|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 6,236
The Swizzler.... 6000+ posts
|
|
The Swizzler.... 6000+ posts
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 6,236 |
It's like I always said.......there's a reason why some of us use common sense.
Art teacher in hot water over topless photos!
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) -- Until they found the topless photos, Austin High School officials considered Tamara Hoover an excellent art teacher with a knack for helping students find their creativity.
Now, she's fighting for her job.
The photos, which were posted on Flickr.com by her partner, depict Hoover in the shower, lifting weights, getting dressed, in bed and doing other routine activities.
Hoover said Friday the photos are art and makes no apologies.
"I'm an artist and I'm going to participate in the arts," Hoover said. "If that's not something they want me to do then I want to be told that. I don't feel as if I was doing anything that was beyond expectations."
The school district said the photos were inappropriate and violate the "higher moral standard" expected of public school teachers. As she was escorted out of class last month she was told that she's become an ineffective teacher.
The district wants to revoke her teaching certification, which would keep her out of Texas classrooms permanently. Hoover will appeal the ruling and is prepared to take the case to court, she said.
Hoover's abrupt dismissal highlights a new concern for employees: Your boss has Internet access, too.
"People don't realize when they put their entire diary out there, they're giving very private information to the public," said Kate Brooks, director of career services for liberal arts students at the University of Texas at Austin.
The photos came to light last month as a result of a feud over ceramics equipment with another art teacher, according to sworn affidavits. Students who had seen the pictures showed the teacher, who then notified school officials.
Austen Clements, one of Hoover's students, noted that many artists have nude pictures, including Georgia O'Keeffe.
"If Georgia O'Keeffe wanted to teach at Austin High, I don't think they'd say, 'No, you have nude pictures online,"' Clements said.
The school was attended by President Bush's daughters, Barbara and Jenna.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1
We already are 15000+ posts
|
|
We already are 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1 |
yup....you definitely have lots of common sense. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 13,392
[insert non-dated reference here] 10000+ posts
|
|
[insert non-dated reference here] 10000+ posts
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 13,392 |
Where the fuck are the pictures?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,952 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,952 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
PrincessElisa said:
Art teacher in hot water over topless photos!
All kidding aside, Elisa demonstrates the problem people who put too much of their lives on line can have.
You Are What You Post: Bosses are using Google to peer into places job interviews can't take them
Googling people is also becoming a way for bosses and headhunters to do continuous and stealthy background checks on employees, no disclosure required. Google is an end run around discrimination laws, inasmuch as employers can find out all manner of information -- some of it for a nominal fee -- that is legally off limits in interviews: your age, your marital status, the value of your house (along with an aerial photograph of it), the average net worth of your neighbors, fraternity pranks, stuff you wrote in college, liens, bankruptcies, political affiliations, and the names and ages of your children. Former Delta Air Lines (DAL ) flight attendant Ellen Simonetti lost her job because she posted suggestive pictures of herself in uniform on her "Queen of Sky" blog -- even though she didn't mention the airline by name. "We need Sarbanes and Oxley to come up with a Fair Google Reporting Act," says Brian Sullivan, CEO of recruitment firm Christian & Timbers. "I mean, what the hell do you do if there is stuff out there on Google that is unflattering or, God forbid, incorrect?"
Not a whole lot. That's because today there are two of you. There's the analog, warm-blooded version: the person who presses flesh at business conferences and interprets the corporate kabuki in meetings. Then there's the online you, your digital doppelgänger; that's the one that is growing larger and more impossible to control every day.
Because anyone, anywhere, at any time can say anything about you on the Web, reputations are scarily open-source. And because entire companies dedicate themselves to recording every inch of information on the Web, it's becoming difficult to unplug from the Google matrix, let alone make anything on the Internet go away. "This takes people's own agency out of how they want to present themselves," says Alice Marwick, a technology consultant and PhD candidate in New York University's Culture & Communications Dept. The Internet started out with avatars and anonymity. Now online and offline are bleeding together. "It's consolidating personal information into the aggregate," says Marwick, even though "our social practices haven't figured out how to keep up with the technology."
Search engines make it possible for employers to scour all manner of digital dirt to vet employees. Online profile company Ziggs.com CEO Tim DeMello fired an intern after he discovered that on the intern's Facebook profile he divulged that while at Ziggs he would "spend most of my days screwing around on IM and talking to my friends and getting paid for it."
For lawyers, Google is paradise, often delivering more damning information than the discovery process does. Employment attorney Eric C. Bellafronto was recently on the phone with a client who had an employee with a history of being MIA. The slacker's excuse that day was that he was in Arizona taking care of a sick grandmother. While talking to the client, Bellafronto Googled the suspected faker and up came the fact that he was in Sacramento, being arraigned in federal court.
I was able to track down a deadbeat dad this way. The guy claimed to be unemployed and judgement proof but I happened to be surfing on a local message board when people were asking for recommendations for a local contractor. Deadbeat was recommended by several of the posters. So I supoenaed the posters' ISPs, got their real names, subpoenaed them to give testimony and proved the guy had lied under oath about his income and assets. He ended up getting charged with perjury and welfare fraud and having to pay back approximately twenty thousand dollars in ill gotten gains.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1
We already are 15000+ posts
|
|
We already are 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2 |
(pjp they dont have traffic clerks do that stuff)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1
We already are 15000+ posts
|
|
We already are 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1
We already are 15000+ posts
|
|
We already are 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2 |
(  )
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 6,747
I've got more guns than you. 6000+ posts
|
|
I've got more guns than you. 6000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 6,747 |
"Um, Miss Hoover? I can see your tits..."
"Ah good. Now I'm on the internet clearly saying I like tranny cleavage. This shouldn't get me harassed at all." -- Lothar of the Hill People
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 19,633
I walk in eternity 15000+ posts
|
|
I walk in eternity 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 19,633 |
Any teacher I have dated NEVER put naked pics of themselves online for all to see. It's just being practical. I feel badly for the lady, but she fucked up.
"I offer you a Vulcan prayer, Mr Suder. May your death bring you the peace you never found in life." - Tuvok. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1
We already are 15000+ posts
|
|
We already are 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1 |
I really don't see the big deal but I guess that's me being socially liberal. I hope they make it illegal to google stuff about potential employees.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1
We already are 15000+ posts
|
|
We already are 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1 |
I really don't see the big deal but I guess that's me being socially liberal. I hope they make it illegal to google stuff about potential employees.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
I'm very dissapointed by this. What has happened to our society? Where has our goodness and decency gone? It's tragic, really. I'm disturbed and saddened by what's happened here.
That the pictures have been removed, I mean. It's terrible. This was all I could find.
MisterJLA is RACKing awesome.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
The link has a link to her myspace page. She seems like a nice lady.
MisterJLA is RACKing awesome.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1
We already are 15000+ posts
|
|
We already are 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1 |
She's very pretty. It is fucked up. Was she a good teacher? Then that is all that should matter. I don't care what my employees do outside of work (as long as it is legal) if they can come in and do their job as asked by me.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 13,392
[insert non-dated reference here] 10000+ posts
|
|
[insert non-dated reference here] 10000+ posts
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 13,392 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 47,826 Likes: 8
Hip To Be Square 15000+ posts
|
|
Hip To Be Square 15000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 47,826 Likes: 8 |
And once again moral values are judged by those with no idea of what they are talking about!
She is an art teacher, and its very well known that artists use nude models, so why is it so strange that an artist would pose herself?
Its not like she starred in a hardcore porn film.
Also, what significance does this have on how she does her job?
If they are saying that its wrong for her students to see her nude, then this in itself shows exactly how fucked up the moral majority are.
Instead of punishing a grown woman for doing something that to her, is totally natural as an artist, they should be asking the parents how come their children are looking at those pictures if they are morally corrupting as they would have us believe.
Also, do these moral highlords deem all nudity as porn?
Were Adam & Eve the worlds first porn stars?
Is the Venus DeMilo porn?
Its just another case for the repressed trying to enforce their backwards opinions on everyone else!
Welcome to the 21st century you fucking idiots, try to keep up with the rest of us!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,952 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,952 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
PJP said:
I hope they make it illegal to google stuff about potential employees.
Won't happen. If its on google, or any public web site, its public information.
But I agree with you that there is no legitimate basis to fire this woman for something she did on her own time which is completely legal.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Hey! I've got topless pics online. I wonder if the City of San Francisco will fire me? Not! 
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,952 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,952 Likes: 6 |
In San Francisco, unless the pics were to show you wearing a "vote republican" t-shirt, I doubt anything you do or don't wear could get you fired.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 6,236
The Swizzler.... 6000+ posts
|
|
The Swizzler.... 6000+ posts
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 6,236 |
Just make it pretty awkward teaching. "Hey miss......we saw those pictures online......."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 47,826 Likes: 8
Hip To Be Square 15000+ posts
|
|
Hip To Be Square 15000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 47,826 Likes: 8 |
And once again:
a) Why were these children allowed to look at such pictures if nudity is so wrong?
b) Why is the nude form such a corrupt disgusting thing?
c) What does someones personal life have to do with their work life unless it effects the way they work?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,952 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,952 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
Nowhereman said:
Why were these children allowed to look at such pictures if nudity is so wrong?
Were they "allowed" to look at the pics, or did they discover them while surfing the net?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 13,392
[insert non-dated reference here] 10000+ posts
|
|
[insert non-dated reference here] 10000+ posts
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 13,392 |
They wouldn't have just discovered them -- they had to have searched her name to find them.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,952 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,952 Likes: 6 |
My point was that it was unlikely that an adult directed these kids to the photos. More likely, the kids either heard rumors about them, and did a search, or found them by accident while looking up their teacher on the internet.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 47,826 Likes: 8
Hip To Be Square 15000+ posts
|
|
Hip To Be Square 15000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 47,826 Likes: 8 |
And do they not have such things as net-nanny programs these days?
If parents do not install these programs, then it is their fault if their children are exposed to this.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,952 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,952 Likes: 6 |
I'm not sure a "net nanny" program would block an innoculous web site on which a participant chose to post tasteful nudes.
You seem to be trying to argue that the parents are at fault or intended for the kids to see the pics. There doesnt seem to be any evidence for that. Accidents do happen.
Again, I'm not saying they are right to fire the teacher. The opposite in fact. I just don't see how any one can be assigned blame here.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 47,826 Likes: 8
Hip To Be Square 15000+ posts
|
|
Hip To Be Square 15000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 47,826 Likes: 8 |
Did you read my posts?
My whole point is that this isnt porn, yet these moral crusaders admonish the teacher but fail to ask the questions of why these children would be able to see it.
Parents are wholly responsible for what their children do & see on the net, so if this is porn as these people would like to pretend, why do they not also question why the children would get access to it.
What I'm saying is its double standards.
If you say what the teacher has done is wrong, then you have to say that the kids viewing it have also done wrong.
Fact is neither her nor any kids who might see the pictures have done anything wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
PrincessElisa said:
Just make it pretty awkward teaching. "Hey miss......we saw those pictures online......."
You may feel uncomfortable about it. Other people may not. This woman for example was comfortable enough being photographed and allowed the pics to be published on the internet by her husband. There's a good chance it wouldn't bother her at all. I find it amazing that in this day and age such a fuss is made over this.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1
We already are 15000+ posts
|
|
We already are 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,952 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,952 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
Nowhereman said:
If you say what the teacher has done is wrong, then you have to say that the kids viewing it have also done wrong.
We don't hold children to the same standards of behavior as adults. Something that may be "wrong" for an adult is sometimes simple curiousity for children.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 47,826 Likes: 8
Hip To Be Square 15000+ posts
|
|
Hip To Be Square 15000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 47,826 Likes: 8 |
But once again you totally ignore a good portion of the post.
I said that the parents are wholly responsible for their children, so on that basis if the kids do wrong, then it is the parents responsibilty for not monitoring their children properly, ie installing a net-nanny style program.
And saying that we dont hold children to the same standards of behaviour is a pretty piss poor argument.
Are you saying that if children do something wrong, they should not be punished?
No fucking wonder so many kids today are growing up to be trouble makers & dropouts!
If you dont instill a system of right & wrong at an early age, its too late to do anything about it when they become adults!
If a child is old enough to understand that looking at nude pictures is a turn on (i cant think of a better term right now) he is old enough to know he shouldnt be looking at them at his age.
But none of this really matters as in this case the only people in the wrong are the moral majority, but you seem to wanna take this off in a completely different direction.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,952 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,952 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
Nowhereman said:
But once again you totally ignore a good portion of the post.
I said that the parents are wholly responsible for their children, so on that basis if the kids do wrong, then it is the parents responsibilty for not monitoring their children properly, ie installing a net-nanny style program.
I had addressed that point. I noted that I believed a "net nanny" program would not necessarily have prevented these particular pictures from being discovered.
Furthermore, you are imposing an unrealistic standard on parents. Short of completely isolating a child and/or monitoring that child one on one 24/7 it is impossible to completely prevent all possible exposure of a child to things which a parent may not approve.
Quote:
And saying that we dont hold children to the same standards of behaviour is a pretty piss poor argument.
Are you saying that if children do something wrong, they should not be punished [etc]
Actually, we don't hold children to the same standards of behavior as an adult. We never have.
Children are allowed, depending on their ages, to scream in public, throw food, soil their diapers, walk around naked, "play doctor," get in fist fights and generally engage in behavior which would get an adult arrested, incarcerated and/or committed to a mental hospital. Even when a child is old enough to be charged with a crime, often we try that child as a "juvenile" and impose a different form of "punishment" than we would as an adult.
Likewise, we impose certain laws on adults that regulate their interactions with children and prevent them from engaging in certain behaviors towards children that are legal if engaged in with consenting adults (see, eg, statutory rape or sexual abuse).
Why? Because we understand that children do not have the same capacity for reasoning right and wrong that adults do.
Quote:
But none of this really matters as in this case the only people in the wrong are the moral majority, but you seem to wanna take this off in a completely different direction.
Every one here is in agreement that the teacher shouldn't be fired. Every one here is in agreement that what the teacher did in her private life had no bearing on her job performance. That was the issue when the tread started and that's the issue for most of us today.
The only person who keeps trying to take it in a different direction is the guy who keeps bringing up some tangent about the kids being in the wrong also.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 47,826 Likes: 8
Hip To Be Square 15000+ posts
|
|
Hip To Be Square 15000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 47,826 Likes: 8 |
You really are a retard. My "tangent" was relevant to the case in point, yet you keep pushing the topic into that direction rather than address it to the matter it relates. Your points that children can do all that stuff like fighting, shouting etc is also laughable. If you feel that a child should not be punished for this sorta stuff just shows why children grow up being social rejects. If a child gets into a fight, the only way to teach it that it is wrong is to punish it. The level of punishment might be different, but it is still punishment. And as for Quote:
Furthermore, you are imposing an unrealistic standard on parents. Short of completely isolating a child and/or monitoring that child one on one 24/7 it is impossible to completely prevent all possible exposure of a child to things which a parent may not approve.
How am I imposing unrealistic standards on parents?
Maybe it is impossible to monitor a child 24/7, but that doesnt excuse not punishing a child if it does do stuff that is wrong when it is out of your sight.
Parents are the biggest influence on children as they grow, and the standards they follow later in life are often dictated by the enviroment they are raised in.
A negelected child (and I dont just mean a child who isnt looked after, I am talking about a child that is allowed to do whatever it wants without fear of reprisal) will grow up with a pretty strange view of what is right & wrong!
On top of that, the monitoring of children isnt just about moral values etc, its about the childs safety.
Can you honestly say that as a parent, you have not gone out of your way to monitor your children as much as you possibly can?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,952 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,952 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
Nowhereman said:
How am I imposing unrealistic standards on parents?
Maybe it is impossible to monitor a child 24/7, but that doesnt excuse not punishing a child if it does do stuff that is wrong when it is out of your sight.
First off, you're assuming the children were punished somehow. The fact that a newspaper didn't report that a child got in trouble for looking up "nekked" pictures on the internet is not surprising, given the complete banality of that happening. A child getting punished for such things isn't news. If it was, the local paper would no doubt be filled with items about groundings, time outs and the like.
Second, you continued to imply (though with your current clarification you back off somewhat) that the parents are somehow "at fault" because they didn't monitor their children 24/7 and, as a result, their kids happened to find these naked pictures.
Quote:
Your points that children can do all that stuff like fighting, shouting etc is also laughable.
If you feel that a child should not be punished for this sorta stuff just shows why children grow up being social rejects.
If a child gets into a fight, the only way to teach it that it is wrong is to punish it.
The level of punishment might be different, but it is still punishment.
Your final sentence here shows you grasp the concepts I was discussing, even if you steadfastly refuse to grasp the conclusion.
As you, yourself, admit, we don't treat the children the same as adults. Therefore, its bizarre that you keep expecting us to in this situation.
As pointed out repeatedly, I think what the teacher did in her own private life here was completely unrelated to her job and in no way warranted her termination.
However, for the reasons listed above, that doesn't mean a person is hypocritical for holding that teach, an adult, to a different standard than a child. Its simply a recognition of the fact that children are held to a different standard sometimes.
Quote:
My "tangent" was relevant to the case in point, yet you keep pushing the topic into that direction rather than address it to the matter it relates.
If its relevant it bears discussion. You, yourself, keep bringing it up. As such, it is difficult to see any reason why you keep objecting to the discussion of your own "tangent."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 74
Bitchswitch 25+ posts
|
|
Bitchswitch 25+ posts
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 74 |
omg WHO CARES?? So she showed her tits. Big deal. What does that have to do with "common sense"?
Rosey Palm
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 19,633
I walk in eternity 15000+ posts
|
|
I walk in eternity 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 19,633 |
Thomas Paine wrote "Common Sense."
"I offer you a Vulcan prayer, Mr Suder. May your death bring you the peace you never found in life." - Tuvok.
|
|
|
|
|
Ms. Hoover? 
