Nigerian university sparks outrage as staff check whether female students are wearing bras before exams
In a short clip that spread quickly on social media, two women seem to be touching the breasts of the women in the queue as they walk past. Students at Olabisi Onabnajo University confirmed to CNN that the video was shot at their school, in Nigeria's southwestern Ogun state.
In the video, one female student appeared to be removed from the queue after one of the women touched her.
CNN has not been able to confirm when the video was taken but a student representative at OOU, who defended the school over what he dubbed the, 'no bra, no entry policy,' said exams began this week.
The university has not responded to CNN's request for comment and has not commented publicly on the alleged policy amid widespread outrage on Nigerian social media.
Student union leader Muizz Olanrewaju Olatunji said in a post on X Tuesday that the check for bras 'is not a new policy' in the school, which he stated, 'promotes a dress code policy aimed at maintaining a respectful and distraction-free environment, encouraging students to dress modestly and in line with the institution's values.'
Olatunji shared parts of what he said were the school's policies, which described indecent dressing as that which shows sensitive body parts 'such as breasts, buttocks, nipples and belly-buttons,' including 'any dressing that is capable of making the same or opposite sex to lust after the student in an indecent manner.'
Human rights lawyer Inibehe Effiong described the OOU's bra policy as 'draconian' and 'arbitrary,' and one that 'might amount to some form of sexual harassment.'
He told CNN that 'physically examining the bodies of students to determine whether they are wearing a bra or not is not only degrading but also undignifying.'
'There could be medical explanations for why certain students may not feel comfortable wearing a bra at a particular time,' he said, adding that enforcing the policy 'without exceptions, or without taking peculiarities into consideration is arbitrary,' and could lead to legal actions.
Student leader Olatunji said in another post on X Tuesday that talks were ongoing with OOU's administration 'to explore alternative approaches to addressing indecent dressing, focusing on respectful and dignified interactions between students and staff.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
6 hours ago
- Bloomberg
Meta's Threads Offers Changes In Effort to Regain Relevancy
By Welcome to Tech In Depth, our daily newsletter about the business of tech from Bloomberg's journalists around the world. Today, Kurt Wagner reports on some changes to Meta's Threads and whether it's enough for the social network to gain cultural relevance. Paramount settles with Trump: Paramount reached a $16 million settlement with President Donald Trump over a lawsuit that alleged election interference. He had sought damages of $20 billion. No money will be paid to him directly.
Washington Post
8 hours ago
- Washington Post
Serbian police detain 79 protesters as dissent persists against populist president
BELGRADE, Serbia — Serbian police said they detained 79 university students and other protesters as they broke up street blockades in several cities that are part of persistent dissent against President Aleksandar Vucic's populist government. Officers in riot gear intervened late Wednesday and early Thursday in the capital, Belgrade, the northern city of Novi Sad and the southern cities of Nis and Novi Pazar. Authorities denied reports of police brutality and excessive force against demonstrators.
Fox News
8 hours ago
- Fox News
High school seniors see red when they learn the size of the national debt
"$10 million?" "$100 million?" "No, you're crazy, it's got to be more than that, it's got to be like in the billions." "Yeah it's got to be at least maybe $50 billion dollars. Maybe even $100 billion." "That much?" "Maybe" "No, no it must be even more than that. I bet you it's a trillion dollars." "A trillion dollars? No way it's that much." I had just taught my high school seniors in U.S. government class about budgets and national debts and asked, "How much money do you think we owe? How much is our national debt?" Their ridiculous responses, ranging from millions to billions to $1 trillion, are funny but also sad. Finally, I can't listen anymore and, feeling like the evil queen giving Snow White the poisoned apple, tell them: "$37 trillion dollars." There's a stunned silence. I then walk around the room with my hand out and start shaking students' hands, each time saying, "Thank you." They look at me, confused. Eventually a boy asks, "Why are you thanking us? "Because you're the ones who are going to be paying it." More stunned silence. Of course, many of them have heard, one way or another, about Washington's spending problems, deficits and debts. But it was not until this moment that they finally understood what it really meant – and what it will mean for them. Many of them are worried they'll incur student loan debt – they were unaware of the other debt they're inheriting. I put up, along with a photo of my granddaughter playing in our back yard, and ask, "How much does she owe?" It takes them a minute, but they find the "Debt per citizen" section – $108,010. She is 3 years old. Of more immediate interest for them is "Debt per taxpayer," since some have already begun paying taxes, and most others will soon. That's $323,051. I say, "Look at that debt clock – what is the worst number on there? Not the highest, the worst." After a couple minutes, I direct their attention to the section, "Interest on the debt." It's a little over a trillion dollars a year. Their ridiculous responses, ranging from millions to billions to $1 trillion, are funny but also sad. Finally, I can't listen anymore and, feeling like the evil queen giving Snow White the poisoned apple, tell them: "$37 trillion dollars." "What does that money buy?" one of them asks. I take a piece of scrap paper off my desk, crumple it, hold it up, and say: "To the taxpayer, it's worth exactly as much as this crumpled paper. That money doesn't build a single hospital or school or bridge. It doesn't build a single bomber or manufacture a single bullet." I show them that in July of 2020 debt service was only $386 billion a year and the national debt was $26 trillion. I ask why would debt service be 2.6 times as high now when the national debt is "only" 1.4 times as high. The answer is that interest rates have gone up, greatly increasing the interest we pay on the debt. The students try to come up with solutions. "Why not just pay it by printing more money?" I explain hyperinflation and pass around a couple 100 million Deutsche Mark bills from Germany in 1923. I tell the story of a German woman filling an old wheelbarrow with Deutsche Marks, going to the store, leaving it outside for a moment while she selected some bread and milk, then coming back to find the old wheelbarrow gone--and the worthless bills dumped out in the street. We watch the 2009 Onion satirical video "U.S. Government Stages Fake Coup To Wipe Out National Debt" in which a newscaster informs viewers: "The White House today enacted an emergency plan to eliminate all the United States' financial obligations to foreign nations by faking a violent coup of the American government …the fake coup began at 10 a.m. today, when fake rebel leader Octavius Del Monte stormed Congress, pretended to kill several congressmen … then said 'Hear my words China, Japan, and the United Arab Emirates. The U.S. and all its vast debt, no longer exists. Henceforth, this land will be called Octavia. Do not even try to collect funds owed!'" The newscaster then explains that "Representatives on both sides of the aisle said the plan was the best option left for lowering our debt after ideas like burning down the country for the insurance money and disguising the nation as Canada were deemed infeasible." I ask the students why it seems almost comical how worried they were in 2009 about the national debt. There's a pause. Then one student raises his hand, and answers, ruefully, "Because it was only $10 trillion back then." The students want to know how we--the allegedly responsible adults – could have done this to them. I list some of the reasons: On the larger political reasons, I ask, "Have you ever seen your parents argue when one wanted to buy something?" Some hands come up. A girl volunteers that a couple years ago her parents had a long running argument – mom wanted to buy a new refrigerator, and dad said, "We can't afford it". They were mad at each other. "What happened? How did they resolve the conflict?", I ask. "They bought a new one. I think they put it on their credit card." "Well, there's your answer."
