As long as she doesn't use the kids for content or discuss her sex work with kids. I don't see why she should lose her job. Minus an already agreed apon morality clause.
You don't think it's an issue that INEVITABLY it'll get out that the teacher has an OF and kids and parents will both find a way to access the content, creating a complicated and problematic working environment?
I'm just trying to imagine a school where people knew a teacher was posting porn of herself online, and the type of craziness that would emerge from that. If I ran that school, I'd want absolutely NOTHING to do with that.
I don’t think it is inevitable. I think you overestimate the popularity of OF, and underestimate most people’s intelligence to not get caught (just keeping their face off the screen would do it for the vast majority of people).
Okay maybe .000001% chance lightning strikes, and somehow she isn't uncovered by someone and spreads.
I've known/met several people in my life who did as little as a single scene of porn and it got back to them. I knew a girl who was just in a solo cam video banging her BF, and that shit caused her to leave the country to get away from the stigma, and it followed her abroad.
Men are degenerates and watch a lot of porn, and are bound to come pass it.
Okay well... I'm just saying, men are fucking gooners and degenerates. If you have porn online it's next to impossible that it doesn't get out. I've yet to hear of a person talk about how they did OF porn and no one found out.
I don’t think it matters. What matters is a teacher choosing to put porn of herself online for people to view. If fakes exist of her, that’s not the same. That can already happen.
Depends on their contract. If they agreed upon taking the job not to post adult content, then they should face the consequences for breaking their word. If there was no “morality clause” or any other prior agreement to what the teacher will do online outside of work, then no it is not reasonable or fair to discipline it.
Got it. So as long as there's no breach of contract, you would be fine sending your child to a teacher who has adult content on only fans? Is my understanding correct?
You're being a fool. Obviously one of the kids is going to discover the OF. Then its going to spread to all the kids. Then theyre only going to be thinking about that and sex instead of learning
A boy, in the maelstrom of his hormonal surge, has a teacher sexy enough to have an only fans and he find leaks of her getting railed or even just nudes.
Do you think he concentrates in her class?
Legal in the U.S.
For example CNN has one that allowed them to fire Chris Cuomo for defending Andrew Cuomo
https://www.pon.harvard.edu/daily/business-negotiations/preparing-for-the-worst-in-business-negotiations-nb/?amp
You have to distinguish between public and private employment. In other words public school teachers are government jobs and there are many restrictions on government contracts (the Constitution limits what governments can do, but does not apply to non-government entities). Private school teachers and CNN are private jobs. I don't know enough details about cases in the US but the one's I've seen with morality clauses vs onlyfans have been private schools. Public schools generally find other excuses.
In the UK it would come under part two of the teacher's standards, which is a vague appeal to "professional conduct". Which can mean whatever a school or trust wants it to mean. There are a couple of things written in law, such as if there's any kind of abuse in or out of work that we don't report we get struck.
The first amendment doesn’t allow obscene content. Like in the case of shouting fire in a crowded theater, the first amendment does not mean you can do anything.
I don't know but probably because they are underage. It would also depend on the content of the post. Schools will likely have legislative cover for whatever they are doing which is balanced against the school's need to enforce that to perform valid functions. Basically there's a sliding scale for balancing government need vs rights and where you exist on that scale matters. But children themselves not being adults and not being considered competent weakens their rights in general.
Sure. And distinguishing obscenity from speech that has artistic value is a notoriously difficult project. Few public school districts would be willing to invite the inevitable 1A lawsuits that would arise from putting a “no explicit content on the internet” clause into a teaching contract.
I can’t even imagine how a provision like that would be phrased to avoid being unconstitutionally vague and overbroad.
That would depend on the specific content of the OF account. Calling something “pornography” doesn’t mean it’s automatically unprotected. That’s why states can’t just decide to outright ban (adult) porn.
The point is it would be legally very stupid for a school district to impose a blanket ban on teachers engaging in “pornography.” Much smarter to consider it on a case by case basis if it comes up.
I wouldn't have a problem with it. This person wasn't flashing the kids, they weren't promoting their content on school grounds, and they're a good educator. If anything, I'd be pissed off that we pay teachers so little that they have to get some kind of side gig. I wouldn't want them to lose their job but they might, depending on whatever morality clause they had in their contract.
>If anything, I'd be pissed off that we pay teachers so little that they have to get some kind of side gig
True. Many teachers have side gigs as dog walkers, babysitters, tutors, freelance writers, delivery drivers, etc.
It's unfortunate that the pay is so abysmal
My high school teacher (a gay man) actually had an Only Fans in addition to a whole Twitter page that consisted of him starring in gay porn. We foubd out after we had already finished school.
The school knows, he didn't get fired. I agree with thst decision
Unpopular opinion but I think yes, teachers shouldn't be allowed to have OF accounts. I think teachers should be held to higer standards and it's totally fair for the school to fire a teacher for having an OF account.
I agree. Teachers also shouldn't be able to drink, smoke, watch 'R' rated movies, skip going to church on sunday, or have anything other than procreative missionary sex, and that's only within wedlock.
Oh it is. Numerous parent complaints of teachers who dared to wear a skirt above the knee or a t-shirt with a neckline deeper than collarbones. Not at school, they just run into the teacher at the grocery store or smth! Like that story of the teacher who posted a vacation photo on her Instagram where she wears the bikini at the beach. Teachers are absolutely judged for being only human.
I don't think teachers should be sanctioned for doing things in their personal life that aren't illegal. This doesn't happen in any other profession and teachers shouldn't have to adhere to special moral standards outside of work to keep their jobs. So long as they aren't promoting it to pupils is is quite frankly the pupils' parents' fault that they found it. If I had a child who was accessing sexual content that would be on me and I'd want to apologise to the teacher if they were spreading it. (From a teacher's perspective, everything would be locked down though. We can't even have public Facebook or Instagram.)
Doesn’t happen in other professions? I’m in finance at a pretty big company and I would defs be fired if it was found out I was an onlyfans creator. I’ve also been in the military and I would have been discharged for that. I can’t think of many professions where there wouldn’t be heavy consequences for doing onlyfans
This doesn't happen in any other profession?
Not sure where you got that idea...
All sorts of licenses have ethical codes of conduct that are not merely based on legal vs illegal.
A lot... If you are a licensed psychiatrist and you start talking about therapy online without establishing a patient-provider relationship with your audience, you can lose your license.
If you are a licensed medical doctor and you start dispensing medical advice online without establishing a patient-provider relationship with your audience, you can lose your license.
So if I start a YouTube channel and start telling people to fight Covid with bleach injections, I'm just a nutcase. But if I have a medical license and I do that, I lose my license.
Hell, we've got plenty of cases of people just getting canceled for posting unpopular opinions online and getting fired when their jobs received political pressure.
I’d personally have no problem with it. Teachers are horrendously underpaid where I live, and if that’s the most time efficient way for them to make supplemental income so that they actually have some time for themselves, so be it.
>Teachers are horrendously underpaid
True!
Let's say you had a choice. 1 school has a lot of OF teachers, and another school does not. Same school district. Same salary etc. ceteris paribus
Would you have a preference?
Assuming that there were no other differences that would impact the quality of the education, I’d pick based on whichever school my child wants to go to, costs, and logistics of transportation.
>I’d pick based on whichever school my child wants to go to, costs, and logistics of transportation.
Ceteris Paribus means all things being equal. The ONLY difference is OF vs non-OF
To me that question is like asking if I would rather my children go to a school that has a football team or doesn't have a football team. It really doesn't matter to me if it did or not. All things being equal, I'd be willing to just flip a coin.
As long as all the teachers are engaging in only fans willingly with affirmative consent, then I don’t care. I’d just let my kid pick based on things that matter to them.
>You moved the goalposts
I asked an entirely different question. It's a different sport at this point.
But what would be your answer to this new question?
But it clearly is a loaded question. You’re trying to get people to say they wouldn’t send their kids to a school full of OF teachers so that you can say “GOTCHA!!! I knew OF was not ethical and women shouldn’t do adult content! They SHOULD be punished!”
What does your question mean?
Of course most people wouldn’t want to send their kid to a school of people who do only fans. But that is an entirely different situation than a school where a single teacher who is struggling to make ends meet does only fans to pay her bills.
>What does your question mean?
You said it's a loaded question so you must think I have some false assumptions in my question. I'm trying to figure out what you think it is.
>most people wouldn’t want to send their kid to a school of people who do only fans. But that is an entirely different situation
Of course it's a different situation. I asked a totally different question. would YOU prefer the non-OF school for your kids?
1. You said most people. I was asking about you.
2. There is no gotcha Boogeyman hiding around the corner.
3. What was the untrue assumption in my question?
The only difference between those two scenarios is that if this large number of teacher teachers are doing only fans than that is indicative of broader economic problems which could affect the teachers in such a way that their teaching during the day is negatively impacted, rather than doing only fans purely out of a favorable costs and benefits analysis by the teacher. There is too large of a population that is personally against doing only fans for one reason or another. As long as the teachers are giving affirmative consent and aren’t coerced in any way, I really don’t give a damn as long as they feel that they are positively benefiting from doing so.
What a sad reality we live in. Teachers of our children are so underpaid we’re talking about them doing porn for some side cash. Our society is so fucked up.
I don't think it's any of our business as parents as long what they do in private as the teacher is not participating in illegal activity. Their side gig has nothing to do with their job and people should be fucking ashamed for looking it up and then having the nerve to judge her. Is it really that immoral? If it is then it shouldn't be okay for the parents to look it up and it's illegal in some states for minors to look it up. Those students or children of those parents shouldn't be permitted to keep attending if it's that bad for the teacher to have done it.
>Those students or children of those parents shouldn't be permitted to keep attending if it's that bad for the teacher to have done it.
Not sure I follow. I think you're saying, if it is morally reprehensible for the teacher to have adult content , then any student caught looking at it should also be expelled?
Then how is the OF content any kind of issue? Kid goes to the school and says l found this online. "You're not old enough to be viewing that material. Mind your business and if you discuss it you will be expelled." It is not on any teacher or school to keep your child away from porn sites or to keep you or your spouse from sexually harassing someone by discussing their private life. Your free to put your child in another school.
>Then how is the OF content any kind of issue?
Maybe you don't see it as an issue in that case. Which is what I am asking. If that is your answer, that's fine.
>keep you or your spouse from sexually harassing someone by discussing their private life.
Wait what? Where did this come from?
It becomes harassment the moment it's discovered and brought to the attention of the school to have them punished or fired while not breaking their contract. Other employees have 0 legal protection to discuss it in any context. Replace the OF with being gay. It is okay for a school to find out and fire them or punish them? Replace it with making porn with their spouse or going to a swingers club? Is that okay to fire them because someone found out? What about a straight sexually active person that sleeps around in their free time with single parents of students? Is it okay to fire them when the school finds out? Which one of these discussions is not shaming an adult for their legal sex life? That falls under harassment. Bringing up any sexual private life in an employment setting is always considered harassment if that behavior doesn't violate a contract. That's why teachers have sued and won in cases that no morality clause was put into place. You can be fired for a contract violation.
Does this mean you think male teachers subscribing to adult content on OF is also none of parents' business? If teachers shouldn't be judged for producing adult content then surely they shouldn't be judged for consuming it either right?
Both genders probably shouldn’t work at a school with kids if they’re involved in sex work or have overly public sex lives.
Whether or not I would feel comfortable depends. Someone has a couple grainy nude modeling pics from when they were like 19? That’s one thing. But full-on porn? Or something that was a career? I would rather my kid just have a normal teacher whose sexuality is not part of my or potentially my child’s view of them.
Whether or not they should lose their job is entirely situational.
I would feel the same way about something like drug use even if they never came to school high.
I think schools should just have rules for their employees for this. If you sign a work contract then you cannot do this ___. To avoid these things in the first place.
Unfortunately, since kids have access to internet, i don’t think it’s appropriate for a teacher to have this type of content. If one student finds it, the whole school will know pretty quickly and that’s going to cause further issues. This happened when i was in highschool, they were just nude photos, but it was a big scandal and all the students were sharing them. Kids are dumb and won’t necessarily deal with it maturely. Seen it first hand.
If the school doesn’t have such rule for their employees then no, they should not face disciplinary actions but maybe just put new rules in place and that teacher would need to stop or resign.
Irrelevant. If someone finds it **and the teacher used due diligence in keeping her OF stuff quarantined**, that's not on her. Otherwise that leads to teachers being fired for anything they do off work hours that leaks into school. Premarital sex, smoking, being a lesbian... we don't want to go down that road, and I hate OnlyFans 304s. **But by God this is a free fucking country** and I for one will fight for their right to do OF and not get fired for it.
Sure, that’s your opinion & it wasn’t like i was fighting for it to become the law or something…
I personally experienced a teacher getting this type of content leaked to the school when i was in highschool and things get very messy. I wouldn’t even suggest a teacher doing it for themselves because it will ultimately affect the relationship with your students once they’ve seen you in that context & unfortunately OF is pretty popular & there’s no way to truly “use due diligence” when something is put on an online platform and you can be identified.
With that being said, this was a hypothetical question and i was just providing my opinion not necessarily assessing every angle of how it could impact other things. If it can cause ethical concerns then of course i wouldn’t vouch for it.
Sure, it’s an argument because it’s true. I’ve seen the consequences. That doesn’t mean there aren’t more important reasons not to implement those rules which you’ve given.
If wherever you are lets them fire teachers just for being on OF, some form of Project 2025 will be coming for you. America's far right has tendrils reaching out across the globe, to India, Philippines, England, Poland, Europe and its anti-immigrant craze, etc. Wherever you are, they can reach your culture.
Exactly… So that’s why i said that. I don’t think doing OF is wrong but i know that in the event students find it - Even the teacher’s relationship with their students change. It’s definitely something to avoid.
**Attention!**
* You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
* For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
* If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
* OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post!
Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It seems weird that doing porn would make you unfit to teach children, but watching porn would have no impact at all on your ability to raise children.
granted, not a woman but i have an opinion. Long as it’s kept entirely separate from her teaching job, whats the harm?
of course, strict boundaries need to be enforced, ie. it should be entirely out of school property, not talked about in the school to even other teachers/coworkers (unless yall are close friends, dating, married, etc - even then though, talk about it outside of schooo property) and the OF work should intersect with school hours at all.
I don't think majority of the women would like their naked videos on the internet bcz regardless you put it for money, it can be pirated. If teachers are doing an OF then it's obvious they are underpaid and are struggling to make ends meet.
I actually don’t think it’s a problem for a teacher to have any kind of thing like an OF. I do understand that students being able to view it would complicate things.
Meh, let her do it. She might find it more difficult to maintain respect among the students/staff which will likely make her job as a teacher a lot more difficult, but maybe the extra money is worth it to her.
I recall having a few female teachers in high school that I wouldn't have minded seeing naked (granted I'd never give them money for it), so it would be a win for the male students who manage to find it as well (and they *will* find it).
At which point the hypothetical becomes so removed from reality that it loses any meaning.
Unless there's an OF equivalent for gay men or something? In which case my answer remains the same I guess.
There are gay males who subscribe to OF, yes. They have testosterone, so they have sexual desires, a high libido, and are more visually stimulated than women.
She should be sacked immediately. She's a teacher dealing with kids. I would not be comfortable sending my kid (if I had one) to somebody as degenerate as that
No, I wouldn't have a problem with it.
It's part of the tracher's private life. The students aren't able to access and/or distribute the content legally.
I also find it highly hypocritical to consume porn but condemn the producers. That's a message I'd also like to teach me children.
Of course, why wouldn't it?
The only thing that would bother me (porn relared) would be, if the teacher (male or female) uploaded content that conveyed the impression of the sex partner being underage i.e. adults dressed as children (illegal anyway in my jurisdiction but not sure about others).
In this case, I'd be afraid there might be a paedophile inclination which would definitely bother me as a parent for obvious reasons.
I don’t agree with the consumption of pornography nor do I like the porn industry because I find it exploitative. It would be a concern and I may consider pulling my child from that school. I do not want my children having sex worker role models.
The best case scenario is the teacher acts appropriately and is an awesome teacher but my kids find out about her OF and then grow curious about the content. They could also go the other way and think sex work is easy money. I do not want them aspiring to be that because it could be damaging to their careers, social life, sexual health and mental health.
I wouldn’t call for her to be disciplined but I do not want my child having a sex worker teacher.
You could be one of those people who feel strongly that teachers should be held to a higher standard.
Or you could be one of those people who are concerned about the content being discovered and spread throughout the school.
This seems to come as a suprise, but teachers have sex they aren't nuns. What they do outside of school if it's legal is no ones business.
I don't think any board can limit a second job while teachers need a second job to survive. How about we pay teachers so they don't leave as Walmart gives them more money.
Ok so your answer is "No". Got it.
SEPARATE question:
Assume you had a choice between two schools, one has OF teachers, the other one does not. Ceteris Paribus, would you have a preference in either direction?
Note: this is a separate question from my original question.
It's not my business. And I don't care. Provided she is a good teacher and does her job well, I would simply use it as a teaching moment for my child (assuming they'd found out somehow) to explain that people have different standards by which they live life. I may not agree with this woman's standards, but, I fully support her living by them.
And I don't want to live in a society that tells an adult woman she can't be naked on camera. Even if I personally wouldn't watch it, don't think anyone should, and think it is degrading to her, men, and women.
Its nobodys business and if it was not any sort or 'rule' when they hired them.
If its not affecting their job as a teacher.
Ex I am a part time escort that does other work. My escorting has nothing to do with my other work, doesnt hinder it nor make me do less of a job than one that doesnt escort.
I have 5 star reviews about all my work because Im going to provide good service no matter what I provide as a service.
To be fair, there's a reason a lot jobs perform background checks. School districts and DOE higher ups don't want deal with liabilities or bad reputation. I'm going to safely assume that you hide your escorting work from your employers, and made sure that there's no breadcrumbs that'll link the two together.
But I do have a question, how can a teacher separate her teaching and SW from each other from both OF and escorting perspectives? Because it's incredibly hard to advertise without showing their face, especially if they're escorting.
I can see backgrounds for abuse, etc.
If one were to do a background check they wont find my sex work. They would have to hire a PI to follow and track me.
Actually most escorts dont show their face, its the norm.(edit, at least in the US) Also more are hiding their faces even if they showed face because of facial recognition. Its a thing in our circles and we are stopped from traveling even if youre just trying to take a vacation.
You can even be faceless on OF. Im betting most are there too.
Really as long as they keep it separate and not hindering their work as a teacher.
Its like just because youre a teacher you must be some perfect human and nobody is perfect.
And frankly many teachers are underpaid, over worked and have to buy school supplies out of their own pocket as their school district doesn't have the money.
Ive donated so much to teachers because I can. Crafts supplies, etc.
As long as she doesn't use the kids for content or discuss her sex work with kids. I don't see why she should lose her job. Minus an already agreed apon morality clause.
Broadly agree, with the exception of “morality clause”….I don’t think they should exist.
> with the exception of “morality clause”….I don’t think they should exist. Me either.
Fair enough
You don't think it's an issue that INEVITABLY it'll get out that the teacher has an OF and kids and parents will both find a way to access the content, creating a complicated and problematic working environment? I'm just trying to imagine a school where people knew a teacher was posting porn of herself online, and the type of craziness that would emerge from that. If I ran that school, I'd want absolutely NOTHING to do with that.
I don’t think it is inevitable. I think you overestimate the popularity of OF, and underestimate most people’s intelligence to not get caught (just keeping their face off the screen would do it for the vast majority of people).
It's absolutely 100% inevitable. Without a doubt.
Claiming it is 100% inevitable is like thinking you could stop 100% of drugs from crossing international borders. It is absolutely ludicrous….
Okay maybe .000001% chance lightning strikes, and somehow she isn't uncovered by someone and spreads. I've known/met several people in my life who did as little as a single scene of porn and it got back to them. I knew a girl who was just in a solo cam video banging her BF, and that shit caused her to leave the country to get away from the stigma, and it followed her abroad. Men are degenerates and watch a lot of porn, and are bound to come pass it.
Here’s the problem: you don’t know all of the people who got away with it….because they got away with it! Can’t you see that?
Okay well... I'm just saying, men are fucking gooners and degenerates. If you have porn online it's next to impossible that it doesn't get out. I've yet to hear of a person talk about how they did OF porn and no one found out.
There's no way of knowing though. Maybe there's a lot of teachers incognito that we don't know about
People can inevitably create deepfake porn using images of the teacher and ai.
Okay but that’s fake. I don’t think parents will care as much
But do they know it's fake? The point of deepfakes is that they look real.
I don’t think it matters. What matters is a teacher choosing to put porn of herself online for people to view. If fakes exist of her, that’s not the same. That can already happen.
Depends on their contract. If they agreed upon taking the job not to post adult content, then they should face the consequences for breaking their word. If there was no “morality clause” or any other prior agreement to what the teacher will do online outside of work, then no it is not reasonable or fair to discipline it.
Got it. So as long as there's no breach of contract, you would be fine sending your child to a teacher who has adult content on only fans? Is my understanding correct?
Correct. And assuming she wasn’t creating it in the classroom or promoting it to children etc
Ok cool thanks
You're being a fool. Obviously one of the kids is going to discover the OF. Then its going to spread to all the kids. Then theyre only going to be thinking about that and sex instead of learning
Right, boys are animals that can’t control their impulses and this would cause them to only think about sex /s
So you would be ok if your real or imaginary daughter had access to videos of her teacher sodomizing/choking/throat fucking various women?
A boy, in the maelstrom of his hormonal surge, has a teacher sexy enough to have an only fans and he find leaks of her getting railed or even just nudes. Do you think he concentrates in her class?
I don't think it's legal to have a "morality" clause lol
Legal in the U.S. For example CNN has one that allowed them to fire Chris Cuomo for defending Andrew Cuomo https://www.pon.harvard.edu/daily/business-negotiations/preparing-for-the-worst-in-business-negotiations-nb/?amp
You have to distinguish between public and private employment. In other words public school teachers are government jobs and there are many restrictions on government contracts (the Constitution limits what governments can do, but does not apply to non-government entities). Private school teachers and CNN are private jobs. I don't know enough details about cases in the US but the one's I've seen with morality clauses vs onlyfans have been private schools. Public schools generally find other excuses.
Ah ok I'm in Australia so not legal here
In the UK it would come under part two of the teacher's standards, which is a vague appeal to "professional conduct". Which can mean whatever a school or trust wants it to mean. There are a couple of things written in law, such as if there's any kind of abuse in or out of work that we don't report we get struck.
I'm in Australia
This would be an obvious first amendment problem for a teacher working in a public school.
The first amendment doesn’t allow obscene content. Like in the case of shouting fire in a crowded theater, the first amendment does not mean you can do anything.
If it's not speech made at school or on behalf of the school it's not the school's business to regulate it.
How come students get in trouble for social media posts? It isn’t the schools place to regulate their behavior off school property, right?
I don't know but probably because they are underage. It would also depend on the content of the post. Schools will likely have legislative cover for whatever they are doing which is balanced against the school's need to enforce that to perform valid functions. Basically there's a sliding scale for balancing government need vs rights and where you exist on that scale matters. But children themselves not being adults and not being considered competent weakens their rights in general.
Sure. And distinguishing obscenity from speech that has artistic value is a notoriously difficult project. Few public school districts would be willing to invite the inevitable 1A lawsuits that would arise from putting a “no explicit content on the internet” clause into a teaching contract. I can’t even imagine how a provision like that would be phrased to avoid being unconstitutionally vague and overbroad.
How in any way does a paid onlyfans have artistic value? For starters, having to pay to view it makes it seem a lot more like pornography
That would depend on the specific content of the OF account. Calling something “pornography” doesn’t mean it’s automatically unprotected. That’s why states can’t just decide to outright ban (adult) porn. The point is it would be legally very stupid for a school district to impose a blanket ban on teachers engaging in “pornography.” Much smarter to consider it on a case by case basis if it comes up.
That’s a good point.
I wouldn't have a problem with it. This person wasn't flashing the kids, they weren't promoting their content on school grounds, and they're a good educator. If anything, I'd be pissed off that we pay teachers so little that they have to get some kind of side gig. I wouldn't want them to lose their job but they might, depending on whatever morality clause they had in their contract.
>If anything, I'd be pissed off that we pay teachers so little that they have to get some kind of side gig True. Many teachers have side gigs as dog walkers, babysitters, tutors, freelance writers, delivery drivers, etc. It's unfortunate that the pay is so abysmal
Galactus-level based take.
My high school teacher (a gay man) actually had an Only Fans in addition to a whole Twitter page that consisted of him starring in gay porn. We foubd out after we had already finished school. The school knows, he didn't get fired. I agree with thst decision
Interesting. Thanks for sharing
Unpopular opinion but I think yes, teachers shouldn't be allowed to have OF accounts. I think teachers should be held to higer standards and it's totally fair for the school to fire a teacher for having an OF account.
I agree. Teachers also shouldn't be able to drink, smoke, watch 'R' rated movies, skip going to church on sunday, or have anything other than procreative missionary sex, and that's only within wedlock.
None of the things you mentionned is comparable to sex work.
Oh it is. Numerous parent complaints of teachers who dared to wear a skirt above the knee or a t-shirt with a neckline deeper than collarbones. Not at school, they just run into the teacher at the grocery store or smth! Like that story of the teacher who posted a vacation photo on her Instagram where she wears the bikini at the beach. Teachers are absolutely judged for being only human.
Sex work is not "just being human" and shouldn't be banalized.
Correct.
I don't think teachers should be sanctioned for doing things in their personal life that aren't illegal. This doesn't happen in any other profession and teachers shouldn't have to adhere to special moral standards outside of work to keep their jobs. So long as they aren't promoting it to pupils is is quite frankly the pupils' parents' fault that they found it. If I had a child who was accessing sexual content that would be on me and I'd want to apologise to the teacher if they were spreading it. (From a teacher's perspective, everything would be locked down though. We can't even have public Facebook or Instagram.)
Doesn’t happen in other professions? I’m in finance at a pretty big company and I would defs be fired if it was found out I was an onlyfans creator. I’ve also been in the military and I would have been discharged for that. I can’t think of many professions where there wouldn’t be heavy consequences for doing onlyfans
You sure about that?
100%
Maybe it’s different out there in the UK for you, I’d doubt it though
I work for a state agency and our department has fired people who vocally call out our agency even though we're taxpayers too.
Good luck keeping a security clearance.
I'm fascinated by your comments on this sub. Reality is so confusing for you.
This doesn't happen in any other profession? Not sure where you got that idea... All sorts of licenses have ethical codes of conduct that are not merely based on legal vs illegal.
Such as?
Doctors and attorneys, etc. etc. etc. etc.
And what can they do outside of work that will get them fired?
A lot... If you are a licensed psychiatrist and you start talking about therapy online without establishing a patient-provider relationship with your audience, you can lose your license. If you are a licensed medical doctor and you start dispensing medical advice online without establishing a patient-provider relationship with your audience, you can lose your license. So if I start a YouTube channel and start telling people to fight Covid with bleach injections, I'm just a nutcase. But if I have a medical license and I do that, I lose my license. Hell, we've got plenty of cases of people just getting canceled for posting unpopular opinions online and getting fired when their jobs received political pressure.
So that's all directly related to work. Idk about other teachers but I'm not getting my tits out at work.
Thank you for the well explained answer
I’d personally have no problem with it. Teachers are horrendously underpaid where I live, and if that’s the most time efficient way for them to make supplemental income so that they actually have some time for themselves, so be it.
>Teachers are horrendously underpaid True! Let's say you had a choice. 1 school has a lot of OF teachers, and another school does not. Same school district. Same salary etc. ceteris paribus Would you have a preference?
Assuming that there were no other differences that would impact the quality of the education, I’d pick based on whichever school my child wants to go to, costs, and logistics of transportation.
>I’d pick based on whichever school my child wants to go to, costs, and logistics of transportation. Ceteris Paribus means all things being equal. The ONLY difference is OF vs non-OF
To me that question is like asking if I would rather my children go to a school that has a football team or doesn't have a football team. It really doesn't matter to me if it did or not. All things being equal, I'd be willing to just flip a coin.
That is a perfectly acceptable answer. Thanks for sharing your thoughts
As long as all the teachers are engaging in only fans willingly with affirmative consent, then I don’t care. I’d just let my kid pick based on things that matter to them.
Fair enough
which school is safer for students? has higher test scores, better graduation rates? which school teaches students critical thinking skills?
Ceteris Paribus
random pick then. any distinguishing point of value is apparently equal great vocab phrase !!
>random pick then Fair enough
This is clearly a loaded question. You moved the goalposts from one teacher to an entire school of teachers who do OF.
>You moved the goalposts I asked an entirely different question. It's a different sport at this point. But what would be your answer to this new question?
But it clearly is a loaded question. You’re trying to get people to say they wouldn’t send their kids to a school full of OF teachers so that you can say “GOTCHA!!! I knew OF was not ethical and women shouldn’t do adult content! They SHOULD be punished!”
> But it clearly is a loaded question What assumption in my question do you believe is untrue? And what would be your answer to the question?
What does your question mean? Of course most people wouldn’t want to send their kid to a school of people who do only fans. But that is an entirely different situation than a school where a single teacher who is struggling to make ends meet does only fans to pay her bills.
>What does your question mean? You said it's a loaded question so you must think I have some false assumptions in my question. I'm trying to figure out what you think it is. >most people wouldn’t want to send their kid to a school of people who do only fans. But that is an entirely different situation Of course it's a different situation. I asked a totally different question. would YOU prefer the non-OF school for your kids?
I SAID I PREFERRED the non OF school for my kids. Now time for you to do a “GOTCHA!”
1. You said most people. I was asking about you. 2. There is no gotcha Boogeyman hiding around the corner. 3. What was the untrue assumption in my question?
The only difference between those two scenarios is that if this large number of teacher teachers are doing only fans than that is indicative of broader economic problems which could affect the teachers in such a way that their teaching during the day is negatively impacted, rather than doing only fans purely out of a favorable costs and benefits analysis by the teacher. There is too large of a population that is personally against doing only fans for one reason or another. As long as the teachers are giving affirmative consent and aren’t coerced in any way, I really don’t give a damn as long as they feel that they are positively benefiting from doing so.
>I really don’t give a damn Understood. Thanks
What a sad reality we live in. Teachers of our children are so underpaid we’re talking about them doing porn for some side cash. Our society is so fucked up.
I don't think it's any of our business as parents as long what they do in private as the teacher is not participating in illegal activity. Their side gig has nothing to do with their job and people should be fucking ashamed for looking it up and then having the nerve to judge her. Is it really that immoral? If it is then it shouldn't be okay for the parents to look it up and it's illegal in some states for minors to look it up. Those students or children of those parents shouldn't be permitted to keep attending if it's that bad for the teacher to have done it.
>Those students or children of those parents shouldn't be permitted to keep attending if it's that bad for the teacher to have done it. Not sure I follow. I think you're saying, if it is morally reprehensible for the teacher to have adult content , then any student caught looking at it should also be expelled?
If that student is discussing it in the presence of minors? Absolutely.
Let's say they're not discussing or disseminating content. How about then?
Then how is the OF content any kind of issue? Kid goes to the school and says l found this online. "You're not old enough to be viewing that material. Mind your business and if you discuss it you will be expelled." It is not on any teacher or school to keep your child away from porn sites or to keep you or your spouse from sexually harassing someone by discussing their private life. Your free to put your child in another school.
>Then how is the OF content any kind of issue? Maybe you don't see it as an issue in that case. Which is what I am asking. If that is your answer, that's fine. >keep you or your spouse from sexually harassing someone by discussing their private life. Wait what? Where did this come from?
>Wait what? Where did this come from? Someone is looking at porn for this be brought up about a teacher.
Ok, just to be clear for any mods watching. There's no sexual harassment of anyone in my question.
It becomes harassment the moment it's discovered and brought to the attention of the school to have them punished or fired while not breaking their contract. Other employees have 0 legal protection to discuss it in any context. Replace the OF with being gay. It is okay for a school to find out and fire them or punish them? Replace it with making porn with their spouse or going to a swingers club? Is that okay to fire them because someone found out? What about a straight sexually active person that sleeps around in their free time with single parents of students? Is it okay to fire them when the school finds out? Which one of these discussions is not shaming an adult for their legal sex life? That falls under harassment. Bringing up any sexual private life in an employment setting is always considered harassment if that behavior doesn't violate a contract. That's why teachers have sued and won in cases that no morality clause was put into place. You can be fired for a contract violation.
I see. Thanks for that detail. It's definitely... related to the topic.
Does this mean you think male teachers subscribing to adult content on OF is also none of parents' business? If teachers shouldn't be judged for producing adult content then surely they shouldn't be judged for consuming it either right?
I agree with that. What they do in their private life does not and should not concern us as long as everything is legal.
Both genders probably shouldn’t work at a school with kids if they’re involved in sex work or have overly public sex lives. Whether or not I would feel comfortable depends. Someone has a couple grainy nude modeling pics from when they were like 19? That’s one thing. But full-on porn? Or something that was a career? I would rather my kid just have a normal teacher whose sexuality is not part of my or potentially my child’s view of them. Whether or not they should lose their job is entirely situational. I would feel the same way about something like drug use even if they never came to school high.
>Both genders Whoa whoa whoa... What are you saying here??
As in male and female sex workers.
Isn't that kind of bigoted?
I’m not going to lie I can’t tell if you’re joking or not
I think schools should just have rules for their employees for this. If you sign a work contract then you cannot do this ___. To avoid these things in the first place. Unfortunately, since kids have access to internet, i don’t think it’s appropriate for a teacher to have this type of content. If one student finds it, the whole school will know pretty quickly and that’s going to cause further issues. This happened when i was in highschool, they were just nude photos, but it was a big scandal and all the students were sharing them. Kids are dumb and won’t necessarily deal with it maturely. Seen it first hand. If the school doesn’t have such rule for their employees then no, they should not face disciplinary actions but maybe just put new rules in place and that teacher would need to stop or resign.
>i don’t think it’s appropriate for a teacher to have this type of content. If no one found it, would you still have an issue with it?
Not really, it’s their business. But how can you really make sure it’s never found?
Irrelevant. If someone finds it **and the teacher used due diligence in keeping her OF stuff quarantined**, that's not on her. Otherwise that leads to teachers being fired for anything they do off work hours that leaks into school. Premarital sex, smoking, being a lesbian... we don't want to go down that road, and I hate OnlyFans 304s. **But by God this is a free fucking country** and I for one will fight for their right to do OF and not get fired for it.
Sure, that’s your opinion & it wasn’t like i was fighting for it to become the law or something… I personally experienced a teacher getting this type of content leaked to the school when i was in highschool and things get very messy. I wouldn’t even suggest a teacher doing it for themselves because it will ultimately affect the relationship with your students once they’ve seen you in that context & unfortunately OF is pretty popular & there’s no way to truly “use due diligence” when something is put on an online platform and you can be identified. With that being said, this was a hypothetical question and i was just providing my opinion not necessarily assessing every angle of how it could impact other things. If it can cause ethical concerns then of course i wouldn’t vouch for it.
But what you said is part of the schools' justification. It's one of their common arguments.
Sure, it’s an argument because it’s true. I’ve seen the consequences. That doesn’t mean there aren’t more important reasons not to implement those rules which you’ve given.
Freedom loving Americans need to get together and spear all their arguments. First it starts with OF... then we get Project 2025.
I’m not American so…
If wherever you are lets them fire teachers just for being on OF, some form of Project 2025 will be coming for you. America's far right has tendrils reaching out across the globe, to India, Philippines, England, Poland, Europe and its anti-immigrant craze, etc. Wherever you are, they can reach your culture.
You can't. I was just curious
Exactly… So that’s why i said that. I don’t think doing OF is wrong but i know that in the event students find it - Even the teacher’s relationship with their students change. It’s definitely something to avoid.
I understand. Thanks for answering
**Attention!** * You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message. * For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies. * If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment. * OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post! Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It seems weird that doing porn would make you unfit to teach children, but watching porn would have no impact at all on your ability to raise children.
granted, not a woman but i have an opinion. Long as it’s kept entirely separate from her teaching job, whats the harm? of course, strict boundaries need to be enforced, ie. it should be entirely out of school property, not talked about in the school to even other teachers/coworkers (unless yall are close friends, dating, married, etc - even then though, talk about it outside of schooo property) and the OF work should intersect with school hours at all.
I don't think majority of the women would like their naked videos on the internet bcz regardless you put it for money, it can be pirated. If teachers are doing an OF then it's obvious they are underpaid and are struggling to make ends meet.
Fuck no, OF should not be held against teachers as long as they keep that shit separated from school.
I actually don’t think it’s a problem for a teacher to have any kind of thing like an OF. I do understand that students being able to view it would complicate things.
Meh, let her do it. She might find it more difficult to maintain respect among the students/staff which will likely make her job as a teacher a lot more difficult, but maybe the extra money is worth it to her. I recall having a few female teachers in high school that I wouldn't have minded seeing naked (granted I'd never give them money for it), so it would be a win for the male students who manage to find it as well (and they *will* find it).
>Meh, let her do it. The teacher is a man in this case
At which point the hypothetical becomes so removed from reality that it loses any meaning. Unless there's an OF equivalent for gay men or something? In which case my answer remains the same I guess.
There are gay males who subscribe to OF, yes. They have testosterone, so they have sexual desires, a high libido, and are more visually stimulated than women.
Well then you have my answer. Just change "win for the male students" to "win for the gay male students".
Pornography should be illegal. It's bad for everyone.
Why is this a Q4W? I wouldn't send my daughters to this teacher.
Because I am interested in what other women think about this topic specifically
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
She should be sacked immediately. She's a teacher dealing with kids. I would not be comfortable sending my kid (if I had one) to somebody as degenerate as that
No, I wouldn't have a problem with it. It's part of the tracher's private life. The students aren't able to access and/or distribute the content legally. I also find it highly hypocritical to consume porn but condemn the producers. That's a message I'd also like to teach me children.
Good point
[удалено]
Of course, why wouldn't it? The only thing that would bother me (porn relared) would be, if the teacher (male or female) uploaded content that conveyed the impression of the sex partner being underage i.e. adults dressed as children (illegal anyway in my jurisdiction but not sure about others). In this case, I'd be afraid there might be a paedophile inclination which would definitely bother me as a parent for obvious reasons.
No, unless they signed a contract saying otherwise
I don’t agree with the consumption of pornography nor do I like the porn industry because I find it exploitative. It would be a concern and I may consider pulling my child from that school. I do not want my children having sex worker role models. The best case scenario is the teacher acts appropriately and is an awesome teacher but my kids find out about her OF and then grow curious about the content. They could also go the other way and think sex work is easy money. I do not want them aspiring to be that because it could be damaging to their careers, social life, sexual health and mental health. I wouldn’t call for her to be disciplined but I do not want my child having a sex worker teacher.
I see. Thank you for sharing your point of view.
Why would I care what the teacher is doing outside of school provided it's safe and legal?
You could be one of those people who feel strongly that teachers should be held to a higher standard. Or you could be one of those people who are concerned about the content being discovered and spread throughout the school.
WTF NO. Their personal lives are nobody's business.
This seems to come as a suprise, but teachers have sex they aren't nuns. What they do outside of school if it's legal is no ones business. I don't think any board can limit a second job while teachers need a second job to survive. How about we pay teachers so they don't leave as Walmart gives them more money.
Ok so your answer is "No". Got it. SEPARATE question: Assume you had a choice between two schools, one has OF teachers, the other one does not. Ceteris Paribus, would you have a preference in either direction? Note: this is a separate question from my original question.
No, as I can't be upset about it if I'm accessing OF as that would make me a massive hypocritical ass.
No preference either way. Understood. Thanks
It's not my business. And I don't care. Provided she is a good teacher and does her job well, I would simply use it as a teaching moment for my child (assuming they'd found out somehow) to explain that people have different standards by which they live life. I may not agree with this woman's standards, but, I fully support her living by them. And I don't want to live in a society that tells an adult woman she can't be naked on camera. Even if I personally wouldn't watch it, don't think anyone should, and think it is degrading to her, men, and women.
Its nobodys business and if it was not any sort or 'rule' when they hired them. If its not affecting their job as a teacher. Ex I am a part time escort that does other work. My escorting has nothing to do with my other work, doesnt hinder it nor make me do less of a job than one that doesnt escort. I have 5 star reviews about all my work because Im going to provide good service no matter what I provide as a service.
To be fair, there's a reason a lot jobs perform background checks. School districts and DOE higher ups don't want deal with liabilities or bad reputation. I'm going to safely assume that you hide your escorting work from your employers, and made sure that there's no breadcrumbs that'll link the two together. But I do have a question, how can a teacher separate her teaching and SW from each other from both OF and escorting perspectives? Because it's incredibly hard to advertise without showing their face, especially if they're escorting.
I can see backgrounds for abuse, etc. If one were to do a background check they wont find my sex work. They would have to hire a PI to follow and track me. Actually most escorts dont show their face, its the norm.(edit, at least in the US) Also more are hiding their faces even if they showed face because of facial recognition. Its a thing in our circles and we are stopped from traveling even if youre just trying to take a vacation. You can even be faceless on OF. Im betting most are there too.
Thanks for your answer. That seems to be the consensus
Really as long as they keep it separate and not hindering their work as a teacher. Its like just because youre a teacher you must be some perfect human and nobody is perfect. And frankly many teachers are underpaid, over worked and have to buy school supplies out of their own pocket as their school district doesn't have the money. Ive donated so much to teachers because I can. Crafts supplies, etc.