Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2019/11/21/fiona-hill-11-she-put-the.html
…
Nevertheless, she put the fire out with her hands, and finished the test.
I would say she’s very capable of maintaining singular focus!
Dr Hill and Holmes have made it very clear today that there was a clear request from the president to non official channels to investigate political opponents for personal political gains and partisan politics.
It is…CRYSTAL FUCKING CLEAR.
Nevertheless, she persisted.
Dr. Hill’s facial expressions when the GOP members soap box and rant says it all. She is clearly thinking “What a bunch of fucking idiots…why in god’s name did I move here.”
She may be contemplating the equally unsavory leadership back in the old country, and considering other options.
‘She put the fire out with her hands and finished the test.’
This a woman who has learned to survive in a room full of people who would set fire to her pigtails. Now she is in the impeachment hearings with a room full of Republicans. Kinda makes sense.
Once, when she was 11, a boy in her class set one of her pigtails on fire while she was taking a test. She put the fire out with her hands, and finished the test.
Gather round children, do not F U C K with someone like that, ever.
Look what she just did to the TGOP, see what I mean.
“Though she be but little, she is fierce!”
― William Shakespeare, A Midsummer Night’s Dream
Have not heard it yet, but I have to wonder how long until the Repubs start to complain about how many of these impeachment witnesses are immigrants or children of immigrants. You just know it is eating at some of them that “these damn ferners are ganging up on our president!”
But he said he didn’t do it! And if he did, it wasn’t illegal.
I feel like infantilizing Dr. Hill and reducing her persona to a cute anecdote is ridiculous. The YASS QUEEEN bullshit is spawned from a tiny, insignificant part of her life which is entirely outside a storied and noble career. She’s a grown woman weathering a barrage of extremely significant events with dignity after a period of intensity you and I will never know, and that’s what defines her in this moment and takes precedence. That’s what defines her character. She’s not a Funko Pop figure.
“Despite her handicap, she is competent!” This is what I’m talking about. (No offense to the poster-- I know where you’re coming from, I swear, and I’m sure it’s in good faith.) It’s just a weird look and it happens to lots of notable female figures when they emerge into the public consciousness. Like most things I’m sure there’s two sides but it skeeves me out.
I’d agree except that it doesn’t sound cute nor infantilizing to me, it sounds badass, as in, “if she did this as an 11 year old, imagine what she’s capable of as an adult, and we are seeing that now”.
My impression, at least.
This was my impression as well. I do think in this moment, the emphasis should be on her extreme qualifications and experience, but as a woman reading the reporting, I didn’t feel like this anecdote undermined the message about her character. I’m just happy they didn’t report on her shade of lipstick or skin care regime.
I totally get it, no worries. I think it’s a knee-jerk reaction to try and personalize an admirable figure via anecdote, and it’s exceptionally easy to buy into. What you have to ask yourself is, what would you do about a smoldering ponytail? Would it have actually been any different than what she did?
uh. but it is a quote from a rather famous piece of theater/literature that has a meaning to it. And it is apt here. Her outer demeanor belies a much more fiery and dangerous inner one.
there is nothing wrong with it.
Same here
I was watching, I was not surprised, it certainly did not come across as infantilizing after that story her attackers were much more careful when addressing her.
uh. thanks.
What is there that appeared weak about her outer demeanor? She’s remarkably capable and commands respect. After seeing her whomp everyone’s shit all over the place without breaking a sweat, was your first thought, “I can’t believe a woman did that”?
Absolutely agreed, and I should have been clearer-- thanks. I’m referring to the narrative premise of the original post specifically.