Wednesday , October 23 2019
Home / australia / The magistrate struck the short shorts of Sydney

The magistrate struck the short shorts of Sydney



There are dozens and dozens of crimes that you may be charged under the Australian Criminal Code.

However, as far as I can say using Google and the complete lack of legal knowledge, wearing shorts, even very, very short, shabby ones who show their bottom, is no form of legal infringement.

However, a magistrate in Sydney claimed responsibility to criticize the female prosecutor's clothing.

Yesterday, at Saint George Shire Standard Barbara Diana Vaccanche Cordenas, 37, appeared before judge Jane Carney at a local court in Sutherland yesterday on charges of driving alcohol.

Vascanche Cardenas, Chilean, arrived to face the music in a yellow jersey, white coaches and feeble shorts, clothes that the judge clearly did not think was the satirical equivalent of the emotions of a fire.

"It's perfectly appropriate to carry cut off shorts to your boots in court," said Ms Karney Vascone Cordenas through a Spanish interpreter. (There is no question of whether this ensemble would be considered acceptable, if it is about knee length).

"I'm very tolerant of all kinds of clothes, but this is a beach attire, what you wear."

Mrs. Carney then asked if Mrs. Cardenas had a jumper to tie her around her waist – a totally sensible investigation given it was pushing 30 degrees on Wednesday.

Although Vasconcello Cardenas did not have a shirt or card, somehow the wheels of justice were able to continue to spin. She pleaded guilty, was fined $ 400 and was disqualified from driving for three months.

But let's take a moment here to call the bulls ** t. This is a tart shaming, simple and simple.

First, men routinely roll in court, wearing a nasty assortment of shorts, t-shirts and their best polyester tracksuit, and yet the choice of clothing rarely attracts the joy of the presiding judges.

The fact that they are dealing with drugs, robbing banks or driving a drunk is usually considered more important.

Second, let's talk about the odd, stubborn idea that what a woman wear brings a certain correlation with "respect" and "appropriateness".

Example A: When Serena Williams was told she was in the French Open, her ordered black helmet (which she had to help prevent life-threatening blood clots) did not show "respect the game and the place."

Example B: Tennis Player Alice Cornette received a violation of the code for her "disobedience" act of a very, very short stripping of her jersey that was wrong.

Figure C: When Megan Markle wore a dress with thighs during her Australian tour and many people left the Instagram royal account to call their clothes "disrespectful".

FURTHER.

When women put their taste in front of the sensitivity of others, it is considered overheated and "disrespectful" because we are expected to give priority to the feelings of others, all the time, regardless of that.

Finish it.

Women do not become and think about whether their trousers send real signals about what might be encountered with patriarchal structures of power when they leave the house. We just think about what makes us feel good (or what we can wear during flooding, record heat waves).

Women's clothing is not about sending visual signals about our compliance with social norms. It's about putting things on that brings us joy – or it's the last clean thing in a cupboard.

At least until someone enters criminal offenses against fashion in the penal code. Now that's another story.


Source link