This morning, Twitter is all a’flutter about a photo that was apparently posted to a teacher’s Facebook: The immediate question arose about whether the teacher overstepped her boundaries in doing the student’s hair. Was it the teacher’s place to judge the condition of the girl’s hair? Was it OK for her to style the hair? Was it acceptable that she posted it on social media? My first reaction is that I need the whole story, but I don’t have it at all. Too often, social media captures a portion of a situation and runs wild with assumptions. It happens all the time from celebrity deaths to everything else. People need to learn not to make snap judgments when they don’t have all of the facts in front of them. There’s no way to form an educated opinion if you don’t have a full picture (no pun intended) of what’s happening. My initial questions are myriad: Does the girl normally come to school looking unkempt/neglected overall? Was this a one-time event? Is the girl’s hair really all that unkempt or is it just that it was “out” instead of neatly braided/twisted? Is her overall appearance unkempt or was it just her hairstyle? Were the […]
Admittedly, I don’t follow college sports or their athletes. I could generally care less, but I’ve been hearing a lot of buzz recently about the possible charges facing Florida State University’s quarterback Jameis Winston as a result of a rape accusation. On December 5, the State Attorney, William Meggs, announced that Winston would not be facing criminal charges due to what he called a lack of evidence, elaborating, “We have a duty as prosecutors to only file … charges if we have a reasonable likelihood of a conviction.” It’s important to interject here to explain what Meggs meant. Criminal charges were not filed because prosecutors did not believe that they would be able to prove to either a judge or jury, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the crime(s) in question occurred. That does not mean a crime did not occur. It means there isn’t enough evidence to prove it in a court of law. It does not mean the victim falsely reported a rape, falsely implicated Winston, or did anything falsely. It means that there is not enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the crime occurred. I would also like to venture that even if charges were filed against Winston […]
I’m a junky for online advice columns. Carolyn Hax ranks in my top 5, and what I read today made me sad for humanity. In the question “Family ties cause friction,” a woman expressed her concern over her mother doting on her stepbrother’s children. “Disrespected” is in a relationship and neither she nor her partner want to have/raise children. That pretty much means her mother won’t have biologtical grand-kids anytime soon. “Disrespected” is offended that her mother dares to treat her stepson’s children as her own grand-kids and make no fuss about the lack of blood relationship. Instead, she goes on, saying “Am I right to feel resentful? I mean, they aren’t actually her grandchildren at all. Shouldn’t she explain that they are technically the children of her husband’s children?” My answer in short: No and no. You need to grow up.
Ah, the long-awaited return of the Quotidian Acts of Stupidity. Today’s awards go to: Marlon Styles, Jr., Principal of Mt. Healthy High School & Lori Handler, Superintendent of Mt. Healthy City Schools These gracious beings have withheld high school senior Anthony Cornist’s diploma because of his guests’ “excessive cheering” when his name was called during the commencement exercises. (Click for original news report) Yes, you read that correctly. He is being penalized because his family cheered too long for him. I’ve been to plenty of commencements where I scoffed at a few obnoxious families who tap-danced on the line of acceptable cheering. I’ve heard pots and pans banging, airhorns blaring, and just loud people being … loud. It can be frustrating to sit idly while they cheer for someone you probably don’t and never will know. I also concede that it can be disruptive when you’re stalling the ceremony to give the following student their due time in the spotlight.
This morning I was having a discussion with a colleague about their uneasiness at being the “bad guy” in an impending break-up and the looming prospect of divying up mutual friends. Part of the conversation dealt with how to manage joint events where under normal circumstances both would be invited — but also recognizing that a joint-invite was just that: a joint-invite. Eventually the conversation circled back to how to manage the neutral friends (the ones who don’t initially side with one ex or the other) and how much effort you put into maintaining or building a relationship with them. It made me reflect on the break-ups I’ve had in the past and how much I grapple with the fair and reasonable division of people, places, and things. Actually, I don’t. I don’t like having anything become mutual in a relationship because if/when things go south, I want to be able to live my life without that person being around as they live theirs.