• SSJ2Marx@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Those other commenters have accepted a premise baked into your comment that I do not. Why can’t a public role model also be a model on OnlyFans? The only reason you would think that those two things are incompatible is if you think that there is something morally wrong with one of them, which I don’t believe holds water. There is no form of sex work that I believe disqualifies someone from being a role model, and therefore a teacher, a parent, a counselor, or anything else.

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

      I think the other person is not wording their point correctly. Let me try to word it for them, at the risk of putting words in their mouth.

      It is revealed to a group of 17-18 year old high school boys that their teacher does porn. These boys have access to the internet. What do you think is going to happen next? Obviously what will happen is that someone will look it up, share it, and then it causes a problem. Not because it’s immoral but because you have immature horny creatures bringing something into the school that isn’t appropriate. It’s inappropriate because school is for learning not ridiculing or being sexist towards your teacher for doing porn.

      In a purely practical sense, of teaching students with as little interruptions and interpersonal conflict as possible, it’s easier to not employ the teacher doing porn. It removes a factor of friction in an already tedious and complex job.

      If we lived under communism where a community of parents could take time off of their jobs and go to school with their kids, and the teacher could pause teaching, then we could ensure those kids were taught a valuable life lesson about what is and isn’t appropriate, how to react to porn, and all that. But we don’t live in that society, we live in the one where schools are essentially prisons that double as job training centers. Nobody has the time and we don’t have the material underpinnings of an accepting culture. Thus, teachers who do porn will be fired.

      • D61 [any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        ·
        9 months ago

        For the tldr crowd…

        “Its easier to fire a teacher than it is to teach teenagers that sexually harassing a teacher is wrong.”

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

          Well, I can’t TLDR because everyone in this chain is hypersensitive right now and looking for any room to accuse everyone being secret reactionary sex puritan chuds. Sometimes you have to explain stuff.

          But if anyone here thinks they can convince a local school board to reinstate OnlyFans teacher and give a moving West Wing speech to convince all the kids that porn is actually rizzed up with the sauce, then do it. I mean it’s not like this site has any major differences in opinion on porn anyways. I’m sure we all have the correct true leftist take and can publicly broadcast that message to liberals and reactionaries in a way that actually solves the problem of sexism in Western Culture.

    • Carguacountii [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Its not so much whether sex work is or isn’t immoral, or unethical, I’d consider that a separate discussion, but rather how that practice relates to children and their education and development. Something can be ok for adults to learn about or engage in but not for children.

      As an example, its usually seen as not a good thing for children to learn about being a soldier (even if it happens in practice), despite it being a very good way of making soldiers, to teach them young. But the resulting harm to those children and society makes it generally outlawed, and certainly against public opinion. This is seperate and distinct from an argument about whether its good or bad, right or wrong for an adult to learn about being a soldier. The same applies to drug use - you need to be wiser and better educated than a child to engage with it, because of the risks and harms involved.

      edit; to further clarify, with the soldier analogy, you might be ok with it being taught in a structured and carefully thought out way, but not for children to be watching war footage, if you see what I mean.

      • Are_Euclidding_Me [e/em/eir]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        9 months ago

        The soldier analogy maybe would make sense if kids’ books weren’t chock full of stories of soldiers in wars. If kids’ movies weren’t mostly based on plots of violence involving people fighting in wars. If kids didn’t “play army” consistently. If kids were never exposed to veterans through school assemblies. If military recruiters weren’t given full access to schools. But unfortunately, all of these things happen, I experienced them when I was in school.

        It’s foolish to think war and soldiers aren’t heavily, heavily romanticized in our society, and much of that romanticization is directly aimed at children. I do think this is getting less bad over time, luckily. I know the military is having a difficult time recruiting enough people, so that’s good.

        But fundamentally, I think sex is cool and good while war is lame and bad, so I would have zero issue with an onlyfans model teaching children and I would not want a veteran or national guard reservist teaching children.

        • Carguacountii [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          9 months ago

          I used the analogy because of how people (parents especially) feel about war, and because its a thing that carries great risks of harm and exploitation, being a soldier. Of course there are circumstances where a parent, out of desperation usually (sometimes out of greed) - as a matter of survival - would be ok with it. But generally speaking, people who aren’t desperate don’t want their children to be soldiers, they want them to be happy, prosperous, not maimed, not violent and so on, so there has to be a lot of incentive and propaganda around it to convince people - and even then it finds a lot of resistance from people.

          I know that soldiers are romanticized, and so is violence, but I don’t think that because that occurs, education of children should be a free for all - gambling is another example, because its something that children (and adults of course, but that’s a different though related issue) are vulnerable to taking a bad lesson from exposure to, that can lead to harmful consequences for them and others.

          Sex is cool, but it can also be harmful, in and of itself or as an aspect of a relationship with others. War is similar - if a soldier is defending out of necessity their people from violence or theft, that’s cool, but there is a lot of scope for it not being cool. Things like this, that have a great potential for harm and risk of harm, for individuals and communities, need to be treated very carefully and cautiously when it comes to children (and really, adults of course, but especially children). Despite sex being (usually) cool, its not I don’t think an issue to request that teachers of children, as role models and authority figures, should not be pornographers - just as they should not be soldiers.

          • Are_Euclidding_Me [e/em/eir]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            9 months ago

            I still think you’re putting sex and war at the same general level of harm and I simply disagree with that moral ranking. Sex is almost always positive, war is almost always negative. These are not the same.

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

              Sex is almost always positive

              I’m sorry, but this is an absurd statement. Sex between consenting adults without coercion, in which neither party is violating an existing relationships boundaries is generally neutral to positive but that is a ton of qualifiers.

              It’s often positive, not almost always.

              • Are_Euclidding_Me [e/em/eir]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                9 months ago

                Yeah, sure, you’re right of course. Sex can be super damaging in certain contexts. I do still think that fundamentally sex is a beautiful, wonderful part of the human experience while war is an occasional unpleasant necessity that it would really be better to do without if at all possible. They seem fundamentally different to me, and I’d like a world with more (and better) sex and less war. But you’re right, sex with no qualifiers isn’t “almost always” good. That’s a very good point.

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

                  Right, and sex work often ends up being one of the situations where people get abused right? Like if someone is making money on onlyfans, more power to them, but much of the sex work being performed in the world is being done by desperate people who’d rather not do it?

                  • Are_Euclidding_Me [e/em/eir]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    Yeah, that’s true. That’s part of why in every reply I’ve made in this thread I’ve specifically been sure to say “onlyfans model” and not sex worker more broadly. Because there is a ton of exploitation in porn. I don’t know, I’m just grumpy that sex is treated as this terrible, dirty thing that must be hidden at all costs and never talked about. It’s one of my main issues with the puritanical society we live in, it’s damn near impossible to have good conversations about sex, or treat it as something that can (and should be) positive.

                    Anyway, I’m about to logout and touch-grass, so I likely won’t be responding. I hope you have a great day! (And I always love seeing you around, with your good takes and your Venture Bros references!)

        • Carguacountii [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          9 months ago

          I don’t feel good about it at all, and I think it should be banned! The presence of one bad thing doesn’t make other bad things ok, though.

          We are our experiences, our environments, and with children they’re in a stage where learning lots is more important than learning or experiencing critically, and they don’t have much wisdom or experience to be properly judgemental or to contextualise or understand what they see or hear, so we have to treat them differently. Development is also a process over time, so we need to make sure the learning content is appropriate for the age or developmental stage (including social development), and also not all taught at once but rather gradually, depending on their current capacity.

          I’m unsure why you’d think its a necessary question to ask, given the comment you’ve responded to, but I hope you’re satisfied with the answer.

            • Carguacountii [none/use name]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              9 months ago

              could you explain why, I feel that I’ve explained my position in various comments (but I can reiterate if you’d like) and I’d like to know why you think it means my brain is wormy?

                • Carguacountii [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Well I disagree with what they’ve said, and I don’t think they’ve explained it at all, rather just accused me of being a puritan or similar. Could you try, in your own words?

                  I think the claims that have been made by others against me or my position that weren’t simply lazy smears, I’ve already refuted (that what a teacher does publically is no business of the public, and that because military teachers/recruiters are allowed in schools so too should this, that there is any relation to trans people or drag queens to this issue, that teachers being fired for being pornographers means sex work is consequentially immoral). I certainly don’t feel that anyone’s said anything in contradiction that’s caused me to even consider that my stance might be incorrect, but I’m willing to consider a reasonable and good response - I don’t want to have brain worms after all.

    • AlpineSteakHouse [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      9 months ago

      Why can’t a public role model also be a model on OnlyFans? The only reason you would think that those two things are incompatible is if you think that there is something morally wrong with one of them

      Being an OnlyFans model is not a moral wrong, but the industry of modern pornography is absolutely incompatible with a moral society.

      You are an adult, at the very least you have your defined sexuality. Imagine a child’s first experience with sexuality being porn of their teacher. We all know that porn dehumanizes women, but imagine how it will affect children when that person is someone they know in real life?

      No one did anything morally wrong here. But you have to prioritize the protection of the children or the teacher. I choose the children, you choose the teacher. What conclusion you get from this is up to you.

      • SSJ2Marx@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        9 months ago

        the industry of modern pornography is absolutely incompatible with a moral society

        I agree, but it isn’t the sex workers who are the problem with the industry of modern pornography. It’s the human traffickers, the sleazy producers, the pimps and all the other rent seeking capitalists who make the industry bad.

        imagine how it will affect children when that person is someone they know in real life?

        I imagine that it will humanize sex workers in the eyes of the children, whereas squirreling all of them away into the dark corners of society where they can’t be seen serves to further dehumanize them.

      • Rom [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Imagine a child’s first experience with sexuality being porn of their teacher. We all know that porn dehumanizes women, but imagine how it will affect children when that person is someone they know in real life?

        Okay, but the first response to that should be “sit down with your child and discuss appropriate boundaries,” not “fire the teacher.” Holy fuck stop being afraid to be a parent and just talk to your damn children, people.