Community archive

Ask something
Discussion Locked

Personal privacy and expression vs Public Status

0 helpful
30 replies

by mickster269

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

I blame Maxwell for this post.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/06/16/naked.teacher.ap/index.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13305345/

Basically, she lost her job as an art teacher because her companion posted pictures on flickr.com where she wasn't wearing a shirt.

Her companion is an artist, and they were artistic pics. But her School board feels that she should be fired for it.

I don't think this is fair at all. I feel that what a person does in thier private life should have no bearing on thier work , unless it directly affects and influences thier work. She was a fine teacher, and had recieved positive job reviews and awards.

But now that she dared showed a naked breast on a website, she's going to get fired. I never saw the pictures, but by all accounts there was nothing pornographic about it.

I really have a problem about this. personally don't think teachers should be role models. they perform a duty, a task. They teach students information. They inform students. They further student's learning in certain areas. They perform a function, just like policemen, fry cooks, telephone repair people. They are not in the education system to teach morals.

Morals come from Mom and Dad (or extended family, caregivers, etc). Morals come from religious faith, if neccessary.

I don't want MY son to learn morals from anyone other than his mother or myself. I don't want him to learn them from the street, from friends, from media, from schools, or from some Joe Public.

If they are going to nail a teacher to some higher moral standard as a "Public Figure", then they need to examine every single elected official, every single policeman, fireman, newscaster, and anyone else that has a "public" personna.

And, when it gets down to the crux of the matter... bloody hell. She was not wearing a shirt. Good Grief. It's not like she is the only person in the world that takes her shirt off. Now, if she was shooting a person, robbing a store, participating in a dog fight... I might be swayed else wise. But is the Austin School board saying that no public person should ever be naked???

I hope that Austin takes notice of how many people think that they are out of line, that think her actions are being held to a rediculous standard, and just how stupid they look.

(unfortunate oversite requireing edit):

I didn't make it clear that the TEACHER didn't post the pictures on a web site, but her COMPANION did. I also neglected to mention (if it has any bearing) that her companion is also female, so she is involved in a lesbian relationship (if that has any bearings on the situation).

My apologies to the first 10 respondants to this topic.

30 replies

by mjwx

There are really two point to this argument, to which I have given a score.

One, Mickster you are absolutely correct. This is the teachers private life and the school board should not have sacked her (we are suffering a teacher shortage in Australia at the moment). +2 for freedom and privacy

Two, The photo's should never have been put up on flickr. That makes her private life some what less private. - 1 for stupidity

Still with + 1 point it's not enough to sack someone. Discipline yes, as the photos can be taken but should never have displayed in such a public location (she is a teacher and has to set an example).

by Member 25348569

The Americans have much less tolerance towards public display of breasts and the moment she posted the pictures, they were public. Topless bathing in the US on "normal" beaches isn't the norm! You can also see it in the furore caused by the "accidental" display of Janet Jackson's (nippleless) breast during the Superbowl, which caused only amusement in the UK - and I suspect in Oz as well if the story even got a mention. You see the difference, also, as the word t*i*t is asterisked - tit - by the autocensor.

So the teacher racks up at least another minus point for being a bad teacher inasmuch as she was so out of touch with how her community would react! When in Rome...

Another thought. Did she think to ask, first - "Hey guys! I'm an artist - can I do this and keep my job?". Oh, well, another point off for stupidity or arrogance or whatever it was.

I have her on -1 using American scoring.

Using my own scoring system, though, I can't see what the fuss is about. Nobody is hurt by this woman's actions.

by mjwx

but youre right also, far to hypersensitive.

In AU, we will censor the word t-i-t but a bare breast will only earn you an M rating on TV.

by jamesrl

says its perfectly legal for a woman to walk around topless. There was a case in the 80s, where a woman protested that it was sexist that men could be topless in public and she couldn't. She won.

But the issue at hand is whether the board has a right to intrude. From a legal perspective the board cannot prove "mens rea" which is intent - as she didn't post them, she can't be violating her contract, no matter what it says.

She may be naive, but she isn't guilty.

James

by deadly ernest

If her actions would've resulted in the Texas courts laying criminal charges then go ahead and sack her, if not the board members have a rectum blockage caused by their cranium. According to the article, she's a bloody arts teacher and is practicing what she teachers and what she was taught by that some bloody school system a generation or so back.

In short the school board are hypocrits and a bunch of idiotic wan***s.

Sure it might have been smart to check out how stupid the board was before she did this, but there is nothing in the job description of a teacher that they are to have or set higher moral standards.

If the board make this stick on the standards claim then they better be going around Texas and sacking every bloody teacher that goes into a bar or a gambling joint or a strip joint - gee those ones are showing the kids how to drink and gamble. Oh, lets not forget about sacking those frightful teachers that smoke, shs, dare I say it, tobacco.

by gadgetgirl

(I blame Max, too, btw!)

Here in the UK, it is not just dependant upon terms and conditions of contract, morals etc. it is also down to the applicable Code(s) of Conduct for the given profession. If the teachers' code was found to state that she could not pose nude, then she shouldn't have. Simple as.

I've actually had to apply this one in my current job. The nursing profession over here is a stickler, and adhere (like superglue) to many of the medical codes of conduct, not just the nursing ones. Subsequent to an investigation I had to perform, whilst the disciplinary process was grinding away within the hospital, the nurse in question was summoned before the local board of the RCN to answer questions on bringing the nursing profession into disrepute.

Long story short, she had posted herself onto a shared porno website, therefore had contravened around three professional codes of conduct.

This resulted in her dismissal from her post within the hospital, and consequently after further investigations by the RCN, her nursing registration was removed.

(and yes, I do get some doozies....have another one on the go at the moment, which is why I'm "intermittent" these days)

Yes, ok, it's an extreme example, but I can (sorta) see where the school board is coming from insofar as they have to keep the teaching profession professional, if you see what I mean.

Also, bear in mind, that what is "Art" to one person may be considered "porn" by another. It's one of those personally definable things. By keeping the levels high, they're covering all points at the same time (unintended DE there!)

Oh, well, back to this one now......... ok, define a Class A drug......

GG

by deadly ernest

of condutc that one reads and agrees to before starting employment - I have worked in Australian that have similar codes. It is another where there is NO set code and you get hit by someone else's qhalitative statement of 'high moral standards'. Which is the case here - she violated no set or printed rules of the local or state school boards.

I've read a few of the reports, the woman is an art teacher, highly regarded as one of the best teachers in the school. She was taught art in that very same school system, and nudity is part of the art world. The photos were of her topless and were very artistic, she did not give permission for them to be publicly posted. They were posted for some weeks before they were brought to the attention of the school board by a teacher whom she was in conflict with over the use of some school resources. This is more a case of political in-house fighting using any straw to get at someone.

If the school board is totally justified in there approach then no teacher any where in their jurisdication can even THINK about taking a holiday on a topless beach anywhere in the world and heaven forbid about using a camera at home with their significant other.

She is in breach of rules that they thought up to win a fight over the use of resources. And even if that was not the case they are stepping way out of line to invade her private life. If being topless is immoral (as they say) then what about the teachers who smoke, drink or gamble - sheeet go back 70 years and thsoe WERE the rules that applied to teachers, but then they got paid more than the school administartors and more than most politicians - not anymore. Teaching is no longer a very high paid profession, so they have no case to insist on outrageously high standards that are well above the social norms.

by j.lupo

pretty much what is generally the rule. Our personal opinion's aside, the culture and political factors occuring where the incident took place really are at fault.

I think what someone does on there own, in privacy, is there business so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. However, when they choose for whatever reason to make it public, then public pressure will influence the outcome of making it public. We are a society and regardless of individual beliefs, as a society, the group will bring pressure to conform to the groups standards.

by tig2

I have worked in the school system. One of the first things you learn if you want to continue in that employment is what you CAN'T say and do. For instance, you can't wish someone a Merry Christmas, you can't have a conversation with a student about sex, morality, religion, or home life, you had better not have those kinds of conversations with another teacher, and what ever you do- DON'T HUG OR TOUCH IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM A STUDENT OR ANOTHER TEACHER! All of those things and many more will result in dismissal or denial of tenure. And frankly, I can't imagine that there is a single teacher out there that doesn't know the rules- whether they are written down or not (many of them aren't)

The problem is that "freedom" is a whole lot less free than we would like to think. Every day, someone is offended by something and it becomes something we can no longer do.

Teachers ARE to some extent role-models or at least they used to be. Because teaching effectively is dynamic, the theory is that the teacher becomes the embodiment of the subject. I was taught that interactive teaching was the most effective. I agree. I wouldn't dare try it any more- I would likely trip on one of those "never do's". Similar to nursing, it is a caring profession- but you don't dare care- you'll find yourself unemployed.

And, bad news Mick, it is beginning to show itself in other professions as well. You can be dismissed for any number of things in the corporate world as well. Even who you know can be used against you.

Don't blame Max. He is absolutely correct that by reducing individual liberty, such as this is going to occur. I will be interested to see if he posts to this as I would be interested in hearing his views. Dawg too. Unfortunately, I have noticed that when Max points out that situations like this should not be legislated, that personal responsibility is the correct path, that government should be seen (evidence that they are doing the right things) and not heard (self aggrandising garbage designed soley for the purpose of re-electing the fat-a$$es that exist to drain the system for their own greed), he gets shouted down by any number of people.

Is this situation wrong? Yes. The correct follow-up uestion is, "What can we do to reverse this trend?"

by mr.wiz

Sounds like the Austin school board should look into their own closets for skeletons. Its not like she took her shirt off in class or anything. Many classical styles of art used the nude. These Texans sound like a bunch of prudes and this woman is paying the price.

by ed woychowsky

Here's an idea, search the web/newspapers/yearbooks for pictures of male teachers in the same school district without shirts. Then inquire why they haven't been dismissed. Most states/provinces/towns/cities require equal treatment.

A little over a decade ago NY City fired a female police officer for posing in Playboy, while the males that posed in Playgirl were not fired. If I recall, the city settled for $26M.

If the school board doesn't back down then perhaps the voters will force them out when the bill comes due.

by faradhi

OK, this is the problem.

Texas is a largely republican state and the "religious right" (I hate that term but I need something quick here.) comprises a large portion of the republican party in Texas. The "religious right" will object to this teacher on two points: a) she is a lesbian b) she is nude on that thar' Internet. The school board should be doing what they believe their constituents would want them to do. If the school board does what is right in this case, they are going against their constituents. (This is at least my perception of Texas politics from Tennessee.)

So, while it is easy to say X,Y, and Z is the correct action for the school board to take, we do not have to respond to answer to the people of Austin.

by deadly ernest

the Christian religious right is that Jesus taught that God gave people free will and it was not our place to deny them that right. Thus when they start to deny people the use of free will in areas where they are NOT hurting others, they are placing themselves above God and, as such, no longer Christians but Satanists as he was the one who wished to control everyone and force them to do things his way.

by deadly ernest

I replied, I even looked at some of the other photos her significant other posted - very artistic and nice, and no I didn't see the ones they are complaining about, they had been removed. Her friend is an accomplished and very talented photographer.

I researched before I commented and I would think some others would have too.

by mickster269

I read some of the comments that left me thinking the writers thought the teacher had posted the pics herself.

by deadly ernest

but all the media articles mentioned that they were posted by her partner - a professional photographer and photographic artist.

What I find interesting is that the p[ics weren't a problem until the in-house fighting over the school resources looked to be going her way. Hmm.

Oh, well - if they are that big a bunch or wan***s then she might be better off setting up to teach art as a private teacher giving individual lessons.

by onbliss

You used this word "caregivers" after parents. Can you elaborate little more on what you mean? Thanks.

by tig2

A caregiver in this instance would be a guardian, step-parent or other designated "parental" figure.

In other cases, a caregiver would be a health aide, doctor, or nurse.

A teacher would never be considered a caregiver as they are not the parental figure in a student's life- excepting their own children.

by onbliss

Hmmm...I thought the location was different. It answers one question on why are you a nice person :-)

by mickster269

By caregivers, I meant family members that are not parents that the child may be living with (like grandparents), or adults in a foster home enviroment.

by onbliss

Thanks :D. I wanted to actually understand whom did you (mickster) place under that "bucket".

by onbliss

Though I wanted to shorten it to Mick, I did'nt know for sure.

Hey, did you know you are quite popular. Google "mickster", and the fifth result is a disucssion from TR :d

by mickster269

The 5th most popular site on Google, and it's a thread jd started.

::sighs::

btw, I am NOT the "Pinball" Mickster!

by tig2

When I joined TR it simply refused to acknowledge that I lived anywhere. I could update it all day and still be "No location specified". Since I recently scrapped my old browser and got a better one, I thought, "what the heck" and tried again. Much to my surprise, I suddenly had a State.

And thank you for a lovely compliment!

by onbliss

...to you too. Never know when I will run into you, in the Land of 10,000 Lakes.

by btljooz

When I was in High School I took Art from the Nineth Grade through the 12th. My (male) art teacher brought in a female model for us to draw the human anatomy in pencil. The model's standing pose was as some of the famous nudes from all phases of Art History.

Did this make my Art Teacher a bad person? NO!!! Did this make the model a bad person? NO!!!

We were simply learning to draw the human anatomy which we were, at that time, studying in Biology Class.

by dr.phil

The title should say enuf. There is such a cadre of OBN (old boy networks) that run the political machine in Tx. Once someone greases their palms, well, it's too late and they would never admit error as they would be "loosing face" even if it is the right thing to do no matter what moral rule they broke.

--A non-bubba from Tx

This discussion is closed to new replies.