Rikki Anderson aka Tericka Dye: Teacher fired for porn star past

[Avatard]

Kaneman 1
Hypocrisy 0

Well said.

[Particle Man]

Originally Posted by Avatard

Kaneman 1
Hypocrisy 0

Well said.

This

Originally Posted by azoomm

Did you know I worked at a strip club, once upon a time?

Presses: they have been stopped.

[goof2]

Originally Posted by Kaneman

Complete bullshit, once again. I don't think public school administrators are actually capable of making good, fair decisions.

Its not just teaching, A LOT of jobs will fire you if they find out about this kind of past. I have a stripper friend who's trying desperately to get out of the business....but keeps getting fired when her new jobs find out she used to strip. She's funny, intelligent, works hard and learns her jobs well....still gets fired though.

Tell her to quit wearing glitter and insisting on receiving her paycheck in crumpled up singles.

Originally Posted by Kaneman

Bullshit. Why is it ridiculous to think having a perfectly legal job should affect future employment ONCE you've already been hired? She wasn't running drugs and guns for the Mexican cartels, she was legally employed and paying taxes. Does this all boil down a a jealousy thing? Women jealous of a woman pretty enough to take her clothes off and men jealous of the type of woman they never got the chance to fuck?

I bet if a Marine sniper who has violently killed 20 people would be perfectly acceptable to teach children, but not a former stripper.

I get what you are saying, but the fact is her former profession is a distraction from her current profession. Being hired also doesn't create an unbreakable pact. The decision to hire is based on a set of circumstances. Changes in those circumstances will also cause the decision to employ someone to be reexamined. I think teaching is seen as a little different from most professions in another way. Putting a person in front of kids in that role serves as an endorsement. Unlike athletes, movie stars, and musicians a teacher is supposed to serve as a role model. This woman's past removes some of the "role model" luster.

Ultimately an employer will determine what is acceptable for an employee. In this case the "employers" are effectively the school district, the school board, and the parents. The decisions she made have consequences and one of those appears to be her former career and her current career being incompatible.

[Kaneman]

As long as they are good teachers, don't push their views or morals onto my kids and show up prepared to do their jobs well I don't care what their past is so long as there is no history of aggression, violence, theft or other true criminal behaviors.

My big problem with this is what it represents to what our society thinks is important or relevant. Kind of like when we found out the greatest threat to our societal fabric was actually Janet Jackson's nipple. The inability to break away from these completely false morals that dictate it is perfectly acceptable, even glorious, to be violent and kill everything that we run across somehow it is more sinful to expose the human body and be sexual.

Look, I'm not trying to glorify some chick on camera with a baseball bat in her ass and two dicks in her mouth as a piece of art. I'm saying it is wrong to hold someone back for a non-criminal past. Everyone wants to pretend they're better than her, to pass judgment and look down on her and use this whole bullshit "distraction" argument. EVERY attractive female teacher and student is a HUGE distraction to any teenage male student....are we going to fire them all too? We can eventually shift our moral focus to something more positive and productive that actually makes a difference, but not if we sit on our hands and go, "Oh well, that's what society accepts so that's whats up."

Honestly, do you have any idea how impossible it is to learn algebra with a raging boner? Can't be done.

[goof2]

Originally Posted by Kaneman

As long as they are good teachers, don't push their views or morals onto my kids and show up prepared to do their jobs well I don't care what their past is so long as there is no history of aggression, violence, theft or other true criminal behaviors.

My big problem with this is what it represents to what our society thinks is important or relevant. Kind of like when we found out the greatest threat to our societal fabric was actually Janet Jackson's nipple. The inability to break away from these completely false morals that dictate it is perfectly acceptable, even glorious, to be violent and kill everything that we run across somehow it is more sinful to expose the human body and be sexual.

Look, I'm not trying to glorify some chick on camera with a baseball bat in her ass and two dicks in her mouth as a piece of art. I'm saying it is wrong to hold someone back for a non-criminal past. Everyone wants to pretend they're better than her, to pass judgment and look down on her and use this whole bullshit "distraction" argument. EVERY attractive female teacher and student is a HUGE distraction to any teenage male student....are we going to fire them all too? We can eventually shift our moral focus to something more positive and productive that actually makes a difference, but not if we sit on our hands and go, "Oh well, that's what society accepts so that's whats up."

Honestly, do you have any idea how impossible it is to learn algebra with a raging boner? Can't be done.

So this comes down to you not being happy with where "society's" moral focus is? Along with that you want to change "society's" moral focus to be more in line with yours because you think it is better? The woman made the decision to have sex on camera for money. I don't particularly care but I don't think those who do are just morally confused people who desperately need their attitudes changed either.

[101lifts2]

This is not about the male highschooler being "distracted" from this this chicks past. It is about the school covering it's ass so it does not get sued over some stupid pimple nosed teenaged punk who sues over "emotional distress".

[derf]

Originally Posted by 101lifts2

This is not about the male highschooler being "distracted" from this this chicks past. It is about the school covering it's ass so it does not get sued over some stupid pimple nosed teenaged punk who sues over "emotional distress".

Totally disagree, its about the principals phone not ringing off the hook from the PTA every 5 miinutes

[Particle Man]

Originally Posted by 101lifts2

This is not about the male highschooler being "distracted" from this this chicks past. It is about the school covering it's ass so it does not get sued over some stupid pimple nosed teenaged punk who sues over "emotional distress".

Let's see how many times the word "ass" can appear in this thread

[pauldun170]

I'd like to enter this thread, but I'm not sure if I can pass the entrance exam.

[Rangerscott]

My ass itches. No really, it does.

I love it when porn is brought up and people just freak the fuck out as if it's some crazy weird shit. It's an adult woman having sex with adult males. People that don't know porn are the ones that think of weirder shit than I do because they have no fucking clue. Not all porn involves a plunger and horse dick.