What ARE we teaching?

An e-mail went out yesterday to the EFF-Austin list about Tamara Hoover, who’s apparently under paid administrative leave and being considered for termination by the AISD school board for artistic nudes of her on a flickr site. A search reveals over 600 pictures of her, only about 10% of which involve nudity, and from what I can see, it’s usually just an exposed breast, clearly nothing in the school board’s definition that would warrant termination. The Statesman has a story this morning as does Austinist. Ms. Hoover (I seriously thought that was a joke when I saw the URL. Simpsons, anyone?) has a MySpace page where she’s posting some of her side of the story, she’s holding back some since she’s exploring legal proceedings.

The comments on the Statesman and her blog seem overwhelmingly supportive of her. I have to agree with some comments that the discipline should be reserved for the other teacher and student who brought up the page in class. It sounds like the other teacher had it out for her and showed poor judgement by following up on the student’s initial comment. If the board does fire her, it’s another reason in the growing list that are causing me to seek alternatives for my own children. Let’s hope they come to their senses and keep her.

Update (2006.06.13 21:36 CDT): The Statesman has printed a statement from AISD General Counsel, which pretty much just says that they think she should be fired and they’re not going to comment until they make a decision…which will be to fire her.

Update 2: (2006.06.14 14:07 CDT): Fleshbot has also picked up the story (don’t click on that one if you’re easily offended as they cover the pr0n industry among other things).

42 Comments so far

  1. sf_mark (unregistered) on June 13th, 2006 @ 1:01 pm

    I was wondering when you guys would mention this story.

    What’s clear from looking at Celesta Danger’s and Tamara Hoover’s Flickr sites is that they are girlfriends — Danger says as much on her page of photos of Hoover. So isn’t what’s really going on here that the district wants to get rid of a teacher who is openly gay?

  2. ttrentham (unregistered) on June 13th, 2006 @ 1:48 pm

    I avoided bringing that up exactly because her sexuality shouldn’t matter and I don’t think we have enough information to say that’s the reason. On top of that, Austin is generally pretty open minded about such things, unlike the rest of our fair state. Or am I being naive?

    Oh yeah, my Simpsons reference should’ve linked this.

  3. omit (unregistered) on June 13th, 2006 @ 6:26 pm
  4. Carl Webb (unregistered) on June 15th, 2006 @ 12:22 am

    I’m a fellow MySpacer and I’ll be suppporting Celesta and Tamara on my Yahoo group, AISD Watch.


  5. wae (unregistered) on June 15th, 2006 @ 4:00 am

    What’s also clear is that — at 690 photos — Celesta REALLY liked taking pictures of Tamara. A little moderation goes a long way.

    But the issue that is getting short shrift is what kind of teacher Tamara is. I’m a lot less interested whether she shows her hoo-hoo on Flickr than whether she can motivate and advance her students as artists. The only argument I’d buy from the school is that her pub(l)ic nudity might hinder her credibility, although this seems to be more problematic for her snarky co-worker than for her art students.

  6. blog responder (unregistered) on June 15th, 2006 @ 6:55 pm

    Apparently her students love her and she consistently gets very high performance ratings from the school. It’s another case of people becoming fixated on the completely inessential and insignificant side of the question.

  7. blog responder (unregistered) on June 15th, 2006 @ 6:57 pm

    Here’s a comment from the newspaper article:
    “June 14, 2006 11:29 AM |
    My daughter is one of Ms. Hoover’s students. She loves Ms. Hoover and said she is one of the best teachers she has had. I have placed a call to AISD asking that she be reinstated. She is a wonderful teacher and we need more like her. Stop the witch hunt!!”

  8. Regina Ann (unregistered) on June 15th, 2006 @ 9:09 pm

    I think this is terrible. We in Austin have seen much worse. i sit on the couch to watch the news and i see 3 cops beating a man unmercifully while he is face down and handcuffed and pooofff they all walk without any problem. I mean if 3 cops that were trained cannot handle a guy handcuffed they should of flunked out!!! if i were u , you have people as myself who have never met you Tamara , and we are on your side. go get a great lawyer and also contact the American Art Guild, fight this all the way. I am 52 and you are still so young, go fight for your rights and for the rest of your life!Make this town Eat it big time.We have many other problems that seem to just disappear here in Austin ( politician) and so on, but the little people here seem to get fired or have huge fines . Texas get your priorities straight! I wish you the best Tamara . i remember when nudes walked into our classrooms for us to draw after we were done with fruit. Go big and make these people pay. This is America and you have all the rights with all of us behind you. I have a video that was on HBO and this artist went through America with people nude right on the streets for photos and nothing was done , even the police patroled and knew it was art! they just patroled to keep things from getting out of hand. a woman sat on rocks right in front of the 2 towers that are now gone in New York. you should get this guy and make a stink like no other! we will walk with you through town as Cindy Shehan has her support. GOD BLESS AMERICA. WHAT the heck is next!!!!! good luck Tamara. oh ya why is it at Barton Springs i see many topless woman also on celebrations on 6th st. you know the ones ,Mardi Gras etc. i see girls there also topless. Tamara where else will u have such support then a city of artists and musicians! we will be by you. think about it parents….. how many times did we just watch a movie we rented and darn if there weren’t boobs in it, and oh my goodness, look the kids are in the room. I wish you the best Tamara!!! Reginaann

  9. Kitchens (unregistered) on June 16th, 2006 @ 11:48 am

    As a teacher in the State Of Texas, I am obligated to uphold a sense of diginity for my classroom. It does not include placing personal information or photos on a accessible internet site. Ms. Hoover seems to think she can do this and be looked at in a different aspect as regular citizens. Ms. Hoover, if you need to place topless photos of yourself where the public can see them, isn’t that what an art studio or museum is for?? You made a bad choice. Now you must deal with it.

    Have a personal showing of your pictures to your 15 and 16 year old students at your house or studio. Pin Head.

    That was a dumb choice you made Ms. Hoover. San francisco may need some art teachers.

    Elementary teacher and proud of it.

  10. ttrentham (unregistered) on June 16th, 2006 @ 12:04 pm

    Actually, Doug, according to accounts, she didn’t post the photos. It was a friend.

    She was upholding the dignity of the classroom and never mentioned the photos or showed them at school. It was another teacher’s poor judgement entertaining a student’s comment during class time that resulted in the photos becoming more widely known. What do you think of the behavior of the other teacher?

    The Statesman has another article on the subject, Kelso weighs in with his usual good old boy humor and the Statesman Editorial Board comes out in favor of dismissing her.

  11. Dallas resident (unregistered) on June 16th, 2006 @ 10:31 pm

    To carry this to extremes, there are plenty of people out there who are good at what they do and use poor judgement in other areas of their lives. If a pilot has a tendency to drink too much or often goes overboard with some perscription drugs in his free time, do you say “Oh, he is a great pilot. What he does with his free time is his business. All of you are closed minded idiots.” Simply saying someone is good at their job does not excuse all their other behaviors because those behaviors can cause problems in their jobs. We have an obligation to act like the responsible adults we are supposed to be and not indulgent, self centered, “i can do what I damn well please and all of you can just live with it, because the most important things are me me me, and my precious, sacrosanct artistic freedom” people. Artistic Freedom can be carried pretty far, are all of you willing to stand behind that no matter what she does with it?

    Nudity in art is fine; however, I seriously question the judgement of a woman who chooses to teach kids AND ALSO allows nude pictures of herself to be posted on the web. Either on their own is fine, but combined is just begging for trouble. SHE HAD TO KNOW THIS. She might be one of those folks who likes drama and is always spoiling for a fight. On her myspace site, she says she likes “activists”. This whole thing sounds highly attention seeking to me. Sure, she is not the one who actually brought it to class, but in my opinion, it was just a matter of time. If her name was on that site with the pictures, that staying “secret” forever just wasn’t going to happen.

    If you ask me, she sounds like a person who craves lots of attention, negative or positive.

  12. Glen (unregistered) on June 16th, 2006 @ 10:34 pm

    It’s time to focus on academics.

    This whole thing makes me sick. Is a bared breast really worth a woman’s career? Schools need to stay out of a teacher’s personal life. Period. I hope this woman is able to punish the school district in the most painful financial way, and I hope the kids don’t suffer for it.

    If this woman gets fired steps should be taken to make the system truly fair. To start, teachers caught going to church, any faith will do, should be fired for participating in and promoting a violent mythology. Crazy huh?

    It seems that things haven’t changed at all…kids still get their real education outside of school. It’s no wonder children reject their official role models when life is constantly whitewashed by them. Its also no wonder would-be great teachers become architects, chemists, lawyers, etc., because they don’t want to live by some jackass school administrator’s moral standards.

  13. mike giron (unregistered) on June 16th, 2006 @ 10:44 pm

    ttrentham has his head up his ass. What she does on her own time is her business.

  14. Surly (unregistered) on June 16th, 2006 @ 10:51 pm

    AISD continues to demonstrate why it’s one of the worst school districts in the state. She’s an ART TEACHER. Most of the classical art cherished and revered for generations are of nudes..I thought Austin, of all places, would be more tolerant of diverse views and ART. Instead, we devolve into a Puritanical, stupidly naive, hypocritical, closed society where we think we must protect our poor, innocent adolescents from experiencing the real world..Firing this woman serves no purpose other than demonstrating, once again, the absolute failure of AISD and the high schools of Austin to provide a relevant, educational experience for young adults. A good teacher is worth their weight in gold. For God’s sake, wake up people……..

  15. Yeahright (unregistered) on June 17th, 2006 @ 1:03 am

    You’ve got to be kidding me, right?

    Excerpt from FOXNews.com story:

    “The school district said the photos were inappropriate and violate the ‘higher moral standard’ expected of public school teachers. As she was escorted out of class last month she was told she’s become an ineffective teacher.

    The district wants to revoke her teaching certification, which would keep her out of Texas classrooms permanently. Hoover will appeal the ruling and is prepared to take the case to court, she said.”

    Higher moral standard?? Where does the district draw the line, at the “public” or “private” standard? Sounds like Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell has come back to bite Austin High in the ass.

    Get ready for the “It’s because I’m …” defense.

  16. Bruce (unregistered) on June 17th, 2006 @ 3:07 am

    You conservatives in Texas getting all wound up about artistic nudity…you’re simply too much! (you’d never last two seconds in California!) This is all much ado about nothing.

    You’re just re-confirming what the left thinks about conservative nut cases. Just let it be and get on with your lives – that way you don’t look stupid and you don’t ruin someone’s career. God wants us to be good, kind and loving you know.

    Bruce, a Liberal Republican in California

  17. G (unregistered) on June 17th, 2006 @ 6:04 am

    I sure hope that they are going to ban television and most advertising down there in texas too! After looking over her pics I would rather show them to my kids than have them watch an hour of tube!!! At least there was an artistic expression there as opposed to blatent exploitation that you see on TV to make a buck.

  18. Peter (unregistered) on June 17th, 2006 @ 7:54 am

    This comment is for Doug the Homophob Elementary Teacher. Welcome to the 21st century. The web is the art studio/gallery of today. This woman sounds like an interesting, inspiring, and dynamic teacher who actually lives what she teaches, rather than merely talking about it. I’d be delighted to have her as the teacher of my children.

    As for homphobs in the classroom, you are the one who should be fired. Having a teacher in the classroom who a bigot is clearly a threat to the moral development of my children and I would have my children removed from your care post haste.

  19. Fred (unregistered) on June 17th, 2006 @ 8:19 am

    Doug, you are a freakshow. May God protect the children who have you as a teacher.

  20. SR (unregistered) on June 17th, 2006 @ 10:14 am

    There is an internet term for people who plaster their silliness all over vanity pages like MySpace.
    “Attention Whores” Read the page. Just another airhead. She’s ot bad-looking, and I’m all for nudity and free speech, but the whole thing is much ado over nothing.
    In a school system, the parents are the customers. If you don’t care for their standards, there are other places to seek employment.
    I could care less about nude teachers, but one silly and vain enough to be a MySpace-cadet needs to go.

  21. Bigh (unregistered) on June 17th, 2006 @ 11:10 am

    Caught this story through CNN, and found it interesting enough to look into. Looked through Ms. Hoover’s Flickr page as well as her partner/photographer Celesta Danger’s Flickr page. Visited their websites, looked at as much of their work as I could find.

    I found vital, alive, inventive work. Lots of good, substantial stuff, worthy of young practicing artists. Not of hint of anything pornographic. Very rarely even sexual, and that in itself is rare in any art circle. As you dig you find an obvious but subtle lesbian flavor, but that should not be an issue. Unfortunately, I think it IS the primary issue, but nobody will admit to it.

    Bottom line, I really don’t understand the fuss, especially in a city like Austin, which I found very free-thinking when I’ve visited. Nudity and sexuality are part of human life, and are essential to the arts when portrayed with dignity and sincerity. In my hometown, we have high school art classes that introduce advanced students to fully nude figure drawing. Are artistic photos of an art teacher living an artistic lifestyle more offensive to Victorian sensibilities than that? Apparently so. I have to think it’s the lesbian flavor that is seen as so risky.

    BTW, I live in a very conservative small city in Georgia. AISD is embarrassing themselves. We have met Big Brother, and he is us.

  22. ttrentham (unregistered) on June 17th, 2006 @ 12:40 pm

    Mike Giron:

    Head up my ass? It looks to me like I’m agreeing with you. Perhaps you confused me with someone else?

  23. Brian Ragle (unregistered) on June 17th, 2006 @ 1:37 pm

    I reviewed this story with my photographer wife and we both laughed over the hysteria of this situation clouded over in terms like “dignity” and “propriety”. Hey, I’m talking to you, Doug.

    Hoover was the photographic subject of another artist, in this case her girlfriend. In what way does this violate some kind of self-righteous morality standard? Are we to presume Doug advocates art classes which leave out works of art which in some way show a portion of the human anatomy without clothing? Will the works of Raphael include a CENSORED bar over women’s breasts? Will Michaelangelo’s “David” be depicted with air-brushed swim trunks covering his exposed genitals?

    Intelligent readers can easily see what this is really all about: a teacher feud which has now resulted in the manipulation of alleged social norms with art as the true victim here.

  24. Charles (unregistered) on June 17th, 2006 @ 3:08 pm

    Having looked at the photos, it would seem hard to come to any conclusion other than that their main offense is that they pretty plainly portray Ms. Hoover as a lesbian. What little nudity there is strikes me as easily off-set by the clearly artistic nature of the photo group taken a a whole. One could take the (somewhat naive, in my opinion) high road in maintaining that it’s impossible to know with certainty AISD’s motives – but I personally think that gives the officials involved too much leeway. Ms. Hoover was suspended over disapproval of her lifestyle. It’d be refreshing if the judgemntal, hang-em-high homophobes involved had sufficient courage of conviction to state their objections plainly – and not scurry like roaches behind a “it’s for the kids” misdirection.

  25. Someone in Houston (unregistered) on June 17th, 2006 @ 4:22 pm

    ya know….it’s because of retards like the people wanting to fire this excellent teacher that are causing a lot of the troubles.

    being afraid of our own bodies, in some form of twisted morality…

    it’s the religious and moral left that cause this – not the people who do it…

    Oh, and to the extra-retard who posted that you were sure that they needed teachers in San Fran? Kiss off you bigotous piece of crap. I’m sure you’ve taken one “for the team” to come off saying stuff like that – and it’s retards like you that are a prime example of the issue.

  26. Dan (unregistered) on June 17th, 2006 @ 4:46 pm

    Leave it to Texans to get upset over some nude – and hardly explicit – photographs, yet support a war that has no defined goal, end, or even a plan to get our soldiers out but has caused the deaths of over 2500 Americans.

    That is obscene. Get upset over that you morons.

    There are bigger things in this world to get upset over.

  27. Someone in Houston (unregistered) on June 17th, 2006 @ 4:54 pm

    *** That is obscene. Get upset over that you morons.

    There are bigger things in this world to get upset over. ***

    Funny – some of us Texans are more upset over the retards in the AISD who want to fire this teacher.

    And yes, I support the troops, and I support the war to rid the world of dictators who do things like Saddam did. The Sudan should be next, IMO.

    If you don’t like how our country is run, get enough votes to change it, or get the f*ck out.

  28. John (unregistered) on June 17th, 2006 @ 4:55 pm

    The school board in Austin that is all upset over an art teacher’s participation in art is why Texas is and always will be the solid waste excretional orifice of the United States.

    I am so glad I don’t live there.

  29. Dan (unregistered) on June 17th, 2006 @ 5:10 pm

    >it’s the religious and moral left that cause this – not the people who do it…

    Hey Houston – don’t you mean the religious and moral right? They are the ones that get their panties bunched more than anyone else over nudity or sexuality – well, except for muslims.

    And if you support the troops, do you support sending more and more to their deaths? Is that your twisted idea of “support”?

    2507 American deaths in a war for 9/11, er, uh, Al Qaeda, WMDs, er, uh, spreadin’ democracy – yeah that’s it! Spreadin’ democracy!

    You agree with that do you? And killing our kids to do it? That’s obscene.

  30. Someone in Houston (unregistered) on June 17th, 2006 @ 5:54 pm

    **** 2507 American deaths in a war for 9/11, er, uh, Al Qaeda, WMDs, er, uh, spreadin’ democracy – yeah that’s it! Spreadin’ democracy!

    You agree with that do you? And killing our kids to do it? That’s obscene. ****

    9/11 – yes. WMD’s? Yes. If you don’t believe Saddam had used them years before against his own people, and that he moved them to some other 3rd world piece of shit country before we invaded this time, you’re as much of a retard as the AISD.

    And I have kids. My son wants to become a Marine to serve his country. He may spill his blood so you can enjoy the freedoms you receive, like all the others that died before. if it happens, I will be proud. You should show some respect for those that give far more to their country than some moronic piece of ass like yourself.

  31. fuckpeople (unregistered) on June 17th, 2006 @ 6:09 pm

    how are you supposed to get enough votes to change things if you don’t voice your opinion dumbass in houston?

  32. Alabama Thanks Texas (unregistered) on June 17th, 2006 @ 6:20 pm

    You Texans make us look downright intellectual and sophisticaed. Thanks!

    And I thought Alabama was bad for backwards thought.

    A couple of questions though: What freedoms are being protected in Iraq, and where did Saddam get the WMDs that he used against his own people.

    Oh – two more. Someone in Houston – Will you still support the war if your son dies in Iraq?

    And why do you Austinites care more about a woman making art than you do about Americans dying?

  33. Ray (unregistered) on June 17th, 2006 @ 6:33 pm

    Hmmm — so it is ok to kill 30000+ Iraqi civilians and soliders and let 5000 American boys die …. but a young woman gets fired for showing a few nipples??

    God Bless America!

  34. Steve Savage (unregistered) on June 17th, 2006 @ 7:56 pm

    let’s not forget that this is texas. Vibrators sold in texas were required to have warning labels. it is a christian conservative hellhole with wood-paneled dwelling people who have sex with their sister then take her to church.
    The only place worse is Oklahoma.

  35. Someone in Houston (unregistered) on June 17th, 2006 @ 9:57 pm

    *** Oh – two more. Someone in Houston – Will you still support the war if your son dies in Iraq? ***

    Yup – I would. Because I believe getting rid of Saddam and other scumbags in the world makes the world a better place. My only regret is that we didn’t take the bastard out in 91 as we should have.

  36. GQtaste (unregistered) on June 17th, 2006 @ 11:28 pm

    Someone in Houston, then you go police the world then! What is Bush? What is Cheney? Bingo Oilmen! That’s what it all boils down to.

    Steve Savage, you’re right about Okla. I was born and raised in this hellhole.

    as ever

  37. Lauren the Fish (unregistered) on June 18th, 2006 @ 11:03 am

    One way to reduce this tempest-in-a-teapot to it’s essence and thereby expose the ludicrousness underlying the AISD’s knee-jerk response would be to ask, in public and on the record, “Please cite any and all objective scientific evidence from any legitimate source which even hints at the most remote possibility that the sight of a photograph depicting a human breast could harm any person, of any age, in any way whatsoever.”

    Just this one excerpt from the Statesman’s editorial clearly demonstrates the glaring absence of rational thought:

    “An employee is entitled to constitutional protections, including freedom of expression. But what happens when that right conflicts with the ability of the employee — especially one whose charges are minors and who is paid by the public — to do his or her job?”

    I humbly ask the author of this rhetorical nonsense (or anyone else who shares the opinion set forth) to explain, clearly and succinctly, exactly how does the existence of an artistic photographic depiction of a person – which may or may not include that person’s breasts (or ankles, for you Victorian throwbacks) – or elbows, or fingernails – CONFLICT with that person’s ability to do her job – that job being ART INSTRUCTION?

    Bottom line, the underlying premise is that permitting the public at large, including children and adolescents, to view an image of the human body in which one or more normal, healthy mammary glands (of which there are approximately 6,000,000,000 at last count) are visible – is in some (deliberately) unspecified way “immoral.”

    Ya. And me? I’m Marie of Romania.

  38. Marc (unregistered) on June 18th, 2006 @ 12:01 pm

    The term ‘nudity’ is thrown around alot in this case! When a man walks around without a shirt we don’t say that he is nude or even partially nude.

    In Austin, women may be topless in ANY public place and it is completely legal! That’s right… women can jog on the hike/bike trail that runs right in front of Austin High School and in front of countless tweens, pre-teens, and teens, and it is 100% legal.

    The city of Austin has deemed that no damage will occur to a child by viewing a female breast.. if it did, it would change the law.

    Why is it that we say a topless woman is ‘nude’… or she posted ‘nude’ pics of herself when we don’t say the same thing about men?

    Even having a law in Texas that forbids women to be topless would be a violation of the Texas Constitution and its Equal Rights Amendment prohibiting discriminatory practices in its legal framework.

    This entire case is a disgrace to AISD and the people that support Tamara’s termination.


  39. John (unregistered) on June 19th, 2006 @ 1:00 am

    A lot of people in this discussion seem to think Texas is simply a collection of undereducated right-wing hicks. It’s a lot more complicated than that. By most sources, Houston has the third and Dallas the sixth largest gay populations in the U.S.; Austin is up there somewhere (I’ve seen as high as fifth, but I’m not sure I believe that). Austin is very high on the list of gay _couple_ population centers, however.

    Back in the 1980’s, a bunch of undereducated right-wing hicks tried to go after the gay community in Houston with a political group called “Straight Slate”. Much to their amazement, they went down in defeat. They tried again, and went down in an even bigger defeat. That’s mostly set the tone for politics in the state since — minor, largely pointless, anti-gay actions (Defense of Marriage Act which had no legal impact, etc) but nothing that _does_ anything.

    Yes, it’s also a state where we have occasional tragic gay-bashing murders. Part of that comes from having a large rural-conservative population, part of it simply comes from having a _large_ population (second largest in the U.S.). However, you don’t see much gay-bashing of that sort in the large cities (and Texas has 5 metro areas over one million).

    Unfortunately, a lot of the school boards are the last bastions of people who _do_ care. I agree with the people who argue that most likely AISD is really after her because she’s lesbian, not because she has topless photos — topless really isn’t a particularly big deal in Austin.

    My point in writing this is mostly to say: it’s easy to go after Texas, but it’s wrong. It’s wrong because this is a state very much in flux, and bashing it doesn’t help get it where you probably want it to go. It turns off the liberal-minded people to anything else you have to say, while the conservatives high-five each other and say hell-yeah! Is that what you want to accomplish?

    Remember that, while Bush the second is (at least nominally) from Texas, LBJ (one of the liberal greats, excepting perhaps Vietnam) is much more _from_ Texas. Remember that while California is a liberal place in many ways, it brought us Nixon and Reagan.

  40. Peter (from the UK) (unregistered) on June 19th, 2006 @ 9:24 am

    When I first read this story I thought it was some kind of spoof. Then I looked at the photos with growing disbelief. It seems that after the Creationists’ continuing bizarre attacks on Darwin, an American educational establishment is about to make itself a world laughing-stock again.

    As to the alleged offence, could you help me? Is it the whole female breast that offends, or some percentage of it, or is it the nipple?

    As for Doug, the elementary school teacher, I do hope that he isn’t teaching English. He seems to be somewhat out of his depth there.

  41. Mike (unregistered) on June 19th, 2006 @ 11:48 pm

    Seems like everybody’s focusing on the partial nudity in the pictures. The photo sets have far more graphic violence (the ‘dead girls’ series should be X-rated) and bi-erotic stuff (naked men making out in the shower). Too late to find the pics with Ms. Hoover, as they magically disappeared from the flickr.com system in the past 3 hours. A little browsing through the world Ms. Hoover and her friends occupy was enough to kill my appetite. Ms. Hoover’s partner is deeply disturbed, and their circle of close associates should not be allowed to work with minors. That goes double if she’s a great art teacher, because her students would look up to her as a role model.

    Her partial nudity in the pics is tame, but the whole scene in general is very very sick.

    And who cares if all of Europe thinks the USA is prudish? Kids aren’t adults, and it’s just plain irresponsible to expose them to the same sorts of ‘entertainment’ that adults are free to choose.

    If I wanted to live with European perspectives on morality, I’d move there. I for one thank God almost daily that I live in this country, even with all of its other shortcomings. For cryin’ out loud, it’s one of the reasons our ancestors braved the seas to move to this side of ‘the pond’ in the first place.

    So please hear us, Europe: We love you dearly as friends and allies. But don’t take it personally if we don’t want to be just like you.

  42. manage up (unregistered) on June 21st, 2006 @ 6:48 pm

    Ah you folks are all being pretty nasty and negative so why keep the ill will flying? She took a risk, someone that was opportunistic used it against her (shame on them, put that is life, let’s all grow up here without being so judegmental, hell we all play these silly games at work, everyone that has posted here). So go for Tamara and her lover as they got what they wanted, attention, and the teacher who snitched got what she wanted, tamara fired, so that is that. Let’s let it sit without slamming each other…


Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2009 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.