UPDATE: I have created a new website on the topic of the Mount Si Hot or not contest. The site includes the ability to love or appreciate some pages! It should be fun! The site is mountsicuteornot.com
According to komonews.com and kirotv.com, the Mount Si high school is issuing threats against students who might potentially visit a website featuring a hot-or-not contest of some female students. The news article states that the school itself has not seen the website and is going on the reports others have given of it. It appears that the contest is based on legal photos or images of young ladies at the school or schools, and that some of the girls are unhappy about it because they believe a woman or a girl should be evaluated based on other factors than her appearance and demeanor.
Anyway, the school is supposedly threatening to withhold privileges such as sports participation, prom or graduation.
The United States Supreme Court has ruled that schools cannot restrict student “speech” unless it would materially and substantially disrupt classwork and discipline in the school. The main decision on this subject is called Tinker.
I am not a lawyer, but I seriously doubt that that criteria can be met and the school district may be setting themselves up for lawsuits by students who wish to participate and/or with the assistance of the ACLU.
Supposedly, according to the school district, some of the female school students feel badly about the contest. I am not sure what is a good solution morally speaking . . . I do not believe that unilaterally threatening the students who wish to play or participate is morally sound and it appears it is not constitutionally sound by the Supreme Court decisions.
There is a wikipedia page which discusses the Supreme Court decisions about regulating student speech. The main criterion which seems applicable in this case is that of whether or not the hot-or-not contest would create or pose a substantial threat of disruption. A female student feeling that the contest is degrading . . . although I am not a lawyer, I don’t see the substantial threat of disruption by the existence of an semi-private website whose participants or viewers are by invitation only.