highlyeccentric | (no subject)

(no subject)

Teacher sacked for appearing in Cleo

Ok, how many primary school children read Cleo? Very few, I'd say. So the problem is with the children's parents finding out that *shock* their kid's teacher has a sex life! OMG!

If it were *high* school, it'd be another matter- most of her female students would be reading the magazine, and students seeing their teacher naked would be... not a good plan. But *primary school kids shouldn't be reading Cleo anyway*! Since when is it inappropriate for a teacher of children to be known to have sex?

*Mutters and grumbles*

Ok, that's my rant for today.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

*bangs head against desk*

If their real motive was keeping it hushed up to protect the poor innocent children, why didn't they, I don't know, keep it hushed up to protect the poor innocent children?

RANT RANT RANT.

I seem to be ranting about sex a lot lately. People are starting to give me funny looks.

I dunno. I've mixed feelings about this one. Primary children aren't the target audience of Cleo, but some of their parents might well be, and I can imagine it'd be a bit of a shock to open the magazine and find that kind of article about your child's teacher. I think that might come under the heading of "TMI". To me it feels like a boundary has been crossed that shouldn't be. I know this makes me sound like some kind of old-fashioned prude (I'm really not), but I think it undermines the teacher's position w.r.t. the children to be so exposed. In some professions, private life is better left private, and teaching is one of them.

Also, there's a time, place and manner for children to learn about sex, and IMO a titillating article about one's teacher in a magazine isn't one of them.

Sorry this isn't very coherent - I can't quite find the right words to express why this feels wrong to me.

How is it undermining her position with relation to the *children*, though? It's the parents who are reading and being offended.

If the children are finding out about sex from Cleo, at under twelve, you have a bigger problem than whether or not their teacher is interviewed in it...

Is it that the parents are just offended on their own behalf about her daring to have OMGseks!!??!! though? Or is it that they're worried a) that their kids might find out (re: what I said about undermining her position) and b) whether the teacher might be similarly open about her sex-life in the classroom? Cos those would be the two things that would concern me if I was one of the parents. I know it probably seems ridiculous to think b), but I would definitely want to check (however I would not check by going to the press for gods' sakes).

Of course, psychoanalytically speaking, I rather suspect that the loudest protesters are those who are secretly titillated about this peek into the teacher's private life (because of the old "thou protesteth too much" rule). Much of society's ability to continue functioning comes (IMO) out of the fact that people put quite a bit of energy into *not* thinking about people they're in daily professional contact with doing things like going to the toilet, having OMGseks, etc. etc. Seeing her naked is probably a bit too uncomfortably close to the bone. Nobody likes to think of someone else as being *gasp* human.

If they are worried about the teacher being open about sex (not really a problem by itself, but may be inapproprite), then that is what needs to be discussed with her and with her principal. It's completely immaterial, however, because that is not the reason given for the firing- it is solely and only because she was in a magazine talking about things.

This is a perfect example of someone being fired for something from their person life, which has no impact on their job. She did not have child pornography, she was not showing children such things or discussing sexual things outside the classroom, she, in short, did not act inappropriately at all.

The fact that the parents have psychological trauma from realising their child's teacher is a real person is not said teacher's problem. Especially when, apparently, her students adored her.

But unfortunately, her personal life did impact upon her job, because she took it into the public realm by choosing to participate in the Cleo story. Not expecting that sort of revelation to potentially have an impact on one's job is IMO a bit naïve. She has a position of responsibility to young kids. She didn't do anything illegal, but she revealed in a public forum more of and about herself than would normally be considered wise given her position as a teacher. I wouldn't be at all surprised if there is something in her contract of employment about behaving with propriety because of the very nature of her employment - this is the same reason people are instructed to be cautious about what they put on their MySpace/Facebook pages. The bounds of privacy are no longer what they were, given the speed with which information moves nowadays.

Of course, now that the press have got hold of the story there's no chance the children won't find out (as Highly has already pointed out). Who took the story to the press?

But unfortunately, her personal life did impact upon her job, because she took it into the public realm by choosing to participate in the Cleo story. Not expecting that sort of revelation to potentially have an impact on one's job is IMO a bit naïve.

True. But only because we live in a society where a woman enjoying sex is eeevilll. It wasn't even a pornographic magazine, where one could almost make the argument that it would be somehow damaging for the children to see that.

It was naive, but not because she did something wrong- but because the school acted badly and she should have known that it would.

She has a position of responsibility to young kids.

How, exactly, did she violate that responsibility?

I wouldn't be at all surprised if there is something in her contract of employment about behaving with propriety because of the very nature of her employment...

As a public school teacher, she wouldn't have a contract. And if she did, that would be (dodgy, but realistic) ground for firing, and there would therefore be no media involvement- an open and shut case.

Besides. Not a pornographic photo shoot, at all. The photos are decent shots of a couple embracing.

My problem isn't with her having a sex-life. My problem is with her putting a very personal part of her life into the public domain where her students could (potentially) see it. Of course there's nothing wrong with the naked human body, or with the sight of a couple embracing. For me, it's the squick-factor involved, of having something so personal on public display. That's my personal reaction, because I would be deeply uncomfortable with doing something like that, but I realise it can't necessarily be generalised to the whole population.

BTW, as I said before, I do think there's a time and place for children to learn about sex, and I don't think it's through seeing their teacher naked in a magazine, no matter how much we might want to rail against society's unfair standards regarding women and sex. That's what I meant by her responsibility to the children.

BTW, as I said before, I do think there's a time and place for children to learn about sex, and I don't think it's through seeing their teacher naked in a magazine

of course not! But where in this does anyone think the children would see their teacher in Cleo?

See my answer to your other comment.

hmm.

i don't think you can ever control the 'time and place' in which children learn about sex.

i've never tried bringing up kids but i imagine for most people awkward moments like if your kid found this picture are the main times in which conversation about sexuality opens up? i mean it seems to me something that surely parents deal with a fair bit and no-one is hurt? why can't the parent just explain to the kid that, yes, even your teachers have husbands/wives and love each other very much etc. it wouldn't be massively different from kid asking awkward questions about a billboard of a random naked woman/couple?

You're right that it's naieve. No Sydney lawyer would *think* of doing such a thing- not because it's wrong, per se, but because women in the corporate world know that it'll result in firings, loss of promotion, unwanted attention, and so on.

this is the same reason people are instructed to be cautious about what they put on their MySpace/Facebook pages

Not really, it's not. MySpace/Facebook are child/teen centred environments; Cleo is an adult magazine. Like I said, it'd be different if she taught high school. But there's no reason to think that her students would ever have got hold of the article...

She didn't do anything illegal, but she revealed in a public forum more of and about herself than would normally be considered wise given her position as a teacher.

No, of course it's not wise! But it didn't warrant summary dismissal and giant hullabaloo. A quiet word with the teacher about avoiding such situations; a phone call to every complaining parent, explaining that Miss Whatsit is not talking about sex in class and that her private life- or her choice of how much to air- is not the school's business unless she shares it at school or to students, would have been about right.
It's *Cleo*. Not porn; not a salacious sex blog, just Cleo... Ill-advised, but not immoral.

But there's no reason to think that her students would ever have got hold of the article...

You'd be amazed. I remember when I was in grade 4 a classmate brought along her father's porn magazines to school. I don't imagine those were left lying around casually, but she found them anyway.

I agree with your comments about how it should have been handled (how the hell did the press get hold of this story anyway? The school? A disgruntled parent? The teacher herself? Whoever did it should have their butts kicked). I should point out that my comments aren't at all coming from a position of morality vs immorality. I'm talking about propriety, which is a different thing. I'll probably get my butt kicked for saying this, but IMO she should have checked with her employers *before* agreeing to do the story.

even if she taught in high school, i don't think that would justify sacking her. yes, she would have to deal with her students' responses - but that's her decision and if she thinks she can do it, then great. if of course it turns out that her classes all fall to pieces and no-one listens to her anymore, maybe she needs to change schools, but until that happens, so what?

it seems like what has happened is some parents think what she's done is immoral and therefore she is not a good role model for children; i don't think she has done anything immoral. and, niamh_sage, your arguments seem to be mainly about whether her actions would make her job difficult - which is different from whether they are moral. (correct me if i'm misreading your arguments, i have only skimmed them i admit!)

sorry, just noticed you specifically said you weren't talking about morality/immorality.

the question then is, why does propriety matter? because it might make her students not respect her (which is her call about whether she can manage that, maybe even teach them something in the process)? because it's just wrong (in which case we seem to be back to morals)? ... some other reason...?

since you're replying to me, i'm not sure niamh's going to see and answer that question...

well, it's probably for the best anyway :)

must.not.get.into.internet.arguments.

back to thesis, bron...

Hrm. Two teachers in a loving and committed relationship who are comfortable enough to talk about this in a magazine strictly limited to adult readership.

Two teachers who are obviously sexually attracted to each other and not kids.

Hrm.

Definitely don't want them teaching kids, then. /roll.

Yeah, all these sexually active teachers, I dunno. Back in my day all we had was repressed perverts!

Er...is Cleo strictly limited to an adult readership? Because as far as I can remember (it's been quite a while since I last bought one), it wasn't in the age-restricted section of the newsagent.

amusing comments about this on lp (http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/05/10/saturday-salon-139/)

i like this comment
Oh, by the way, did I miss something in that story? I couldn’t find any reference at all to standards of literacy and numeracy.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

(no subject)

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

yes, i am procrastinating... help me :(