• Egon [they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    but once its found out, it is their business since it becomes public knowledge.

    Here’s the neat part: No it isn’t. It’s not something the teacher does at school or during school hours, so it’s not public business.
    What if the teacher wrote 90’s gangster rap songs? What if the teacher was a gun nut? What if the teacher wrote the next big group of gritty fantasy novels like ASoIaF? Lots of SA in those books… Should the teacher be fired then? What if the teacher lands a gig on Law & Order SVU as some sort of sexual offender? What if the teacher likes to jog in bootyshorts? That’s kinda scandalous. What if the teacher drinks pepsi, but this is a coke town?
    All of those reasons are precisely as valid as your “concern” for a teacher with OnlyFans

    • Carguacountii [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      9 months ago

      Something that a teacher advertises publicly is the public’s business.

      I think if they’re writing books with that kind of material, then yes - I’d fire nabakov immediately for example (at the least). With the 90s gangster rap, it depends on the content. With the guns, it depends on what kind of related material they were publically releasing.

      Some of your other examples are too petulant and silly to respond to.

      • Egon [they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Lmao are you Helen Lovejoy?
        WONT SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?

        What people do in their free time is their own choice. You judge teachers on what they do at school, because that’s where they’re teachers.

        Some of your other examples are too petulant and silly to respond to.

        Oh I thought we were supposed to assume good faith in order to have a productive discussion? My examples show that there is no cutoff for your moral panic, it’s completely arbitrary. You of course won’t engage with this because you’re a shithead who thinks “debating” is something to be proud of debate-me-debate-me

        • CarmineCatboy2 [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          What people do in their free time is their own choice.

          Let me put this in the simplest way possible. The second you focus your energies on defending teachers’ rights to do online porn, you have ceded the entirety of discourse surrounding the Education System to the conservative right at best, and the fascist right at worst. You will be exiled to the fringes of society by the parents themselves.

          Sometimes it’s not about Libertad, Carajo.

          • Egon [they/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            9 months ago

            Let me put this even simpler: If your response to hearing a teacher has an OF is “they should get fired” then you suck. If your response is “well if you defend the teacher for having an OF then you lose the optics war!” then you suck and you’re stupid. For one we’re on a niche internet forum, nothing here matters. Behaving like this in any way constitutes as the public discourse with weight to change anything is silly. For the other it’s not a good thing that teachers have OF platforms, but blaming them for it and going along with that puritanical moral panic is giving away territory in your so precious discourse.

            Libertad? This isn’t some libertarianism thing.

            Also all the people that are arguing “well what if my kids find porn of their teacher?” Should probably implement some sort of parental control, if they’re so worried of their children finding porn.

              • Egon [they/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                9 months ago

                If your response is "well if you defend the teacher for having an OF then you lose the optics war!

                Boy I sure am glad I wrote more than that one sentence

          • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            9 months ago

            You will be exiled to the fringes of society by the parents themselves.

            Picking your battles is important. A teacher doing OnlyFans is a great example of something that’s defensible but very much not a hill to die on.

            • Egon [they/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              9 months ago

              This is a niche shitposting leftist forum. There are no hills here. Nothing matters. It’s all valleys, which makes it all into mountains and molehills as well.

        • Carguacountii [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          9 months ago

          Well we should think of the children, its important socially.

          You’ve said elsewhere that you’d be concerned if a teacher were a facist - would you not mind if they were teaching to the cirriculum at school, but in their time off work publically promoting fascist material? I don’t mean to conflate the two subjects (fascism and pornography), but just point out that we don’t (and shouldn’t) judge teachers just on what they do at school. Of course, then it becomes a question of what is and isn’t acceptable for a teacher to be doing in public outside of work, and I don’t think its moral panic to say that pornography is not acceptable - sex education and teaching about relationships is very sensitive as a subject for people because as I’ve said there’s a great potential for harm and exploitation.

          We should assume good faith until demonstrated otherwise of course. You don’t think your pepsi coke thing was silly?

                • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  How do you expect to get anything done if you call other people on your small leftist forum chuds because you disagree on one thing despite agreeing on 99 others? You know there will be plenty of other leftists who disagree with you on this or that, right?

                  • Egon [they/them]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    13
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    I think they’re a chud because they have a puritanical worldview and they use typical chud debatebro tactics.
                    I don’t expect to get anything done thru a website and I sincerely hope you don’t either. This isn’t a place for organizing it’s a safe space for leftist shitposting and it sincerely saddens me to see people be so blindly supportive of obvious puritanical moral panic BS.

                    You know there will be plenty of other leftists who disagree with you on this or that, right?

                    IRL I’ve had this conversation while I worked at a school and one of the temps that worked there turned out to have an onlyfans. The only person who got fired was the guy who made a big stink about it. This was because we worked with children and people found it weird how obsessed he was with porn.
                    I’ve done plenty of IRL organizing and you’d be surprised the kinda things you can talk out with regular normal people. I don’t have to agree with them on everything, but being weird judgemental prudes using debate tricks learned by 3rd graders don’t make them into someone where one can have a fruitful cooperative effort.

      • Rom [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        I think if they’re writing books with that kind of material, then yes - I’d fire nabakov immediately for example

        If you think Lolita was condoning its subject matter then you completely misunderstood the entire message of the book. This is why we need media literacy.

        • Carguacountii [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          Fans of that book, or the literati, always say that, and yet its very popular with child abusers. No doubt there are those who read it and were disgusted. Most people however don’t need an elaborate fantasy novel to tell them that kind of thing is very very bad.

          If I’ve misunderstood the message, and others have too (it isn’t generally well liked, except in certain circles, usually called at least ‘controversial’), then we can be sure that anyone writing such material shouldn’t be a teacher, and certainly children shouldn’t be exposed to it - and the way communities work, children at such a teacher’s school would be well aware of any controversial publications they might have made. Personally, I think it is a literary trick (like the ‘poverty porn’ genre) to justify the promotion of dodgy material to a certain class for titilation, so I’d do a lot more than sack such an author.

      • SineNomineAnonymous
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        I’d fire nabakov immediately for example (at the least)

        You didn’t read it, did you?

        And I’m not saying it’s a good book because it isn’t.