• thisbenzingring@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    274
    ·
    1 year ago

    He (the principal) said she was punished because she is the ‘hood ornament’ of the school."

    Oh for fuck sake! This is crazy old fashioned bullshit right here.

    • PunnyName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      150
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      JFC, that’s not just bullshit, it’s outright objectification and misogyny.

      • kautau@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        97
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Don’t worry he quoted the Bible

        the principal had referred to Bible scripture on several occasions and informed her he was ‘well within his right’ to enact the discipline he chose

        Ah yes, I forgot that Jesus came down to earth and said “don’t enjoy yourself women, your only purpose is just to have children under our neofascist theocratic regime”

    • ColorcodedResistor@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      87
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Shes not a woman, she is a literal piece of flare, FOR MY Institution REEEEE”

      Excuse me, Real Life? pump the brakes.

    • Rally@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      1 year ago

      Such a bad and disgusting comment that should have no place today. It goes back to making this poor girl sound like property.

    • RagingNerdoholic@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      64
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Devil’s advocate: it could just be poor choice of metaphors to say that she’s a representative of the school, which can reasonably choose to be associated — or not — with a certain image and perception of professionalism.

      • ColorcodedResistor@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        51
        ·
        1 year ago

        No. he would have used a more appropriate metaphor, His choice of words underlines his thoughts at large.

        i would never refer to anyone as a fucking hood ornament. that’s dehumanizing.

        His brazen attitude to speak about his thoughts and not consider them to be objectifying is scary.

      • Maalus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        35
        ·
        1 year ago

        He could’ve just said “representative of the school” instead though, could he?

      • CarlsIII@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m getting pretty sick of people saying shitty things because they’re bad at metaphors. People who are bad at metaphors should just not use metaphors.

        • deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          He didn’t use an inept metaphor. It was exactly the metaphor he meant: that women are objects, property to be exploited by his administration.

        • pinkdrunkenelephants
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          If a devil’s advocate has to use a linguistic argument to justify a bad choice, the devil’s advocate is not actually needed.

      • thisbenzingring@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        1 year ago

        This person is the authority who is taking her potential scholarships because of dancing. Your take actually makes it worse. She is just a thing to him and not a young girl doing a popular dance that women do. It’s probably even worse in his mind because it’s a dance popularized by black people from the city.

      • Syrc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        This would only make sense if it was explicitly explained and forbidden to her beforehand.

        And since there’s no way any school who cares about their reputation would do that, no, that’s not reasonable. You can’t hold me to a standard I didn’t agree with.

      • pinkdrunkenelephants
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not a semantics question, it’s about why the school gave her the scholarship in the first place.

        They literally wanted to use her as a PR mascot and took the scholarship away when something negative came out about her.

        That’s why it’s problematic. She should be entitled to that scholarship regardless, yet here we are.