August 24, 2011

Should a teacher be fired because he was — in the past — a porn star?

Does it make any difference if it was gay porn?

Does it matter that he used an alias in the movies? That he won awards for his film performances?
[Shawn] Loftis was suspended from his substitute teaching position in the Miami-Dade County Public Schools in January; his teacher's certification was revoked in April, despite his insistence that his porn days were over.

Loftis' porn shtick was to film in exotic locations around the world and slide sight-seeing and history segments into the dirty flicks. He took a similar travel-focused approach to his citizen-reporting gig with CNN.
Loftis is a popular CNN "citizen reporter." Here's one of his clips:



He'd left porn to go into teaching. Now, kicked out of teaching, he's back to porn.

Would you fire a teacher because he used to be a porn actor?
Yes. No matter how good a teacher he was.
Yes, but only if there were some other problems.
No. But this could be a factor if there were serious other problems.
No. This should not be a factor at all.
No. It's to his credit that he had a successful porn career and left it to teach.

  
pollcode.com free polls 

ADDED: This may be a remnant of an old belief that teachers of young children shouldn't be sexually active at all. My maternal grandmother was a teacher at a time when female teachers were required to remain single. She hid her marriage to retain her job.

IN THE COMMENTS: Zachary Paul Sire notes that there are questions about whether Loftis had quit porn.

188 comments:

traditionalguy said...

What were the grounds for firing him?

Are they afraid he might marry a student?

Or is he radioactive?

Using immorality as a grounds would make many teachers very nervous.

Pogo said...

Why have any behavioral standards at all?

All one need do is say: 'That was yesterday. Now I don't do that anymore.'

Former porn star?
Former hooker?
Former cokehead?
Former terrorist?
Former KKK Dragon?
Former child murderer?
Former pedophile?

Why not?

What a great message for middle school students.

"Shawn Loftis ditched his porn career in the spring of 2010 to focus on teaching..."

Spring, last year?
Who cares?
Why not Spring 2011?
Why not "Shawn Loftis ditched his porn career this morning to focus on teaching..."

Coming soon: Casey Anthony, first grade teacher.

Pogo said...

Jeebus, don't computers in the Florida middle schools have Google?

The Drill SGT said...

TG, for the record, he's still in the porn business.

if you aren't at work, google his name or look at http://worldofmenblog.com

which I purposely dont link to, because it is extremely NSFW

Joe Schmoe said...

Schools are part of city and town services, which invariably are funded by taxpayers, and hence should be responsive to the taxpayers' wishes.

As a parent I'd have a hard time (no pun intended) if my kids were in his class. I'm guessing enough parents felt the same way, put pressure on the school board, and the board acted accordingly. Democracy in action. No big deal in my book. Sorry; our choices do have consequences. There are lots of other jobs this guy can do.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

It's going to get out no matter what, and there's no way for the kids to take him seriously once it does. Plus, the kids shouldn't be considering that sort of thing, or trying to normalize it. I can't think of a non-sex related hypothetical that would be similar, but I'm sure that there is one (Maybe if he were one of the Jackass guys? That would be enough to say no teaching, IMO.)

The gay/straight issue doesn't make a difference to me.

- Lyssa

AJ Lynch said...

I would love to see the stunned reaction if Pogo had a chance to make his great arguments in front of the next school board meeting. I'd be shocked if the public did not stand and applaud him.

FloridaSteve said...

I'm not against Porn and I'm not against teachers... But.. Parents are entitled to "feel" good about who is teaching their kids. I don't expect Little House On The Prairie but there are limits.

Hoosier Daddy said...

"... That he won awards for his film performances?..."

Seriously?

FloridaSteve said...

Pogo is dead on.

Scott M said...

Didn't we have almost this exact problem before with a woman? Seems like there was something more shady about her, though...changed her name? Ex-soldier?

Regardless, my takeaway from that discussion was one of maintaining the credibility of the authority figure that is the teach in the classroom. It ruined hers, it ruins his.

The gay thing doesn't matter to anybody except those it matters to, if you get my meaning. For students who consider it a big deal, the teacher's credibility of authority is eroded even further than what it would be for mere porn.

The Drill SGT said...

At some level, teachers need to have the appearance of being role models. In the world of google, when kids take classes on being computer literate, how can one not expect that on the first day of google instruction, the kids won't google their name and the name of , oh say their teacher?

which leads you in two steps from Shawn Loftis to Collin O'Neal to "World of Men", to supension from school for bringing gay porn into the classroom.

Get an A in Google, get suspended.

I'd feel the same about Linda Lovelace. Ex-Porn stars will never work out as middle school teachers, children being children. parents being parents.

Pete said...

There is something not quite right about someone who thinks working as a porn actor, gay or straight, is a good idea.

You don't want that someone teaching your children.

The Drill SGT said...

Hoosier Daddy said...
"... That he won awards for his film performances?..."

Seriously?


as judged by his peers... One needs to understand the caveats :)

Curious George said...

He won awards for his film performances? That changes everything.

In the category of best actor in a Prison Rape movie, the Dong goes to....Collin O'Neal!

"Wow I have so many people to thank. But first a shout out to my class at West Side Elementary...turn off that computer and go to bed...big test tomorrow!"

trumpetdaddy said...

So redemption plays no part in Pogo's morality? I'm not saying Loftis has "redeemed" himself or even claimed to have done so. I'm just curious how the people who are former "insert bad social stuff here" ever reenter a society where Pogo controls the rules. I'm also curious why a person with a drug addiction, or who has sex for money (on camera or off), is equated with terrorists. Jenna Jamison = Mohammed Atta in Pogo's world? BTW, Casey Anthony wasn't accused of killing other people's kids, just her own.

Shouting Thomas said...

I think you've finally stumped me, Althouse.

In the school districts near where I live, tenured teachers live in fear only of the morals charge that can lead to their dismissal.

It's not a good idea for a teacher to let his students' parents know that he smokes pot.

One of those parents is going to go after the teacher's ass if that pot smoking is discovered.

So, porn star may be beyond the pale.

Quayle said...

Always gotta leave room for people to change.

AJ Lynch said...

"BTW, Casey Anthony wasn't accused of killing other people's kids, just her own."

Trumpetdaddy's bestest example of librul illogic.

Irene said...

Buried in the story is the information that he was in "non-compliance with the school's code of ethics."

Without the code's text, we don't know whether the school district suspended him because he was a gay porn star or because he was a porn star porn star.

The code might say, for example, that teachers can lose their licenses if "in the present or the past they engaged in conduct that does not conform to the norms of a role model for children."

ndspinelli said...

Ron Jeremy for Teacher of the Year. I would love to see that WEAC advertisement.

purplepenquin said...

So Pogo thinks that a porn star is akin to being a criminal and/or a terrorist? And others agree with that opinion?

*rolls eyes*


It smells a tad prudey in here...get back to me when ya'll come up with some examples of comparable behavior that doesn't involve harming others.

El Presidente said...

I would take a current gay pornstar over some of the lazy hippy dip-shits that currently teach my kids.

Pete said...

Clearly purplepenquin has no children.

great unknown said...

It's a legal profession. [Or, one could say, it's a branch of the legal profession.]

How about firing teachers because they were/are liberals. They would probably corrupt the students more than a former porn star. Conservative parents should get up and make a stink about it; let's see what happens.

purplepenquin said...

Clearly Pete has no rational response.

ALL of the examples Pogo gave involved criminal behavior and/or terrorists, which isn't really comparable to being in the porn industry. Are there any legal professions that ya'll beleive should disqualify someone, for life, from teaching? That's all I'm asking...

trumpetdaddy said...

AJ Lynch - I wasn't forming a syllogism, merely stating a fact.

I'm not a liberal, either.

Although, to follow your reference to the use of logic, what I am or am not matters not a whit to the truth or falsehood of what I said earlier. Appeal to authority fallacy, and all that jazz...

Tim said...

Just another reason for Libertarians to build that floating libertarian utopia out at sea - porn actors can moonlight as teachers, or vice versa - I mean, it's nobody's business which one is the real job and which is the part time one, right?

campy said...

What's the problem? It's not as if he was a rethuglican or something else really bad.

Oligonicella said...

trumpetdaddy said...

"I'm just curious how the people who are former "insert bad social stuff here" ever reenter a society where Pogo controls the rules."

There are more jobs than teaching.

"I'm also curious why a person with a drug addiction, or who has sex for money (on camera or off), is equated with terrorists."

No, actually you're not because it was a list of credentials one wouldn't want a teacher to have. In that manner, and that manner only, was he equating the two. But you knew that, you were being disingenuous.

"BTW, Casey Anthony wasn't accused of killing other people's kids, just her own."

And the logical point behind that statement was what, exactly?

Scott M said...

The question, from an employment standpoint, is what did the school district know when they hired him? If they didn't know about it, I'd say he's got a disclosure issue regarding other employment. Depends on the local rules/statutes.

My standpoint on whether it's "right" to allow gay porn (or any porn) actors to teach middle-school children boils down to what I want my children to think is "right". In the last year, my oldest has gotten seriously involved with a wonderful girl at college. They've come home to visit a couple of times and she's definitely a keeper. The first time they were due to arrive to stay for the weekend, my wife and I were discussing sleeping arrangements. Initially, I didn't really think about anything other than the fact that I was pretty damned sure they were sleeping together at school, so it didn't really matter to me for them to share a fold-out in my house.

My mother made a very good point. When I was that age, she was adamant about girlfriends sleeping separately until they became wives. She pointed out that while it was a moral question for her and asked if things like that instilled a healthy respect and regard for marriage over just shacking up. I couldn't say that it didn't.

In other words, if you value marriage, there is a certain level of discipline you have to have about the topic if you want to instill that or inspire that in your kids.

I bring this up because I believe it's the same with porn and, depending on your outlook, gay porn. If you want to instill or inspire a certain regard for porn in your children, a certain level of discipline, including lines in the sand, must be maintained.

Shouting Thomas said...

So Pogo thinks that a porn star is akin to being a criminal and/or a terrorist? And others agree with that opinion?

Since I've led a life of sin and misery, I can't tell you with certainty that the production of porn is always and inevitably linked to criminals.

Curious George said...

"purplepenquin said...

It smells a tad prudey in here

Are there any legal professions that ya'll beleive should disqualify someone, for life, from teaching? That's all I'm asking..."

So I would guess that not only do you think that he should be able to teach, but also that he should also be able to openly continue his porn career?

Tim said...

I totally dig the purplepenguins of the world who think its totally cool for the kids to google their teacher's name and find out he makes a living sodomizing another dude's anus on film.

That's the world we should all want to raise our kids in!

We should have an affirmative action program for porn stars to be teachers.

El Presidente said...

I can't believe I am coming down on the pro-pornstar side of an argument but of:

Former porn star?
Former hooker?
Former cokehead?
Former terrorist?
Former KKK Dragon?
Former child murderer?
Former pedophile?

Pornstar (and arguably KKK Dragon) do not necessarily include criminal activity. I assume that Miami Dade does a background check on their employees and he cleared that check initially. Did they reconsider his morals based on the porn revelation? Do they doubt his ability to teach or control a class room based on the disclosure? Even if he can be fired for his past how does a teacher's certificate get revoked?

Dan in Philly said...

There's really no way I would want my kid being taught anything by a former porn star. Any why is anyone who was ever in a porn automatically a star, anyway? Can't you be a porn character actor???

Ann Althouse said...

"Buried in the story is the information that he was in "non-compliance with the school's code of ethics.""

I know, and it made me wonder if there's more to it, for example, it seems likely that he was required to fill out a form listing his past occupations and that he left that out. If they could have refused to hire him on this ground but didn't know it, I think they should be able to fire him for it.

But I don't think this should be a reason not to hire someone.

I certainly don't think he seems like he might do something sexual with children. Quite the opposite!

madAsHell said...

His movies weren't selling, so he decided to fall back on teaching??

I dunno....I guess I would want someone who wanted to be a teacher.

Although if this engineering gig doesn't work out, then I'm sure I can find work in the valley.

chickenlittle said...

Pete said...
Clearly purplepenquin has no children.

He'll deny that, Pete. I think I already asked once.

There's little difference between a paid porn star and a prostitute. I believe it's a matter yet to be adjudicated. Would purplepenguin want a paid whore teaching his non existent kids?

As for "forgiveness" -it seems to me that the active/inactive status of said paid professional makes a big difference here. That and the sincerity of said paid professional.

Ann Althouse said...

"Any why is anyone who was ever in a porn automatically a star, anyway? Can't you be a porn character actor???"

I know. That question caused me not to use "star" in the text, but I left it in the post title (picking it up from the article).

I think the problem is with the word "actor." Calling everyone a "star" is perhaps less inaccurate than calling them all an "actor."

Oligonicella said...

purplepenquin said...

"...get back to me when ya'll come up with some examples of comparable behavior that doesn't involve harming others."

then purplepenquin said...

"ALL of the examples Pogo gave involved criminal behavior and/or terrorists, which isn't really comparable to being in the porn industry."

Notice the shift from examples that don't involve harming others to just aren't criminal behavior. Went back andreread his post, eh?

Shifted the goalposts and shafted self in process.

Once because as far as I know (I might be wrong) being a former KKK Dragon is not criminal.

I dropped of the 'harming others' because that phrase is so logically nebulous a simple cigarette smoker would be subject.

chickenlittle said...

purplepenquin said...It smells a tad prudey in here

That odor? It's just the smell of purplepenguin poo.

Dan in Philly said...

Ann 'I think the problem is with the word "actor." Calling everyone a "star" is perhaps less inaccurate than calling them all an "actor."'

At least in a porn, there's action, which means it's a term more appropriate than movies in which the actors mostly talk...

roesch-voltaire said...

Given the continual Republican drum beat against public school teachers, who else is left to go into the teaching profession?

traditionalguy said...

I believe that immorality should be a grounds to fire teachers.

Now will someone help me draw that line for? No erasures allowed.

Christians say that we believe men become New Creations that have been born again by believing in the death for them, burial and resurrection for them by a representative who is God's son.

Can a porn star become a believer and start over or not?

Let's ask Titus. He will probably forgive one so long as he is not fat.

Overweight as immorality maybe another necessary test.

After all teachers are role models.

Joe Schmoe said...

So redemption plays no part in Pogo's morality?

Redemption has nothing to do with this. You're implying pornography is a bad thing (hence the need for redemption) while simultaneously implying it is not a big deal or disqualifying condition when it comes to teaching children.

The guy can still do just about anything he else wants. I'm not saying he's a bad guy and I'm not even saying pornography is an evil industry. It just doesn't mix with school kids.

I can't believe the guy made it through the hiring process. How'd that happen?

trumpetdaddy said...

Yes, it absolutely true that there other jobs than being teachers. More and more employers are litigation-averse, however, so the fields of "respectable" employment narrow every year.

Which brings me to my first earlier point. At what point are people who have done something bad forever condemned for that bad thing?

Which leads to my second point. When compiling a list of bad things to exclude folks from being a public school teacher, why did Pogo equate porn actor or drug addict with terrorist?

Simply saying that they are all things we wouldn't want teachers to have in their past is an attempt to blur the thought process I'm criticizing; one which picks "terrorist" as something that would naturally be included on a list with "porn star."

I'm not defending porn stars or terrorists. I'm interested in the thought process that equates them because it is the same thought process that apparently leaves no room for redemption of others.

El Presidente said...

"Non-compliance with the school's code of ethics" sounds a lot like code for "we really want to get rid of him." If he had some specific infraction you can bet someone would have leaked it to the Daily News.

John Burgess said...

When I was a kid, pregnant teachers were put on leave as soon as they started to show their gravidity. Sex or intimations thereof, had no place in the classroom, according to school board thinking.

Pogo said...

Refusal to deny teaching jobs because of behavior like this results eventually and directly in the recent riots of London.

What does legal have to do with it?

Some legal jobs that should not become middle school teachers:

Stripper
Porn star
Las Vegas prostitute
Colorado marijuana dispenser
US Congressman


The slope is icy and steep.

chickenlittle said...

Calling everyone a 'star' is perhaps less inaccurate than calling them all an 'actor.'

Note that "star" has very strong teacher/pupil connotations.

Pogo said...

You're fast approaching "No Behavioral Standards Allowed", trad guy.

John Burgess said...

Florida Steve said (and others imply):

--- Parents are entitled to "feel" good about who is teaching their kids.

Does that work if the parents don't like the color of, the ethnicity of, the religion of the teacher? How about the political views or views on things like education?

Parents have a role, but I'm not about to give them total authority over who is employable.

Shouting Thomas said...

Given the continual Republican drum beat against public school teachers, who else is left to go into the teaching profession?

A stupid, stupid misdirection statement. What else can you expect from a commie? Commies lie.

Republicans don't hate school teachers. I don't identify as a Republican, but I find myself often voting that way out of a lack of other choices.

The complaint against public school teachers is:

o Teachers use public schools as platforms for political indoctrination

o Teachers are overcompensated

o Teachers receive overly generous benefits

You are a compulsive liar, r_v. What else is to be expected from a commie.

And, another complaint against teachers. Only the teaching profession will shelter open commies like r_v. The rest of us know better than to cop to that vile identity in public.

o

Tank said...

Tim said...
Just another reason for Libertarians to build that floating libertarian utopia out at sea - porn actors can moonlight as teachers, or vice versa - I mean, it's nobody's business which one is the real job and which is the part time one, right?


There is so much stupid and ignorance in this short paragraph it's hard to quantify.

A classic no-nothing anti-libertarian comment. Really, if you want to be anti-libertarian, up your game a little.

El Presidente said...

They are teaching analingus to eighth graders in my school district. No seriously, "It works for both sexes." Sounds like this guy would be a star. We have a program in my state to bring in new teachers with real world experience in areas. why limit this to engineers and scientists?

Oligonicella said...

I almost worked in Florida as a teacher. Subbed and was ready to go, but I decided I really didn't like FL. The state.

One thing I'll tell you, their research is *very* thorough. They found an arrest I had as a kid because I was picked up with a bunch and then released and everything dropped because I wasn't involved in the original charge.

I've worked Fed, State, County, City, Military and other governmental contracts and not one background check unearthed that.

FL FOUND it. I was just 18 at the time and everything was dropped and it was in a friggin' podunk town in KS.

FL FOUND it and questioned me. My account squared and they dropped it.

FL is strict. You lose your job if you have three DUIs or get one out of state and don't report it.

If you're a teacher in FL, don't f*ck up.

rhhardin said...

Debbie does Driver Education.

Mr. Colby said...

I would not trust the judgment of a man who had made those past choices. Seems unlikely that, given the pool of folks who might take this job, porno-dude is the best choice.

Titus said...

I don't care for gay porn or any porn.

I do sometimes watch straight porn though. But it has to be amateurs, not "stars" and it has to be grainy footage.

My favorite part of watching porn is if there is a comment section. The comments are hilarious. Everyone is a critic and they are fucking serious.

I need something authentic and real in porn.

Studio porn is too stylized and boring. I always think of Boogie Nights. The "directing" aspect of porn bothers me. All I can think of when watching it is someone behind the camera shouting commands which I find to be a turnoff. I want spontaneous.

Someone filming themselves in their bedroom is much more interesting.

Did this guy fly around the world filming porn? He seems to particularly like Cuba.

What an odd job.

MadisonMan said...

Is he a good teacher? (Or Was he?)

It's very hard to separate your professional lives in the age of google. If he's been hired after full disclosure of his past, I'm not sure how they can fire him.

This is an interesting discussion timing-wise, as my son registered at HS on Monday, and he got some god-awful non-pornstar-past teachers (that we are agitating to change now). If the past is not an issue in the classroom -- that's a big If -- I would retain a good teacher. Was this teacher's past/present effecting his classroom?

FedkaTheConvict said...

Just Google the name Tera Myers. She is a former porn star who managed to get fired from two teaching jobs in different states.

The background checks must not be very thorough because she managed to get hired as a teacher twice.

The kicker is that it was a student who discovered she was an ex-porn star.

Lucien said...

How 'bout we get rid of all the bad teachers. Then we can start deciding how many of the good ones we should fire because of their past careers, what they say about same sex marriage on the internet, etc.

kwood said...

Some life choices preclude making certain other choices in the future. That's just the way it is.

Oligonicella said...

trumpetdaddy --

"I'm interested in the thought process that equates them because it is the same thought process that apparently leaves no room for redemption of others."

And you know the redemption is real how? Did he get a plaque, or maybe a notarized degree, or are you just taking his word?

The Drill SGT said...

Ann Althouse said...
"Any why is anyone who was ever in a porn automatically a star, anyway? Can't you be a porn character actor???"


Not being an expert on gay male porn, I suspect the answer is simple.

If you are the guy with the 10 inch dong who is on top, you are the star.

If you are the guy bending over or kneeling with your mouth open around said object, you are likely the actor. or actee.

where is Titus when you need him as an expert witness :)

Scott M said...

My favorite part of watching porn is if there is a comment section.

I didn't even realize there was such, but one of the best up and coming young comedians today, Hannibal Burres does a long bit about youporn.com and it's comments section. In particular, interracial videos and the racism in the comments section. He riffs about horniness overcoming racism and the entire bit is hysterical.

The Drill SGT said...

whoops Titus arrived :)

Can you address the Star versus actor issue?

Titus said...

I don't know if Porn Star would even be revealed in a background check.

Education, Work History, Federal and State Criminal Record, Driving Record, perhaps Credit History if you are working with money.

But Porn Star, doubt it.

Hoosier Daddy said...

"... It smells a tad prudey in here...get back to me when ya'll come up with some examples of comparable behavior that doesn't involve harming others..."

Prudence has nothing to do with it but as others said, credibility among his students.

James said...

Where do we draw the line though?

Last school year my son's high school jazz teacher was forced to resign after porn was found on his district-issued laptop. A student opened his laptop and rifled through it while he was out of the room, and saw the photos. He went home and told his mom who triggered an investigation by the school district.

The music teacher was excellent; just before this incident one of his jazz bands won the competition as the best in state; they performed at Monoma Terrace during Wisconsin Music Educators Conference and held master classes at some Madison high schools.

In the last few years three of his jazz students have gone on to Berklee and on to the Julliard School Yet despite all that he was forced out for pictures of adults on his computer.

Hoosier Daddy said...

"... Given the continual Republican drum beat against public school teachers, who else is left to go into the teaching profession?"

I take back my previous comment. Evidently lack of credibility isn't confined to ex-gay pornstars.

Tim said...

Tanks said:

"There is so much stupid and ignorance in this short paragraph it's hard to quantify.

A classic no-nothing anti-libertarian comment. Really, if you want to be anti-libertarian, up your game a little."


A classic, reactionary comment. Really, if you want to be pro-libertarian, up your game a little. Or actually, a lot.

Scott M said...

Last school year my son's high school jazz teacher was forced to resign after porn was found on his district-issued laptop

I tend to take the view that character flaws are a lot like icebergs. What you can see is probably only about 10% of the underlying hidden problems.

The teacher in the story you told had some serious judgement problems if he put porn on a work-issued laptop. It doesn't matter how they were found.

Hell, if it were up to me, regardless of what censure or firing the teacher got, the student should be disciplined to the max allowed by district rules for going through the teacher's laptop.

ndspinelli said...

Porn stars, strippers, etc. do not use their real names. Background checks involve names, ss#'s, dob's, etc. I'm a little dissappointed in you folks to not understand this basic.

I had to track down several pole dancers who witnessed an assault in a titty bar. It's hard as hell to get real names for these folks.

kwood said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Drill SGT said...

Titus said...
I don't know if Porn Star would even be revealed in a background check.


I forgot you are in the HR business, in NYC right? a cutting edge industry?

don't you guys run a google check as well as a credit check?

wouldn't that lead you rapidly from Shawn Loftis to Collin O'Neal to "World of Men"

I'm in a small business, we google all our hires. I can't believe that somebody running background checks doesn't

lyssalovelyredhead said...

PP said: Are there any legal professions that ya'll beleive should disqualify someone, for life, from teaching? That's all I'm asking..."


I did address this earlier (I suggested the Jackass guys), I'll add that I would disqualify most anyone who'd appeared on a reality show (the conflict-driven kinds, not the fluffy/documentary/competition ones), hookers, strippers, members of horrible (but legal) organizations (i.e. KKK, Phelps' church, NAMBLA), and people who had been outspoken proponents of illegal behavior, such as drug advocates.

These would count even if the person had renounced the prior behavior. It's about whether they can be an effective teacher while the kids know about their past (which they will know). Sometimes its not even fair (I, for example, am sympathetic to drug legalization, but I still wouldn't want my kids to have a teacher who had, say, videos on the net which the kids could and would look up, proclaiming the benefits of pot. Most kids are too immature to sort out the nuances there. Heck, most adults are, too.)

- Lyssa

Titus said...

Stanley Kubrick, in Space Odyssey-2001, designed the first Ipad Tablet.

Thank you.

Clouds and Tits.

James said...

>>Hell, if it were up to me, regardless of what censure or firing the teacher got, the student should be disciplined to the max allowed by district rules for going through the teacher's laptop.


I used to think like you but the entire episode forced me to reconsider.

As far as I know nothing happened to the student.

BTW, here's a link to the story from the local paper: Park teacher loses teaching license after porn allegedly found on computer

Robert Cook said...

"Parents are entitled to 'feel' good about who is teaching their kids."

Why?

purplepenquin said...

Pogo's revised list is mostly focused on the sex industry...with a medical marijuana dispenser (How about the guy who dispenses Viagra, you REALLY want that kind of person teaching your kids?!) & Congressman thrown in for laughs.


Many of the soldiers who have served in Iraq and Afghan have had to actually kill children while in the course of their duty. Should a school-board deny them employment based on that?

Hoosier Daddy said...

"... In the last few years three of his jazz students have gone on to Berklee and on to the Julliard School Yet despite all that he was forced out for pictures of adults on his computer..."

Is it that hard to find qualified teachers who can display a shred of good judgment?

He put porn on his work issued laptop and then left it unattended and openly accessible. In many companies, just the latter two security lapses sooner would be grounds for termination. Heck, what private student info could that kid have accessed?

Letting him go seems reasonable considering his lack of good judgment.

The Drill SGT said...

One separate lesson, that might escape the one college student that reads this blog.

Nothing posted to the internet ever really goes away. your internet history is going to persist. avoid early, doing something there that will haunt you long after.

That means Face-book

Hoosier Daddy said...

"... Many of the soldiers who have served in Iraq and Afghan have had to actually kill children while in the course of their duty. Should a school-board deny them employment based on that?.."

Had to?

You're not very bright are you?

Hoosier Daddy said...

"... "Parents are entitled to 'feel' good about who is teaching their kids."

Why?.."

Lmao!

Titus said...

Most large companies use outside companies to conduct background checks. The candidate fills out a form and the background check verifies information they give you. They generally don't seek out any additional information. They want to know if you graduated from college, are not a criminal, and have a solid work history.

I never worked for a company that googles someone before hiring them.

The Recruiter may google them just to see if they can find out anything about the person but this is generally not a policy of a company.

I have only worked in large, fab., multi-layered PRIVATE, yet publicly traded companies.

I have no idea what PUBLIC/Commie/Schools require from Background Checks.

The Drill SGT said...

purplepenquin said...
Many of the soldiers who have served in Iraq and Afghan have had to actually kill children while in the course of their duty.


well that certainly orients us on your perspective.

American Soldiers and certainly not Many American Soldiers, do not purposely or accidentally kill children.

The soldiers I know take risks and losses to avoid that.

However, in war, stuff happens. But it doesn't happen regularly.

BTW: It's Congress and the President who order them to make those attacks.

Joe Schmoe said...

This issue reminds me of liberal NIMBYism. Oh yeah, windmills are great! Wait, you're gonna put one in my yard or in front of my seaside cottage? I don't think so!

Do you think Obama would have sent his kids to the Sidwell Friends School if they had ex-porn actors in their faculty? Do you think Sidwell Friends School would ever hire an ex-porn actor? More liberal do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do.

As an academic thought exercise, this is fun. In the real world it has no legs.

James said...

>>Is it that hard to find qualified teachers who can display a shred of good judgment?<<

Except that he was replaced by a young woman who graduated from Wisconsin last year. I was more concerned about her fraternizing with students not much younger than her than anything a 55 year old guy could have done.

edutcher said...

Organized homosexuality has a problem with the Boy Scouts ever since they started restricting homosexuals from leading Boy Scout troops.

More than a few turned out to be predators.

This is similar.

purplepenquin said...

So Pogo thinks that a porn star is akin to being a criminal and/or a terrorist? And others agree with that opinion?

In many areas, what's done in porn is criminal.

*rolls eyes*

Somebody tell him to pick up his eyes and put them back in his head so his brains don't fall out.

PS Another Hipper Than Thou Lefty. Of course, they know more than everybody else. Just look at the mess they made in CA.

The Drill SGT said...

Titus said...
They want to know if you graduated from college, are not a criminal, and have a solid work history.


and that you have filled out the app accurately, are honest, haven't left any jobs off the appp and have no unexplained gaps.


at least that is what the DoD security investigator folks look for.

purplepenquin said...

Yes, Hoosier, "had to".

Are you saying that no children are being killed in those war zones? Or are you suggesting that the kids are getting shot because it is something the troops simply want to do, rather than have to do? Or are you just trying to take a cheap personal shot without really giving any thought to what was actually said?

Please clarify...

Scott M said...

I was more concerned about her fraternizing with students not much younger than her than anything a 55 year old guy could have done.

That's a heaping helping of cart before the horse, isn't it? Sprinkled with your own hangups? What about being male and 55 makes one more responsible or have better judgement. On the one hand, we have a young, female teacher who's basically an unknown. But, as far as your story relates, she hasn't been caught with porn on a school-issued laptop yet.

Unconscionable that the student was not punished to the largest extent possible. A message to other students that invasions of privacy are okeydokey.

Oligonicella said...

James --

"Yet despite all that he was forced out for pictures of adults on his computer."

I've worked that industry. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that said laptop was provided by the school system. If I'm wrong there, I'd bet he had hooked into the school's wifi more than once. That meant he exposed school resources, as porn is the primary vector for malicious code along with dumbasses clicking emails. That's why those rules occurred; cost, not the kids.

I dealt with porn problems with tech guys for years before schools had those resources.

I'd fire the IT guy for the same thing.

wv inesight: Take from'a my inesight what'a you will.

Robert Cook said...

"The complaint against public school teachers is:

"o Teachers use public schools as platforms for political indoctrination

"o Teachers are overcompensated

"o Teachers receive overly generous benefits"


Who says teachers use public schools as platforms for poltitical indoctrination? How do you know? Are such incidents--if any--widespread or anomalous? Do you have documentation or merely anecdotal hearsay? Or just speculation?

As to whether teachers are "overcompensated" or receive "overly generous benefits," who are you to say? Is this nationwide or just in certain states? Again, how do you know and by what standard are you gauging what levels of compensation and benefits are "overly generous" or "just right?"

Titus said...

Many people don't put all their jobs on an application.

Especially part time jobs or Porn Star jobs. Or a job that they had 20 or 50 years ago.

They just leave it off, so there is nothing to verify.

Driving Records will be verified if you need to drive in your job. You can have a few speeding tickets and perhaps one DWI and still get hired-at least a the companies I worked for. But the DWI should of been something many years ago, not last week. Driving Records are cleaned after 7 years.

If they are a recent college grad and did something stupid and were arrested they may be cut some slack. Although, I don't usually work with those employees because they are too junior and too below on the Corp. Org. Chart. I would rather not have any interaction with them. I prefer Senior Management or Executive interaction.

Some companies would not give a shit about his porn star status. He needs to find that company. It would be a better fit.

purplepenquin said...

well that certainly orients us on your perspective.

My perspective is as a former member of two different branches of the US Military. (11-Bravo and a Squid)

American Soldiers and certainly not Many American Soldiers, do not purposely or accidentally kill children.

Not according to the briefings at least two units were given when getting ready to roll with a convoy. I heard from two different grunts that they were told to run over, rather than stopping the vehicles, if anyone was in the road. When asked if that included children, the answer was "of course".

I ain't saying combat is pretty, and I ain't holding judgement against those men&women...rather, I'm asking if being a former solider in a combat zone would be enough to disqualify someone from teaching in a classroom.

Carol_Herman said...

If the teacher murders the English language; and can't get kids to understand their speech. I think you'd have a reason NOT to hire this person. And, not to keep them on staff.

Yup. NO EBONICS.

But if the teacher presents the material. AND, CAN DO THE MATH ... Better than a lot of other hires!

By the way, how do you find out someone was once a porn star? Did parents, looking at porn ... but two and two togther?

The Drill SGT said...

I'm asking if being a former solider in a combat zone would be enough to disqualify someone from teaching in a classroom.

No, since I've been in combat and taught in classrooms.

I know Roger J, who posts here as as well.

AllenS, killed any babies lately?

Oligonicella said...

purplepenquin --

"soldiers ... have had to actually kill children..."

It's telling that you don't see the difference between 'had to' and 'chose to'.

Robert Cook said...

Who's to say a former combat soldier won't freak out in the classroom and imagine the kids are "gooks" or "hadjis" and pull out a knife and slit a few throats?

I wouldn't "feel good" about my kids being taught by a former soldier! That should be enough reason to disqualify 'em!

Joe Schmoe said...

Who's to say a former combat soldier won't freak out in the classroom and imagine the kids are "gooks" or "hadjis" and pull out a knife and slit a few throats?

I wouldn't "feel good" about my kids being taught by a former soldier! That should be enough reason to disqualify 'em!


So you're a no for ex-postal workers too?

traditionalguy said...

Pogo...Standards are fine with me.

In fact I have 3 or 4 that I keep which therefore should be applied to everyone just to divide the good people like me from the bad people who don't meet my standards.

I myself am very big on eating, drinking and keeping Sabbaths my way or else.

Too bad that troublemaker Paul wrote Colossians 2:16.

Titus said...

Some men have fantasies about porn stars and doing them.

I would never want to do a Porn Star.

Oligonicella said...

Robert Cook --

"Parents are entitled to 'feel' good about who is teaching their kids."

Why?

It's a derisively dumb question, but you apparently don't know. So, here goes.

They're my kids. That's of course number one. I love them and want for their safety and well-being. And you nor anyone else can tell me that this desire is wrong or bad.

This means I want to ensure the best I can for their education. If my selections are forcefully restricted by say, the government, then I certainly have a right to poke my nose in and stir things up for the first reason.

This includes who they select to spend eight hours a day with my child.

Lastly, it's my money, they're my employees.

James said...

>>That's a heaping helping of cart before the horse, isn't it? Sprinkled with your own hangups? What about being male and 55 makes one more responsible or have better judgement. On the one hand, we have a young, female teacher who's basically an unknown. But, as far as your story relates, she hasn't been caught with porn on a school-issued laptop yet.<<

You know I might have been tempted to take you seriously until you declared "I tend to take the view that character flaws are a lot like icebergs. What you can see is probably only about 10% of the underlying hidden problems. "

Arguably we all have that "character flaw" since practically all of us have been exposed to porn, or actively sought it out, at some time.

I searched the young woman's name online and noticed she was heavily involved in activist circles at Madison while a student there. As far as I am concerned that's more offensive than what the guy did.

Pogo said...

"Colossians 2:16
English Standard Version (ESV)
Let No One Disqualify You

16 Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath.
"

Sure, you can play reductio ad absurdum. So can I.

So why limit a pederast from teaching high school?

Let's say he quit pederasty this morning.

James said...

@Oligonicella. You're right; and I've had to let people go for violating Internet policy so I'm aware of the issues. But in the particular example I cited it seems a high price to pay (a 30 plus year career gone, revocation of license, etc). Perhaps there were other things I don't know about.

Scott M said...

Arguably we all have that "character flaw" since practically all of us have been exposed to porn, or actively sought it out, at some time.

You're not getting the point then. Being exposed to porn is not the problem. Seeking it out is not the problem. Making the conscious decision to download it and put it on your school-provided laptop is a huge lapse in judgement. In the context of that, we see a serious character flaw (lack of good judgement) which is probably riding on top of a nice jumble of unseen problems.

Errors in judgement like this rarely exist in a vacuum.

PS - I'll cry if you don't take me seriously.

Joe Schmoe said...

Why is Anthony Weiner out of a job? It was Weiner's own party-led by Barry and Pelosi-that ushered his departure. What exactly was his fireable offense? There were no charges filed. And what standards were Democrats applying within their own party?

Pelosi and Barry cited him as a 'distraction' who 'wouldn't be able to do his job going forward'. Is there a parallel here?

MayBee said...

He should move to my district. There are probably enough former porn star parents to inoculate him from outrage.

Zachary Paul Sire said...

ALTHOUSE: He was not a porn star "in the past." He was working as a porn star CONCURRENTLY, while he was teaching. He was also having live sex shows on webcam sites, tweeting about his productions, blogging photos from the set, releasing DVDs, uploading YouTube clips, etc.

I hate how the story has become "former" porn star (just because he said he was!) when this idiot NEVER left the industry and thought he could simply have both jobs at the same time. He told the Miami New Times (which first reported this story) that he had "dumped" his porn career, but they didn't even bother to check.

Link that documents how insane this guy is (ads on site NSFW): http://thesword.com/collin-oneal-loses-substitute-teacher-job-due-to-porn-present-not-porn-past.html

Geoff Matthews said...

Women have been fired for this, so equality demands it.
Beyond that, students need to respect their teachers. Being in porn is a disreputable activity. Want to be respected? Then don't do disreputable things.

Oligonicella said...

Well, well, well. Looks like those believing in his redemption were a bit gullible.

What I like best is the comment section in Zach's link. This guy is a known shady and he's not getting much sympathy.

Oligonicella said...

And Zach... my eyes.

wv: condlizi - Actually, that helped. She's an attractive woman.

trumpetdaddy said...

Teachers are afraid of being found out smoking pot not because it is immoral, but because it is illegal.

The teacher with porn on his laptop should have been fired because the laptop is the property of the school system.

The student who went into the laptop should have been disciplined as well, for reasons mentioned by others.

I have no information whether Loftis has been redeemed or has claimed to have been, and his redemption status isn't germane to my overall comments posted previously.

I'd be curious to know where this school district ranks in objective measures of student achievement vs. less-"moral" school districts, after controlling for the usual statistical demographic categories, and if the hiring policy in this district leads to statistically-significant improvements in those measures of student achievement.

Or if it is merely a means of providing legal liability risk management, which is most often the case with such hiring policies.

As regards parents' feelings: if you truly feel that committed to the best environment for your kid, home-school. Give up some material luxury for the sake of your kids rather than try to run off otherwise competent teachers because they have legal, though admittedly "icky," activity in their previous professional career.

Oligonicella said...

And an explosion of discussion of ancillary educational quirks ensues to cover the fact that this guy was a douche who was a porn star *while* concurrently subbing.

This is not the hill you wanta die on.

Pogo said...

Redemption doesn't give a clean slate.

A recovered alcoholic, for example, should never work in a bar.

A pederast should never work in a school.

A socialist should never be President.

The temptations are too great.

Hoosier Daddy said...

"... , I'm asking if being a former solider in a combat zone would be enough to disqualify someone from teaching in a classroom...."

I'd say in your case, yes. Not from the combat but your evident lack of critical thinking skills.

trumpetdaddy said...

I'm still not seeing an answer to my original two questions.

At what point are people excluded from society due to previous bad behavior? This is the essence of what I believe Althouse was asking in the original post. Is redemption never possible for certain activities, even if those activities are legal?

Why is porn actor or drug addict considered equivalent to terrorist by some, Pogo in particular? Is being paid to perform sex on video the dividing line and everything beyond that is the same as mass-murder, planting bombs, flying planes into sky-scrapers?

Loftis may well be an opportunistic, attention-seeking, douche-bag. Certainly sees he is. Again, appeal to authority, or lack of authority in his case, doesn't answer the questions above.

It just ignores those questions.

Scott M said...

It just ignores those questions.

The "question" seems to ignore the possibility, now apparently confirmed, that he's still participating in the activity. How can there be redemption when the person is still doing it?

Hoosier Daddy said...

"... Yes, Hoosier, "had to".

Are you saying that no children are being killed in those war zones?.."

Not at all. Your claim they had to means they had to because they were ordered to or had to in defense. If 12 year old achmed is pointing an AK at a soldier, Achmed is now a combatant.

Sorry penguin but your analogy is piss poor unless you want to clarify it.

Again, what kind of respect do you think any teacher would get from kids once they knew he/she was a porn star? Think for two seconds.

trumpetdaddy said...

Would you fire a teacher because he used to be a porn actor?

That is the question Althouse asked.

My questions arose out of Pogo's post and haven't been answered yet.

Digging up further information about the porn actor/teacher that was used as the starting point for the discussion doesn't answer the questions initially posed.

It illuminates that particular individual but not the overall subject of the discussion. Forest, trees, and all that.

Pogo said...

1) "At what point are people excluded from society due to previous bad behavior?"
Not excluded from society, excluded from mentoring the young as school teachers.

"Why is porn actor or drug addict considered equivalent to terrorist by some, Pogo in particular?"
They suggest poor judgement. Demonstrating good judgement would be never seeking to become a mentor for the young as school teachers.

The very fact of asking to teach suggests they are still dangerous morons controlled by their id or ego or libido.

Catch 22!

Pogo said...

Yes, I think there are certain behaviors that forever exclude you from teaching in schools, no matter how much you are sorry and will never ever do it aqain.

I may forgive a man for being a peeping tom, but I don't ever want him teaching junior high.

trumpetdaddy said...

I agree on the question of redemption being questionable when one is still engaged in the sinful activity. Go forth and sin no more was what the Lord said, wasn't it?

The "sin no more part" is the hard part of living. One of the reasons I'm grateful to be a Roman Catholic is the recognition through the Sacrament of Reconciliation that "sinning no more" is a constant challenge that needs reaffirmation through the faith community.

Anyway, I'd still like to see my earlier questions addressed directly in the abstract case, as I intended them. Loftis was the means to open Althouse's discussion, not the whole and entire point of the discussion.

trumpetdaddy said...

So being a terrorist is merely an exercise in poor judgment, akin to being filmed having sex or doing a line of coke?

vnjagvet said...

Yeah, I can see it now.

Ninth Grader: Hey Mr. Loftis. That was a great [insert street name for any sex act] clip I saw you in last night. How about a little action?

Why should a school board take a chance?

I don't think the answer changes if Mr. Loftis were Ms. Loftis.

Pogo said...

"So being a terrorist is merely an exercise in poor judgment"

It is at least that, as are the others in my list. Some are also criminal. All indicate dyscontrol of executive function and poor moral character.

Redemption means proving that conclusion wrong in the long haul. It should not be an experiment involving children, however.

Oligonicella said...

trumpetdaddy said...

"...that "sinning no more" is a constant challenge..."

Which they can do elsewhere, not around kids.

Just in case they lapse. No certificate of redemption stamped by the appropriate authorities and all.

Oligonicella said...

trumpetdaddy --

"So being a terrorist is merely an exercise in poor judgment, akin to being filmed having sex or doing a line of coke?"

Nope. They all do share that trait though.

trumpetdaddy said...

OK, fair enough.

Filing bankruptcy or getting divorced are also signs of poor judgment. Should bankrupts or divorcees be dismissed from teaching, as well?

Or is it the sex piece of the equation that is the core issue? Or are you assuming that anyone engaging in non-standard sex with other adults would necessarily engage in sex with minors?

Do we assume that folks engaging in non-standard adult sex are likely to be pedophiles, absent any evidence of pedophiliac proclivities, and we exclude them automatically, just in case?

I'm not saying I agree or disagree with your conclusions at all, and haven't been the whole thread. I'm just questioning your reasoning, respectfully I hope.

purplepenquin said...

what kind of respect do you think any teacher would get from kids once they knew he/she was a porn star?

What kind of respect do you think any teacher would get from kids once they knew s/he has shot&killed children?


(Snarky answer: Both teachers would get a rowdy classroom to instantly behave as soon as it was said "Shut up or I'll treat you like the last co-worker/kid I was with!"

purplepenquin said...

...and how soon will it be before a community (I'm looking at YOU, SanFran) decides that tobacco use is an immoral choice for an adult to make, and anybody who ever smoked should not be allowed to teach the children?

Oligonicella said...

trumpetdaddy --

"Filing bankruptcy or getting divorced are also signs of poor judgment."

Will this simply going to be a list of all woes that might happen that you can come up with? If so, no thanks. Death by a thousand cuts and all.

"Or is it the sex piece..."

You know, I'm really having a hard time believing that you're not ignoring what folks are saying, so I'll be blunt.

Folks don't particularly want someone who thinks it's OK to take a few hundred in exchange for simultaneously taking dicks in two or more orifices teaching their kids anything at all.

Have I been clear?

Pogo said...

One can only hope that purplepenguin is not a teacher.

Scott M said...

What kind of respect do you think any teacher would get from kids once they knew s/he has shot&killed children?

Without context, the question is meaningless. Porn, on the other hand, contains all the context necessary in one word.

The Drill SGT said...

trumpetdaddy said...
OK, fair enough.

Filing bankruptcy or getting divorced are also signs of poor judgment. Should bankrupts or divorcees be dismissed from teaching, as well?

Or is it the sex piece of the equation that is the core issue? Or are you assuming that anyone engaging in non-standard sex with other adults would necessarily engage in sex with minors?


There are 2 issues here.

1. The first seems important, but we dont have the facts. Was he truthful in his application? If not, that goes to an underlying issue that I think generally rules in favor of the employers. Lying on applications for employment is a firing offense.

2. Certainly in the security clearance area, and I would argue potentially in other "high trust" professional occupations, factors like:
- bankruptcy
- credit history
- lifestyle (they don't call it a lifestyle poly for nothing)
- drug use
- alcohol use
- martial stability
- criminal records
- deviant sexual activity
- honesty
- etc

all weigh directly into the decision about whether or not a person is a security risk.

judgement call.

Martin L. Shoemaker said...

trumpetdaddy said...

Why is porn actor or drug addict considered equivalent to terrorist by some, Pogo in particular?

They're not. You're confused. Let me try to explain.

Putting two things in the same category does not mean you consider them equivalent. It means they both happen to share the defining traits of that category, however they may differ in other traits.

My car is red. The star Betelgeuse is red. My car and Betelgeuse are both in the category of Red Things. That does not mean that I consider my car to be equivalent to Betelgeuse.

David said...

"So redemption plays no part in Pogo's morality?"

He can redeem himself all he wants. Just not as a schoolteacher. If the guy had any sense, he'd realize that too. It is instructive that upon leaving the teaching gig he went back to porn.

Suppose he just did porn in the summer, when school is not in session. That's ok, right?

Most parents are going to have misgivings about this. Those misgivings are not unreasonable, and porn acting is not a constitutionally protected status (yet.) The parents' concerns should predominate here.

purplepenquin said...

One can only hope that Pogo isn't allowed near any children, at any time.

trumpetdaddy said...

"Putting two things in the same category does not mean you consider them equivalent. It means they both happen to share the defining traits of that category, however they may differ in other traits."

Re-read that and then tell me that I'm the one "confused."

Generally, things that share "defining traits of [a] category" would be considered to be equivalents, at least in the context of the category being discussed.

My question to Pogo was why he considered terrorists and porn actors to share defining class traits. He responded with the bit about "poor judgment." Which I asked about further.

No one has yet explained why, when putting together a list of disqualifying traits for school teachers, "terrorist" would even occur to anybody, except as an instance of humorous hyperbole. If that was the case when Pogo included terrorist, he hasn't said so.

Other responses alleging lack of understanding on my part essentially center on "porn is icky," but don't address how the icky standard should be more broadly applied to other cases.

Martin L. Shoemaker said...

Yes, you are the one who's confused.

The category "Things that demonstrate poor judgment" is not the category "Things that are morally equivalent."

But that undercuts your whole argument, so you'll just keep ignoring it.

Robert Cook said...

"'What kind of respect do you think any teacher would get from kids once they knew s/he has shot&killed children?'?

"Without context, the question is meaningless. Porn, on the other hand, contains all the context necessary in one word."


More people look at porn than have shot & killed children and it is a more normal impulse, so the onus is still on the person who has killed kids to prove it is safe for him to be around children.

Martin L. Shoemaker said...

trumpetdaddy said...

No one has yet explained why, when putting together a list of disqualifying traits for school teachers, "terrorist" would even occur to anybody, except as an instance of humorous hyperbole.

A two word answer: Bill Ayers. An admitted terrorist who became a teacher. The example is not hyperbole, it's a real-life example.

Pogo said...

Trumpetdaddy, that has been asked and answered already.

Ingenious comeback. Purplepenguin. Wow.

Jose_K said...

There's little difference between a paid porn star and a prostitute. I believe it's a matter yet to be adjudicated
It was in California.It is no prostituion since you dont pay to have sex with the person paying but with another person while watching.
I tought that the first action is proxenetism and the second a voyeur but the Calfornia court ruled that

Scott M said...

Generally, things that share "defining traits of [a] category" would be considered to be equivalents, at least in the context of the category being discussed.

How do you suppose? I have a paint brush made of authentic horse hair. My uncle has a horse. Which do you suppose is better at staining my deck? (without using urine)

trumpetdaddy said...

The Drill SGT has hit upon the crux of the entire discussion. Yes, screening for employment entails risk evaluation for the employer.

Differing levels of tolerance for past activities apply for different job categories.

So, back to Althouse's original question. We've concluded that many folks would not want a former porn actor getting a job as a school teacher.

The question is why? Do you think people who engaged in sex for money in the past are poor role models? Are teachers supposed to be role models or are they supposed to teach math and history and science?

Why is non-mainstream adult sexual behavior disqualifying and not smoking, or being bankrupt, or liking NASCAR?

Do you think people who engage in sex for money are necessarily pedophiles? On the basis of what?

These are the questions that Althouse has implicitly raised.

William said...

Alternatives exclude. If you choose to be a porn star, you choose not to be a teacher, or the spouse of a member of the clergy, or the president of the PTA. You can drink and you can drive, but it is out of bounds to do both.....Like many here, I have wrestled with the idea of becoming a porn star. An easy way to make a few bucks, and God only knows the fortune I could have made in gay porn. But I chose a more arduous and more moral way of earning my bread. That's what we want to encourage in kids. We don't want to legitimize the porn industry as a vald career choice.

Scott M said...

Let's try again.

I would not want a former (definitely not a practicing) porn star as a teacher. Starring in porn shows a high level of poor judgement. Poor judgement is Bad Thing.

trumpetdaddy said...

Re: Ayers. Obviously, being a former terrorist is not disqualifying to be a college professor. But being a porn actor is for being a grade school teacher.

Ponder that for a while.

purplepenquin said...

A pederast should never work in a school.

Oh. I think I understand your concerns & worries now. You're honestly and sincerely worried about the physical dangers towards the children.

If I was of the beleif that part of being a homosexual meant that one was also sexually attracted to kids, then I'd totally agree with your opinion on this issue. While I don't agree with the basic premise, I appreciate being able to better understand your viewpoint.

Scott M said...

Ayers and this porn star are in the same set as teachers. Does that make them equivalent? Think about that for a minute.

trumpetdaddy said...

As to being in porn showing, by definition, poor judgment? I generally agree with that for the vast majority of performers in that industry.

There are those in the industry who have made vast amounts of money when no other line of work was available, though. Depending on how we define "poor judgment," it might be said that they made a good decision, but that isn't the topic of this thread.

Now that we've clarified the "poor judgment" standard, what other examples of prior poor judgment exclude someone from being a school teacher, or is non-mainstream sexual behavior the only, or principle one?

Pogo said...

"Are teachers supposed to be role models or are they supposed to teach math and history and science?"
Both.

"Why is non-mainstream adult sexual behavior disqualifying and not smoking, or being bankrupt, or liking NASCAR?"
Sometimes they are.
Tradition and religion decide.

"Do you think people who engage in sex for money are necessarily pedophiles?"
WTF??

Martin L. Shoemaker said...

trumpetdaddy said...

Re: Ayers. Obviously, being a former terrorist is not disqualifying to be a college professor. But being a porn actor is for being a grade school teacher.

Ponder that for a while.


No need to ponder. The fact that the University of Illinois at Chicago College of Education thinks that being a terrorist is not disqualifying doesn't mean that sensible, intelligent people agree with that assinine judgment.

Pogo said...

"Depending on how we define "poor judgment"


Poor judgement is, by definition, being unable to see why your middle school teacher shouldn't also be an internet porn star.

purplepenquin said...

Tradition and religion decide.

Well, traditionally teachers (in America) were unmarried women, no?


Grandpa always said that as soon as we started allowing 'em to have sex, those over-paid teachers were gonna wanna film it as well!

trumpetdaddy said...

"Ayers and this porn star are in the same set as teachers. Does that make them equivalent? Think about that for a minute."

No, they are not. That's the whole point of the thread, remember? Loftis isn't a teacher anymore. We've been discussing the reasons why.

BTW, "things that have horse hair" and "things that paint my deck" are not the same category, although a horse-hair brush can be in both, whereas the horse itself is only in one of them.

Google "Venn Diagram." It might help.

bagoh20 said...

Don't ask, don't tell.

Somebody has to do the porn. It doesn't get done by itself.

Blue@9 said...

Former porn star?
Former hooker?
Former cokehead?
Former terrorist?
Former KKK Dragon?
Former child murderer?
Former pedophile?

Why not?


Seriously, you're going to put porn star in the same category as terrorist or child murderer?

At most you can say it's a disreputable profession, and that may be a colorable argument against later employment as a teacher, but just say that straight up. No need to bring eye-rollingly bad analogies--the dude ain't Hitler.

purplepenquin said...

Poor judgement is, by definition, being unable to see why your middle school teacher shouldn't be divorced.

Poor judgement is, by definition, being unable to see why your middle school teacher shouldn't have ever filed for bankruptcy.

Poor judgement is, by definition, being unable to see why your middle school teacher shouldn't be a sports fan.

Poor judgement is, by definition, being unable to see why your middle school teacher shouldn't also be *whatever*



*shrug*


I guess that is that then...

Pogo said...

Blue@9, read the above explanations about how categories work.

Scott M said...

Things that have horse hair would be a category that includes both the horse and brush. Why is that so difficult?

trumpetdaddy said...

"Are teachers supposed to be role models or are they supposed to teach math and history and science?"
Both.

-Why? Aren't you supposed to be raising your kids and not outsourcing that to strangers?

"Why is non-mainstream adult sexual behavior disqualifying and not smoking, or being bankrupt, or liking NASCAR?"
Sometimes they are.
Tradition and religion decide.

- So it IS a cultural construct, and not an objective, rational standard? Fair enough.

"Do you think people who engage in sex for money are necessarily pedophiles?"
WTF??

- Apparently, some folks think "homosexual" means "wanting to have sex with minors."

Martin L. Shoemaker said...

trumpetdaddy said...

Now that we've clarified the "poor judgment" standard, what other examples of prior poor judgment exclude someone from being a school teacher, or is non-mainstream sexual behavior the only, or principle one?

Apparently -- despite your repeated comments on it -- you missed the fact that Pogo already proposed his list:

Former porn star?
Former hooker?
Former cokehead?
Former terrorist?
Former KKK Dragon?
Former child murderer?
Former pedophile?


I'm not saying I agree with that list; but for you to claim that "...non-mainstream sexual behavior [is] the only, or principle [example]..." being cited is a flat-out lie. You made a huge stink about terrorist being on that list, and now you pretend the list had only one item in it.

Personally, I would exclude former cokehead from the list. While successful drug rehab is less frequent than I would like, I've known people who turned their lives around from drugs and are successful professionals.

I've also seen religious revivals where a former prostitute or former porn star tells the story of their redemption, and the church then embraces them as a witness for their faith. So I might exclude them, too. If redemption is good enough for the church, it's good enough for the school.

But you want some serious bad judgment? If the comments above are true (I'm not interested in the sordid research it would take to verify them) and he's not "former" at all... Or if he deliberately hid information he was required to disclose as a condition of employment (and assuming that requirement was legal in that jurisdiction)... Then those are poor judgment, poor enough to disqualify him.

Pogo said...

Purplepenquin, in fact, the categories of those who could not teach has varied over time.

Apparently we are moving into a time where all is forgiven, and purplepenquins want their kids taught by porn stars, hookers, cokeheads, terrorists, KKK Dragons, child murderers, and pedophiles.

I hope it works out well for you, although I suspect otherwise.

trumpetdaddy said...

"Things that have horse hair would be a category that includes both the horse and brush. Why is that so difficult?"

It isn't.

What is difficult is wondering why you wanted to paint your deck with a horse. ;)

Does the horse work on contract? My deck needs painted.

Pogo said...

"So it IS a cultural construct, and not an objective, rational standard? Fair enough."
What makes you believe that cultural constructs are not objective, rational standards?


"Personally, I would exclude former cokehead from the list."
I probably would, too. But erring on the side of caution as to degree of reform is important, as the porn star case here clearly demonstrates.

trumpetdaddy said...

I just think including those who have actually harmed others, especially extreme harm like terrorism, in a list with those who have mainly harmed themselves was curious.

As regards KKK membership, apparently that is not disqualifying for the US Senate from WV. Nor is "cokehead" disqualifying for president of the USA, because the current occupant, as well as the two previous, have admitted cocaine use at one time or another in their lives.

Whether you would want any of them to be "role models" or teach your children? YMMV.

trumpetdaddy said...

"So it IS a cultural construct, and not an objective, rational standard? Fair enough."
What makes you believe that cultural constructs are not objective, rational standards?

Some are, some aren't. I think that's what we're discussing.

purplepenquin said...

purplepenquins want their kids taught by porn stars, hookers, cokeheads, terrorists, KKK Dragons, child murderers, and pedophiles.

That wasn't what I was trying to say at all. I'm sorry that you got confused. What I wanted was to learn more about why you..and others...feel as you do about this.

I just find it kinda interesting how squeamish some folks get about s-e-x. Most of the teachers (even the single ones) are making whoopee, and there ain't much outcry about that...as long as it is consenting adults, of course. But videorecord those consenting adults and let other consenting adults watch it and suddenly it is as big of a deal as being a terrorist or molesting&killing a kid.

What makes the whole thing really interesting is that ya can't really explain why you feel this way...rather, you just know you do and anyone who disagrees with ya is showing "poor judgement."


I am being sincere..for real..when I say that I thank everyone for sharing their point of view. Threads like this one are, to me, what makes the 'net a wonderful place.

/hugs


(but totally in a non-gay way)

(NTTAWWT, of course)

The Drill SGT said...

trumpetdaddy said...
Are teachers supposed to be role models or are they supposed to teach math and history and science?


rephrasing:

teachers ARE role models, good or bad, whether we like it or not for their charges.

This district and/or its parents has made the normative decision that porn stars and/or liars are bad role models. that may be unfair to some, but it's a reasonable decision based on shared community values

it's their money...

traditionalguy said...

Pogo...I love you. But you want to take the civil law as your basis for punishing criminals and mixing it with God's Torah that executes criminals so it never has to deal with this problem of recidivism.

And the Christian witness is to personal forgiveness to the same degree that we want God to forgive us. I hope God is not weighing my past life against me because he forgot the New Covenant part.

The Catholics know why confession is a necessary part of a survivable life. But the Reformed church wants to use belief in perfect doctrine as their basic priest free sacrament, but perfection ends up excluding most people most of the time.

Now where do we draw the line? You have to deal with Rom 8:1 and Gal. 5:1 or twist your doctrine into a pretzel anyway.

Robert Cook said...

"teachers ARE role models, good or bad, whether we like it or not for their charges."

Says who? I had teachers I liked, teachers I didn't like and teachers about whom I was indifferent; I never looked at them or thought about as role models.

I didn't even think in those terms, and I suspect many or most children do not.

To the degree I consciously or subconsciously considered anyone to be role models, it was my parents.

Scott M said...

I never looked at them or thought about as role models.

Robert Cook - Objective observer of the human condition since pre-school.

Of course...this assumes that everything that shapes our behavior and our thoughts is processed on a conscious level all the time. Go ahead and hang your hat on that one.

Hoosier Daddy said...

The fact that this is even a subject for debate says much about the left right divide in this country.

Peter said...

Well, we're talking about public schools. Government has a near-monopoly on taxpayer-funded K-12 education, and that makes a big difference in weighing who should have the trump card.

If parents had real choices then it would be different. If parents had real choices then socially conservative parents could choose to send their children to schools that did not violate their beliefs, and more permissive parents could choose schools that employ [ex-?] porn stars.

But, they don't. And therefore he should find another job. Such as (if he wants to teach chidlren) teaching at a private school. If he can find one that will hire him.

And, as a general principle, the needs of students- mostly as expressed by the students' parents- should always trump what teachers want. Because the school exists to serve the needs of students, not to serve the needs of teachers.

Scott M said...

not to serve the needs of teachers

Reactionary, knuckle-dragging, heretic.

Pogo said...

"ya can't really explain why you feel this way...rather, you just know you do and anyone who disagrees with ya is showing "poor judgement.""
Not true.
Human experience cruelly teaches that the failure to learn from experience is punished severely.

Those lessons, learned over millenia, are bundled nicely into tradition and religion.

What I have said is completely uncontroversial in all areas of the US save those dominated by the left.

They're considered no-brainers, they're so easy to decide. For the left, they require much useless cogitation, because, like purplepenguin, they have nothing on which to base a decision, having decided that tradition and religion are useless.

Pogo said...

"I didn't even think in those terms, and I suspect many or most children do not."

That's why children need role models.

They are ignorant uncivilized beasts.

Pogo said...

"But you want to take the civil law as your basis for punishing criminals and mixing it with God's Torah..."

tradguy, you're reading far too much into my comments.

I can see in my heart to forgive a pederast. But I can also see that it's in the best interest of all, even him or her, to help them avoid the near occasions of sin.

And a current or recent porn star is not a good role model. It would be morally wrong to have him or her teach children.

jamboree said...

What age are the kids?

My 6th grade teacher was a playboy centerfold. Her past was behind her, but it still informed her persona. She was a walking playboy Miss Havisham - wore clothes fully 15-20 years out of date from her "Glory Years", full porn star cleavage showing, and had the little boys give her shoulder massages as a "reward".

We also had a male teacher with a huge long dick who wore no underwear - just let it hang down his jean leg. Our drama teacher was flaming as well.

Should she have been fired? I dunno. Almost all junior high teachers are or were freakish in one way or another. You'd have to fire them all except the favorites.

You're so sensitive at that age and adults are so sad and generally creepy. You've got nothing to do but look at them for an hour a day. And judge them. Hah. Is being creepy and sad around the Little Dears a fireable offense?

As far as I know, no teachers hit on kids until high school.

el polacko said...

all this 'moralizing' about porn is nonsense. visual depictions of sex have been around since cave drawings and can, more recently, be largely credited for the growth of the video tape/dvd markets and the popularizing of the internet.
funny how porn can simultaneously be a multi-billion dollar industry and the object of so much (public) scorn. put down the torches and pitchforks, zip up your pants, and just ask whether or not this past (and/or present) porn actor is a good teacher? that is, do his students learn from him? that's all that matters. the only teacher who should be required to be a 'saint' is maybe a nun...and i'll wager that even a few of them have a history that would shock some folks of delicate sensibility.

Methadras said...

Oh sure, what is in the past is in the past. Right? And an award winner too. I'll never understand awarding porn actors some sort of accolade for their on camera deviancy. Oh look, Harriet, he's porking him sideways. Well, by cracky, give that shit-pusher an award.

Has anyone paged Titus yet?

rhhardin said...

The interesting way to argue it would be to argue that all teachers are porn stars really.