Worst Persons in the World

Idaho School District 25 officials for this:

An Idaho high school basketball coach was fired after posting a picture of her boyfriend touching her chest on Facebook, but the boyfriend, who coaches football at the same school, is still at his job.

“I don’t feel that photo is something to have me terminated on,” former Pocatello High girls’ head coach Laraine Cook told KIFI-TV in an interview aired on Monday. “I don’t feel it’s an immoral photo, and that’s what the termination is based on.”

The photo, in which both Cook and football coach Tom Harrison were dressed in swimsuits, was reportedly taken over the summer and posted briefly on Cook’s Facebook. KIFI reported that Cook was reprimanded by the school at the time, and the photo was taken offline. But the picture was later brought to the attention of state School District 25 officials by an unidentified source, spurring the decision to fire her on Oct. 24. Harrison was reportedly reprimanded.

So the woman is fired, but the football coach boyfriend — who did the groping — isn’t. Because football.

This entry was posted in Misogyny, Worst Persons. Bookmark the permalink.
  • dbtheonly

    So the ‘toucher” is unpunished & the “touchee” is fired.

    I keep thinking that there’s got to be some logical problem with a progression of “Worst Persons in the World”. But this may be it. The ultimate worst.

    • Kitty Smith

      Nah, I’d say the dude offering his own daughter to be raped was far worse. This makes me want to slap the shit out of people, though.

  • candideinnc

    But did she post the picture? If she did, she is an idiot.

    • Razor

      Really? An idiot for posting a picture of her boyfriend with his hand on her clothed boob? And I hear she was also showing ankle! And the town kids have been dancing!

      • candideinnc

        Yes, an idiot. If my boyfriend groped me, I wouldn’t post a picture of it–clothed or unclothed. Teachers are fools if they open themselves up to something like this.

        • Razor

          If they were naked or actually groping each other, sure… but this is clearly a playful photo of two people goofing around on vacation. Reminds me of Krystal Ball getting ten tons of shit for being a woman who dared to acknowledge that she might actually have sex in her personal life.

          • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ nicole

            So, uh, when exactly did you actually SEE the damn photo, Razor?

        • Christopher Foxx

          Teachers are fools if they open themselves up to something like this.

          And all those girls in their short skirts, why they’re just asking to get raped.

        • Christopher Foxx

          If my boyfriend groped me

          Who said he was groping her? The description given is that he was “touching her chest”. I can picture a number of ways that two people in bathing suits could pose for a photo where he would be “touching her chest” without it being lewd.

          But the important thing is we blame the woman, right?

        • Kitty Smith

          That’s fantastic. *FUCK OFF*.

  • trgahan

    My guess is the “unnamed source” who re-released the picture to state officials AFTER the original punishment and it’s removal is a parent of a girl’s basketball player who isn’t getting enough playing time.

    I assume the logical (HA!) explanation for the States actions is that the boyfriend has a better win-loss record as a coach and football playoffs are starting soon. Piss off the football boosters during the season and kiss your own job goodbye.

  • Teddy’s Person

    This story has me all kinds of conflicted. First, I don’t think the picture, as described, warrants termination. I’d have to know the details of women’s employment contract to agree or disagree if it even warrants a reprimand. Second, if the school board is going to overact, be equal opportunity assholes. Third, I’m amazed at what people are willing post on their Facebook pages (but I’m an old). Would these two coaches have struck the same pose at midfield or midcourt at halftime? If the answer is no, then maybe don’t post the picture on Facebook. I know they were on a private vacation when the picture was taken, but posting the picture made their vacation public. I just can’t defend people’s privacy on Facebook. We all have public and private lives, but Facebook is part of your public life. Lastly, as for the unnamed source, trolling people’s Facebook pages is gross.

    • D_C_Wilson

      The worst thing she should have gotten was a reprimand. Him too. I agree that was foolish to post it on Facebook. Teachers have to be very careful about their public image. I know some teachers who won’t even have a Facebook page for fear of what other people will post on their wall. But this isn’t a firing offense.

    • Lazarus Durden

      It is, and it isn’t. Was her Facebook profile public? If not then there is an expectation of privacy, sure it might be naive but in your analogy it’s not the same as striking a pose at halfcourt. It’s more like striking a pose at a secluded spot on a beach surrounded by friends who are in on the joke, except some jackass photographer takes a picture and sends it to your boss.

      Also this is about different punishments based on gender. Women are perceived as the guilty party for human sexuality. It goes all the way back to Eve. She tempted poor Adam. It’s “Well men have no control over their sex drive but women should know better!” In my area women have been fired from Christian schools because they live with their boyfriends who work for the same place. The man doesn’t get fired because he has a woman, who should be his wife, to support now that she’s unemployed. That’s the issue. If they both were fired I wouldn’t have a problem with it, I’d think it’s stupid but at least fair but they weren’t and it’s pretty clear as to why.

      • feloniousgrammar

        Yeah— remember how that half time “wardrobe malfunction” was Janet Jackson’s fault because NIPPLE, even though it was Justin Timberlake who pulled the cup off?

    • Christopher Foxx

      Would these two coaches have struck the same pose at midfield or midcourt at halftime? If the answer is no, then maybe don’t post the picture on Facebook.

      What if they wouldn’t? Why do they have to conduct themselves, on vacation, away from work, in their personal lives, as if they were in front of the entire school? What business is it of the school what they do on their own time?

      • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ nicole

        >>> What business is it of the school what they do on their own time?

        When she posted the image to a public site, viewable by students, parents, et al, she made it the business of the parents of her students, who very likely reported it to the school.

        • Kitty Smith

          Because god forbid a student might discover a teacher has a personal life outside of school. Next thing you’ll now, they’ll be having SEX and smoking CIGARETTES and then they’ll be CRACKHEADS.

          THINK OF THE MOTHERFUCKING CHILDREN!

    • Kitty Smith

      Wow, I didn’t realize it was their job to be acting like they were working for the school *all the goddamn time*.

      I think some new pay negotiations are in order. Because that’s a lot of fucking overtime.

  • Jado

    “because…football.”

    Well, yes…but also because He Can’t Help It. He’s a guy, and guys will automatically grope and fondle whatever female flesh is placed in front of them. And there’s also bound to be drooling and howling and inappropriate comments and suggestions, but what can be done? They’re men. We can’t expect them to control themselves or behave with a modicum of dignity or discretion.

    WOMEN are responsible to control the actions of their men. And also to control the actions of their teenage daughters. And sons. And dogs and cats. Honestly, expecting any sort of assistance form men just smacks of sexism. You people are all sexists.

    • JozefAL

      Yep Jado, that’s the EXACT reason why Muslims are excoriated by right-wingers: Because they FORCE their women to cover up from head to toe to avoid “tempting” men from acting like primitive animals. On the other hand, of course, we’ve got the right-wingers in THIS country trying to shame women into “covering up” and “dressing modestly” because men are nothing more than primitive animals–and it’s usually the primitive animals leading the battle to make sure women cover up.

      “Well, it’s not MY fault I raped her. I mean, she was in that bikini and her bouncy woman parts were almost falling out and her hair was just down to her shoulders, blowing in the breeze and wearing 5-inch stiletto heels, and I just couldn’t control myself. If only she’d been wearing a 3-piece suit and had her hair up in a bun and was wearing 1940s type schoolmarm glasses and wearing sensible flat shoes, I would never have had those nasty thoughts. No. I would’ve just been wondering why she was wearing that at the beach. And then imagining what she must’ve looked like in a bikini with her hair down, no glasses and 5-inch stiletto heels.”

      • D_C_Wilson

        And the irony is, the countries with the highest incidents of rape often require women to be covered from head to toe whenever they leave the home.

  • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ nicole

    Same old, same old.

    Also……people need to understand that Facebook is not their personal, private little sanctuary.

    • Christopher Foxx

      And employers need to understand that what people do outside of work is irrelevant.

      • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ nicole

        So because you say so, employers will stop trolling the Facebook pages of prospective and current employees? I don’t think so.

        What happened to that woman may have been unfair (but we don’t really know that since we haven’t seen the image), but the fact that she was fired, and not her boyfriend, is what’s really wrong here.

        >>employers need to understand that what people do outside of work is irrelevant

        This is so ridiculous, Christopher, and far too easily debunked. If a person were to rob a bank should that irrelevant to employers? How about if your kid’s teacher stars in porn movies?

        • Kitty Smith

          Yeah, no. First of all, it is irrelevant to an employer if a person wants to rob a bank–unless they’re working at the bank they’re looking to rob–as it’s relevant to the authorities (although, if I were an employer I’d be tempted to fire them because they are FUCKING STUPID to announce a bank robbery on facebook).

          Second of all, it is irrelevant to me or a school if a teacher has or had starred in porn movies, as one’s appearance in porn movies is not indicative of an inability to teach or a desire to hurt or molest children. It is only relevant if the teacher decides to involve the school in some fashion.

          While it is entirely unfair that she was fired and her boyfriend was not, she *should not have been fired in the first place*.

          Man, fuck this “act like you’re employed 24/7 on facebook” bullshit. If I’m expected to represent my employer all the fucking time, I’m going to be fucking paid for it.

          • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ nicole

            We have a very basic disagreement, Kitty.

          • D_C_Wilson

            I really hate to say this because I really do believe that what a person does outside of the work place should be none of their employer’s business. However, school districts have to deal with the real world problem in that there are parents who will scream holy hell about something like this. There are parents who will go to school board meetings and tie up the agenda making complaints about this kind of thing, maybe dragging it out for months demanding action. It’s wrong, but that’s the world we live in. Teachers do have to be conscious of their public image.

            Having said that, I’m going to reiterate what I wrote below: This should not have been a firing offense. The school board greatly overreacted to this incident. And the unequal punishments are ridiculous.

          • SEPA_Q

            Yes, teachers do have to be conscious of their public image. But they also have the right to have a life outside their job, and, if they are not acting illegally or immorally, they should be supported in that right by their employers, i.e. the administration and, yes, even the school board. When was the last time you heard either one stick up for the rights of their teachers to be free of 24/7 judgment by parents who may have a hidden agenda and who do have big mouths? Maybe it’s too idealistic, but I’d love to see a school board tell an interfering parent that the teacher had a right to do “X” as long as it was a. not on school property/time, b. had nothing to do with the students, and c. was neither immoral or illegal. Coaches have an especially difficult position, as there is a strong likelihood that there is at least one disgruntled parent ready happy to make trouble for a coach when s/he doesn’t think his/her child is getting “enough” whatever. FB or no FB.

            A family member who was coaching a high school girls’ team was recently told “resign or be fired” based on an ANONYMOUS letter to the school board after an incident in which he played only a tangential role, where he was NOT in charge of the students (parents were there and were in charge), and after which he took the initiatiative to report, explain and even apologize to the team members, the parents, and even his administration. Thought it was settled (had even been verbally supported by the school administration) until the anonymous letter went to the school board and then the local paper. Best guess is that it came from the father of a team member who wanted more playing time for his daughter. Fie on them all. /soapbox

            BTW, he keeps his (sparse) FB private and will not accept “friend requests” from any student.

            As to these two, equal treatment is called for. Either warn them both or fire them both.

          • D_C_Wilson

            I agree that they should have the right to a life outside of school. Unfortunately, that’s not the world we live in, as your relative discovered. It’s wrong and it’s harsh, but until things change, teachers have to be careful. This is especially if they live in a state where their union rights have been stripped.

          • Kitty Smith

            It’s shit like this that cements the thought in my mind that the United States is less of a nation than it is a fucking infection.

            I mean, why would anyone want to be a teacher? Sure, it’s rewarding to help children learn and understand the world, but then you have to deal with entitled fucking twits and their children, the hours are *far* longer than advertised, the pay is fucking pitiful, and you’re not allowed to have a personal life because some entitled fucking twit might take offense that you’re not some sort of flesh robot designed to parrot what they say.

            For all the noise we make about how important educati-oh, wait, never mind, that’s for our lords and masters, the peons can go fuck themselves.

            And now I’m back to thinking ‘infection’.