A council has apologised after parents were offered a choice of class photos with or without children with complex needs in them.

Parents at Aboyne Primary complained after being sent a link from a photography company offering them alternative pictures.

    • xorollo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Nah, in Texas and Florida, they just keep kids with ‘complex needs’ all together in a classroom at the end of the hall, so they don’t have to do anything fancy for the classroom photo.

    • Swordgeek@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      The school was unaware that the company did this.

      In Texas or Florida, it would have been the school (board) organizing the alternate shoot.

      • shottymcb@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        That seems unlikely, even if it’s what they claim. You would need the staff to help organize the separate photos.

  • CluckN@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    8 months ago

    I remember when retarded was the PC term. Now we just call them republicans.

  • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Fucking PC language making articles indecipherable. “Complex needs”, wtf does that actually mean? How many fell into this category? Were different pictures taken, or was one edited after the fact? Why are they afraid to add context?

    • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      the argument is - and I agree - “special” needs implies the needs are optional, surplus, extraneous, unusual and/or deliberate and actually makes less sense than “complex” needs.

      If you “need” it - it’s not special. Some fish don’t need sunlight, does that mean that plants that need light have “special” needs? “This plant is so special it needs sunlight for photosynthesis” would be a weird statement. “This child is special because it needs to eat several times a day” “This child is special because it needs to wear warm clothes to prevent it freezing to death in low temperatures” “This child is special because it wasn’t born knowing how to read, it had to be taught” etc- all make no sense. “This child needs to eat, wear clothes, yet learn how to read” are all so obvious to be taken as read.

      are you absolutely sure the objection is because “complex needs” is truly impossible to understand, or actually because changing a learned behavior is sometimes uncomfortable and requires effort?

      • dogslayeggs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        Umm, special doesn’t mean optional, surplus, or extraneous. Like, no definition of it means those things. It doesn’t even imply those things to anyone I’ve ever met. It can mean unusual, though.

        So your entire next paragraph doesn’t make sense if you substitute special for unusual. Because it is unusual that some plants don’t need sunlight. Also, I think it is funny that you said some fish don’t need sunlight.

        • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          In other news differently abled is totally useful because the differently abled person is ABLE to get from A->B in a different fashion than walking via assistive devices and disabled is crap because it implies that they aren’t able to and next year complex needs will be bad because the need to have education food live aren’t complicated or hard and implying it is discourages us from trying.

          I don’t think the problem with dealing with complex needs is the language used but a problem with evolving the language faster than the new choice of words can spread is that it loses its communicative power if outside of people who deal with the issue professionally for instance in school or government nobody has heard the new choice of words and doesn’t understand what is being communicative.

          “Photographer offered “no chairs” version of class photos with all the disabled kids photo-shopped out.” is pretty clear.

          I’m just assuming it was edited because the idea of literally staging a version where the disabled people weren’t allowed to sit for would be if anything more offensive but we are obviously dealing with insensitive bastards so who knows.

        • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Its not unusual that a portion of a population deviates from common norms and expectations. This is true for animals, (humans) and plants alike.

          In many cases deviations can be explained as a being caused by natural genetic mutations that are also the driving factor behind evolution. Of course only a minor subset of mutation is actually advantageous enough to have a chance of eventually being present within the majority.

          There is no need to act like its weird or special. Its just natura and it can be predicted with statics.

        • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          usage for

          … optional:

          well if you want to make it a special occasion we could get a special cake

          surplus

          oh no, those are my special plates for guests only

          extraneous

          and I made an extra special cupcake just in case

          also I think you misread me, I was saying it’s not special if a plant needs sunlight

          • dogslayeggs@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            None of those are correct. Are you not a native English speaker?

            Special occasion means an occasion that isn’t ordinary… i.e. unusual. Special cake for the occasion isn’t surplus, it’s just a cake that is specific to the occasion. Specific, shockingly, shares a root word with special.

            Special plates for guests only are the plates you don’t usually use… i.e. unusual. Yes, they might ALSO be extraneous, but that isn’t what makes them special. Heck, if you entertain a lot and use those plates for the guests, then they definitely aren’t extraneous.

            Special cupcake means you made something you didn’t make like the normal ones or as many as usual… i.e. unusual.

          • shottymcb@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            None of those sentences are remotely equivalent if you actually substitute. They’re nonsensical, even.

            Well if you want to make it an optional occasion we could make an optional cake?

            oh no, those are my surplus plates for guests only?

            and I made an extra extraneous cupcake just in case?

            also I think you misread me, I was saying it’s not special if a plant needs sunlight

            You were the one equivocating those words.

            • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              8 months ago

              It’s easy to be disingenuous to make yourself sound right, for instance, if I was to be deliberately obtuse I could read your reply as:

              Less than one from over there grammatical constructions equal distant same upon thou certainly switch. Such exists jabberwocky, divisible by two.

              Which doesn’t make any sense - yeah, because I was an asshole about it.

              My original point is clear, easy to grasp and understandable and you’re just trying to derail to score some minor point.

              If it makes you feel better- yes if you interpret words wrong they sound wrong. Congrats, you win the internet debate.

                • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  can you explain what you mean? I shared my experience of why the argument was formed from my experience in education and community communications.

                  I volunteer for two arts organizations and I work for a tech org - one of which I sit on the board for - who work (at least partially) with young, disabled and/or vulnerable people, and/or have to check communications against best practice.

                  I have at times been physically long term disabled (although right now I consider myself able bodied), my wife is long term disabled, and I have previously worked with arts organizations focused around hearing loss, sight loss and mobility, and prior to that I was a curriculum organizer for a school district with a focus on engaging those with learning disabilities more in the classroom.

                  Obviously, the disability community is not a monolith and with any nomenclature (see: differently abled, wheelchair-user debates) there are people on both sides of the argument who do and don’t have disabilities.

  • dogslayeggs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    8 months ago

    I was watching some TV show, maybe CSI SVU or maybe some English crime procedural, where the parents were brought in to talk about their son physically abusing a special needs person. It turned out the parents photoshopped out the special needs person from the class photo, and that was used as evidence that they encouraged his discriminatory behavior. I was thinking while watching the show that those are some real fucking assholes for photoshopping out someone from a school photo before they would display it in their home.

    Turns out it was something real people do.

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      8 months ago

      You know the only reason the company offered this option was because they had been asked by other parties.

    • lud@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Btw, who displays class photos at home?

      Why would you want a bunch of random kids on your wall?

      • Microw@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        With a couple I know, they had the class photo of one of their sons at the fridge one year. Seemed weird to me too, so I asked. Turns out the son had wanted to hang it because he had always had trouble with fitting in in previous schools, and this was the first time he really was friends with those kids and invited them over as well.

        That seemed like a good reason to me personally.

  • eatthecake@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    8 months ago

    How did they get two different versions? Did they take two sets of photos or edit out some of the children? I hope somebody gets fired.

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I kinda hope they used that guy on whatever, that always does a “terrible” job editing people’s photos.

    • bitchkat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Obviously they took two photos and let the parents choose to buy option A or option B.

      • eatthecake@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        So they took a photo with all the kids and then asked the undesirables to leave for the second photo? And everyone was fine with that?

        • PlungeButter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          8 months ago

          Well, from the article:

          It is understand some class photographs were taken before the pupils with additional support needs were brought in.

        • dogslayeggs@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          My guess is they took a picture with the smaller group first and then brought in the second group to take the full picture.