You are still supporting a double standard here. You have repeatedly referred to your massive physical stature (combat training?) that gave you a decided "edge" in dealing with these mooks, implying that
1) a teacher without these advantages is somehow "deficient" and/or bears at least some of the blame (e.g., for not being more "situationally aware");
2) male colleagues should be expected to intercede.
In your last posting, you have provided more background so as to better contextualize your statements and ameliorate some of your more outrageous assertions; it seems that now you are no longer blaming the poor female teacher for being so feeble, but rather indicting the "System" for putting her into that untenable situation - a reasonable and fair position! You've also explained that mechanisms and procedures should have been put into place so that a teacher could call upon trained assistance (vulgo: "muscle") if a risky situation should arise. Also praiseworthy!
But you still haven't distanced yourself from your initial reproof of me for suggesting that "male teachers - who have probably already been victimized by school policies re. 'reverse discrimination' and 'patriarchy' - would be fools to "step up to the plate" and intercede when a female colleague is in distress.
If a dedicated squad of bruisers is on "stand-by" and ready to jump into action when a teacher (of EITHER sex) requests assistance, I'm all for it (though I have already pointed out that, in a thoroughly "woke" system, this would only shift the problem, with the physically fit male security personnel then constantly having to intercede and "rescue" their weaker, less-fit female counterparts - a point that you have yet to respond to).
Regards,
well, i see you’re back to the attack!
certainly ‘fair’ i guess since i gave ‘last word’ and have now continued to respond in the thread. very well. i’ve got church right now but i’ll come back to read your latest, later.
dadfly