Teacher fired for pr0n

[Sean of the Thread]

That she starred in 11 years prior. Is stripping to pay for an Education Degree still acceptable?

What's your take? Should she have been fired or not?





Teacher Fired For Making Porn Movie 11 Years Ago

POSTED: 6:27 am PDT May 5, 2006

REIDLAND, Ky. -- A western Kentucky high school teacher fired for being in an adult movie several years ago said she has since turned her life around.

Tericka Dye had taught science at Reidland High School for the last two years. She was also a volleyball coach. But school officials recently learned that she participated in an adult film made 11 years ago when Dye was 23.

Schools Superintendent Tim Heller said he decided to fire Dye because her presence in the classroom would be a distraction. Her pay was also suspended for the rest of the school year.

[Wezas]

Did she lie on an application that directly asked if she'd been in any adult films/print?

If not, there is no way they should suspend her pay and if I were her I'd sue.

[Back]

I don’t see a problem with this. If it were a man, then I would. Call me sexist.

[Snapp]

Sexist.

That was 11 years ago. It's not like she's still a porn star on the side or something. It doesn't seem right at all, but then, it is Kentucky.

[Praefection]

I'm weird but I'm really interested in how they found out she did the movie... was someone watching old porn and recognized her?

I think it's a pile of shit though. Honestly, how many people did something in their younger days and have now regreted it? Holding my past over my head when she's making an obvious attempt to better herself and her students is just asnine.

[Apathy]

The real question is: is she hot?

[CrystalTears]

Wow, someone take away Xyelin's ability to create polls. Those choices are the pits. :P

It's bullshit. It was 11 years ago, her life before teaching, who the fuck cares?!

Can't a girl do porn these days without it affecting her life negatively? Why is sex such a taboo thing yet violence is okay? What is the big deal?

[Skeeter]

ZOMG I saw UR BOOOOOBIES. UR Teh fired!

I definately think she has grounds for wrongfull termination and possibly contract violation. KY is pretty freakin backwards anyway though. Doesn't surprise me.

[Beguiler]

Yeah, unless there was something in the teacher's contract that specifically asked about former employment, I don't think she should be fired. Unless she was recruiting new actors for an upcoming feature film..heheheh.. No, seriously, people change, and her going into teaching certainly is a change in lifestyle. Go for it. Sue them, take their trailers!

[Wezas]

Now, if they find out she used to be a cokehead (I assume it would be on the application) and she lied on the app, I say fire her.

But this is just stupid. To take away her pay is even more stupid.

[HarmNone]

I'd guess she has a lawsuit here, if she elects to pursue it. Firing someone for something they did eleven years ago is a reach, to say the least.

[DeV]

Bogus as hell. It was 11 years ago and she was 23 at the time, wtf.

I'd like to review the film, "for educational purposes", to review the extent of her porn star abilities at the time in question and determine if her actions on film could in any way undermine her ability to teach... and not just new sexual positions.

[radamanthys]

I bet a student saw it. I wonder if they took away her license.

[ElanthianSiren]

She should have used an alias. Anyway, I'm with the majority on this one.

-M

[GS4-D]

The real question is: is she hot?

See for yourself...

http://www.ktvu.com/education/9165504/detail.html

Click on her name in the article, it takes you to her picture.

[Alfster]

she looks trampy

[Skeeter]

Ugly people have no business making Porn. I reverse my earlier position.

[CrystalTears]

Heh, she didn't age well, did she? The issue is still dumb though.

[Apathy]

See for yourself...

http://www.ktvu.com/education/9165504/detail.html

Click on her name in the article, it takes you to her picture.

Well then... The gut reaction is no.

However, I would be willing to bet she is well into the land of "freakness" which may allow a typical "No" answer to be reversed.

Final judgement pending upon the old pr0n getting resurfaced due to "buzzworthiness" and is viewed for scientific purposes.

[DeV]

I need to see a picture of her at 23 to make a proper determination. She looks like a school marm in that recent picture.

[SpunGirl]

Wow, no. That's fucked up. Porn isn't illegal, it's not like she was a coke dealer 10 years ago or something. She should move here and teach instead.... Jake has students whose moms are strippers, she'd fit right in at the PTA meetings.

-K

[Kainen]

Everything you do affects you. Regardless of how long it might take it to catch up with you. While it's not cool that it was 11 years ago.. she was stupid to think she could do something like that then expect people to want allow her to teach kids. What I am seeing in people's answers doesn't shock me.. but it does show how far standards have fallen. Maybe I am in the minority, but I think that you have to be careful about the things you do in life, or stuff can come back on you and bite you in the ass.

[Sean of the Thread]

The conservatives right nutz didn't really flock to this thread as I first expected.

[Daniel]

. Maybe I am in the minority, but I think that you have to be careful about the things you do in life, or stuff can come back on you and bite you in the ass.

^

What does any of that have to do with her ability to teach math to kids?

If anything, I will be teaching my kids to accept knowledge from wherever it might come and to be receptive of things regardless of its appearence or past history.

I've had a pretty unique life. I've been through alot of shit, but seen alot of good things as well. My mom now currently works at a department that is probbably the top in its field in the world, and as such have had the opportunity to talk with several noble prize winners and other such academic people. Yet, some of the most intelligent people I've ever met have been homeless or didn't even have a high school diploma. Furthermore, the things I learned to be successful now and the things that got me on the right path were from people who had actually made mistakes or who were those who had bad shit happen to them and were able to impart the knowledge of those experiences on me.

You aren't protecting your kid from the world by trying to take everyone out of it who might have done something wrong. You're sheltering it and in the process hurting the only prospect he has to be a grounded individual, so chances are he'll be just another douche bag in America who thinks of his exceptional american experience as being the only valid one.

[StrayRogue]

America is so mixed up about porn. On one hand you have those whom assume the morale highground and say it's evil and it's the devil's work etc. This approach is realised via TV censorship, the Messe commission, Federal iditements, and crazed Christian do-gooder zealots like Anthony Comstock whom could entrap, search and siege and generally be a gimp at will.

Yet on the other hand America dominates the porn movie industry. It amasses as much per year as Hollywood. It's an interesting dichotomy.

[Daniel]

What is an Iditement?

[Skirmisher]

Hush, you know he meant indictment.

[CrystalTears]

Maybe I am in the minority, but I think that you have to be careful about the things you do in life, or stuff can come back on you and bite you in the ass.
I feel it's unfortunate that in this day and age, someone being in porn films in their early 20's is subject to "bite you in the ass".

We're not talking about kiddie porn here, right? Just adult films, correct? What does this have to do with teaching children 11 years later? Frankly, and this is probably where I'm in the minority, but if she was STILL doing adult films on the side, where it didn't affect her teaching, I wouldn't have a problem with it. What she does on her own time is her own business providing that she's not breaking any laws.

I swear I don't understand people sometimes. It seems we're going backwards with tolerance at times.

[Apathy]

Yet on the other hand America dominates the porn movie industry. It amasses as much per year as Hollywood. It's an interesting dichotomy.

Fact: Porn industry reported higher profits than Hollywood this year.

[HarmNone]

It occurs to me that it's rather silly to fire this woman for making porn movies eleven years ago. Even if you disapprove of porn, she isn't making them now (that we know of), and the school is aware that she has made them in the past. That makes her the "devil we know". How many teachers (or priests, or doctors, or policepersons, or whatever) who have never made a porn movie, or have but are not known to have, are out there molesting children right now? It seems to me it's better to know than not to know. The "devil we know" isn't likely to be doing anything now that would endanger her position because she knows she'll be the first to fall suspect should something outre' occur.

[Czeska]

I haven't read the whole thread, so this is just the first "off the top of my head" thought.

If the kids know she made porn, it's going to influence her ability to teach effectively, most likely.

[HarmNone]

Heh. Yeah, it probably would, Mir. Question is...who felt it necessary to allow the "little tykes" access to the information? If it had been kept quiet, as it should have been, this problem wouldn't exist.

[Wezas]

Not sure if it's said in the articles if it was a student/other teacher/parent who found the pr0n.

If it was the student, they should have just asked her politely to change school systems. Instead, it's a huge news story and it'll be hard for her to find work anywhere (outside of porn).

[Jolena]

Not only that, her movies came out in 1997, according to the information that I looked up on her from the company that produced and filmed her porn movies. She wasn't some 'oh I did it one time for money/fun/experiment' type girl. She's got several movies out there, most of which feature some pretty racy and extreme situations. That in and of itself isn't bad, but perhaps rather than her (reportedly) statements that she just did it for one day 11 years ago, she might try coming clean now that she's busted. I could understand the embarassment, but its already out there. Lying about it at this point makes her look worse in the eyes of those who are accusing her the most. Plus well..whether she MADE those movies 11 years ago or not, they didn't come out until 9 years ago.

Edited to add that the production company of her films stated that she didn't leave porn film until 1999, where she suddenly 'disappeared' from the industry, having done pretty much all that there was to do in this type of film.

[HarmNone]

So, in our quickness to judge, our greed for sensationalism, and our love of punishment, we've put one more qualified person out of a job and on the street. Wunnerful.

[Daniel]

Because you know. Porn Companies are bastions of reputability.

[Apathy]

Not only that, her movies came out in 1997, according to the information that I looked up on her from the company that produced and filmed her porn movies. She wasn't some 'oh I did it one time for money/fun/experiment' type girl. She's got several movies out there, most of which feature some pretty racy and extreme situations. That in and of itself isn't bad, but perhaps rather than her (reportedly) statements that she just did it for one day 11 years ago, she might try coming clean now that she's busted. I could understand the embarassment, but its already out there. Lying about it at this point makes her look worse in the eyes of those who are accusing her the most. Plus well..whether she MADE those movies 11 years ago or not, they didn't come out until 9 years ago.

Edited to add that the production company of her films stated that she didn't leave porn film until 1999, where she suddenly 'disappeared' from the industry, having done pretty much all that there was to do in this type of film.

So 2 years difference in when the movies came out changes everything?

Are you high?

[Jolena]

I do not believe it changes everything, nor have I said that she should have been fired. So no, I'm not high. I do however, think that if the information out there by the production company is true, that any little slight lie this woman might tell to 'soften' the blow of the discovery is not going to help her and in fact will give them more to work with. Hence, the statements I made in my post.

There's a large difference between "Oh I just did it once, on one day, for some spare cash to make it 11 years ago." and "Rikki Anderson has appeared in multiple pornography films and her career ended in 1999".

Do I feel badly for her predicament? Absolutely. What she did back then should not be used for her termination now. However, as I said, lying even slightly (as in the 2 years difference) about when she did this, how often she did it, the circumstances surrounding it, etc will probably not do her one ounce of good against the vicious remarks and actions of those persecuting her.

[Skirmisher]

Far too many hypocritical wannabe prudes in this country.

[Sean of the Thread]

Far too many hypocritical wannabe prudes in this country.


ooooo! Elaborate please.

[SpunGirl]

Who cares if the kids know she did porn? Maybe it would teach the kids that people come from all walks of life, that people's outlooks and life paths can change, and that they cannot judge someone based on something as silly as a two-year porn career from almost a decade ago.

Basically, what Daniel said.

-K

[Daniel]

Just because she appeared in multiple films doesn't mean she did multiple scenes. Porn companys regularly regurgitate clips of the same scenes into different movies.

[Kainen]

All this "teach kids that people come from all walks of life thing" and "it's sad that stuff done in the past can bite you on the ass" stuff makes me ill. It feels like people are saying "do what you want, it's ok.. no one will be mad if you are around our children etc" Fuck that.. I don't want some whore that was in porn movies teaching my kid. I don't give a shit if America IS the porn capital of the world.. you have to draw the line somewhere. These lax attitudes towards who teaches our children is the same ones that allow other even less desirable people around our kids. Yeah you go ahead and say it's ok for some woman (or man for that matter) who spread her legs on camera to teach your kid.. not mine.

[Skirmisher]

I wonder how many of your kids friends parents whos houses they play at pay to watch these whores do their thing.

Thats okay though?

Or do you quiz everyone about any possible whoring they may have done in the past also?

[Kainen]

Regardless of how you try to make it seem ok.. it's not. I can't always be around to stop my kid from watching that crap.. but I can do my damnest to see that he doesn't. Maybe if other parents gave a shit more about their kids, some of the crap that goes with teens wouldnt be. The bottom line is that people who make or act in porn arent the kind of people I want around my child. This crap of "well he's going to see it anyway" is no reason for me to back down from my responibilities (spelling) as a parent. Part of that is trying to guide them in what is wrong and is right, and to me.. fucking someone on camera for money isn't right.

[Jolena]

Why isn't it right? People have sex all the damned time. So what if someone gets paid to do it. It's not like sex is a dirty secret that everyone should be ashamed of.

I could understand if she was fucking kids or something like that, but she's not. She was on camera with consenting adults having sex. Why is that a suddenly horrendous thing that makes her unable to teach kids?

Edited to add: Are you afraid that she's going to whip out one of her movies, show it to some kids and perhaps encourage them to become porn stars when they grow up? I'm genuinely curious why you think that her being an adult film star eliminates her ability to teach children volleyball and science.

[Jorddyn]

I could understand if she was fucking kids or something like that, but she's not. She was on camera with consenting adults having sex. Why is that a suddenly horrendous thing that makes her unable to teach kids?

Because sex is dirty and evil. And we should thank the person who was watching the video of her having sex for pointing it out and saving us from the evil that is her. That person is who we should aspire to be.

Jorddyn, big fan of hypocrisy

[SpunGirl]

So let me get this straight. If someone has done something in the past which they feel was silly or decided wasn't right for them, and they aspire to better themselves and make a different kind of contribution to society, and they succeed in their goals....

We should teach our children that they are still dirty, dirty whores for what they did during two years out of 32 on this earth, and therefore unfit to come into contact with them?

Heh.

-K

[Sean of the Thread]

The spin is incredible around here... and the hypocrits.

I'd tell you all to goto bed you got work in the morning but... you just fucking chat and forum hop all day at work anyways.

btw I love all you loose women.. lets all lock legs and swap gravy!

[Latrinsorm]

Why isn't it right?Though the marketplace strives to convince us otherwise, human beings aren't to be bought and sold as commodities, because human beings aren't merely objects. It's not that *sex* is bad, it's that dehumanization is very, *very* bad. Giving up your subject-ness for some colored paper? WTF is that? From what you seemed to find, this also didn't appear to be an emergency sort of "my child is dying from an expensive-to-treat disease" situation. There has to be a monster of an extenuating circumstance for dehumanization to be permissible.

Now, maybe this particular actress was a transcendent pioneer in her field, bringing about a renaissance of empowerment for the disenfranchised. In that case, hurray. That doesn't seem to be what happened, though.

In any event, her lying about the details was an *extraordinarily* bad idea.
If someone has done something in the past which they feel was silly or decided wasn't right for themI'm all for rehabilitation and forgiveness. People seem to get cranky when I say things like child molesters and murderers should be forgiven if they're contrite though, I don't know what the problem is. Wait, yes I do, it's that moral relativism just doesn't pass muster as a serious ethic.

Some things are just right and wrong. Contrition leads to forgiveness, but lying isn't contrition. She still shouldn't have been fired without cause, as the rule of law is paramount to a stable society, but let's not whitewash this lady just yet.

I also don't think it's fair to classify her firing as a pariah sort of situation. Not being in contact with and not being in prolonged, unsupervised contact with are pretty different.

As an aside, I thought she was sorta good-looking.

[Sean of the Thread]

<insert diety> help the person that molests my children. While your morality allows forgiving them.. ...

Bottom line is morality is different for all... and in this situation it is no different.

[Skirmisher]

Regardless of how you try to make it seem ok.. it's not. I can't always be around to stop my kid from watching that crap.. but I can do my damnest to see that he doesn't. Maybe if other parents gave a shit more about their kids, some of the crap that goes with teens wouldnt be. The bottom line is that people who make or act in porn arent the kind of people I want around my child. This crap of "well he's going to see it anyway" is no reason for me to back down from my responibilities (spelling) as a parent. Part of that is trying to guide them in what is wrong and is right, and to me.. fucking someone on camera for money isn't right.

I don't think many if any here were suggesting that the schools should be showing hrdcore porn during school.

I don't think the teacher in question had a strippers pole installed and lectured while doing a routine for the class.

The point I made was that I KNOW that at least one or two of the houses your child(ren) play at, assuming they leave the house, have parents who watch or watched porn. They dont put it on and leave it to babysit the kids ala The Lion King i'm sure but then neither did this teacher flaunt her past for anyone.

So unless you interrogate everyone of your friends, then you are being hypocritical, i'm sure unintentionally, but hypocritical nonetheless in condemning this woman for making a few movies back when she was young.

Unless there is some truly bizarre stuff in there like pedophelia or bestiality its just sex for goddnes sakes.

[Daniel]

These lax attitudes towards who teaches our children is the same ones that allow other even less desirable people around our kids

^

Good luck sheltering your kids. Im sure they'll be well adjusted members of society.

Wait..I take that back. I'm sure they'll just another douche bag american who somehow thinks they deserve the advantages they get as Americans just becase.

[Wezas]

Xyelin, you need to start making the polls public so we can see who is voting what. Besides Kainen's vote, obviously.

[Sean of the Thread]

I think we should start firing all the gay and lesbian teachers as well.

[Skirmisher]

There ya go.

[Wezas]

I'm forwarding that post to your brother.

[Alfster]

I think we should start firing all the gay and lesbian teachers as well.

Don't forget the minorities!

[Skeeter]

I think we should start firing all the gay and lesbian teachers as well.

Then who will teach Gym?

[Latrinsorm]

Bottom line is morality is different for allThis isn't actually the case, if you look into it. I encourage you to do so.

[Jolena]

While I can agree with some of what you posted Latrinstorm, I have to ask a question. You seem to be centered around the fact that she did this 'for colored paper'. Would your opinion of whether it is right or wrong, and whether she is fit to teach science and volleyball, change if she was not paid and simply did it for free?

[Sean of the Thread]

Or in the name of science attempt to fit a volleyball?

[DeV]

>>The bottom line is that people who make or act in porn arent the kind of people I want around my child.<<

What if she never acted in or made porn but instead had a HUGE collection at home that she watched in her leisure. Would that be ok? Oh, wait, you would you ever know would you.

I understand the moral implications involved. However, this woman obtained the proper credentials that allow her to teach children in an atmosphere where porn should never be a topic of discussion between adults and children. I can understand the reason she was removed from the position at that school, but for something like this to be made public, potentially jeopardizing this woman's future career and everything she went to school and worked for is wrong, imo. Teachers are not angels. In fact, most would not be teaching your children if they were not being paid, quite badly I might add, for the opportunity. We all whore ourselves out to a certain degree.

[StrayRogue]

I don't understand why people are being all uptight with the assumption that porn is a bad thing or that people who watch, collect, or make porn are somehow twisted perverts.

[Kainen]

Why isn't it right? People have sex all the damned time. So what if someone gets paid to do it. It's not like sex is a dirty secret that everyone should be ashamed of.

I could understand if she was fucking kids or something like that, but she's not. She was on camera with consenting adults having sex. Why is that a suddenly horrendous thing that makes her unable to teach kids?

Edited to add: Are you afraid that she's going to whip out one of her movies, show it to some kids and perhaps encourage them to become porn stars when they grow up? I'm genuinely curious why you think that her being an adult film star eliminates her ability to teach children volleyball and science.

This is EXACTLY what I mean by our standards have come down. I find it sad that people are making excuses for her. If I found out that someone was showing my kid porn I would do my damnest to see them jailed for it AT THE LEAST. I suppose you think it's ok for your kids to see that shit.. but not mine. I think that there should be SOME standards for the people that are around my child.. if you don't care that much about who's around your's.. well I guess thats your business. If you dont have enough morals to understand why it's wrong to fuck people on camera for money.. well thats not my business either. I don't want people like that around my child.. no I can't ask everyone around him about their morals.. but that doesn't mean I should turn a blind eye (like so many of you would) to the fact that I dont need some chick who made money whoring herself out on camera teaching my kid. I am not posting anything after this because all reading this thread is doing is making me sick and sad.. sick because I KNOW there are parents that are replying that they don't think it's wrong to allow porn stars around their kids and sad because I know that my expecting the people who are in a position to guide my child (teachers in this case) to have higher moral standards than someone who does porn movies is the minority. Worse, instead of people understanding why I wouldnt want that sort of person around my son, I am getting talked down to. Everyone has their opinions.. and I have to respect that, but mine isn't going to change and I doubt anyone else's is either.

Ok and I am adding this because some dumbass implied that what I said meant that we should get rid of gay and or minority teachers.. dont add shit to what I said. Being gay doesn't mean you are a whore or that you make porn. I don't have any problems with gay teachers. I just don't want people like drug addicts, porn stars, child molesters, murders, rapists.. etc near my child.

[CrystalTears]

I guess this means that if they weren't getting paid to have sex it would be okay, or that it were filmed for posterity? And I don't understand why something she used to do before her teaching career has anything to do with her current employment.

Wait wait.. I hadn't heard anything about her showing porn to her students. Is that true or are you adding a factor that has nothing to do with what we're discussing?

And please don't tell me you believe that every single person your child is in contact with, that you trust, doesn't have some deep dark secret that you may be against. I really don't know what someone does in their life, so long as not affecting a child, has any negative impact on your or your children. And why is having consensual sex considered whoring?! Damn. Comparing porn stars to child molesters and rapists... good lord.

I think it's safe to assume that you're completely against porn, both those in it and those who watch it. That's fine. But you're the one calling the rest of us crazy for not putting our foot down and throwing this chick in the slammer because we don't agree with you, and being sickened by our responses.

[Skeeter]

I guess Paris Hilton is cleared to teach. I assume she didn't get paid for that.

[Wezas]

I guess Paris Hilton is cleared to teach. I assume she didn't get paid for that.

That's hot.

[DeV]

Fortunately for Paris, you don't have to go to take any classes to become a porn star.

And what CT said! Where does it say she was showing porn to kids? Of course that isn't ok, but that isn't stated anywhere in the article.

[StrayRogue]

Kainens post:

God I hate conservatives. It would be worse if she was gay as well I presume.

[Sean]

Some of my art teachers used to pay people to pose naked for figure drawings in their spare time...

Those harlots.

[Latrinsorm]

if she was not paid and simply did it for free?To dehumanize oneself for nothing would be even worse. They're both really bad. Getting paid is like getting shot in both kneecaps but then you get a candybar.
I suppose you think it's ok for your kids to see that shitShe wasn't SHOWING it to the kids, she was just IN IT a long time beforehand. I'm sorry, but I couldn't bear to read the rest of your rambly paragraph-esque thing.
that it were filmed for posterity?Two people saying "hey let's film this so we can reminisce later" is fine. Two people saying "hey let's film this so people we've never met can use us as masturbatory or sexual aids" is not fine. People aren't (just) things. That's the issue.

[DeV]

You think getting paid for porn is dehumanizing?

[CrystalTears]

People aren't (just) things. That's the issue. What issue? Are the people in the film complaining that they were being used unfairly? As far as I know, most porn stars get into this line of work voluntarily. They are using their bodies for entertainment for others, nothing more (or maybe just for the sex and get some money for a good time, whatever).

So does that make a stripper bad because she's showcasing her body for money? Why would that be okay but the second actual intercourse is involved it's not okay?

You sound like an ex boyfriend of mine who didn't like women who enjoyed oral sex because he felt it was demeaning to women. How enjoying something, anything, sexual is dehumanizing is beyond my comprehension.

[Sean of the Thread]

Worse, instead of people understanding why I wouldnt want that sort of person around my son, I am getting talked down to..


O RLY? Wtf do you think you're doing in your posts? Hope you don't live in a glass house.

If you're going to pull the "morals" card then gay teachers are in the same deck. At least be consistent if thats you're only defense.

Would you let me around your kids based on my online personality?

[Daniel]

I find it sad that people are making excuses for her. If I found out that someone was showing my kid porn I would do my damnest to see them jailed for it AT THE LEAST


She wasn't showing kids the porno.


I am getting talked down to. Everyone has their opinions.. and I have to respect that, but mine isn't going to change and I doubt anyone else's is either.

You just said we make you sick. You want special consideration? How surprising.


just don't want people like drug addicts, porn stars, child molesters, murders, rapists.. etc near my child.

Etc, being? Homos? Niggers? Chinks? Kikes?

Why exactly do you include porn stars into your list? Of all the things in there its the only one that isn't a crime. So where exactly is your moral indignation coming from?

What are you basing your morals on?

[Tisket]

Why does it seem that Latrinsorm is just drowning in stupid lately? Moreso than usual that is...

[Latrinsorm]

Are the people in the film complaining that they were being used unfairly?That's just it. It's not an issue of personal taste or palate, it's a necessary truth that dehumanization is wrong. A person who says "you know what, I like being objectified" is not being rational.
So does that make a stripper bad because she's showcasing her body for money?A stripper has more grey area because there's human contact involved between the creator and the receiver, but mostly yes.
You think getting paid for porn is dehumanizing?Commerical pornography is, by definition, dehumanizing.
Why does it seem that Latrinsorm is just drowning in stupid lately? Moreso than usual that is..:)

[Jolena]

This is EXACTLY what I mean by our standards have come down. I find it sad that people are making excuses for her. If I found out that someone was showing my kid porn I would do my damnest to see them jailed for it AT THE LEAST. I suppose you think it's ok for your kids to see that shit.. but not mine.

I'm not sure if I want to laugh or slap you for making such a idiotic statement. First off, I didn't say that she was showing porn to kids in the class, I ASKED if you were afraid that she might as the basis for your saying she shouldn't be around kids in a teaching position. Please learn to read before responding next time. I like you Kainen, but seriously you have lost your fucking mind this time. Please don't assume that I would think it's 'ok' for my kids to see pornography. I never indicated in ANY way that I would think it was okay for that to happen.


I think that there should be SOME standards for the people that are around my child.. if you don't care that much about who's around your's.. well I guess thats your business. If you dont have enough morals to understand why it's wrong to fuck people on camera for money.. well thats not my business either. I don't want people like that around my child.. no I can't ask everyone around him about their morals.. but that doesn't mean I should turn a blind eye (like so many of you would) to the fact that I dont need some chick who made money whoring herself out on camera teaching my kid.

I agree that there should be standards for who teaches children. And there ARE standards in place. Are they flawless? No. But you still haven't really answered my original question about WHAT it is you think will happen if this woman taught your children in school. Rather than just 'She's a whore and I don't want her around my kids', why not try to give a valid argument to it? Oh but of course, you aren't responding anymore because you know, we're just making you sick because we ask questions and don't think being a porn star for 2 years makes her ineligible to teach kids 9 years later.

And once again, PLEASE go ahead and 'talk down' to us and make assumptions about us even as you cry for us not to do the same.


Worse, instead of people understanding why I wouldnt want that sort of person around my son, I am getting talked down to.

My intention was not to talk down to you over your opinion, but to discuss it and find out more of WHY you felt that way, including what you think will happen if she continues to teach those children as she has for the last 2 years in that school system. I don't understand your reasoning, you are right. You've given me no real support of your thoughts.

[StrayRogue]

I just hope her son doesn't grow up to be so narrow minded.

[CrystalTears]

All I can say to you at this point is that I completely disagree with you. Arguing the points with you will just give me a headache. ;)

[Apathy]

Kainens post:

God I hate conservatives. It would be worse if she was gay as well I presume.

No, that would make it ok.

Unless she were a man and gay, then it would be COMPLETE DAMNATION.

[Snapp]

Posted by Latrinsorm
Two people saying "hey let's film this so people we've never met can use us as masturbatory or sexual aids" is not fine.[/i]
You never look at porn or use it for a "masturbatory aid?"

[Sean of the Thread]

You never look at porn or use it for a "masturbatory aid?"

Sadly to his dismany Bruce Springsteen doesn't star in any porn.. thus why he is so bitter.

[Latrinsorm]

thus why he is so bitter.lol

This might sound unbelievable, but I've tried watching porn from time to time and I end up getting bogged down thinking about who these people are, what caused them to decide to do this for a living, what they're like IRL, etc. I had less (zero) trouble in my younger years, but apparently I've grown some (or gotten stupider, if you listen to Tisket) since then.

[Sean]

I'm gonna have to go with Tisket on this one.

[SpunGirl]

Latrisorm, I seriously love how you're like "omg if you choose this career you're not being rational because I don't agree with the choices you're making!"

If anything, porn is MORE respectable than stripping. Porn is two actors playing a role for the entertainment of the viewing audience. Period. People cry at sappy romances and tragedies, and they jerk off to porn. Situation filmed to elicit a reaction. Really no difference there.

-K

[CrystalTears]

Apparently a sex scene in ANY movie is dehumanizing then. The actors are getting paid to have that sex scene, I see no difference.

If people are happy with what they are doing, and are legally doing it, I really don't see why anyone else should care or judge them for it.

[SpunGirl]

Down with the dehumanization of people falling down in movies! It may make you laugh, but they're irrational actors who are doing it for the dehumanizing buck!

-K

[Warriorbird]

I guess we've discovered Latrin's liberal side. He's liberal just like Tipper Gore.

[Latrinsorm]

omg if you choose this career you're not being rational because I don't agree with the choices you're making!What a poor characterization. :( Truly, I expected better from you.
If people are happy with what they are doing, and are legally doing it, I really don't see why anyone else should care or judge them for it.A previous post of yours indicates otherwise. http://forum.gsplayers.com/showpost.php?p=462814&postcount=53

I'll spare you the tired historical examples of legally acceptable and morally despicable activities.

[DeV]

Way to bring a completely irrevelant topic into the debate, Latrin. It doesn't prove your point, btw. I'm fairly certain she was very much within the context of this particular subject matter when she made that statement.

[Latrinsorm]

It sounded like a global philosophy to me. I'm sure CT will be able to elucidate us.

[SpunGirl]

That's just it. It's not an issue of personal taste or palate, it's a necessary truth that dehumanization is wrong. A person who says "you know what, I like being objectified" is not being rational.

But what if they don't feel they're being objectified? In fact, that they are just acting? I'm sure you'd also tell them they're being irrational because in your view they ARE objectified... but if you view them as objects, that doesn't mean the rest of us have to.

Again, fictional situation filmed to elicit a reaction. That's all.

-K

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Who says some people don't like being objectified, at least for short periods of time? Yeah, some people don't but not everyone is the same in that manner. Some may view it as wrong, for some women and men it's a turn on and it's fulfilling. As long as no one is being raped or sexually harassed (meaning unwanted contact/interaction) as a result of their personal choice, I see *nothing* wrong with it.

Some people find it immoral, tasteless, whatever. It's still your right to be a stripper if that's what you want to do, and other people's rights to go see a stripper if that's what THEY want to do. The same thing applies to anyone in the adult entertainment business-- be it softcore or hardcore.

[HarmNone]

Those who find such things immoral, tasteless or distressing can, with little effort, avoid such things. They can even avoid the people who do not find such things immoral, tasteless or distressing.

[Back]

Who says some people don't like being objectified, at least for short periods of time?

Can I have your number?

:lol:

:pirate:

[SpunGirl]

What isn't being said but is in the subtext of the "no objectification" rant is that sex is very, very dirty and should not be on film produced for mass consumption. Bad Anal Annie, bad bad bad.

-K

[Jolena]

rofl. :heart: Spungirl. Seriously.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Haha yes.. Sex is VERY dirty. It should be illegal to enjoy sex at all-- there should be a procedure that must be followed or else you risk losing your job (and possibly much more). The procedure consists of lifting the skirt of your nightie, while laying in bed under the covers, lights off, only as much as you need and laying flat as a board, still and quiet as a corpse as a man pounds away without touching you at all with his hands or as little of his body as possible (missionary position is the only legal one here). He should also be as fully clothed as possible during this. Hopefully, the children will learn the same proper procedure as they mature and learn that sex is for reproduction alone and that any pleasure is a sin and dirty, and the world will be a better place if instead we can focus their attention on all the murdering, thieving, conning, and other violent acts occuring in the world instead of this horrible dirty thing called sex. </sarcasticrant>

[CrystalTears]

You lost me. What does that post you referenced have ANYTHING to do with this?

[Latrinsorm]

But what if they don't feel they're being objectified? In fact, that they are just acting?What, to you, is the purpose of acting?
What isn't being said but is in the subtext of the "no objectification" rant is that sex is very, very dirtyUntrue, and again, I expected better from you.
Who says some people don't like being objectified, at least for short periods of time?I don't think anyone's said that.
Those who find such things immoral, tasteless or distressing can, with little effort, avoid such things. They can even avoid the people who do not find such things immoral, tasteless or distressing.I guess I will have to cite these tired old examples after all: I guess we should have left the South alone, it's just our cultural bias saying that slavery is wrong. I guess we should have stayed out of WWII, it's just our cultural bias saying that brutal genocide is immoral. It was happening way over in Europe, too, it requires so little effort to avoid it. I guess I shouldn't have offered to help that lady with her bags the other day, it's just my personal bias that people suffering is distressing. With very little effort, I could have just walked right on by.
You lost me.In the post from this thread, you said "If people are happy with what they are doing, and are legally doing it, I really don't see why anyone else should care or judge them for it." Put another way, anything that people can legally do is morally acceptable. However, in the post from the other thread you said "I'm all for leaving abortion legal, however I'd like there to be more restrictions so that it's more of a rare occurance, than a standard procedure that anyone can have at any age with no parental consent (the latter being a HUGE peeve of mine)."

Even if you hadn't said that second bit, think about what it means to suggest that anything legal is morally acceptable. Martin Luther King Jr. would be one of the most despicable people who ever existed. This doesn't mean your position is inherently wrong, but consider the ramifications before you support such a view.

[CrystalTears]

You are, for a lack of a better word, fucking psychotic.

How did you go from me saying that someone having sex legally shouldn't be judged, to a discussion about abortion where I said that it should continue to be legal but have some kind of limitation to it? It's irrelevant.


Put another way, anything that people can legally do is morally acceptable. Hey crackhead, where did I say that either one of these acts is morally acceptable?

YOU are making this a major morality issue. If she was going into your church and knew she was a stripper/porn star, and she was standing at the door licking everyone as they walked by, kick her out for all I care. If she was showing her students porn, kick her ass out. However YOU are the one deciding that sex for public entertainment is immoral. Being paid for sex is immoral. Stripping is immoral. That's your problem, not mine or anyone else's. It's obviously not immoral enough that within themselves they are legal.

Martin Luther King? WTF? Where the hell are you going cause it's not about this thread, that's for fucking sure.

[Latrinsorm]

How did you go from me saying that someone having sex legallyAs I said, it sounded very much like a general philosophy to me. :shrug: Your position on this particular instance was clear, it didn't make sense to me for you to reiterate it in general terms.
Hey crackhead, where did I say that either one of these acts is morally acceptable?"Should" is a moral word. "I really don't see why anyone else should care or judge them for it." We can call it "ethical" if you want.

[SpunGirl]

Latrinsorm, please stop side-stepping the examples put forth. If you feel that porn actors are objectified due to the nature of their acting (dirty sex!) aren't all actors objectified? I hope you don't watch any movies or TV at all.

I also demand you quit objectifying you GS character immediately, making him or her life a life that is purely for your own entertainment. And I'm sorry that I'm disappointing you, but never fear, I didn't expect anything else from you at all.

-K

[CrystalTears]

You're making a moutain out of a molehill. Let's get back to the basics because you seem to love to confuse the issue to sway people from what you're getting at, thus letting you feel that you won the argument, when in reality , people no longer want to bother to try and figure out WTF you just said and give up.

Do you feel that she deserved to get fired for making porn BEFORE her teaching career? Just answer the question with a yes or do, it will do nicely.

[Warriorbird]

Latrin already Godwinned the thread. He loses.

[HarmNone]

There's nothing like overreaching your subject matter, Latrin, to absolutely destroy a debate. WWII, slavery in the South, and helping someone who wishes to be helped (Don't pick on some "little old lady" who doesn't WANT your freaking help!) have nothing whatsoever to do with the issue being discussed here.

This woman made pornographic films in order to support herself. She did not commit genocide, nor did she enslave anyone. She didn't ask for your help. She did what she felt she had to do to make a living for herself eleven years ago. Neither you, nor I, can know what prompted her to make that choice; nor, can we know how great her need was at that time. Some of us choose not to judge her. You choose to judge her. We are different people with different views. No need to bring in the big guns for this little argument.

[AnticorRifling]

I remember when I used to make generalizations and skewwed points of view to validate my online arguments....

[Stanley Burrell]

America is so mixed up about porn. On one hand you have those whom assume the morale highground and say it's evil and it's the devil's work etc. This approach is realised via TV censorship, the Messe commission, Federal iditements, and crazed Christian do-gooder zealots like Anthony Comstock whom could entrap, search and siege and generally be a gimp at will.

Yet on the other hand America dominates the porn movie industry. It amasses as much per year as Hollywood. It's an interesting dichotomy.

Supply and demand.

[Latrinsorm]

Latrinsorm, please stop side-stepping the examples put forth.I'm unable to further this discussion until you answer the question. Side-stepping indeed.
I also demand you quit objectifying you GS character immediatelyGS characters aren't people. Porn actors/actresses are.
Do you feel that she deserved to get fired for making porn BEFORE her teaching career? I've already answered this, perhaps in a fit of subconscious precognitive ability.
letting you feel that you won the argumentWhy do people assume the worst about me? :?:
There's nothing like overreaching your subject matter, Latrin, to absolutely destroy a debate.Either your position is a general position or specific to this particular instance. If it is general, you must support all or none. If it is specific, you must show how this particular differs from the posted examples when it comes to the workings of your philosophy. If your philosophy is just "whatever strikes my fancy is right/good", I guess you could go with that, but doesn't it feel sort of silly?

[AnticorRifling]

This isn't a discussion, this is two people (or groups of people) that are just talking at one another while neither is listening. One of you (or one group) could leave and the end result would be the same.

[Skirmisher]

It's true, if you would all just agree with me all the time your lives would be much simpler.

[HarmNone]

I remember when I used to make generalizations and skewwed points of view to validate my online arguments....

Oh, Anticor! Would you share your cure for this terrible malady with the masses, please? I'm sure someone out there could benefit. :)

[HarmNone]

It's true, if you would all just agree with me all the time your lives would be much simpler.

I do. I will. I'm done. :thanx:

[AnticorRifling]

It's true, if you would all just agree with Anticor all the time your lives would be much simpler.

True.

[SpunGirl]

What question, Latrin? Your question about "what is acting?" Why, I think I answered it already, but that just goes to show how much more interested you are in formulating your own responses before you actually think about what people have to say. Acting is a fictional situation filmed to elicit a reaction, be that laugh, cry, or spunk.

-K

[Latrinsorm]

I just wanted to be wholly clear on what you thought before I responded, rather than going off half-cocked. People often accuse me of misrepresenting their holdings, as you've no doubt seen. It may have struck you as heavy-handed, but this is more an artifact of the low speed of dialogue on a message board than a feigned ignorance on my part, I assure you.

So, to your mind, an "actor" concerned primarily or predominantly with story-telling is not, in fact, an actor? He is instead, perhaps, a LARPer with a penchant for film? Perhaps he is a buffoonish anti-jester, an abomination in the guise of the response-elicitor? Where would such a storytelling man (or woman, as the case may be) fall with regards to your definition of actor and acting?

[Snapp]

:banghead: