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.
WTH is social media policy? Is it written somewhere that employees can’t have OF? (And also who found her on OF and snitch on her?)
It’s probably some bullshit like “your social media presence cannot hurt the company” - i.e. if someone is a full on Nazi, clients could look them up and it being a controversy. But now it’s applied to OF by puritans.
Removed by mod
Workers having rights does not force employers to employ and associate with Nazis.
Removed by mod
I’d say somewhere far beyond having a second job but not nearly as far as hate speech. If you’re confused about the concept I suggest you check out how labour laws in most developed nations.
You didn’t answer their question at all, just tried to dodge it by talking about labor laws lol.
The only question there was where to draw the line, which I answered. Hate and other illegal stuff past the line, legal stuff not.
So just being a Nazi is fine as long as they don’t commit any crimes?
You are equating hiring someone who makes and sells their own porn to hiring someone who subscribes to a hateful, violent ideology. They absolutely aren’t the fucking same. One is a legal adult legally providing a digital service to other legal adults, and the other is a member of a group known specifically for violence to advance racial superiority. Only one of those people does anything that could ever lead to another person being harmed or threatened, and as such only one of them should be driven out of society by any means necessary. This is not a “both sides” thing, this is discrimination against someone who has caused no harm, plain and simple.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
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
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
I’m pretty sure that it would mean something like “employees shouldn’t post anything that embarrasses the employer”.
that’s exactly what it is. I work for an employer like that and i can unequivocally say that they are the best employer ever and do a lot of good for the world and never ever ever do anything wrong.
Is your employer in the room now?
Nearly all white collar employees are covered by a social media policy. We have social media training annually and have to sign a document saying we agree to a number of rules on our public accounts.
She has enough money. You get a lawsuit, and you get a lawsuit….