Texas teacher posed nude, should she be fired?

[Sunshine]

She posed for Playboy. Big deal. Let her keep her job.

You are about as slow as molasses in January.

 

[percysunshine]

Since the grades include high school, I can see how it could be disruptive on a classroom full of 16 year old boys. Heck, I always imagined my hot teachers, but to have the pictures....

 

[Pogo]

"Moral" and "wrong" have nothing to do with her purported coming termination.

Did she violate the terms of her contract?

At some point she becomes a distraction to learning.

That is true. Anyone who thinks the boys in that class haven't seen here 'art' is mistaken. When I was in 6th grade we had a young voluptuous teacher just out of college. To this day the men who were goys in her class still talk about her at reunions. They are not sitting in class thinking about math. They are thinking about that teacher.

And that just demonstrates that the distraction comes from the boys and their raging hormones -- not the teacher. As noted before, boys of a certain age don't need a history to hang their fantasies on. They'll make one up. Usually a far more salacious one than this teacher's history. If anything it's arguable the reality knocked those fantasies down a notch.

But what do I know, I only was one...

 

[Luddly Neddite]

The hypocritical rw's who are calling it "porn" and saying she should be fired are the same bunch who were in favor of Joe Arpaio posting ARMED known criminals and ARMED child molesters around schools.

 

[Esmeralda]

The teacher serves at the pleasure of the school board.

It can release her without any statement of cause.

I don't know what the exact laws are in Texas, but unless she is on probation or she has a contract for a certain period and that period has ended, usually a teacher, like any other employee in the country, cannot be fired without just cause.

 

[Esmeralda]

She teaches horny teenage boys.

Her authority is zilch and she should transferred to a grade school.

I think this is a very good point. She has shown extremely poor judgment. Sometimes I wonder why so many nimnos are becoming teachers these days. She destroys her credibility by doing what she did. She has to work with teenage boys and girls? She will just be a distraction and not an effective teacher. She should be transferred to work with children too young to understand what she has done.

 

[Esmeralda]

So she was naked. Big deal. Everyone is naked under their clothes. How about we stop making a prudish big deal about all things sexual and accept that sex is natural, sex is fun, and sex is something we all do (or at least think about).

IMO it is not a moral issue; it is an issue of whether or not she is going to be an effective teacher. Her students are teenagers. They will now have photos of her nude. This is a distraction. It is difficult enough to work with that age group. I think such a thing destroys her ability to manage her students effectively and to teach effectively. Everything will be about her nude photos and not about learning. Teachers' private lives need to be kept out of the classroom: that is the professional stance to take.

 

[Luissa]

So she was naked. Big deal. Everyone is naked under their clothes. How about we stop making a prudish big deal about all things sexual and accept that sex is natural, sex is fun, and sex is something we all do (or at least think about).

IMO it is not a moral issue; it is an issue of whether or not she is going to be an effective teacher. Her students are teenagers. They will now have photos of her nude. This is a distraction. It is difficult enough to work with that age group. I think such a thing destroys her ability to manage her students effectively and to teach effectively. Everything will be about her nude photos and not about learning. Teachers' private lives need to be kept out of the classroom: that is the professional stance to take.

Then the parents shouldn't have brought up her private life.

 

[Esmeralda]

So she was naked. Big deal. Everyone is naked under their clothes. How about we stop making a prudish big deal about all things sexual and accept that sex is natural, sex is fun, and sex is something we all do (or at least think about).

IMO it is not a moral issue; it is an issue of whether or not she is going to be an effective teacher. Her students are teenagers. They will now have photos of her nude. This is a distraction. It is difficult enough to work with that age group. I think such a thing destroys her ability to manage her students effectively and to teach effectively. Everything will be about her nude photos and not about learning. Teachers' private lives need to be kept out of the classroom: that is the professional stance to take.

Then the parents shouldn't have brought up her private life.

They would not have needed to; it would have been known about soon enough. Schools are like Peyton Places: gossip and rumor runs rampant and it is always the kids who know everything thing first. Something like this would have gotten around sooner than later.

The teacher showed incredibly poor judgment to think that her photos would be in Playboy and the students not find out about it. If she thinks it won't become an issue regarding her being able to be an effective teacher, she is, as well, showing very poor judgment.

 

[percysunshine]

I would also guess that the moms of the students are jealous and will not want to take their husbands along on parent/teacher conference day. So there is that to consider....

 

[Luissa]

IMO it is not a moral issue; it is an issue of whether or not she is going to be an effective teacher. Her students are teenagers. They will now have photos of her nude. This is a distraction. It is difficult enough to work with that age group. I think such a thing destroys her ability to manage her students effectively and to teach effectively. Everything will be about her nude photos and not about learning. Teachers' private lives need to be kept out of the classroom: that is the professional stance to take.

Then the parents shouldn't have brought up her private life.

They would not have needed to; it would have been known about soon enough. Schools are like Peyton Places: gossip and rumor runs rampant and it is always the kids who know everything thing first. Something like this would have gotten around sooner than later.

The teacher showed incredibly poor judgment to think that her photos would be in Playboy and the students not find out about it. If she thinks it won't become an issue regarding her being able to be an effective teacher, she is, as well, showing very poor judgment.

If these parents are so worried how are their innocent children looking at porn?
And if a parent found it, why were they looking at? If the latter is true, it is alright to look but one deserves to be fired because that posed for something in college?
Poor judgment? Ten bucks you have looked at playboy or porn. Plus while other teachers have college loans I am guessing she doesn't.
No, the only poor judgement here was letting hypocritical parents make a decision for them.
The wives are yelling "the horror" while the husbands are getting off to the new Madison Ivy porn.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The teacher serves at the pleasure of the school board.

It can release her without any statement of cause.

I don't know what the exact laws are in Texas, but unless she is on probation or she has a contract for a certain period and that period has ended, usually a teacher, like any other employee in the country, cannot be fired without just cause.

Texas is one of five states that does not have those types of "cause" requirements.

 

[Pogo]

So she was naked. Big deal. Everyone is naked under their clothes. How about we stop making a prudish big deal about all things sexual and accept that sex is natural, sex is fun, and sex is something we all do (or at least think about).

IMO it is not a moral issue; it is an issue of whether or not she is going to be an effective teacher. Her students are teenagers. They will now have photos of her nude. This is a distraction. It is difficult enough to work with that age group. I think such a thing destroys her ability to manage her students effectively and to teach effectively. Everything will be about her nude photos and not about learning. Teachers' private lives need to be kept out of the classroom: that is the professional stance to take.

The question is -- who brought it up?

The OP article goes:
>> A Dallas ISD teacher who had posed nude for Playboy&#8217;s website has caused a stir with students and at least one parent, who questioned whether she should be in the classroom. <<

Did she? Did this teacher walk into class one day and say "Hola, here's what I did in college"? That would be a crucial difference. But the article, tellingly, doesn't tell us exactly who brought this up or made an "issue" out of it. That's conspicuous in its absence.

A look around for further info on that question also turns up very little. I did find this:

>> There are stories in the British Daily Mail and in The Australian highlighting "her sexy secret" and "her raunchy past." You can read about her in French, or in Russian. Domestically, the news is similarly fascinated by Deweese: KDFW ran a segment about the "teacher's Playboy past," with an image from the shoot of Deweese making bedroom eyes at the camera. << -- Texas Monthly

-- while that doesn't identify chicen-or-egg, it does tell us what kind of entity thinks this is a big deal, and why. Along with mucrakers cited there like The Blaze. All of which points to a sea of hypocrisy navigated by LCD tabloids who would run over a budding career at the drop of a proverbial hat, as long as it means ensnaring readers and viewers....

>> when it comes to cases like Deweese's, the outlets covering her seem to want it both ways: They want to play the role of the moral scold questioning whether or not it's acceptable for a teacher to have posed for naked photos, while also accompanying their outrage with photos from Deweese's shoot. << (ibid)

Face it folks, somebody's getting played like a cheap banjo here, and it ain't the students.

And let us not abandon the concept of linear time: Deweese is not a teacher who went and did a photo shoot; she's a photo shoot model/student who went on to be a teacher.

 

[Wry Catcher]

If she violated conditions of employment.

Do try to keep up. All photos were taken before she became employed.

 

[Esmeralda]

So she was naked. Big deal. Everyone is naked under their clothes. How about we stop making a prudish big deal about all things sexual and accept that sex is natural, sex is fun, and sex is something we all do (or at least think about).

IMO it is not a moral issue; it is an issue of whether or not she is going to be an effective teacher. Her students are teenagers. They will now have photos of her nude. This is a distraction. It is difficult enough to work with that age group. I think such a thing destroys her ability to manage her students effectively and to teach effectively. Everything will be about her nude photos and not about learning. Teachers' private lives need to be kept out of the classroom: that is the professional stance to take.

The question is -- who brought it up?

The OP article goes:
>> A Dallas ISD teacher who had posed nude for Playboy’s website has caused a stir with students and at least one parent, who questioned whether she should be in the classroom. <<

Did she? Did this teacher walk into class one day and say "Hola, here's what I did in college"? That would be a crucial difference. But the article, tellingly, doesn't tell us exactly who brought this up or made an "issue" out of it. That's conspicuous in its absence.

A look around for further info on that question also turns up very little. I did find this:

>> There are stories in the British Daily Mail and in The Australian highlighting "her sexy secret" and "her raunchy past." You can read about her in French, or in Russian. Domestically, the news is similarly fascinated by Deweese: KDFW ran a segment about the "teacher's Playboy past," with an image from the shoot of Deweese making bedroom eyes at the camera. << -- Texas Monthly

-- while that doesn't identify chicen-or-egg, it does tell us what kind of entity thinks this is a big deal, and why. Along with mucrakers cited there like The Blaze. All of which points to a sea of hypocrisy navigated by LCD tabloids who would run over a budding career at the drop of a proverbial hat, as long as it means ensnaring readers and viewers....

>> when it comes to cases like Deweese's, the outlets covering her seem to want it both ways: They want to play the role of the moral scold questioning whether or not it's acceptable for a teacher to have posed for naked photos, while also accompanying their outrage with photos from Deweese's shoot. << (ibid)

Face it folks, somebody's getting played like a cheap banjo here, and it ain't the students.

And let us not abandon the concept of linear time: Deweese is not a teacher who went and did a photo shoot; she's a photo shoot model/student who went on to be a teacher.

One of my points is that she doesn't need to announce what she did in college, regarding this or anything else. If it is published on the Playboy Website, the kids are likely to see it at some point and she will then be a distraction. If there is something like this to be found out about a teacher, kids usually find it out: in fact, they are usually the first to know.

I am not concerned with any moral issues about what she did, though I think it is a ludicrous argument to put forth that if she didn't have parents to pay for her education, posing nude or dancing nude or whatever is a reasonable option. I came from a background where my parents couldn't afford a cent toward my education and managed to put myself through 6 years of university just working at ordinary jobs.

Teachers still have to earn the respect of their students in order to be effective. A female who has posed nude for Playboy is not likely to do that when she is dealing with teenage boys on a daily basis, no matter how much some people would like to think otherwise. I think she made a mistake, and she is a dimwit. She should choose another profession. Idiots like her just drag down the profession of teaching.

 

[Pogo]

IMO it is not a moral issue; it is an issue of whether or not she is going to be an effective teacher. Her students are teenagers. They will now have photos of her nude. This is a distraction. It is difficult enough to work with that age group. I think such a thing destroys her ability to manage her students effectively and to teach effectively. Everything will be about her nude photos and not about learning. Teachers' private lives need to be kept out of the classroom: that is the professional stance to take.

The question is -- who brought it up?

The OP article goes:
>> A Dallas ISD teacher who had posed nude for Playboy’s website has caused a stir with students and at least one parent, who questioned whether she should be in the classroom. <<

Did she? Did this teacher walk into class one day and say "Hola, here's what I did in college"? That would be a crucial difference. But the article, tellingly, doesn't tell us exactly who brought this up or made an "issue" out of it. That's conspicuous in its absence.

A look around for further info on that question also turns up very little. I did find this:

>> There are stories in the British Daily Mail and in The Australian highlighting "her sexy secret" and "her raunchy past." You can read about her in French, or in Russian. Domestically, the news is similarly fascinated by Deweese: KDFW ran a segment about the "teacher's Playboy past," with an image from the shoot of Deweese making bedroom eyes at the camera. << -- Texas Monthly

-- while that doesn't identify chicen-or-egg, it does tell us what kind of entity thinks this is a big deal, and why. Along with mucrakers cited there like The Blaze. All of which points to a sea of hypocrisy navigated by LCD tabloids who would run over a budding career at the drop of a proverbial hat, as long as it means ensnaring readers and viewers....

>> when it comes to cases like Deweese's, the outlets covering her seem to want it both ways: They want to play the role of the moral scold questioning whether or not it's acceptable for a teacher to have posed for naked photos, while also accompanying their outrage with photos from Deweese's shoot. << (ibid)

Face it folks, somebody's getting played like a cheap banjo here, and it ain't the students.

And let us not abandon the concept of linear time: Deweese is not a teacher who went and did a photo shoot; she's a photo shoot model/student who went on to be a teacher.

One of my points is that she doesn't need to announce what she did in college, regarding this or anything else. If it is published on the Playboy Website, the kids are likely to see it at some point and she will then be a distraction. If there is something like this to be found out about a teacher, kids usually find it out: in fact, they are usually the first to know.

I am not concerned with any moral issues about what she did, though I think it is a ludicrous argument to put forth that if she didn't have parents to pay for her education, posing nude or dancing nude or whatever is a reasonable option. I came from a background where my parents couldn't afford a cent toward my education and managed to put myself through 6 years of university just working at ordinary jobs.

Teachers still have to earn the respect of their students in order to be effective. A female who has posed nude for Playboy is not likely to do that when she is dealing with teenage boys on a daily basis, no matter how much some people would like to think otherwise. I think she made a mistake, and she is a dimwit. She should choose another profession. Idiots like her just drag down the profession of teaching.

Once again this is where linear time comes in. She didn't go get a teacher job and then retroactively pose for Playboy.

I don't see this as a "moral" or a faux-moral or an education issue at all. I see it as a media issue. As long as they want to play this fake morals game to sell papers, it becomes a "story" in the same sense that Lindsey Freaking Lohan's driving record becomes one.

You won't convince me that the Daily Mail and The Blaze and their ilk are interested in the morals of Dallas high school students. They're interested in selling papers, no matter how base the content. But in order to milk this myth and sell those papers they need enablers. I can't get my head around why we would want to give them that kind of power.

 

[Esmeralda]

The question is -- who brought it up?

The OP article goes:
>> A Dallas ISD teacher who had posed nude for Playboy’s website has caused a stir with students and at least one parent, who questioned whether she should be in the classroom. <<

Did she? Did this teacher walk into class one day and say "Hola, here's what I did in college"? That would be a crucial difference. But the article, tellingly, doesn't tell us exactly who brought this up or made an "issue" out of it. That's conspicuous in its absence.

A look around for further info on that question also turns up very little. I did find this:

>> There are stories in the British Daily Mail and in The Australian highlighting "her sexy secret" and "her raunchy past." You can read about her in French, or in Russian. Domestically, the news is similarly fascinated by Deweese: KDFW ran a segment about the "teacher's Playboy past," with an image from the shoot of Deweese making bedroom eyes at the camera. << -- Texas Monthly

-- while that doesn't identify chicen-or-egg, it does tell us what kind of entity thinks this is a big deal, and why. Along with mucrakers cited there like The Blaze. All of which points to a sea of hypocrisy navigated by LCD tabloids who would run over a budding career at the drop of a proverbial hat, as long as it means ensnaring readers and viewers....

>> when it comes to cases like Deweese's, the outlets covering her seem to want it both ways: They want to play the role of the moral scold questioning whether or not it's acceptable for a teacher to have posed for naked photos, while also accompanying their outrage with photos from Deweese's shoot. << (ibid)

Face it folks, somebody's getting played like a cheap banjo here, and it ain't the students.

And let us not abandon the concept of linear time: Deweese is not a teacher who went and did a photo shoot; she's a photo shoot model/student who went on to be a teacher.

One of my points is that she doesn't need to announce what she did in college, regarding this or anything else. If it is published on the Playboy Website, the kids are likely to see it at some point and she will then be a distraction. If there is something like this to be found out about a teacher, kids usually find it out: in fact, they are usually the first to know.

I am not concerned with any moral issues about what she did, though I think it is a ludicrous argument to put forth that if she didn't have parents to pay for her education, posing nude or dancing nude or whatever is a reasonable option. I came from a background where my parents couldn't afford a cent toward my education and managed to put myself through 6 years of university just working at ordinary jobs.

Teachers still have to earn the respect of their students in order to be effective. A female who has posed nude for Playboy is not likely to do that when she is dealing with teenage boys on a daily basis, no matter how much some people would like to think otherwise. I think she made a mistake, and she is a dimwit. She should choose another profession. Idiots like her just drag down the profession of teaching.

Once again this is where linear time comes in. She didn't go get a teacher job and then retroactively pose for Playboy.

I don't see this as a "moral" or a faux-moral or an education issue at all. I see it as a media issue. As long as they want to play this fake morals game to sell papers, it becomes a "story" in the same sense that Lindsey Freaking Lohan's driving record becomes one.

You won't convince me that the Daily Mail and The Blaze and their ilk are interested in the morals of Dallas high school students. They're interested in selling papers, no matter how base the content. But in order to milk this myth and sell those papers they need enablers. I can't get my head around why we would want to give them that kind of power.

Actually, it is an education issue. You may see it as a media issue, but that is because you know virtually nothing about what is needed to be an effective teacher. You've shown repeatedly you have little to no respect for teachers or for education, and you base your entire position here on a 'media' issue of free speech or something. The other side of the issue for you is just a blank page.

 

[Pogo]

One of my points is that she doesn't need to announce what she did in college, regarding this or anything else. If it is published on the Playboy Website, the kids are likely to see it at some point and she will then be a distraction. If there is something like this to be found out about a teacher, kids usually find it out: in fact, they are usually the first to know.

I am not concerned with any moral issues about what she did, though I think it is a ludicrous argument to put forth that if she didn't have parents to pay for her education, posing nude or dancing nude or whatever is a reasonable option. I came from a background where my parents couldn't afford a cent toward my education and managed to put myself through 6 years of university just working at ordinary jobs.

Teachers still have to earn the respect of their students in order to be effective. A female who has posed nude for Playboy is not likely to do that when she is dealing with teenage boys on a daily basis, no matter how much some people would like to think otherwise. I think she made a mistake, and she is a dimwit. She should choose another profession. Idiots like her just drag down the profession of teaching.

Once again this is where linear time comes in. She didn't go get a teacher job and then retroactively pose for Playboy.

I don't see this as a "moral" or a faux-moral or an education issue at all. I see it as a media issue. As long as they want to play this fake morals game to sell papers, it becomes a "story" in the same sense that Lindsey Freaking Lohan's driving record becomes one.

You won't convince me that the Daily Mail and The Blaze and their ilk are interested in the morals of Dallas high school students. They're interested in selling papers, no matter how base the content. But in order to milk this myth and sell those papers they need enablers. I can't get my head around why we would want to give them that kind of power.

Actually, it is an education issue. You may see it as a media issue, but that is because you know virtually nothing about what is needed to be an effective teacher. You've shown repeatedly you have little to no respect for teachers or for education, and you base your entire position here on a 'media' issue of free speech or something. The other side of the issue for you is just a blank page.

I'd refer you back to my "cheap banjo" comment, and that --the psychology of media-- is something I do know about.

Again I don't see a word in this story or any other story about her teaching abilities except in the positive, so it's hard to wrap my head around "drags down the profession of teaching" when all we've got to go on is salacious tabloid media. I don't see a criticism of what she's doing in the classroom.

What I DO see is a lot of muckraking from outside sources far, far removed from Dallas; sources that can't possibly have a stake in what's going on in that high school. And I see that between the two actions of what this girl did years ago and what the muckrakers are doing now, only the latter is designed to hurt anybody.

 

[bianco]

What if it had been a male teacher?

 

[Crackerjaxon]

No, she shouldn't.