Which, obviously to some, is not a problem solved by firing teachers for posting homemade porn.
But that’s not what she was fired for so I see it as a complete non sequitur for this thread.
@chela do you accept that there is no evidence here of a current teacher creating any “inappropriate entanglement”?
If that is an accurate quote then it is an example of cynical but savvy and likely effective marketing by a full time pornography performer. She had no such entanglement while a teacher and I read no one here who is in support such public statements by a current teacher.
Physical entanglements between one of the educators in question with a current student, no, that is not been reported or corroborated by witnesses.
Any evidence of any inappropriate entanglement while she was a teacher?
Any evidence of a desire to have their pornographic careers to openly accepted, shared, discussed and normalized in a k-12 setting?
Pretty much I am reading that the individuals, and those advocating that they should have been allowed to continue to teach, are against discussion or sharing of their sexual entertainment career in the educational setting.
They may preferred to keep it on the down low and yet somehow their moonlighting gig was exposed and now the school district is entangled with the issue and it’s being discussed by the community, administrators teachers and students.
This is the thing. Ultimately, as a committed civil libertarian, I’m gonna come down on the ACLU’s side about defending individual rights. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t some important gray areas here.
So far, AFAICT, nobody has challenged the idea that the ethical principle requiring that the details of adult sexual activity should be kept private from schoolchildren is a valid and desirable community standard. There needs to be a pretty strong firewall between adults and children when it comes to sexual activity, especially in the case of adults in positions of authority and/or responsibility for children.
There’s no threat to that firewall in civil-liberties protections of categories such as race, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity etc., AFAICT. But ISTM that the line gets a bit fuzzier when we’re talking about commercial involvement in online pornography where success is closely linked to publicity and marketing for explicit sexual content.
Totally agree, but ISTM that that’s illustrative of a potential conflict of interest for a teacher qua teacher and qua pornography performer.
It’s commercially advantageous for the porn performer to stir up publicity with titillating suggestions about hypothetical transgressive “hot-for-teacher”-type activities that a lot of her customers or potential customers would find appealingly spicy. And, of course, it’s 100% unethical for the teacher to even hint at such activities being in any way possible or acceptable.
That, ISTM, is a very different situation from a teacher having, say, a same-sex or interracial partner in their personal life. In those cases, obviously the civil-liberties protections for the teacher’s individual rights should override any existing community “standards” opposing interracial or same-sex relationships.
But the conflict-of-interest-in-commercial-activity bit I’m not so sure about.
Which does not have a bearing in this case because the teacher in question is not the one that made it public. So maybe those adults that told their kids about the teacher are the ones that deserve to be fired?
Yes. And while employed as a teacher the teacher respected that firewall, attempting to keep their two identities very separate. As has been pointed out the violators of that firewall were the ones who “outed” her, bringing her sexual activity into the educational space. And the board for facilitating even encouraging its entanglement in the educational community space.
Indeed there is a potential conflict of interest. And indeed with that conflict removed the former teacher can ethically, even if ickily, capitalize on her former teacher identity. No conflict now that she is no longer a teacher.
A teacher doing porn who does teacher student fantasy work advertising that they are a “real teacher” would be I think not in a gray area. Then the entanglement is their responsibility.
Are you under the impression that this thread is only for discussing one specific case?
I am under the impression that this thread is about teachers being fired for being caught doing porn not
Teachers discussing having sex with current students OR
Teachers talking about their sexual life to students
Those are strawmen
As far as I can tell, the only empirical evidence for or against the proposition that a history in porn can affect the classroom is the evidence I posted, in post #772.
As I wrote in that post, I think it supports my position.
Your assertion notwithstanding.
Saint_Cad, I re-read all 70 of your posts in this thread. The closest you came to offering evidence that making porn won’t affect a teacher’s job performance is this:
and this:
See, you admit there would be disruption! Now tell me teachers have a day or two to spare on such distractions.
In all seriousness, I appreciated that second response. I’m trying my best to address your points, and not simply dismiss you. But it’s time somebody told you. That’s not even anecdotal evidence. It’s speculation. In your 25 years of teaching, have you actually experienced a situation where the students found out the teacher was in porn? I found and posted testimony of teachers who actually experienced that situation, and they said it disrupted their classrooms. It disrupted the whole school. Not just for a day or two, either. And that was where the teacher hadn’t made porn in years, and where she was placed on leave as soon as the rumors were confirmed. I have every reason to believe there would be more disruption - of education - if the teacher had continued working.
I’ve fleshed out my position pretty well. I explained some of the philosophical underpinnings behind my opinion. I played hypotheticals but I also cited real evidence. I laid out what it would take to convince me I’m wrong. As of yet I my participation has reinforced my opinion. I don’t think I have any more cards to play, unless you (or someone else) introduces a new angle.
If you want this discussion to continue, you have to give me more to go off than an empty claim of “many counterexamples”, a mistaken belief that I lack any evidence, and the unsupported assertion that all my premises are wrong.
~Max
Did you stop reading there? The next paragraph:
So, yes: prurient prudes and sensationalist media will absolutely disrupt schools every chance they get. The solution to that is to tamp down on prurient prudes and sensationalist media.
As I wrote, that document is probably the closest you will ever get to evidence either for or against. I don’t think it’s a slam dunk and I noted the strongest paragraph for my position. If you go back a couple pages, where I thought I linked the doc to, the testimony of the students is much less pointed.
However I do still think it helps more than hurts my position. That some teachers didn’t report as much disruption in class doesn’t detract from the others. And I’m not predisposed to clamp down on the media, nor local prudes.
~Max
If they’re the ones disrupting education, I’m absolutely predisposed to do that. Not through like law enforcement, but through public outrage at their interference with the schools. They should be made to feel ashamed for their behavior.
How? I mean, they have civil liberties too, right?
The consistent point in this discussion is that they do not have civil liberties within the classroom.
The teacher part time performer would be very wrong to cross lines between their jobs; their sexual life is not something for them to bring up in the classroom and they should ramp down any discussion of it.
The other teachers are free to discuss it as much as they want when they are not in performance of their professional roles but in the classroom their job is to teach. Discussion should be going no farther than stating that every teacher here has a life outside of the classroom and their choices outside of the classroom are none of any of concern. Discussion of it in this classroom will not be tolerated further. Now back to discussing photosynthesis… (Okay, if it is English class and they are reading The Scarlet Letter it could get tricky …)
Here is the rub. There are likely extremely few communities in which that “for shame, think of the children” will be the loudest set of voices.
I remain unsure how much a local school board can or even should be completely unresponsive to what appears in the moment to be an overwhelming community (and voter) response.
You are missing the point. If the criterium you are using is: “Teacher did action X and it caused disruption in the classroom therefore they are an ineffectual teacher then they should be fired.” then yes, in my career I have seen many many teachers do that and NOT get fired. Therefore by my empirical evidence that is not a standard used to fire teachers
I agree with your assessment.
In my opinion, the main issue is this: if a teacher’s behavior outside the classroom negatively impacts the students’ learning from that teacher, they should not be allowed to teach in that school.
I respect teachers. I was a student for 22 years, so I appreciate their work. I withdrew from this debate when it was pointed out that only the teachers’ perspective mattered. However, upon further reflection, I think the students’ perspective is more important.
It is understandable that teachers may not realize how much ridicule they face from students when they are involved in a scandal. Teachers are the last ones to know the students’ “dirty secrets”. They are mocked behind their backs.
As a student, I witnessed some teachers who were involved in scandals (not necessarily porn, but similar situations), and the mockery lasted more than a day or two. Sometimes it lasted much longer, and spread beyond the classroom, to the whole school. Once a derogatory nickname is assigned to a teacher by students, it takes on a life of it’s own, though the teacher may be left unaware. Kids are sneaky.
I don’t think being involved in a scandal affects a teacher’s ability to teach (they may still be excellent teachers), but the crucial question is whether it affects the students’ ability to learn. Not surprisingly, I can find no studies on the effects scandalized teachers on students ability to learn, but it’s not a stretch to believe it has an adverse effect.
Whether we like it or not, teachers are role models for students, especially young ones. I think they are second only to parents in terms of role models. Parents cannot be fired for being sex workers, but I think if a child finds out their parent is a sex worker, it would have a negative effect on their psychological well being in many cases. And I don’t think teaching is the only profession that should be accountable for what we as a society still consider scandalous behavior. Other professions whose members are role models for children should also be accountable, such as police officers and professional athletes (Michael Vick is an example).
Students’ ability to learn is the primary factor in whether or not a teacher should be fired from a teaching position. But, the effect on children of being exposed to porn at an early age should also be considered.
Consider the impact of porn on children’s development, sexuality, attitudes and beliefs. There is evidence that early exposure to pornography can have negative effects on children, such as increasing their interest in extreme or violent forms of pornography, reducing their empathy for rape victims, normalizing promiscuity and infidelity, devaluing marriage and parenthood, and influencing their gender stereotypes and expectations. Moreover, there is a risk that children who discover that their teacher is involved in porn may be more likely to access porn themselves, either out of curiosity or peer pressure.
Therefore, it’s reasonable to expect that teachers who are involved in porn should refrain from teaching, at least temporarily, until the situation is resolved. This would protect the students from potential harm, as well as the teacher from unwanted exposure or harassment. However, this does not mean that teachers who are involved in porn should be shamed or stigmatized. They should be offered support and guidance, and given the opportunity to resume teaching if they quit their side gig and after the scandal subsides. Alternatively, they could be offered a non-teaching position in the school that does not involve direct contact with students, such as an administrator or a counselor.
The main goal of this approach is to balance the rights and interests of both teachers and students, while taking into account the evidence on the effects of porn on children. It’s not intended to be punitive or judgmental, but rather preventive and supportive.
The debate continues on the harmful effects of porn on kids. Here are a few articles/studies on the subject.