Link to spreaker

Listen to 'Benedict's Box' via:

About Me

Big Brother 2012 house mate, single Dad, actor, singer, personal trainer, stripper, adult entertainer, public speaker, activist, columnist, presenter and former secondary school teacher. Canadaphile, Francophile, atheist, fighter for freedom and tolerance, real child protection, sexual liberalism, European integration and abolition of the monarchy.

Sunday, 15 April 2012

YOUR QUESTIONS: In regards to smoking/obese teachers; that's an atrocious example because teachers who smoke do not make money out of it, it's not their profession!? Yet if a teacher was the head of a tobacco comp and endorsed it the GTC may take a different view?

If you honestly believe that the reason I was dismissed and then reprimanded was because I received money for what I do, I think you will find that you are living in, what is commonly referred to as, 'Cloud Cuckoo Land'.
With respect, you were neither at my dismissal proceedings by the school or the GTC hearing. So, rather than hypothesising as to what the GTC may possibly have been considering, let me furnish you with a few facts: At no point at an time during either my dismissal or the GTC hearing was any reference to the receipt of money for my activity ever made. The GTC made absolutely no reference in either its preparation papers against me or in its prosecution during either of the two days of the trial. I quite expected that it might, but it did not.
So despite what you may think the GTC to have thought, a problem with the receipt of payment has never been raised, but simply a criticism of the activity itself: its impact on the school, its students and the extent to which a teacher can be a good example and 'role model' while doing this in their life outside of school. This is exactly why I bring up the entirely relevant examples of obesity and smoking (amongst others) as activities which receive little or no criticism from the authorities or many in society and yet both have proven links to thousands of deaths (what more negative an effect could there be than DEATH???) and yet pornography has no proven negative effects.
Even if your argument about the receipt of payment was true, let me use a real example that you may appreciate and understand. One of my colleagues of the school I worked at also worked part-time in a pub. Obviously, they received payment for it. The school knew of it and had no issue with it. Alcohol is a legal drug in this land which can be purchased from pubs. This person was therefore supplying, to those who consented and are of a legal age, a legal drug. Some people question the morality of the consumption of drugs (both legal and illegal) and some religions oppose it. Even the parliamentary independent scientific committee deemed alcohol to be THE most dangerous drug, out of all legal and illegal drugs, based on both the impact to the individual and on society at large. As a porn performer, I helped in the production of a legal form of entertainment in this land, which is supplied to consenting adults of a legal age. Both of us were in receipt of payment for our services. Both of us carried out these activities outside of school. Neither of us promoted these activities within school time or to minors. Alcohol, however, is proven to be linked to the deaths of thousands of British citizens every year and to the admittance of thousands of young people to emergency departments every weekend as a result of binge drinking. These are direct proven links. Many hypothesise about the potential harm that pornography may have on its consumers. However, nothing is proven. Indeed, some even argue it can have positive effects. These are not proven either. Either way, it has no proven negative effects on anyone and is certainly not proven to be directly linked to anyone's death.
The GTC and the school I worked at clearly had zero issue with whether or not I was paid for the activity. It was with the activity itself and with the fact it had become public knowledge.

1 comment: