You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
35 points

It feels like she knew she would get fired from this new job, leverage it nationwide articles and get even more subscribers to her OF page. She even references the teaching gig in her bio, and the new job in her latest posts.

permalink
report
reply
73 points
*

Maybe. It doesn’t matter. Jobs shouldn’t be able to fire you because you get naked on the Internet, which requires you to pay to even see in the first place.

Edit:

@meep_launcher@lemm.ee made a great point about teacher/student dynamics and I can agree with that in most circumstances (e.g. the students are underage). I still think it’s ridiculous for her second, non-teaching job to fire her.

permalink
report
parent
reply
41 points

I’m a teacher and they specifically have guidelines on what you’re behavior online should be. Keeping your socials clean. Making sure my interactions with students are kept professional.

The fact is that kids these days are nosey and great researchers. Having an only fans as an educator has a huge risk of students discovering it, and will ultimately change the relationship between student and teacher from a student/ teacher relationship to a viewer/ pornstar one.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

This is the most sane, rational summation of this debacle I’ve read yet.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

to a viewer/ pornstar one

And depending on their age, they might even have sex. People want one easy solution to all problems, but being a teacher and a regular office worker is not the same, hence the standards are different too.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Here’s a wild idea that seems to never catch on in 'murica - have the parents actually educate their children about how socially unacceptable that’d be.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Gonna get roasted for this, but why?

I think it’s pretty reasonable for an employer to fire someone for posting racist things on the Internet. I think we can all agree on that. Actions outside of work can have an effect on work and so I think it’s reasonable to make employment decisions based on how the employer acts outside of work. I would argue racism is morally wrong and sex work is not, but I don’t think it’s possible to define employment laws in a way that fits a universal moral code.

I love the protected classes we have for employment now: age, gender, color, religion, etc. I think these protections are valuable to employees everyone, and I think they make sense because they don’t affect your ability to do the job. I having “does sex work on the side” on this list makes much less sense.

I think many, maybe even most, jobs wouldn’t be affected by an employee having an onlyfans, and so in my opinion someone shouldn’t get fired for it most of the time. But I think there’s a clear line between the protected classes and people who post on onlyfans.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Simple answer. Most of us (and most of the world) thinks At-Will employment is barbaric.

It is entirely reasonable to require some substantive effect to warrent termination, even if that substantive effect is not directly the teacher’s fault. Her having an onlyfans account, not grounds for firing. Her onlyfans account passed around by students? Grounds for termination.

There’s a (not so new) trend in the US for companies to crack down on side gigs. Yes, sex work is a politically charged side-gig, but we shouldn’t ever be supporting a company’s right to fire people having side-gigs without a very good reason. So long as your side-gig never encroaches into your day job in any real (not hypothetical) way, there really isn’t a good reason.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

Eh I disagree with some jobs. Teachers are supposed to be role models to students and keep certain things private.

The problem is we aren’t paying teachers adequately for that. It reminds me of essential workers during the pandemic. If we need these people so badly, or we’re asking them to be role models and be private about certain things, then we should be paying them much, much more.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Even if teachers are supposed to be role models for students which I think is debatable it certainly is not applied outside the classroom. They will never be paid enough in any world to warrant them crafting their entire being as if they are some K-pop idols.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

Is it, in your eyes, morally wrong to sell naked photos of yourself?

The porn industry has many, many problems, and OnlyFans has just recently been targeted by an investigative piece by Reuters journalists for doing little about people using their platform to sell non-consensual nude pictures, or even videos of rape, but as long as you yourself are doing it of your own free will, I don’t see the problem, even if you are a teacher.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

How is doing sex work being a bad role model?

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
45 points

Her job doesn’t get to decide what she does in her off time. Of course on the streets of the real world they definitely try and succeed. I’m saying that they should not.

God i just want the world to change for the better. This is dumb

permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 20K

    Posts

  • 526K

    Comments