As a teacher, he should have known better. How do you expect your students to watch you and your wife having sex and then come to class and NOT think about that. How clueless this person is! I am a teacher and I think he should have been fired just for being so stupid.
Modern pornography has exploited a line of poorly reasoned Supreme Court decisions to become permissible/legal free expression rather than impermissible/illegal obscenity. However, applying the definition of obscenity those decision provided, modern pornography is obviously obscene (e.g. appeals to the prurient interest, depicts sexual conduct in an offensive way, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value). The pornography available on onlyfans and pornhub hurts individuals, damages relationships, and negatively impacts relations between the sexes. It is a travesty that it is permitted at all.
It is a sick joke that a professor, someone who should be a person of character capable of imparting wisdom on the next generation, should make pornography and then complain when the university fires him because of his offensive and indecent behavior. That anyone cares about the professors side of the story and that he may have a viable legal case against the university is so discouraging when contemplated beside the terrible decline of our universities over the last few decades. Our universities are in crisis and this professor cares more about being allowed to be a pornographer. This is demoralizing.
This man has an absolute right to his freedom of speech. His employer, in an employer/employee relationship also has rights not to condone his freedom of speech.
Finally, a sane decision by an institution of higher learning. Perhaps the tide is turning! I can't imagine sitting in a classroom and taking this joker seriously after having engaged in such behavior. My son is interested in this school (we live 1,200 miles away) and now I am enthusiastic about supporting him in applying!
Professors at public universities should keep their sex lives inside the bedroom. Or tent. Or whatever. He and his wife are crazy and I agree with the Board of Regents. Who does he think he is, Alfred Kinsey? Oh, that's right, Kinsey and his team sexually abused children and recorded it, in the name of research. The Board of Regents has to deal with the fact that the Wisconsin legislature holds the purse strings, and parents are going to avoid sending their offspring to UW-LaCrosse.
Not sad, not sympathic, and in a more civilized society there would be even worse consequences. Porn is not freedom of speech, porn should be banned or at least ghettoized far away from the public, you shouldn't be exposing the intimacy of the marital bed to the world, and the board of an institution has every right to decide whether your behavior reflects the values and mission of the institution. 17-0: just fabulous.
But I'm sure this guy and his wife will remain unrepentant and refuse to learn from their disgusting behavior. I'm sad people like this are allowed to vote.
Welp, there's now even more insane newsworthy news that I guarantee The FP will ignore:
A whistleblower has come forward with proof that Tim Walz, who you may remember took THIRTY! trips to China (no one takes thirty "trips" to China), is connected to the CCP's direct action to destabilize the government and culture of the United States of America.
I'll be waiting with bated breath for Oliver Wiseman to allow someone here to write about that news.
What interests me is how this scenario was introduced, namely outside of work behaviors being of concern to an organization. One may start with Foucault and Bentham's panopticon to appreciate the normative gaze of the organization toward employees in relation to its moral projects. I think it all started in the late 1700s / 1800s according to Foucault. Before that, I believe workers could mostly do what they liked in their free time. But the story of how it all developed is a long but interesting one.
Since the University of Wisconsin is a public university, the law regards UW as an arm of the government. For this reason, Mr. Gow may have a valid First Amendment case.
His stupidity should be the reason he was fired. If he knows anything about young people, he will know that they will find the video and his sexual antics may cause students to assume they can also be provocative in class or mention what they saw. I know-- I am a teacher.
The Wisconsin legislature is rather conservative and UWisc needed to prove to the taxpayers in the state that the professors teaching their children are not perverts. I predict this will help Trump in Wisco, oddly.
So let’s see if I’ve got this straight: Aging academics of average looks(by their own evaluation) want to showcase her gravity challenged boobs and his presumably medicated partner, Lil’ Elvis, while performing the Beast With Two Backs for paying customers in a quasi public forum, all for fame and fortune. Said academics are employed by a publicly supported institution which, even in these enlightened times, has at least a smidgen of responsibility to maintain a reasonably upright ( no pun intended) reputation and to exercise at least a token of commitment to the well being of those tender young souls delivered to their care. In a fit of rarely exhibited common sense, the governing board elects to fire their sorry asses for, at a minimum, exhibiting dismally bad judgment. On such compelling incidents are landmark Supreme Court decisions rendered. It ain’t exactly Letter from Birmingham Jail but, in these unserious times, it may be the best available to us.
As a teacher, he should have known better. How do you expect your students to watch you and your wife having sex and then come to class and NOT think about that. How clueless this person is! I am a teacher and I think he should have been fired just for being so stupid.
What “speech” did he get fired for, moaning? Porn isn’t speech.
Maybe it's ageism, but from my point of view he is too old to be Porn Professor.
Definitely on board with him being fired. Not on board with him losing $300k worth of sick leave. If he earned it, it should be his.
Modern pornography has exploited a line of poorly reasoned Supreme Court decisions to become permissible/legal free expression rather than impermissible/illegal obscenity. However, applying the definition of obscenity those decision provided, modern pornography is obviously obscene (e.g. appeals to the prurient interest, depicts sexual conduct in an offensive way, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value). The pornography available on onlyfans and pornhub hurts individuals, damages relationships, and negatively impacts relations between the sexes. It is a travesty that it is permitted at all.
It is a sick joke that a professor, someone who should be a person of character capable of imparting wisdom on the next generation, should make pornography and then complain when the university fires him because of his offensive and indecent behavior. That anyone cares about the professors side of the story and that he may have a viable legal case against the university is so discouraging when contemplated beside the terrible decline of our universities over the last few decades. Our universities are in crisis and this professor cares more about being allowed to be a pornographer. This is demoralizing.
Whether watching porn is respectable or not is an individual's choice. Publicly funded universities must abide by the Constitution and Federal law.
This looks like a great case for thefire.org.
This man has an absolute right to his freedom of speech. His employer, in an employer/employee relationship also has rights not to condone his freedom of speech.
Finally, a sane decision by an institution of higher learning. Perhaps the tide is turning! I can't imagine sitting in a classroom and taking this joker seriously after having engaged in such behavior. My son is interested in this school (we live 1,200 miles away) and now I am enthusiastic about supporting him in applying!
Professors at public universities should keep their sex lives inside the bedroom. Or tent. Or whatever. He and his wife are crazy and I agree with the Board of Regents. Who does he think he is, Alfred Kinsey? Oh, that's right, Kinsey and his team sexually abused children and recorded it, in the name of research. The Board of Regents has to deal with the fact that the Wisconsin legislature holds the purse strings, and parents are going to avoid sending their offspring to UW-LaCrosse.
Not sad, not sympathic, and in a more civilized society there would be even worse consequences. Porn is not freedom of speech, porn should be banned or at least ghettoized far away from the public, you shouldn't be exposing the intimacy of the marital bed to the world, and the board of an institution has every right to decide whether your behavior reflects the values and mission of the institution. 17-0: just fabulous.
But I'm sure this guy and his wife will remain unrepentant and refuse to learn from their disgusting behavior. I'm sad people like this are allowed to vote.
I agree with the board. Porn isn't a respectable pursuit, sorry, not sorry.
Welp, there's now even more insane newsworthy news that I guarantee The FP will ignore:
A whistleblower has come forward with proof that Tim Walz, who you may remember took THIRTY! trips to China (no one takes thirty "trips" to China), is connected to the CCP's direct action to destabilize the government and culture of the United States of America.
I'll be waiting with bated breath for Oliver Wiseman to allow someone here to write about that news.
What interests me is how this scenario was introduced, namely outside of work behaviors being of concern to an organization. One may start with Foucault and Bentham's panopticon to appreciate the normative gaze of the organization toward employees in relation to its moral projects. I think it all started in the late 1700s / 1800s according to Foucault. Before that, I believe workers could mostly do what they liked in their free time. But the story of how it all developed is a long but interesting one.
Since the University of Wisconsin is a public university, the law regards UW as an arm of the government. For this reason, Mr. Gow may have a valid First Amendment case.
His stupidity should be the reason he was fired. If he knows anything about young people, he will know that they will find the video and his sexual antics may cause students to assume they can also be provocative in class or mention what they saw. I know-- I am a teacher.
The Wisconsin legislature is rather conservative and UWisc needed to prove to the taxpayers in the state that the professors teaching their children are not perverts. I predict this will help Trump in Wisco, oddly.
So let’s see if I’ve got this straight: Aging academics of average looks(by their own evaluation) want to showcase her gravity challenged boobs and his presumably medicated partner, Lil’ Elvis, while performing the Beast With Two Backs for paying customers in a quasi public forum, all for fame and fortune. Said academics are employed by a publicly supported institution which, even in these enlightened times, has at least a smidgen of responsibility to maintain a reasonably upright ( no pun intended) reputation and to exercise at least a token of commitment to the well being of those tender young souls delivered to their care. In a fit of rarely exhibited common sense, the governing board elects to fire their sorry asses for, at a minimum, exhibiting dismally bad judgment. On such compelling incidents are landmark Supreme Court decisions rendered. It ain’t exactly Letter from Birmingham Jail but, in these unserious times, it may be the best available to us.
Be honest, you fully intended to make that pun.
The comment section here is one of the wittiest I've seen at FP, thanks for this one!
Good grief.