Had to supplement her $42,000 per year teacher salary with OF and made nearly $1 million in six months (almost 50 times as her salary) before the school caught wind of it and forced her to resign. Got a new job out of education and was fired five days later when they discovered news articles about her.
Edit: To those basically saying she had it coming because she made her OF account public…
- Sex work is real, valid work.
- There is nothing wrong with sex work. Sex-shaming is Puritanical horseshit.
- “But her students could find her OF!” is a problem their parents should have to solve. It is not her responsibility to use an alias, because of points 1 and 2.
- Every other argument criticizing her for her sex work during her non-teaching hours is fucking moot.
Removed by mod
If you think they’re right to fire her for porn say they’re right for firing her for porn. Don’t say they’re right for firing her because nazis exist, that’s an excuse not a reason.
We have the technology to tell apart porn makers and nazis, we don’t need to treat them equally.
Removed by mod
And why do you think they should be equated to nazis when they exercise that right?
Removed by mod
Ok so now it’s the employers who made the nazi comparison, that’s progress. Maybe at some point we’ll get you to admit you made a dumb comparison.
That’s a different person, genius
Nobody compared anything, for the love of god
“I support companies having this right because if they didn’t I’d be forced to work with Nazis more often” is a very straightforward concept
Removed by mod
A straightforward concept and also a wrong one. Not firing people for one thing doesn’t mean not firing people for any other thing including being a fucking Nazi.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
you’re not the smartest tool in the shed, are you?
are you a nazi? is this why you’re trying to defend them so much?
Removed by mod
That is the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.
Removed by mod
First tell me why you should be able to infringe on people’s rights because of your beliefs instead of generally recognized protections. You know, the same point homophobes make to not serve gay people.
Don’t worry. I’m not making a comparison 😉
Removed by mod
Except the cases about homophobes refusing to serve gay people aren’t about refusing to serve gay people generally - they’re about refusing to engage in speech they oppose on commission. The case with the homophobic baker wasn’t refusing to sell a gay couple a cake off the shelf - they were refusing to accept a commission to create a custom cake, and a lot of their argument was over whether or not a cake design is speech in the same way an artwork is and whether the 1st Amendment trumps anti-discrimination laws.
Hi, new guy in the convo, dont point your guns at me, just wanted to point out the irony of you saying this after openly admitting you wouldn’t even read the other person’s comment in full
Removed by mod
Sounds like you don’t really understand either very well then. Get off your intellectual high horse. We’re not debating the definition of irony like it’s 2003. And if you can’t see how in your case your reading comp issues “don’t count” but in their case they’re having some sort of personal failing then I don’t know what to tell you. Since you’re so smart why don’t you go read up on the self-serving bias so you can throw that term around later without engaging in introspection too. At the end of it all you will still have failed to comprehend the meaning of what someone wrote to you, whether it’s because you didn’t try hard enough, you’re too lazy, or too stupid. Failing grade is a failing grade. Ugh I’m tired of these high school report card metrics. But I guess coupling the high school language with the intellectual arrogance and poor attitude it reveals a lot about the level of maturity you’re bringing to this conversation.
Removed by mod