Do you ever wonder if you can get fired for painting little Naked Women?

[Talion]

Originally posted by Dragonsreach

Originally posted by Talion

Originally posted by Duende

I think I\'m just remmebering a couple of years back i saw on TV some supermodel or female celebrity was \"painting\" by smearing her body with paint and rubbing herself on a canvas. But in this case, eveybody thought it was great! Nobody was calling her immoral and trying to get her fired from her job. So is it also sexist? ...that a comparatively attractive popular female is applauded for painting with her body, but some unknown Joe Schmoe is called a perv and denounced?

I think that\'s a complety different area. I\'m sorry but it isn\'t. It\'s a case of double standards.
[/color]
One has nothing to do with kids, the other does

The fact of the matter is this guy Teaches kids. If he likes to paint with his Willy then maybe what else does he liked to do or maybe later do with it. And it\'s that mentality that is causing the issue and why the guy got fired. He\'s been tried and convicted on the inference that he MAY be perverted without real proof.
That\'s your opinion, I personally think painting with your penis is perverted.

That\'s the bit I don\'t like, there are certain proffessions that home hobbies should be looked at.
And please a big drum roll for the Neo-Fascist state!
Your statement here is way off base. Your private life should not be dictated by your employer and no-one has the automatic right to investigate what I or you do in our non-employment hours.
How many people look at Online Porn at home, when they are not allowed to at work. Does your employer have the right to stipulate your online habits, No!
So when it comes to your children, you don\'t care what hobbies their teacher has. If he looked at serious hardcore porn, like taking drugs. You would\'t mind him teaching your kids. i would.

If he was a brickie or anything else, I wouldn\'t care, but anything to do with kids...no thanks. Child molesters aren\'t confined to White collar jobs and the concept that it\'s an outsider who is most likley to be a predator against children is incorrect. The greater majority of Child abuse issue comes from within the immediate, or near relation, family group.
I\'m well aware of the facts, but this guy perve or potential perve has acces to children, and more opportunity

If he was to later on go on and rape a child, we\'d all be arguing, \"we should\'ve seen it coming he liked to paint with is wang\"
That\'s an argument without substance!
You can\'t say that the guy is a potential child molester on those grounds, you may as well say \"We are all potential Gropers as we paint with our hands\".
If teaching authorities were to take a real look at the levels of outside involvment/situations that teachers have, how many would decide that because a teacher is suffering from Stress and Depression that they should not be teaching as they are a threat to their pupils. That would rule out at least 60% of the teachers I know.
if they are a potential risk to their pupils then of course they shouldn\'t be teaching.

My argument is based purely based on his proffesion. I wouldn\'t want my children taught by someone who I believe is a bit pervy.
If he doesn\'t get any type of enjoyment from it then why is he doing it. If he does then somethings not quite right about it.

Either way, I don\'t think he should be around children. Purely my opinion

 

[supervike]

Not to defend the guy, but it was more \'butt\' painting than it was \'wang\' painting.

I don\'t really have an opinion on the morality of it. I do think its stupid, and only done for \'shock\' value. But I also think most modern art is done for the same reason. The only thing more bizarre about it is the fact that some people actually shell out money to pay for this type of \'art\'.

But I do have to say the I am questioning the legality (to Ritual\'s points) of these so called \'morality\' clauses....Especially in this case since he really broke no law. I guess I\'d understand the morality clause if he broke the law in some way.....Another case of opening my eyes, I suppose.

 

[noneedforaname]

saying a guy shouldn have a job working with kids just cause he paints with his todger is the same as saying you shouldn\'t employ a welsh man as a sheperd.

In reality being welsh or painting with your pork sword has no bearing on criminality or how well someone will do there job.

In this case you could say he should have moved onto other work if his position became unworkable at the school because he lost the respect of his students. In that case the education board should have facilitated his move to another school so as not to lose a valuable teaching asset.

If he wasn\'t an asset he would have been fired long ago for being crap at his job.

I know for a fact as a kid i encountered plenty of teachers who quit the profession because they couldn handle a class and it had nothing to do with painting with there wang.

 

[Herb the bitter]

Originally posted by noneedforaname

If he wasn\'t an asset he would have been fired long ago for being crap at his job.

The problem is contracts and unions can make it difficult to fire someone for merely being crap at their jobs. As Evil Dave implied, this may have been an easy way to get rid of a crappy teacher.

In my opinion it would be hard to prove an art teacher is incompetent if they do the obvious stuff like show up to work on time.

 

[wiccanpony]

I reserve judgment on this man and being fired because of his hobby.... because I don’t know all the facts

The term “morality” has always bothered me, the word has many different definitions, depending on where you live.

Dragging out personal soapbox:

I have been beaten soundly with the morality word for being an outspoken female Pagan. But that is what is wonderful about this Nation, we can get out vote, lobby, grassroots campaigning and change what we disagree with. Because of these “gifts” our founding fathers have left us, the number of Pagans is on the rise and If I never hear the phrase “are you a good witch or a bad witch” I shall die happy.

jumping down and heading for the Freak Bar.....where everyone knows your name. :beer:

 

[rwnwolf]

The rest of the story

The original poster made a comment about thinking that there may be more to this story. I happen to live in the area, and our local news apparently covered this story in a little more detail, so I will pass the information along.

He was not fired because he paints with his strange parts of his anatomy. He was fired because he made a video of himself painting with strange parts of his anatomy, and allowed that video to be posted on the internet where his students could possibly have access to said video.

This is where the indescency clause in his contract comes in. What he does in his spare time is his business, but what he does when his students are watching or have access to see is another thing entirely. If he hadn\'t made the video and it hadn\'t made it onto the web, he would not have been fired and this would not be news.

It\'s not about him, it\'s about the kiddies. There is no assumption that he is a perv of some kind. The community and the school board is only concerned with the fact that they have a responsibility to the students and the parents of the students not to expose them to a situation where they could point to the screen and say, \"Hey, that\'s Mr. Soandso, and he\'s painting with his @#$!@#!\" to which their parents could be justifiably offended.

Think about it this way: Whether or not you, as an observer of this art is offended by it is irrelevant, your local neighborhood prude has every right to be offended when thier children are exposed to it, whether they are American or otherwise.

When that local neighborhood prude can be brought up on charges of neglect and contributing to deliquency of a minor when they don\'t send their kids off to be taught art by a man who has offended them, and possibly exposed their kids to something that they did not want thier kids seeing (which is within their rights as parents), and you have a situation where the school board is responsible for something that is \"none of their business\". (How was that for a run on sentance?)

Which is why contracts have descency clauses in the first place.

 

[Talion]

Originally posted by noneedforaname
saying a guy shouldn have a job working with kids just cause he paints with his todger is the same as saying you shouldn\'t employ a welsh man as a sheperd.

Do you know what, that has to be the funniest thing I\'ve ever heard.

In my opinion it has nothing to do with how good or bad he is at his job or the morality of it. Like i said I would just think he\'s a bit wierd if he was a brickie.

It\'s to do with trust. I for one would not trust a man who paint\'s with his wanger teaching my kids.

The school has to make decisions based on trust, after all it\'s not their kids.

In most jobs it wouldn\'t matter the only person you\'re going to damage is yourself. But when young innocent (I know not all) kids come into play, then it\'s a different ball game. You can\'t take the risk

 

[wiccanpony]

welcome to the Forum Rwnwolf and thank you for helping to fill in some of the missing facts on the issue.


I’m afraid the Neighborhood prude and I are going to have to agree to disagree.

 

[rwnwolf]

Originally posted by wiccanpony
welcome to the Forum Rwnwolf and thank you for helping to fill in some of the missing facts on the issue.


I’m afraid the Neighborhood prude and I are going to have to agree to disagree.

Thank you for the welcome!

Locally, there haven\'t been any complaints about the artwork itself, or his methods for doing it. The local prudes are only upset that their kids can see this man using his peculiar methods for painting.

Kids are savvy enough to know who it is even if he covers part of his face and uses a fake name. He was only wearing half a mask, so part of his features could still be seen, and they could obviously hear his voice when he spoke. After all, the school board found out somehow right? Some one saw it and recognized him. Otherwise the school board wouldn\'t even know about it in the first place.

I doubt that is really something that people are going to disagree on. Even nudist parents respect the fact that other parents don\'t want their kids to see them holding a nudist picnic at the local park.

 

[Dedwrekka]

Originally posted by supervike

Originally posted by Ritual
Here, it would have been against the law to fire him if his art was the only reason...

I would think that would be illegal here too...BUT...many educators have \'decency\' clauses in their contracts. Who defines the decency is one thing, but I\'ll bet Mr. Butt-brush signed a contract with that sort of thing in it.

I would think that the video clip in the article might have come into play.

*Edit*: *see\'s Rwnwolf\'s post* I was right!

And by the way...

\"Chesterfield lost a tremendous asset today,\" he said.

:moon:

 

[Ritual]

@rwnwolf
Hi and welcome! It\'s interesting to learn more details about the case that started all this, even though my points were more of a general kind and not meant as a defence of this particular person. It seems, from what you tell, that he might have been slightly more interested in his artist career than his teaching career since his actions doesn\'t strike me as very clever if he really valued his teacher job!

@talion
Most \"real\" pervs, that is people who actually abuse other people out of abnormal sexual tendencies (i.e. not the spontaneous, spur-of-the-moment type offender that could be more or less anyone), are very careful about making themselves seem suspicious. Those are the ones, that when they finally get exposed, the people who know them says things like \"I would never have guessed... he/she was such a terrific person!\".

@duende (and others discussing the gender aspect of the situation)
It is far easier to be labelled as a \"perv\" if you are a man, sadly. In some sections of the society here in Sweden it\'s almost got to the point where you have to prove that you are a \"good\" man, or you will automatically be labelled as a sexist, pompous and abusive potential rapist.

 

[rwnwolf]

Thanks Ritual! That\'s why I figured I would post. The news often tells only part of the story. Either to support some agenda, or just to sensationalize or just a lack of professional follow through.

I don\'t know what the case was here, (I suspect a lack of follow up) but \"picky little details\" like that make a big difference in a case like this. Just leaving out a few sentances tells an entirely different story.

 

[petey]

Originally posted by petey

Originally posted by Evil Dave
Maybe even have a king that will impose a national religion.

You have an insidiously imposed national religion: it\'s Christianity and it\'s a stain.

 

[Talion]

Cheers Rwnwolf, for shedding some light on the topic.

I\'ll shut up now, it\'s not often I get drawn into a topic, but it\'s good to have a full on debate sometimes.

 

[Evil Dave]

Originally posted by petey

Originally posted by petey

Originally posted by Evil Dave
Maybe even have a king that will impose a national religion.

You have an insidiously imposed national religion: it\'s Christianity and it\'s a stain.

Funny, I\'m a diest, Wiccan\'s a Pagan.
I haven\'t had anyone threaten me with decapitation.

How\'s about you Wiccan?

We have a majority here that are Christian, that act and try to get laws passed in their own interests, just like every other group in the country, but we aren\'t forced to be part of that group.

To me there is no difference between a Christian looking out for his interests, a Muslim looking out for his interests, an Aetheist looking out for his interests, a gay man looking out for his interests, or a black man looking out for his interests.

It\'s all self-serving, and every group does it. Hell, every individual is self-serving to one degree or another every day.

But, thanks for your ill aimed bigotry, I sentence you to tolerance training.

 

[matty1001]

Tolerance Training Camp lol i watched that the other day!

 

[wiccanpony]

Originally posted by Evil Dave

Originally posted by petey

Originally posted by petey

Originally posted by Evil Dave
Maybe even have a king that will impose a national religion.

You have an insidiously imposed national religion: it\'s Christianity and it\'s a stain.

Funny, I\'m a diest, Wiccan\'s a Pagan.
I haven\'t had anyone threaten me with decapitation.

How\'s about you Wiccan?

We have a majority here that are Christian, that act and try to get laws passed in their own interests, just like every other group in the country, but we aren\'t forced to be part of that group.

To me there is no difference between a Christian looking out for his interests, a Muslim looking out for his interests, an Aetheist looking out for his interests, a gay man looking out for his interests, or a black man looking out for his interests.

It\'s all self-serving, and every group does it. Hell, every individual is self-serving to one degree or another every day.

But, thanks for your ill aimed bigotry, I sentence you to tolerance training.

decapitation, nope........burn in hell, yes, a few times (the nieces grandma, a “Good God Fearing” Catholic would point this out to me all the time. Never you mind that “I” don’t believe in hell.:twisted:

But that\'s her problem, not mine:drunk:

 

[philologus]

Originally posted by wiccanpony

Originally posted by Evil Dave

Originally posted by petey

Originally posted by petey

Originally posted by Evil Dave
Maybe even have a king that will impose a national religion.

You have an insidiously imposed national religion: it\'s Christianity and it\'s a stain.

Funny, I\'m a diest, Wiccan\'s a Pagan.
I haven\'t had anyone threaten me with decapitation.

How\'s about you Wiccan?

We have a majority here that are Christian, that act and try to get laws passed in their own interests, just like every other group in the country, but we aren\'t forced to be part of that group.

To me there is no difference between a Christian looking out for his interests, a Muslim looking out for his interests, an Aetheist looking out for his interests, a gay man looking out for his interests, or a black man looking out for his interests.

It\'s all self-serving, and every group does it. Hell, every individual is self-serving to one degree or another every day.

But, thanks for your ill aimed bigotry, I sentence you to tolerance training.

decapitation, nope........burn in hell, yes, a few times (the nieces grandma, a “Good God Fearing” Catholic would point this out to me all the time. Never you mind that “I” don’t believe in hell.:twisted:

But that\'s her problem, not mine:drunk:

Exactly WP. The state doesn\'t force wiccans to listen to the Christians. Petey, if I\'m correct you don\'t even live here, right?

 

[rwnwolf]

Originally posted by petey

You have an insidiously imposed national religion: it\'s Christianity and it\'s a stain.

[/quote]

There is no possible situation in which a statement such as this, made about any religion in particular, can be anything other then vulgar, offensive, charged and completely uncalled for.

I don\'t care how some jerk/s may or may not have treated you in the past, some basic maturity should be excersized.

 

[vincegamer]

Originally posted by wiccanpony decapitation, nope........burn in hell, yes, a few times (the nieces grandma, a “Good God Fearing” Catholic would point this out to me all the time. Never you mind that “I” don’t believe in hell.

Heck, I was brought up a Catholic and I got the burn in hell message all the time. Of course in Oklahoma, Catholics are the liberal religion. We let everyone be themselves. It\'s the Baptists who say we\'re going to hell.
Having become a humanist/atheist, I suppose hasn\'t helped much. In fact, I think atheists get it harder than any theistic religious minority.