Unbelievable news from Utah. High school administrators at Wasatch High School got a little heavy-handed with Photoshop—they deliberately digitally altered some of the yearbook portraits of girls in the school so that they were wearing nun’s habits and hijabs to cover their, you know, sexy bits. Like their arms.

Okay, I jest about the habits and hijabs, but not about the cavalier sexism of these unrepentant hypocrites, who blithely left some photos untouched while girls wearing identical clothing had sleeves and necklines altered to make them more “modest.”  “We only apologize in the sense that we want to be more consistent with what we’re trying to do in that sense we can help kids better prepare for their future by knowing how to dress appropriately for things,” Terry E. Shoemaker, the superintendent for the Wasatch County School District, said in a statement. And he knows this because….?

Since when are covering up bare arms in desert heat going to help a young woman “better prepare” for her future? Why put the burden of “appropriate” dress on these women—why not tell all the allegedly sex-mad idiots aka the boys and administrators of Mormonville to check their hormones at the door, and grow up?

Or why not have all the students wear uniforms so that there is a standardized dress code and no one is singled out?

I am fed up with these sexist pigs acting as if a normal female body, clad in a normal tee shirt or sleeveless dress, is somehow so provocative that the lustful male students can’t concentrate on their calculus. Lurchers, who came of age in the era of short-short skirts and anything goes, look at these administrators and have to wonder just what perverted thoughts are going through their minds to make such idiotic decisions.

Don’t you think there are more important things in the world to deal with?

Like getting a job?

Or not getting blown away by one of Joe the Plumber’s gun-toting pals?

For more: http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/05/29/3442567/utah-high-school-yearbook/?elq=~~eloqua..type–emailfield..syntax–recipientid~~&elqCampaignId=~~eloqua..type–campaign..campaignid–0..fieldname–id~~

One thought on “A SHOULDER TOO BARE

  1. The video says that the shoulder straps were over 2″, the required size. I suspect what they really had a problem with was the deep armholes. They just didn’t have a line in their stupid dress code that applied to armholes, so they claimed the shoulder straps were too narrow.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *