So this story is taking off. It is in the Daily Mail Daily Beast, and is starting to off on twitter.
https://www.sltrib.com/news/education/2021/06/16/utah-student-with-down/ https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9696947/Teen-syndrome-left-heartbroken-school-excludes-cheer-squad-yearbook-photo.html
A down syndrome girl was included in one photo of a junior high cheerleading group, but not in the other. That other picture without the down syndrome girl was the one used in the yearbook, and the down syndrome girl noticed and is upset.
By all accounts, she was not actually a cheerleader. Supposedly she was a manager. The mother indicates she was not just an “honorary” cheerleading manager, but was actually a manager. The school statements seem to corroborate this, however a response on the local town subreddit suggests otherwise. Whether she was officially manager or made an “honorary” manager is unclear to me. This is why in the excluded photo with her, she is not wearing a cheerleading uniform.
Going through the tweets and replies and mentions on twitter, as well as comments sections in articles and subreddit threads, it seems everyone to a man agrees what the school did was wrong. All the boilerplate exhortations are in play, from “ableist,” to having a heart, to doing what is right.
I think the school was right to exclude her from the photo. Or more particularly the school should have bit the bullet and excluded her from any affiliation with the cheerleader team from the start, precisely because she is not cut out to be a cheerleader.
People say special needs kids wanted to be treated normally. If they wanted to be treated normally, they would not be greenlit into activities that are otherwise exclusionary and competitive for all other students.
Was the cheerleading squad here open enrollment? If not, she is not entitled to join.
People need to come to the seemingly unpleasant realization that cheerleading, like all sports, and indeed all activities of a competitive nature is a priori exclusionary. And cheerleading in particular is world renowned for being exclusionary. It just does not exclude downs syndrome girls, but most girls. If you removed this defining characteristic from cheerleading, it would becease to be cheerleading as we know it.
The only way I would change this position is that it, being Jr High, for some reason did not have tryouts and that anyone who applied to be on the team was on the team. There have to be limits to that though and if the down syndrome child’s disabilities prevent them from being a cohesive member of the ensemble, no dice.
This unpleasant realization that cheerleading, like all sports, and indeed all activities of a competitive nature is a priori exclusionary. And cheerleading in particular is world renowned for being exclusionary. It just does not exclude downs syndrome girls, but most girls. If you removed this defining characteristic from cheerleading, it would be cease to be cheerleading as we know it. This extrapolates to all other such activities.
Take debate club for example—could a down syndrome student actually compete and contribute to a debate team. As someone who did Lincoln Debate in high school, I doubt it.
I will extrapolate this further to this trend of patronizing Down Syndrome and so-called “special needs” children and students broadly. For the past five, six, seven years, there has been a trend in which the Captain of the Football team asks the down syndrome girl out to Prom, or the football team makes one their captain, etc.
In perusing reddit threads and comments sections on these types of stories, I see a rare gem whereby someone pushes back on this. In at least one comment, someone mentioned that it is incredibly patronizing, and about cruel (in a saccharine sweet sort of way) to blow sunshine up their asses, particularly as they only very slowly grapple to comprehend what is happening. In one instance, the down syndrome girl did not comprehend or grasps she was being patronized, though the football captain had a romantic, sexual interest in her, and was devastated there was no date after the prom date. Finally, in all respects, I think it is a burden to other healthy students, a burden almost all probably refuse to acknowledge because of the immense social pressure to pile on with the virtue signaling and act like this is a good thing. It is not The Prom King or Queen who takes out the down syndrome kid to prom as part of an insincere virtue signaling stunt loses out on the opportunity to go on a prom date with someone that individual actually has a romantic or sexual interest in. Cheerleaders have to pretend like this special needs person is just like the other girls when they are not.
The mother of Morgyn Arnold insists most of the girls are her friend. We all know they are not in actuality. Do you really think any of them invited Morgyto sleepovers? Or called her to go to the mall (do kids even do that anymore) or talk about boys? Then take my absurdist example of down syndrome on a Lincoln Debate team. It would have angered me if I had to contend with an opponent at a debate tournament who could not actually debate competently. It would be a lost opportunity on actually competing during that round of the competition. So yeah, I do not like any of this. Stop pretending down syndrome kids can be cheerleaders or part of the cheerleader clique. They most unequivocally cannot. Stop with this charade of having normal kids patronize dwon syndrome and other "special needs kids by going on a date when those kids can scarcely comprehend that they are being made a spectacle of and lied to.
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (2 children)
[–]Richard_Parker[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (1 child)
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (0 children)