[Added: The comments to this post indicate that many don’t know what the exact Naked Teacher Principle is. My fault: I usually re-state it in the posts, and did not this time. The Principle states that a secondary school teacher or administrator (or other role model for children) who allows pictures of himself or herself to be widely publicized, as on the web, showing the teacher naked or engaging in sexually provocative poses, cannot complain when he or she is dismissed by the school as a result. It does not hold, and has never held, that such teachers must be dismissed or should be dismissed in all cases.]
That’s St. Louis substitute teacher Sheena Sittner above—trust me on this. Like some other teachers—and bet there are a lot more potential firees out there—she lost her job over having an OnlyFans account. It wasn’t the school that fired her but the agency that delivers substitute teachers that suspended her pending termination and that she must “refrain from contacting any school or districts.”
The enterprising educator follows July’s Naked Teacher Principle (NTP) star, Maris Nichols, 25, the married Georgia high school teacher who in addition to having sex with students is a provocative OnlyFans performer. Maris was being blackmailed by some of her students who discovered the OnlyFans channel she owns, operates, and uses to display her excellent Linda Lovelace impression, among, uh, other things.
It’s a theoretical argument that Nichols’ example, which provides one reason OnlyFans teachers have no defense to offer school boards once they are outed, doesn’t apply to a substitute teacher. Who would extort a substitute teacher for grades, when they don’t usually give out grades? Never mind, though: there are plenty of other reasons a school (and parents) might not want to have an amateur porn star guiding young impressionable minds. Do I have to go through them again? Here’s an idea: why don’t you review the EA archives on the subject? It will be entertaining, and I don’t have to write the same things I have posted dozens of times over many years.
Sheena does have a distinction that puts her in a sub-category: she’s a dim-witted rationalizing Naked Teacher. She’s been broadcasting X-rated content on OnlyFans along with her substitute teaching for the past two years, and says she knew it would probably be discovered eventually. “If teachers were paid better, women wouldn’t have to resort to online content creation,” Sittner said. “Sex sells.” Yeah, so do kidneys, crack and child trafficking. And, you know, women don’t have to resort to selling their body and dignity for the enjoyment of pervs: there are many other options. Moreover,the reasons one chooses to engage in a side-gig that is incompatible with holding a parent’s trust as a role model and a conveyor of societal values still don’t justify the conduct if it affects others and is inappropriate.
Maybe this is why she’s just a substitute teacher.
I can’t resist: https://youtu.be/-zevxOD9TaY
As this post does not cover new ground and I am in a contrarian mood today, let me take up the challenge (again) to offer a counter perspective in a number of points:
I have to admit a number of biases of mine here
CVB
You developed the contrarian perspective far better that I was prepared to. I was not going focus on the influence of sexuality but more in the direction of teachers creating an ideology among students that whites are inherently morally deficient and that government must supply all the needs of the people.
Either way, many teachers without Only Fans pages cannot be trusted to provide our children with the tools to critically think and only seek to indoctrinate them in social justice porn. I cannot define it but I know it when I see it and hear it.
My view on the Naked Teacher Principle is that this principle is arbitrary, narrow, and casuistic. According to this principle we should not hire Sydney Sweeney because of her recent ad, but the same principle is silent about whether we should hire Jane Doe from Cornell of recent gang bang fame as teacher as long as no video surfaces of the event.
I agree that we need to have a more comprehensive framework on the (dis)qualifications for teachers to whom our parents entrust our education.
However, given that the teaching of DEI, CRT, transgenderism has full support of the teacher unions, my view is that the entire public school system cannot be trusted. Getting the vapors over some nudie pics is not going to address these issues.
You need to read the text of the NTP. I usually include it in the posts, but I did post the tag.
It does not say that having a a naked photo or the equivilent come into public view disqualifies anyone from being a teacher. It states (from the EA glossary available to all in one click above) The Principle states that a secondary school teacher or administrator (or other role model for children) who allows pictures of himself or herself to be widely publicized, as on the web, showing the teacher naked or engaging in sexually provocative poses, cannot complain when he or she is dismissed by the school as a result. In other words, don’t put your naughty bits on the web, and if you do, you are risking employment consequences that are completely predictable and easily avoidable.
Thank you for clarifying that aspect of the NTP. Your response also highlights one of my concerns, namely that the NTP is way to narrow to guide the hiring policies of today’s public schools. I will think about writing an additional comment on hiring and sex education at schools.
Or a guest essay.
Teachers and schools cannot be trysted to teach sex education. This is the parents’ job, and it’s not up to the government to ensure that the job is done to its satisfaction.
I just added a very long comment to this post. Probably goes beyond the scope of the NTP; I would like to open a conversation about education in general, with a focus on sex education.
I’ll put it up as a guest post. Have a title?
Some thoughts about a proper sexual education at our schools.
I was going to send this to you earlier this week, but i did not see something new, except maybe that she was a substitute teacher (which seemed like a distinction without a difference)
-Jut
I am going to latch onto the last paragraph in Jack’s post to argue that the Naked Teacher Principle is wholly insufficient for today’s educational environment at public schools.
...with holding a parent’s trust as a role model and a conveyor of societal values…
Assume that I were a parent of two teenage sons, and they are both educated at a public school. What reasonable expectations should I have for their education, and their development as young men ready to conquer the next stage of life? I mentioned the word “men” in the previous sentence, as we cannot skip sexual development, and the development of a healthy identity. What good parents want is that their boys grow up to men with character, who are secure in their manhood, who know how to properly interact with others including with the other sex, have healthy friendships, do not grow up to be bullies, are able to form healthy relationships and marriages.
The main responsibility for a healthy sexual and moral development of children lies with the parents. Sending a child to school means that some of activities of raising a child is delegated to a third party; however delegation of that task should leave the ultimate responsibility for moral development with the parents. Delegation requires trust. Trust that the values taught at school do not undermine the values taught by the parents and that are commonly held in the parent’s community. Trust that the schools are transparent to the parents about critical issues pertaining to their children. Trust that the teachers of the school act as proper role models, living out those values. This has implication for which teachers you hire and fire; which the NTP relates to.
The current day public school environment betrays the trust of parents in multiple ways. Schools deliberately undermine existing societal values by aggressively pushing radical social and sexual agenda’s favored by radical minorities by shoving these issues into the faces of very young children. I have mentioned transgenderism in a previous comment. Before the Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage (Obergefell) the issue pushed at schools was everything related to homosexuality. This has resulted in a lot of sexual confusion, and a pandemic of children who at a way too young age are put on path of irreversible steps to gender transition. Even worse is that the public schools go to great lengths to hide all this from the parents of the children involved. This type of environments does not generate teenagers who are secure in their sexual identity, who know they are accepted; instead it creates teenagers who are physically and mentally damaged. It creates freaks like Tyler Robinson who was up to his ears in alternative sexualities like furry and transgender, and who proceeded to murder Charlie Kirk.
The current day public school environment betrays the trust of parents is by pushing all the DEI and CRT crap on children. “Toxic Masculinity”, “Smash the Patriarchy”, “Men are trash”, “Women are the Future”. A couple of days ago we saw that this junk is aggressively promoted by the teacher unions. The result of this are dispirited and cynical young men who fail to launch, and will not leave their parents house until in their thirties, do not date and become INCELs, who resent women, and are open for the racist and antisemitic ideas of Mick Fuentes as a raised middle finger to the indoctrination they got at school.
Add to this mix all the feminist sex positivity of OF creators and teachers who initiate sex with students, and you may understand the actions of the Cornell 7 also as a result of the toxic climate at our public schools.
We need to fundamentally rethink as a society on how to educate our children about sexuality, relationships, identity; a quaint principle at the NTP is wholly insufficient to deal with this. The NTP is a relic from the sixties when Playboy Magazine was able to create moral panics.
I do not see any hope for the public school system in the USA. It is unfixable due to the grasp of teacher unions and progressive interests. It needs to be nuked out of orbit. Sending your children to a public school is a form of child abuse.
When thinking about education at other than public schools, we need to consider the following things:
This is a start, other commenters may take it from here….