BBM
This is in response to the bolded part. I do respectfully disagree with this. In no way did she infer, accuse or imply to the governor in a sexual relation in any way. Yes the terms expressed by persons of an older generation might refer to that. But in respect to a younger person it means something entirely different. And seeing that the words were used by a younger person and were not written in such a way that appears to either infer or imply that the governor had sexual relations with anyone else, it could only lead me to believe that she used the wording in the context of youthful language not sexual language.
If she had said that the governor "sucked" someone, or "blew" someone yes, I can see the criticism. But that is not the context she used. She used it in the context of a more youthful language where school sucks, and parents blow (BTW parents "blow" chunks, it is a reference to puking sometimes.)
Well, of course, you are right. Emma did not actually infer that he was having sexual relations and kids do mean something else when they something sucks but they are aware of its meaning and I was really referring to the impact of saying such a thing. The impact is that she used a phrase which infers a person is engaging in a sexual act.
I say that teens know the meaning even if they don't use it precisely in that way, because I hear them (all the time!) saying things like "You suck donkey %$#^&!" They know what the "sucking" refers to.
And Emma knows as well. She didn't say the governor blows, as in blows chunks. She said he blows
a lot. That's more explicit.
It's kind of like the F word. Do people mean it literally when they use it? When someone says that a thing is "F'ed up" It is not meant literally. But the meaning is known and it is rude.
I think the governor was a jerk for calling the school about this. He should have ignored it. And I think the school might have gone overboard demanding an apology. I would have called her in, told her that protest is acceptable but profanity is not, and that she would not be invited to further such events because she embarrassed the school.
But I think it is Emma and her mother who really messed up here. The governor knew exactly what he was doing. He wanted to punish dissent. He succeeded, whether Emma now knows it or not, but only because she played into his hands.
Had she simply written a letter to him saying, "I disagree strongly with your policies. I think you do not have the student's interests at heart. I am a new voter and your actions have guaranteed that you will never get my vote. I will also continue to speak out against you and your policies to anyone who will listen.
However, I apologize for using immature and rude language about you publicly. That was wrong and I have learned it is an ineffective way to express my discontent."
Had she done that, she would not be known as a person who cannot control her sentiment in a public setting. Instead, she chose to make this public. No one else did.
