don't expel them, prosecute them, label them perverts or god forbid, let them within 100 miles of a child psychologist/social worker.

Unfortunately, in a (I hope) rare number of such incidents, what happens is that a child who is sexually molested repeats the behavior on other children. You can't dismiss every incident so easily; there might be something behind it.

[The Fool]

Says who? From the article, and my quote in the OP:
Fool, this sentence is not a quote from the mother. The story says "school officials said", it does not say "mother alleges..."



basically....says me.

The article says the school would not make a comment, rightly so.

The only person they are reporting is the mother...this is simply repeating what the mother says she was told.

[pgwenthold]

Since when is a single action considered harassment? I always figured harassment to be a persistent thing. Form the AmHer dico:

ha·rass v. –tr. ha·rassed, ha·rass·ing, ha·rass·es. 1. To irritate or torment persistently. 2. To wear out; exhaust. 3. To impede and exhaust (an enemy) by repeated attacks or raids

So all the definitions have this issue of persistence, repetition (or prolonged action, to wear out)

I don't know about the legal definition, but clearly sticking fingers in a waist band once is not harassment by any common definition.