this post was submitted on 03 Apr 2025
64 points (100.0% liked)
LGBTQ+
6349 readers
27 users here now
All forms of queer news and culture. Nonsectarian and non-exclusionary.
See also this community's sister subs Feminism, Neurodivergence, Disability, and POC
Beehaw currently maintains an LGBTQ+ resource wiki, which is up to date as of July 10, 2023.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No argument to your second point.
"Forced to resign" is inaccurate, though. That was one of her options; I'd call it a dilemma, but one option was clearly better than the other, so that's inapplicable. You seem to have a reversed notion of accuracy, and while I could go on about media literacy at length, this is not the venue.
The other option was to risk being attacked at work along with all the children, many if whom would likely be killed or injured along with her. That's not an "option". That's like saying you have the option to either work so you can eat, or never work again, or eat, for the rest of your life. Sure it's an option. But not a viable one. She only got to choose how she would be forced out. Leave gracefully, or leave with the blood of children on her conscience. Not that it would be her fault, but if she survived, they surely would make it out to be her fault for not leaving. The threats to her life aren't going to stop. It's just now the children aren't going to be used as bloody pawns.
Not entirely sure what you're on about. When the options are "resign or be fired," there's no timeline for the sorts of scenarios you're inventing. Either choice, today's your last day.
There was no "be fired" option. They couldn't fire her for her gender, but they had to get rid of her or face possible retaliation from the representative or a school shooting or other attack from extremists.