Jesus couldn't be bothered to intervene in the Holocaust, or prevent a child from being raped by a priest, but he really, really cares about what people wear to prom. It isn't about any standard this school is supposedly trying to uphold, it's about forced conformity, and letting people know what happens when they get out of line. I hope this bone-headed move motivates some of these kids to abandon religion the minute they can.
Ok. Why do the charges mention the respective genders and why the under the age of 12 bit. Under the age of 16 or 18, I could understand, but 12? Even if's a sentence enhancing thing, the threshold is too low.
Psychological harm to his wife and kids? That "psychologist" is a whore (no offense meant to sex workers) Getting away from such a monster is the best thing that could happen to his kids.
And the sentence leaves a lot to be desired.
"expressed remorse and apologized to his victim", so fucking what, he raped a 6-year-old.
No place is perfect, but I expected better of New Zealand.
NZ doesn't go in for the hugely long sentences you get in the US. There are factors that the judge – I think – must take into account when sentencing including early guilty pleas not putting the family through the trauma of a trial and so on. I think remorse is probably included in that although, how they judge if it's true remorse or not I don't know. The system is supposed to be rehabilitative as well as punitive, although that's often honoured more in the breach than the observance it seems to me.
Jesus is working the NBA Round 1 games this week. Between that and Tucker Carlson, his plate is full. He had to prioritize so shaming the prom kid rose to the top of the list. It's not easy being an omniscient, omnipotent deity, you know.
Yet once again, a Christian school decides that it's okay to be an asshole to a minority because Christianity. [Sun rises in the east, water is wet, Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead, et cetera, et cetera.] The sad thing is that, once again, the school can get away with it, presuming they don't accept public funds.
If anyone wants to keep track of the myriad reasons why Christianity is losing traction, particularly with millennials and Gen Z, here ya go.
Yeah, including me [in case you hadn't already guessed!]. Thing is, I was an apatheist (indifferent about gods) for the longest time. It was a combination of the likes of the Bakkers, Swaggart, and Falwell, Sr., plus 9/11 to start to move me to a more affirmatively atheistic position.
My dude, you're a regular here too. You know it's entirely possible they're getting public funds AND being absolute bigots. We see it every week, because apparently we like being angry. 😉
Of all the things there are in this world to get worked up about- many of them actual, honest-to-goodness existential threats- 𝘱𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘴 are what you're going with? Not even pants in general, just "pants if they're on a set of legs connected to an AFAB person." 𝘙𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺, Christians... and you wonder why we don't respect you. This- this right here? 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘺. If you don't want to be ridiculed, 𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘱 𝘣𝘦𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘳𝘪𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘰𝘶𝘴.
'k I can't keep up, what's AFAB? I don't want to go to Urban Dictionary today, I have things to do. Heh. Also, you are spot on. Christendom is getting mad that they keep winning stupid prizes after playing stupid games.
My late wife spent years in corporate America. She never wore a dress to work, always a suit. I wonder how this school would have reacted to her if she had shown up to audit their books? (She was an accountant.)
I expect pearls would be clutched and fainting couches deployed. Not just because of the suit but she was a *woman* doing *math*! How did her weak, female mind handle all those scary numbers? Uhm, snark? I just realized that might be their exact reaction.
Actually if I remember correctly, trousers were considered somewhat effeminate in biblical times. Persians wore them. Mind you, so did Roman soldiers I guess.
One of the reasons the Greeks considered the Persians "effeminate" was because Persian men wore trousers.. As I recall it, the attitude was that "real men" weren't afraid to expose their junk to the open air.
"Immodest" in this context just means "I want to punish that woman over there for existing and get away with it." A woman (or, in B's case, a person the powers-that-be 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘤𝘦𝘪𝘷𝘦 as a woman, regardless of their real identity) could be wearing a burlap sack and still run afoul of a modesty rule worded so loosely, and that's precisely the point- the staff gets to target anyone they wish to, for anything they wish to, at any time they wish to, because the rules are arbitrary and subjective.
Clearly not a Mormon function, ladies aren't allowed to show so much *gasp* shoulder! I'm not joking, she'd have to wear a little sweater or something or they wouldn't let *her* in. Honestly not sure how they'd react to someone they feel is female in a suit.
Okay, so women have been fighting this fight for generations. How many stars were dragged for wearing slacks, rejected from roles and studios because they insisted on pants in the forties and fifties? Wasn’t there a big kerfluffle over someone wearing a tuxedo to the Oscars in the 90s? This school is fighting a fight lost ages ago.
At least they are troubled over someone they consider feminine being masculine rather than someone they think ought to be masculine being feminine. Because the worst thing a man can be is considered too lady like. But it’s the same thing I guess. No matter how much they claim they love and respect women, they are misogynistic. Women need to be feminine so they can oppress them correctly and men cannot be feminine because they aren’t supposed to be oppressed that way. (If they’re poor, or a person of color they get to be oppressed, just not the same as women)
I interpret this as a pendulum back-swing rather than fighting a lost battle. 'No Pants Suits' wasn't even a *conservative* thing or concern 10, 15 years ago.
Sigh. The Village wasn't a high quality movie, but it kinda captured what conservatives seem to be driving (backwards) towards, doesn't it?
Mostly I was thinking of Katherine Hepburn, one studio rejected her if she insisted on wearing slacks and not just during awards shows. But Marlene Dietrich and so many others as well.
This person’s pronouns are he/they. They might not have had a choice in the matter as the vast majority of children do not get to decide their primary education, and some do not have a say in their university either.
While it may or may not be true that the school was her parent’s choice, having the strength to wear a suit to a prom purposely didn't suddenly arise just before the prom. This woman most likely had many growing experiences in 13 years that taught her the BS the school was teaching her was, well, BS. This could have been the first time she decided to act on her convictions; there has to be a first time, but I think not. Maybe she asserted herself previously in other ways but wasn't listened to. At any rate, wearing a suit may have been her way of saying, "Do you hear me now?" My concern, and the reason for saying the problem is she attended the school for 13 years, is how much of the school’s BS did she incorporate into her worldview? Wearing a suit to a prom is one thing, but standing up for a woman’s right to choose and for LGBT people is something else. As Bayard Rustin said, "The proof that someone truly believes is in action." Let’s see what she does after the prom. If she doesn't stand up for humanistic values after the prom then wearing the suit was just a stunt.
First, I agree with oraxx that they may not have had a choice on where to go.
Second, B's choice of 'he/they' identification makes for a good bet that this is not the only time they have objected to some school teaching or policy.
Third, political activism is a social good but hardly the one and only primary social good. You might be "concerned" if B is not standing up for women and LGBT in a host of other ways, but I am not. If they want to spend some time (say, at big events like Prom) doing this and other time doing theater, or track or what have you, I have no problem with that.
Lastly, and related to three, they're a kid. Don't put the weight of solving the world's problems on them. Let them be a kid. So again, with activism: if they do this only part time, I have no problem with that. Want to know who should be constantly pushing back, month after month, year after year, on the school's dress policy? The adults. The teachers. The parents. As to the kids...well I'm glad they make themselves heard. But ultimately it's not THEIR job to fix the screwed up adults around them. It's ours.
Well, if the school policy states that students should choose attire consistent with "biblical principles," then every person wearing clothes made of blended fabric should have been kicked out. It's one of Yahweh's many commandments: "Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material." (Lev. 19:19 and Deut. 22:11)
Let's not be serving no Shrimp Scampi at that event, either, and all the boys had better NOT be clean-shaven, either! It never fails to amuse me how believers cherry-pick their way through the bible and utterly fail to notice that they're doing so.
Wonder what the school's reaction would've been had a boy rebelled against the school's dress code and came to the prom dressed in a robe and sandals like you-know-who?
Oh, they doubtless would have lost their shit and cried, "BLASPHEMY!" and "Who do you think you are that you try to emulate Our Savior™" and generally carry on.
Nashville is one of the two "buckles" of the Bible Belt because it has multiple Christian schools and over 700 churches (Abilene, Texas is the other). So what do you expect? Every day I thank the divine spaghetti monster that I don't live in that part of the country. My advice to B is flee any state controlled by the Christian Taliban.
Meanwhile, American Christian schools and churches keep trying to blame their dwindling numbers on anything other than their own regressive policies, obsession with control and conformity, and bigoted behavior. This incident is a classic example of the demise of American Christianity. Let's run the likely outcome forward:
B, his friends, and the fellow students who sympathize with him will remember this marred prom as they continue to grow into full adulthood. Many of them will marry and have children, and because of this "last straw" experience, many will choose to definitely NOT send their kids to their old school or any other Christian school. So the next generation of students for Nashville Christian School will not be supplied by as many alumni as the previous generation, and the student body will shrink year by year until the school cannot stay afloat. Bye.
I wish B and everyone who has been supportive of him a good life.
Jesus couldn't be bothered to intervene in the Holocaust, or prevent a child from being raped by a priest, but he really, really cares about what people wear to prom. It isn't about any standard this school is supposedly trying to uphold, it's about forced conformity, and letting people know what happens when they get out of line. I hope this bone-headed move motivates some of these kids to abandon religion the minute they can.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/300857918/father-of-three-who-raped-6yearold-girl-to-be-deported-to-kiribati
The devil made him do it ... Jesus couldn't be arsed stopping it.
"Unjust and unduly harsh." Says the ogre who raped a 6-year-old?
Ok. Why do the charges mention the respective genders and why the under the age of 12 bit. Under the age of 16 or 18, I could understand, but 12? Even if's a sentence enhancing thing, the threshold is too low.
Psychological harm to his wife and kids? That "psychologist" is a whore (no offense meant to sex workers) Getting away from such a monster is the best thing that could happen to his kids.
And the sentence leaves a lot to be desired.
"expressed remorse and apologized to his victim", so fucking what, he raped a 6-year-old.
No place is perfect, but I expected better of New Zealand.
NZ doesn't go in for the hugely long sentences you get in the US. There are factors that the judge – I think – must take into account when sentencing including early guilty pleas not putting the family through the trauma of a trial and so on. I think remorse is probably included in that although, how they judge if it's true remorse or not I don't know. The system is supposed to be rehabilitative as well as punitive, although that's often honoured more in the breach than the observance it seems to me.
In general, I approve of rehabilitation over punishment. But there is no known effective rehab for child fuckers.
And blaming demons doesn't strike me as remorse.
True but he was from Kiribati ... hence overly religulous and gullible.
Jesus is working the NBA Round 1 games this week. Between that and Tucker Carlson, his plate is full. He had to prioritize so shaming the prom kid rose to the top of the list. It's not easy being an omniscient, omnipotent deity, you know.
Yet once again, a Christian school decides that it's okay to be an asshole to a minority because Christianity. [Sun rises in the east, water is wet, Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead, et cetera, et cetera.] The sad thing is that, once again, the school can get away with it, presuming they don't accept public funds.
If anyone wants to keep track of the myriad reasons why Christianity is losing traction, particularly with millennials and Gen Z, here ya go.
There is quite a number of boomers here too.
Yeah, including me [in case you hadn't already guessed!]. Thing is, I was an apatheist (indifferent about gods) for the longest time. It was a combination of the likes of the Bakkers, Swaggart, and Falwell, Sr., plus 9/11 to start to move me to a more affirmatively atheistic position.
But move I did.
I have lost count of the reasons.
How do I abandon thee? Let me count the ways...
My dude, you're a regular here too. You know it's entirely possible they're getting public funds AND being absolute bigots. We see it every week, because apparently we like being angry. 😉
Nice to see that Christian schools have their priorities in order. :S
Of all the things there are in this world to get worked up about- many of them actual, honest-to-goodness existential threats- 𝘱𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘴 are what you're going with? Not even pants in general, just "pants if they're on a set of legs connected to an AFAB person." 𝘙𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺, Christians... and you wonder why we don't respect you. This- this right here? 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘺. If you don't want to be ridiculed, 𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘱 𝘣𝘦𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘳𝘪𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘰𝘶𝘴.
'k I can't keep up, what's AFAB? I don't want to go to Urban Dictionary today, I have things to do. Heh. Also, you are spot on. Christendom is getting mad that they keep winning stupid prizes after playing stupid games.
Assigned Female at Birth
TY. It flummoxed me also.
Thanks! I seriously can’t keep up. I get an info dump whenever I see my trans nephew but my stupid ass only retains a fraction of it.
OT: Sad News: Harry Belafonte has died at the age of 96. Wonderful voice, genuine talent, and tireless fighter for human rights.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/25/entertainment/harry-belafonte-death/index.html
Dammit, he was one of my favorite people. This is how I choose to remember him, losing it while trying to sing Day-O with the Muppets.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-4xyg4PU-U
"Kingston Town," "A Hole in the Bucket," and so many others.
Surprised Statler and Hilton didn't make some sarcastic statements. I kept waiting for them. Thank you for this.
Statler and Waldorf, not Hilton. Wrong hotel.
What sarcastic thing could they say? It's glorious.
The writers were genius. Prolly decided not to use them here.
Woke up to his music this morning on KEXP.
So much goodness in one man. He was one of the greats.
My late wife spent years in corporate America. She never wore a dress to work, always a suit. I wonder how this school would have reacted to her if she had shown up to audit their books? (She was an accountant.)
I expect pearls would be clutched and fainting couches deployed. Not just because of the suit but she was a *woman* doing *math*! How did her weak, female mind handle all those scary numbers? Uhm, snark? I just realized that might be their exact reaction.
Maybe we should arrange for an exclusive showing of 𝐻𝑖𝑑𝑑𝑒𝑛 𝐹𝑖𝑔𝑢𝑟𝑒𝑠 for them! Think they'd like that? 😁
Black and female. Scanners time.
I like how "biblical principles" for dress just happen to accord with ye old American cultural gender expectations of the 19th century.
Actually if I remember correctly, trousers were considered somewhat effeminate in biblical times. Persians wore them. Mind you, so did Roman soldiers I guess.
One of the reasons the Greeks considered the Persians "effeminate" was because Persian men wore trousers.. As I recall it, the attitude was that "real men" weren't afraid to expose their junk to the open air.
It's not the open air that I don't want to expose my junk to. It's the screams of "My Eyes! My Eyes!"
Too big? Too small? Botched circumcision?
With all the fat around it, it's practically an innie.
TMI!!!!!
Yes, but try that on the subway...
When I lived in NYC in the 70s I tried a few things on the subway that'd stand your hair on end. Those were the days.
I did something at the back of a Greyhound bus while I was stationed at Castle AFB.
Not just once, but several times. Ooh, I wuz the wittle wascal.
I was usually the last one off of the school bus and I always sat in the very back.
My city doesn't allow junk in the open air. You have to keep it in the barn.
By the way anyone saw the woman/girl with the blue dress at the right of the picture ? How spagettis straps are modest* ?
* I am not shaming her but shouldn't the school ban her from the premises for showing her shoulders ?
The school's choices clearly has little or nothing to do with their written policy and much more to do with '50s-era* sexist views.
*1950s...1850s...1750s...
"Immodest" in this context just means "I want to punish that woman over there for existing and get away with it." A woman (or, in B's case, a person the powers-that-be 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘤𝘦𝘪𝘷𝘦 as a woman, regardless of their real identity) could be wearing a burlap sack and still run afoul of a modesty rule worded so loosely, and that's precisely the point- the staff gets to target anyone they wish to, for anything they wish to, at any time they wish to, because the rules are arbitrary and subjective.
Clearly not a Mormon function, ladies aren't allowed to show so much *gasp* shoulder! I'm not joking, she'd have to wear a little sweater or something or they wouldn't let *her* in. Honestly not sure how they'd react to someone they feel is female in a suit.
Okay, so women have been fighting this fight for generations. How many stars were dragged for wearing slacks, rejected from roles and studios because they insisted on pants in the forties and fifties? Wasn’t there a big kerfluffle over someone wearing a tuxedo to the Oscars in the 90s? This school is fighting a fight lost ages ago.
At least they are troubled over someone they consider feminine being masculine rather than someone they think ought to be masculine being feminine. Because the worst thing a man can be is considered too lady like. But it’s the same thing I guess. No matter how much they claim they love and respect women, they are misogynistic. Women need to be feminine so they can oppress them correctly and men cannot be feminine because they aren’t supposed to be oppressed that way. (If they’re poor, or a person of color they get to be oppressed, just not the same as women)
I interpret this as a pendulum back-swing rather than fighting a lost battle. 'No Pants Suits' wasn't even a *conservative* thing or concern 10, 15 years ago.
Sigh. The Village wasn't a high quality movie, but it kinda captured what conservatives seem to be driving (backwards) towards, doesn't it?
I'm guessing you're thinking of that tuxedo/gown ensemble Billy Porter wore? Guy looked awesome in it, and it did make some noise at the time.
Mostly I was thinking of Katherine Hepburn, one studio rejected her if she insisted on wearing slacks and not just during awards shows. But Marlene Dietrich and so many others as well.
The problem is NOT that she wore a suit to the prom, the problem is that she attended the christian school for 13 years.
This person’s pronouns are he/they. They might not have had a choice in the matter as the vast majority of children do not get to decide their primary education, and some do not have a say in their university either.
That may well have been her parent's choice, and not hers.
While it may or may not be true that the school was her parent’s choice, having the strength to wear a suit to a prom purposely didn't suddenly arise just before the prom. This woman most likely had many growing experiences in 13 years that taught her the BS the school was teaching her was, well, BS. This could have been the first time she decided to act on her convictions; there has to be a first time, but I think not. Maybe she asserted herself previously in other ways but wasn't listened to. At any rate, wearing a suit may have been her way of saying, "Do you hear me now?" My concern, and the reason for saying the problem is she attended the school for 13 years, is how much of the school’s BS did she incorporate into her worldview? Wearing a suit to a prom is one thing, but standing up for a woman’s right to choose and for LGBT people is something else. As Bayard Rustin said, "The proof that someone truly believes is in action." Let’s see what she does after the prom. If she doesn't stand up for humanistic values after the prom then wearing the suit was just a stunt.
First, I agree with oraxx that they may not have had a choice on where to go.
Second, B's choice of 'he/they' identification makes for a good bet that this is not the only time they have objected to some school teaching or policy.
Third, political activism is a social good but hardly the one and only primary social good. You might be "concerned" if B is not standing up for women and LGBT in a host of other ways, but I am not. If they want to spend some time (say, at big events like Prom) doing this and other time doing theater, or track or what have you, I have no problem with that.
Lastly, and related to three, they're a kid. Don't put the weight of solving the world's problems on them. Let them be a kid. So again, with activism: if they do this only part time, I have no problem with that. Want to know who should be constantly pushing back, month after month, year after year, on the school's dress policy? The adults. The teachers. The parents. As to the kids...well I'm glad they make themselves heard. But ultimately it's not THEIR job to fix the screwed up adults around them. It's ours.
FYI: *he/they*.
Is it a "stunt" that you keep misgendering B or is it an "action".
Well, if the school policy states that students should choose attire consistent with "biblical principles," then every person wearing clothes made of blended fabric should have been kicked out. It's one of Yahweh's many commandments: "Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material." (Lev. 19:19 and Deut. 22:11)
Let's not be serving no Shrimp Scampi at that event, either, and all the boys had better NOT be clean-shaven, either! It never fails to amuse me how believers cherry-pick their way through the bible and utterly fail to notice that they're doing so.
Then, too, ALL religion is CAFETERIA religion.
Wonder what the school's reaction would've been had a boy rebelled against the school's dress code and came to the prom dressed in a robe and sandals like you-know-who?
Just a thought.
Oh, they doubtless would have lost their shit and cried, "BLASPHEMY!" and "Who do you think you are that you try to emulate Our Savior™" and generally carry on.
Like they usually do.
And if the kid actually quoted Jesus they'd have screamed about socialism, communism, wokeism and more.
Kicking and screaming like spoiled, whiny children.
IOW, Christians.
Then he should reply, "No, no, I'm not cosplaying Jebus. I'm cosplaying the beloved disciple."
Maybe he could've come as Mark, then proceded to run naked like that apostle did after Jesus' arrest.
Hugh Heffner?
What's the joke after Hefner's death?
(image of Hef being surrounded by beautiful women): "No one can look at this photo and still say that he's in a better place."
Nashville is one of the two "buckles" of the Bible Belt because it has multiple Christian schools and over 700 churches (Abilene, Texas is the other). So what do you expect? Every day I thank the divine spaghetti monster that I don't live in that part of the country. My advice to B is flee any state controlled by the Christian Taliban.
If a dress was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for B.
They want people to fit into two (and only two) neat little boxes. Then proceed to narrow those boxes so tightly that no one really fits.
Meanwhile, American Christian schools and churches keep trying to blame their dwindling numbers on anything other than their own regressive policies, obsession with control and conformity, and bigoted behavior. This incident is a classic example of the demise of American Christianity. Let's run the likely outcome forward:
B, his friends, and the fellow students who sympathize with him will remember this marred prom as they continue to grow into full adulthood. Many of them will marry and have children, and because of this "last straw" experience, many will choose to definitely NOT send their kids to their old school or any other Christian school. So the next generation of students for Nashville Christian School will not be supplied by as many alumni as the previous generation, and the student body will shrink year by year until the school cannot stay afloat. Bye.
I wish B and everyone who has been supportive of him a good life.
"B Hayes (he/they, according to Instagram)"
Ah. Thank you. I edited my comment to correct that error.