During the day I get the opportunity to read some of the news articles that appear in publications that are based in North East. Apart from the fact that most of them are filled with stories to do with football there are some snippets of interest.
I have been interested in story covered by the Hartlepool Mail. It describes a former teacher accused of having a sexual relationship with a pupil at her school. The teacher involved has admitted to kissing the boy but said nothing else happened. She is on trial at Teeside Crown Court.
She is accused of grooming the boy by giving him sweets and what the paper describes as “attention”. But it went further to describe what the accused in question was wearing in court. Right down to the colour of her tights and shoes.
“Wearing a burgundy jacket and skirt, grey tights and matching grey high heels, she wept several times as she started her defence.”
Regardless of whether this person is guilty or not what has the colour of her clothing and the type of shoes she is wearing got to do with the evidence provided in court?
Ahhhh you see! She is wearing high heels. You see? See what type of a person she is. She obviously has questionable morals and definitely should be viewed with some sort of suspicion.
This sort of gutter journalism is proof that women again do not hold an equal standing in society. Why is it that we seem to judge women on the basis of what type and how little clothing they wear. Would a man have his clothing describes in such detail if he were accused of the crime? Would his clothing be relevant? No. But it must be if a women dresses in such a way.
I emailed the newspaper. No reply so far. I doubt I will get answer or explanation.