New Hampshire High School Newspaper Puts Out Sex Edition

You know, the line between discussion and obscene has many different layers, but most of us can agree that a high school should not put out an edition of the school paper that is based on sex. The discussion of janitors finding vibrators, anal sex, and topics like why men love women who love women are not appropriate for a high school paper.

But the faculty advisor to the paper seemed to have no problel with it thinking it was a proper venue for expression by the students. And the moron also was confused why parents at the middle school were up in arms that the paper was scheduled to be sent to their students.

The notion of freedom of expression by some of these liberal educators has to be curtailed and common sense let into the room. Sure you want the kids to think outside of the box, but at the same time you need to teach them that expression in a newspaper has to have proper boundaries.

And do not tell me that this same faculty advisor would not have gone ballistic if the student newspaper published a racist or sexist issue on the front page. He then would have felt that there were boundaries.

Some parents are protesting the “sex” edition of the student newspaper at Winnacunnet High School. Several said they were especially offended by a photograph of two women kissing under the headline, “Why men love women who love women,” a quiz question about anal sex, and an interview with an unnamed custodian who said he had found a vibrator in the girls’ shower.

“Those articles offended me personally as a parent,” said Venus Merrill, a school board member. “It’s not something you want to read with your 10-year-old and it’s not something that should be going home.”

Principal Randy Zito said the Winnachronicle had crossed the line of responsible reporting and that he had dealt with the problem privately. He also said he had pulled copies of the paper that normally would have been sent to middle schools in the cooperative school district.

The newspaper’s faculty adviser defended the editors’ decisions and said the February edition of the paper was intended to inform students, not shock people — although they knew it would stir controversy. via Newsday.com