Horse Puncher sacked from teaching job

trisher I haven’t called her Ms Moulds ( though why that is a defence I’ve no idea) or cheerleaded nasty behaviour on social media - that’s a whole different debate. So you cannot aim your criticisms so generally. It is her evidenced behaviour towards the animal have caused justified criticism. Trolls and others on Twitter and the like cause problems for numerous individuals - female and black MPs for one example- tackling them is a different discussion. Nasty behaviour by others does not absolve a crime. Two wrongs do not make a right. In this case, she was wrong. Others’ responses do not suddenly make her innocent. Not everyone who criticised her have taken to issue death threats or extreme reactions, so don’t tar everyone with that brush.

This concept that it's all her fault quietly absolves all of those who have responded by condemning her and frees you from the responsibility for the effect on her family. In order to maintain this you continue to refer to her as Ms Moulds. My main complaint (FGS how manytimes do I have to say it) is that I will not judge on the basis of an on-line video and a social media shit storm. If you want the woman charged with cruelty then do it through the proper channels. If you choose not to do so then don't expect everyone to agree with the course you have chosen because some of us have standards of justice and consider that driving children from their home, death threats, losing your job, losing your husband's business is not simply unjust it is positively inhumane and much as I might personally dislike hunting and possibly this woman I would fight for her to be treated fairly because public condemnation seldom stops or restricts itself to one person or one area of behaviour. Just saying you don't agree with the extreme responses is not enough if you follow it up by calling her names or condemning her. That's just standing on the sidelines cheerleading whilst others do their worst.

Blimey Trisher, how would a wider perception of what happened help in this situation? It wouldn't matter if we saw that the horse was a nightmare and had kicked off big style just before the abuse, nor would it matter if we knew that the woman was married with six children - her abuse was unacceptable in any circumstances and in a job that relies on keeping a level head and a degree of compassion her behaviour was not appropriate. I think your main complaint is that if the video had not been publicised, she would still have her job. But, surely it is a good thing that she has been outed as having a cruel streak and a short fuse, therefore is not suited to a career dealing with young children. If she valued her job and position in society, she should have behaved. Like it or not, we all know our every move can be filmed and placed on social media - it's a minefield, but one most are aware of.

I don’t need a reminder that MsMould’s was employed by a trust. I’d have expected her to be even more aware that she’d lose her job if she brought the agency into disrepute.
What a strange stance to take, accusing others of diminishing Ms Moulds because she isn’t designated as a wife as a result
I’m certain I’m not the only Ms posting here who is married but isn’t a Mrs and doesn’t use her husbands name

Chewbacca

^Much easier to think of her as a Ms.^

Actually, it's much easier to think of her as a horse slapping brute that cannot control her temper.

Of course it is. That's the trouble with social media it doesn't allow for any degree of complexity or any perception of a wider picture.

Much easier to think of her as a Ms.

Actually, it's much easier to think of her as a horse slapping brute that cannot control her temper.

MaizieD

trisher

Have you noticed on this thread the attempts to de-personalise Sarah Moulds by calling her Ms. Moulds, so negating thef act that she is a married woman with children. Perhaps some do realise it has gone too far and are attempting to forget the damage done.

Blimey, trisher. You'd start a fight in an empty room , wouldn't you?

I thought that being designated 'Mrs' made one a victim of patriarchy and an adjunct to a man. A practice no true feminist condones...

What bit of 'depersonalisation' do you object to? Not recognising she's married or that she has children (which is actually perfectly feasible without being married).

So, depersonalised by not being seen as a man's adjunct or as a mother?

Happy Christmas...

Oh come on pretending that this title is being used in the spirit of equality and feminism really is a joke. Many of the papers refer to her husband so she is apparently married. It's de-personalizing because it stops people considering the wider implications of this social media shitstorm for the rest of her family. Much easier to think of her as a Ms.

I've just found the video and I think her behaviour is absolutely appalling. There is no reason for her to kick and slap that horses, other than her own bad temper.

trisher

Have you noticed on this thread the attempts to de-personalise Sarah Moulds by calling her Ms. Moulds, so negating thef act that she is a married woman with children. Perhaps some do realise it has gone too far and are attempting to forget the damage done.

Blimey, trisher. You'd start a fight in an empty room , wouldn't you?

I thought that being designated 'Mrs' made one a victim of patriarchy and an adjunct to a man. A practice no true feminist condones...

What bit of 'depersonalisation' do you object to? Not recognising she's married or that she has children (which is actually perfectly feasible without being married).

So, depersonalised by not being seen as a man's adjunct or as a mother?

Happy Christmas...

Referring to her as "Ms Moulds" is depersonalising her? What now? Oh for goodness sake trisher that's just daft! You and I are very different; I look on that form of address as one of respect not depersonalisation.

Have you noticed on this thread the attempts to de-personalise Sarah Moulds by calling her Ms. Moulds, so negating thef act that she is a married woman with children. Perhaps some do realise it has gone too far and are attempting to forget the damage done.

So nothing for three days Chewbacca unless you count your post teling me there were eye witness reports as well as video evidence which I don't regard as speaking out about it. More of standing back and applauding from the wings.

they certainlyhaven't spoken out about it

I beg your pardon trisher? May I refer you the following posts: mine @ 23.27 on the 23/12/21; Doodledog's @ 18.34 on the 22/12/21; Lincslass's @ 17.04 on 22/12/21; Josieann's @ 15.56 on the 22//12/21; Urmstongran's @ 11.12 on the 22/12/21.

If you're going to take the moral high ground, at least check that you're not on that pedestal on your own.

Iam64

Exactly GrannyGravy.
Trisha it was Ms Moulds who brought the school into disrepute - that’s what public servants get sacked for
An aside but - I was part of a huge protest at Greenham Common. Friends were dismantling fences - I stood back and continued to join in the singing. My pals understood I knew I’d probably lose my job if arrested

Sarah Moulds isn't a public servant she was employed by an educational trust. Trusts and Academies routinely attempt to reduce costs by not using qualified teaching staffbut "Cover supervisors" and replacing expensive senior staff with cheaoper people.

I have never said Sarah Moulds was a good person. I simply questioned if a single instance negated years of good service. Having to resort to intances of criminal behaviour punishable by prison sentences shows how desperate some have become to justify this social media witch hunt.
Of course all teachers aren't good. Have I claimed they are?
Eye witnesses would have been called to an RSPCA investigation and the matter would have been dealt with. Sarah Moulds would have been treated reasonably and punished for any cruelty. Her life would not have been threatened, her children would not have been forced out of their home and her husband would not have lost his business. But that is what has happened and although GNers may not endorse this they certainlyhaven't spoken out about it, and for doing so I have been personally castigated and misrepresented. But hey it's just social media and punching a horse is wrong but ruining a family's life is OK isn't it?

I forgot that you scoffed at the idea of the eye witnesses, trisher.
They would not only have been the hunt sabs but also other riders who were there.

Understood as soon as your post appeared FarNorth

Exactly GG13

trisher you were the one who claimed that the sacking must be unjust and that this woman must be a good person, because she had been appointed to a senior role.
Do you really claim that she was sacked for no good reason, just because her employer saw something on social media?

I am completely horrified by the child abuse and the two situations are not comparable at all.
I was simply making the point that teachers can be bad people.

Exactly GrannyGravy.
Trisha it was Ms Moulds who brought the school into disrepute - that’s what public servants get sacked for
An aside but - I was part of a huge protest at Greenham Common. Friends were dismantling fences - I stood back and continued to join in the singing. My pals understood I knew I’d probably lose my job if arrested

If Ms.Moulds had not punched and kicked the horse there would have been nothing to share on social media…

If someone is accused of a crime and tried in a court of law of course I'm not going to support them. The fact that the only way you feel you can justify the sacking of this woman is by quoting such extreme cases shows you realise something is wrong. Of course anyone in any sphere of employment can commit crimes, of course they should be punished, of course senior teachers aren't exempt from anything. No one has said they should be.
However bringing the school into disrepute is directly related to the sharing of this video on social media and hence is a result of the mob rule some seem happy to endorse.
By all means charge her with cruelty. By all means discipline her but do it properly and not by a lot of indignation and vociferous complaints on social media because that is not only unjust it's dangerous.

FarNorth, yes your point is well made, this horse may be head shy, for the rest if it’s life. It did nothing to provoke violent abuse.
The child abused by the head teacher was seduced , sexualised an abused by someone she trusted. Her recovery is much more complex
No offence intended

Surprisingly less angst about child abuse than animal abuse.

Julie Morris is someone else who was in a senior teaching role - deputy head & lead in safeguarding.
Nevertheless, she has been imprisoned for vile crimes against a child.

Being in a senior teaching role doesn't mean someone is necessarily a good person.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-59754035

* It is absolutely hilarious thatsome support hunting and yet think this woman should be castigated. Of course foxes aren't as special as horses.*

And can we please remember that it’s not horses who hunt foxes, it’s people.