NSFW*

(*Not Safe For Work – seriously, wait ’til you get home to read this post/view the video)

Came across this story via the BBC today. After poking around the Internet, I’ve pieced together the following timeline:

2004

  • Attractive young woman works as model/actress
  • Said woman stars in a short film/advertisement for Scruffs workwear (seems to be British equivalent of Carhartt or Dickies)
  • Film is highly sexually suggestive; includes several simulated sex acts, some of which involve this woman

2005

  • Film sent to construction companies; wins multiple awards at advertising industry awards ceremony in Cannes

2006

2008

  • Video hits YouTube
  • Students and parents see their English teacher simulating sex on an office desk
  • Teacher is suspended pending “an investigation”

Here’s a link to the video on YouTube (you’ll have to sign in to verify your age, as YouTube has it flagged as inappropriate for minors). The teacher is the woman in the first section (“Action Jacket”). Last warning: DO NOT WATCH if you’re at work, or are offended by semi-graphic depictions of sex.

This is huge, people. Should this woman be penalized for a job she took years before she was a teacher? There was no crime committed. On the other hand, could your child take her seriously as a teacher after seeing this video? Is the headteacher within his legal right to take any action at all? How can we separate the moral judgments from the legal ones – or can we?

Even if you find the film to be grossly offensive (which I imagine many will), could you justify letting this woman lose her job? Pretty serious implications here for the rest of us, too – is it fair to hold YOU accountable in a professional context for things you did before you joined the profession?

So many questions coming to mind here, and I don’t know enough about private education in England to know what the legal ramifications are or could be. I’d love to hear from the British contingent on this one – what are teachers and admins saying about this across the pond?

9 Comments

  • It worries me that a teacher can be suspended for a choice they made 4 years before becoming a teacher. Nothing she did was illegal. Bad choice, maybe. On the other hand, how will she feel when she has her own children and they see that commercial? Is this any different that posing for Playboy?

    That said, isn’t this the lesson we have been trying to teach our kids about the on-line world in general? I am 47 years old, and I have to admit I made some less than stellar choices when I was younger, but my “co-conspirators” didn’t have video cameras, cell phones or digital cameras to capture the moment. People will make the same age old mistakes, but now everything gets captured and posted to the Internet.

  • British contingent here (do I get a badge with that on?!)

    Interesting one this. My first reaction was that the video was considerably more graphic than I was expecting from the descriptions and I absolutely see the problem. The BBC report is quite clear that she has been suspended, pending investigation, and this is a perfectly normal procedure in the UK. I would imagine the school will investigate, and the governors will decide if her actions would prevent her from discharging her role as a teacher properly. An alternative might be that she would be referred to the General Teaching Council who could, theoretically, remove her QTS (Qualified Teacher Status)

    While I appreciate this was 4 years ago, as Iteachcomputers says, one of the lessons we’re trying to get over to pupils is that internet age means the actions we took in the past throw a much longer shadow than they used to, and she will have to live with the consequences of her actions. Teachers are supposed to be role models to young people, and this really seems to rub up the wrong way against that.

    It’ll be interesting to see the school verdict once the investigation is over, but I’m really not sure what her defense would be. This wasn’t an event ‘captured on camera phone’, but a professionally made promotional video.

    Final thought – How many pupils under 18 certified themselves suitable to watch this I wonder?!

  • I have to admit that when I read this story the first thing I thought of was I’m so glad that technology wasn’t so advanced in my younger, wilder days. Even though I never did anything this wild, I did some things I’m not proud of but then I grew up. Would society prefer that this woman didn’t strive for something better in her life, to work towards a higher goal? I think it would be a good lesson that your past sometimes catches up with you but once you have made a better life for yourself, it is time to move on and keep this in the past. I think they should leave this woman alone.

  • Quick follow up question for Dave: do you know if she has been suspended with or without pay? I didn’t see that in any of the reports I read.

    Thanks everyone for commenting thus far; I’ll weigh in a little later.

  • As iteachcomputers said, this is exactly the message we are trying to get across to our students: the Internet never forgets.

    Not sure exactly where I stand on this particular case, but to play the devil’s advocate for a moment: isn’t it possible that what the headteacher is concerned about is the general moral fitness of a person who would make this type of film in the first place? Was this her only misstep along the narrow path of righteousness? What other things occurred that might not show up in a Google search?

    We all do things we’re not particularly proud of in our lives. Is there a statute of limitations on youthful indiscretions? Should there be?

  • The cynic in me is wondering if “suspended” is just code for “not fired yet, but it’s coming.” Re: Pat’s point, I’m wondering what this decision means for her career. Will this woman be prevented from pursuing her career of choice because she made a commercial? Arguably in poor taste, inarguably explicit, but it’s not as if this is a pornographic film, which I might be more likely to find incompatible with a career in teaching (despite an overwhelming helping of liberal guilt on that one).

    I’m having a hard time sussing out in my mind what exactly this is about. Is it about:

    a) a young person caught doing something “bad” on the Net
    b) a nation’s attitude toward sex and sexuality
    c) the right of an employer to include “moral fitness” as an employment criterion
    d) the YouTube era’s lack of “statute of limitations on youthful indiscretions” (love that phrase, Diane)
    e) other??

    I appreciate what folks are saying regarding the Internet-savviness lessons here, but I’m also concerned about what those lessons might be. and if they’re the right ones to be teaching (see D above).

  • holy cow. that’s an awesome question, and to be honest, i struggle with similar questions. sometimes the things I say in my blogs or in my poems can be highly suggestive sexually or otherwise, so will i get fired for things I believed from even before i became a teacher? I sincerely hope not. I think if my kids ever found out certain things I wrote about, I’d have their respect that they won’t talk about it. It might depend largely on the person and how they approach the students they teach. I gotta know how this one ends up.

  • thanks for passing this along damian. interesting on so many points.

    point d in your comments above is the most interesting to me. she was hired AFTER all of this had happened. seems to me that honesty is the only weapon she has against her youthful indiscretion. but it’s tricky – should she have come clean during the interview, and risk not being hired? keep quiet and hope you’re not the unlucky soul whose video goes viral on youtube?

    legally speaking, point c, i think that it’s up to each individual private school to determine what it is that constitutes an action that goes against the school’s mission / core beliefs. and that’s what i’d point out for item b as well – whether or not she is fired may have more to do with the values of one specific school community rather than that of the nation. (although by the time it makes the bbc the school may be forced to let her go due to media pressure even if the community is a forgiving one.)

    something like this actually happened to me, although nothing in the story is too NSFW. somehow my new principal received a link to a newspaper article from my uni’s commencement day edition profiling how far i’d changed from my frat boy beer-guzzling days to a committed new teacher. luckily he brushed it off as he knew he’d hired the “after” jeff and not the before, but i’ve often thought that my career would have taken a remarkably different trajectory had that not been the way the event turned out.

  • @jose: Your kids might be cool, but what about parents? Admin? Do you see any risk there at all?

    @jeff: Glad that worked out well for you; the spin of the story sounds much more positive than what this woman’s been up to; if anything, it sounds like it serves of an affirmation that the principal did the right thing in hiring you. I’m also curious as to how that article “found its way” to your principal – buddy of yours? Student? Parent?

    I hate having to watch my back like that. Anything I feel like publishing on the Internet that I don’t feel is 100% safe for school, I for damn sure don’t do it under my own name. Also, having tenure helps.

    Unfortunately, it looks like you don’t even have to have/do anything questionable to get investigated now.

Leave a Reply to Damian Cancel reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

CommentLuv badge

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.