A second teacher at a high school in Missouri was put on leave after administrators discovered her OnlyFans side hustle.

Megan Gaither, 31, said during an interview with the St. Louis Post-Dispatch that she was placed on leave from her English teaching and varsity cheerleading coach position on Oct. 27 after district officials found out about her account on the OnlyFans platform.

  • Grumpy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    43
    ·
    1 year ago

    Humans are social creatures. We are affected direct and indirectly by other people whether you like it or not (unless you want to become a hikikomori).

    The fact that other people give a shit about about someone making porn in their free time, should make you give a shit. This is irrelevant to whether you think they should give a shit or not. Your lack of ability to give a shit signals your lack of foresight into how this affects your life as well as lack of social skills. If she wants to be an OF model, and therefore chooses to do OF content, that's fine. If she wants to be a teacher and thinks she can do OF without consequence, she's stupid.

    • Lizzy Wizzy@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      L take and completely wrong. Fuck people for not only judging for something harmless, but also for directly impacting her life because of it when she didn't impact anyone else's.

      • Grumpy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        24
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        What part am I wrong about? Her OF account has clearly affected her job as a teacher. The evidence of what I said is right there. You're in denial of facts of what has already occurred. If she didn't see this coming, she's stupid.

        I don't care if you think people shouldn't be judgmental. You're being judgement of me right now. And I am of you right now. People always are, always have been and always will. That's how humans work. Your denial or calling it out as bad is irrelevant in your ability to plan for the future.

        Edit: Let me be clear. I am not defending the judgmental. I am pointing out the lack of social understanding.

        • Lizzy Wizzy@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          In that same vain then, I shouldn't dress "slutty" in public otherwise I'm just asking to get raped right? Get fucked.

          • Grumpy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Because you couldn't point out what was wrong, you decided to take a strawman? No, that is not the same vain. The logic isn't consistent.

            It would be: If she doesn't want to get raped, she should take precautions based on the risks involved.

            If this teacher doesn't want to be fired, she should understand that there are risks that follow her actions.

            If I follow your logic, the statement of the teacher would become:

            She must've wanted to get fired, so she did OF. No, the predicate the consequences are backwards.

            Being stupid is not a defense. And your argument is illogical.

          • Grumpy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            11
            ·
            1 year ago

            No, that is not the same vain. The logic isn't consistent.

            It would be: If she doesn't want to get raped, she should take precautions based on the risks involved.

            If this teacher doesn't want to be fired, she should understand that there are risks that follow her actions.

            If I follow your logic, the statement of the teacher would become:

            She must've wanted to get fired, so she did OF. No, the predicate the consequences are backwards.

            Being stupid is not a defense. And your argument is illogical.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Being a social creature doesn't mean you get veto power over how others live their lives. Your justification thus falls flat as does your victim blaming argument.

      • Grumpy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        When you were little, did you parents teach you to look both ways before crossing the street? Even when you're at a stop sign or at a green light? Probably, since you're still alive. Why did they do that? You'd be in the right. If a car hit you, you'd be the victim, 100%. But you do that anyway because being right or being the victim is completely irrelevant. It's not about who gets the blame. It's about what gives you the best outcome. You looking both ways before crossing the street has the best outcome for you. It doesn't matter if you're right if you're fucking dead.

        If she wanted the best outcome of staying as a teacher, she shouldn't have done OF. This should be a very easy deductive logic people should be able to make given what is the current society.

        This is not victim blaming. I lean quite far left, and this is one of the most insanely annoying thing I find about the left. Far too many only look about who's the victim and whose to blame. That shit is fucking stupidest outlook on life. It's a good goal to attain, a world without problem causing things. But unless utopia happens, you need to learn to figure out how the world works. Failure to do that simply means you're stupid. You might be a victim, but you're still stupid.

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Your analogy is false. This is victim blaming and a gross violation of privacy. On your off time you are free to do what you want your employer is not paying you for that time.

          You sound like one of those no-fap types btw.

          • Grumpy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            How is my analogy false? How did I victim blame? What did I blame her of? I said nothing of such. You're going to have to substantiate your claim.

            I masterbate and have no issues others materbating. In fact I already said it's fine if she wants to do OF.

    • Smoogs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      If she wants to be a teacher and thinks she can do OF without consequence, she’s stupid.

      This comment reeks of trying to control women’s sexuality.

      Meanwhile you probably think ‘good job’ when firefighters make a topless calendar and have no qualms if they show up to put out the fires.

      You smell of double standard vomit.

      • Grumpy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I'm not trying to control her sexuality. I, in fact, said it's fine if she wants to do OF. So you have read me wrong. I pointed out people's inability to predict the future.

        You have judged me for judging on things I didn't say. You smell of hypocrisy.