That’s nice. A “Christian” school suspends a teacher because someone stole her phone and now there are naked pictures of her on a revenge porn site.
A female teacher at Cincinnati Hills Christian Academy in Ohio has been placed on administrative leave after school officials found a nude photograph of her on a “revenge porn” site.
…
A spokesman from the school said “we have an employee who appears in some photos that have been compromised and made digitally available,” but he did not indicate how the photographs were first discovered, or whether any of her students had seen them.
A parent of one of her students told WCPO that while “the woman is already a victim,” because this is “a Christian school, parents are upset that a teacher is even taking naked pictures and sending them to people — and her students are old enough to get online and Google their teacher’s name and the photos come up.”
“Parents are upset” that blah blah blah so they think it’s ok for the school to suspend a teacher for something that was done to her. How pleasant, how fair, how decent.
How very Christian of them.
The various Christian sects all have an absolute fear of sex. That someone could be sexual in any other way than in the missionary position with the lights out is something they don’t want to consider.
Well, naturally. I mean, if the kids find out about the pictures, then they’ll know that their teacher has breasts and a vagina and may have had sex. They may start calling her a slut and a whore, and obviously we can’t punish the kids for that!
Besides, this is a great teaching opportunity. Normally Christian schools have to pay to bring in the “abstinence-only sex educators” to teach the girls to hate their own bodies and all the kids to slut-shame; now they get to do it for free!
Has no one at that school ever heard of Photoshop™? Has no one at that school ever heard of petty vengeance? Or just pettiness in general?
Old woman: Officer, it’s disgusting how that man next door walks around naked all the time.
Officer: I don’t see anything.
Old Woman: If you get up on this chair . . . . .
How very Christian of them.
Actually it is. Christianity has a long and storied history of seeking punishment for both the guilty and the innocent alike. What does it really matter what happens in this world, when your greinences will be addressed in the next…see it’s all good, christ will know his own.
All snark aside though, this woman has had her phone stolen and very private photos plastered on some porn site. The violation of her privacy and the humiliation/trauma she must be feeling isn’t enough…oh no.
The school sees fit to announce it from the rooftops and then hand down more humiliation.
Do these people even understand what the compassion they always go on about means?
Hopefully a good lawyer may be able to give them an expensive lesson in it.
Nice, peterh. Cast “Old Woman” as the villain. It probably wasn’t “Old Woman” who gave that teacher’s photo to a revenge porn site. It’s not “Old Woman” who spends hours every day photoshopping women and posting the results on Twitter and Facebook. “Old Woman” is a lot more likely to be the target of hatred than the agent of it.
Just out of curiosity-Is any action being taken against the person or persons who went on the website and found the photos? After all, isn’t looking at pornography a sin?
Americans are very uptight about nudity. Since Europeans are not as freaked about nudity, I wonder if they have the same problems with revenge porn
Ophelia: While I agree it wasn’t clear, peterh is referencing a very old joke, usually told featuring an elderly woman, complaining to the police, about a male neighbor who is parading around in the buff. The cop arrives, and for one reason or another, can’t see a thing (a high privacy fence, or the neighbor’s house is a half-mile away). When he comments that he can’t see what she’s talking about, the complainant then responds that the officer needs to step on a chair/use binoculars/etc. It’s a reasonably humorous jab at the sexual policing of one’s neighbors, or at least it would be, if (as you note) the framing wasn’t invariably sexist and the roles largely gender-reversed from reality.
I know it’s a very old joke. Lots of jokes are very old jokes. Lots of very old jokes are sexist. I do actually understand that it’s a jab at the sexual policing of one’s neighbors; I’m not so stupid that I don’t get that; I’m not even so sheltered that I’d never heard it before.