First, thank you for finally answering the question.
Secondly… I disagree with your premise that committing a felony proves poor judgment. I particularly disagree with your premise because of the way you came to it and what I pointed out earlier, meaning - you know what the activity is, you know it’s illegal - it doesn’t make any sense that the legislature’s label of criminal degree is the make or break issue. Her judgment is better-less bad-up for debate if the legislature decided that prostitution is a misdemeanor why?
Third: what if this educator has been doing a bang up job for years? You’re going to let this new knowledge, considered int he light of the legislature’s labels, drive you to fire her, rather than rely on YOUR judgment and observation that she is an excellent teacher?
All due respect, I think that speaks ill of YOUR judgment.
I wonder how possible it is for the people in this thread who view prostitution so negatively to imagine for a moment the possibility that prostitution itself is really not the problem that leads to all the negative consequences, it’s the attitudes and beliefs our society has about it.
I only saw the first episode, but if you watch “Firefly” you’ll see what I mean…
It’s not a matter of seeking role models. All teachers function as role models for children, whether anyone wants them to, or thinks they should, or not. There’s no possibility, IMO, of children spending that much time with any adult without them being a role model (among others).
Actually, I don’t have the research at the ready, but there is some in existence which points to the idea that in the end, the only REAL, significant, meaningful role models the vast majority of people really “model” themselves after are their parents.
Over a lifetime, of course parents typically have the most influence–but children pick things up everywhere. I suspect that parents’ choices determining which other adults their kids are exposed to, and how, matters as much as any other decision parents make.
Dear God people! This women wasn’t a street-walker, she wasn’t trading sex for drugs, she wasn’t smuggled to the 'states in a shipping container by Angolan cartels.
She was a student who decided to supplement her income by having kinky fun she arranged for herself on the Internet. I don’t see what the fuck is wrong with this, and genuinely many tertiary students, regardless of sex, dabble in similar activities. Would the moral outrage by lessened if this woman had arranged for a casual fuck-buddy on Craigslist? Because that’s essentially what this is, except with the added bonus of money changing hands.
I also don’t understand how anyone can endorse the notion that a teacher who advocates for changing unjust laws is unworthy of being in a classroom. Advocating for social policy reform is precisely the kind of action I’d love to see more teachers engaged in, if only they weren’t so dreadfully overworked and underpaid.
(My girlfriend isn’t a sex worker, but she is a preschool teacher - genuinely one of the most gifted, dedicated, naturally talented, compassionate and empathetic teachers I’ve ever seen working in a classroom. We get up to all sorts of fun in the bedroom - some of which was, until a couple of decades ago, illegal in our state. Should my girlfriend have been fired for writing a letter to the editor supporting the repeal of anti-homosexuality laws had she lived twenty years ago? Or would she have been a dirty slattern who should be driven out of town?)
How many people in this thread know sex workers personally? Have them as friends? Are involved with advocacy groups? Are in any way informed about the issues facing sex workers and discrimination in the developed world? Because some of the attitudes displayed in this thread are terribly misogynistic and oppressive, particularly for a board which claims to be “fighting ignorance”.
I’m not advocating putting her in jail, I’m saying I don’t want my kids taught by a teacher who was a hooker and advocates for the legalization of prostitution.
These are simply not the values I want my children to be exposed to in the form of a role model like a teacher.
Because we’re establishing a rule here. In some places, prostitution is legal. In those places, obviously it’s no big deal for an ex- (or current) prostitute to be a teacher.
In some places, it’s a misdemeanor. In those places, it’s not a big deal either. The locals have determined that they don’t much care about prostitution, so I would no more advocate firing a hooker-teacher in those places than I would someone convicted of, say, public intoxication.
In some places, it’s a felony. In those places, the locals clearly consider it a Very Big Deal. The point is that people have a right to decide how severe given crimes are, and public schools have a duty to consider that information in employment.
Who said I view prostitution negatively? I happen to think prostitution should be legal , and that anyone who argues otherwise is dumb. Hell, it’s already legal, just so long as you label it correctly.
However, I certainly do not think that prostitution is some sort of fundamental right, and that we should take to the streets in support of sex workers.
Can you give an example of what you mean by this? I’m assuming you mean “my kids” instead of “by kids” in the above quote by the way. Are you under the impression that the teacher was talking to the children about prostitution? There was an article she wrote and a website she maintained outside of her school time and without the student’s knowledge.
And abstracting away from the facts of this particular case, would you object to a state employee joining a protest of state actions? Why or why not?
Advocating for law reform and publicizing the fact that you broke the law aren’t quite the same thing.
It’s not even like she was engaging in civil disobedience; she didn’t openly pick up some johns for the purpose of making a political statement. She had sex for money and later decided to politicize it.
Well the civil disobedience comes in by publicizing what she did. She could have supported legalization and said nothing more; or indeed just said nothing. But neither of those actions is as impactful as her standing there and saying that not only does she approve of legalization, but also she is an ex-hooker herself. It’s similar to civil disobedience because she knew it would attract negative responses, and that it was risky to her to be public about it. But she chose to accept that risk to publicize the cause.
And before anyone starts about having to be willing to pay the cost - to me civil disobedience is about the risk, not the actual penalty.
I’m not arguing from some civil disobedience perspective – I’m asking, in direct response to Damuri Ajashi, why teachers should not be allowed to advocate for law reform (on their own time and away from the classroom) when other members of the community apparently can.
I’m also not arguing that her firing was illegal - I’m not familiar with the laws or codes of conduct regarding teaching in her state. What I am arguing is that the perspectives evinced towards women, sex, teachers and sex work by many contributors to this thread are regressive and prudish; and that such attitudes contribute to the continuing oppression of women and ongoing stigmatisation of (healthy, consenting, educated and unexploited) sex workers in society.
Only if you instill “your kid” with the view that sex is wrong.
I bet if she’d been a white woman who’d married a black man the kids would tease her about being a nigger-lover too - let’s just fire her and save everyone the hassle.
There’s no risk involved here. She can’t be subject to criminal charges. She may have lost her job, but risk of losing one’s job would be a rather novel aspect of civil disobedience.
What perspectives specifically are you referring to?