Teachers and OnlyFans
Teachers and OnlyFans in a high school in Missouri. Two English teachers harbored a secret that would ultimately lead to their professional downfall, OnlyFans.
These teachers, like many others, turned to adult content creation to supplement their income, given the relatively low salaries in their field. However, the revelation of their side careers has ignited a debate about personal freedoms and the extent to which employers can intervene in their employees’ after-hours activities.
At St. Clair High School, located southwest of St. Louis, the lives of 28-year-old Brianna Coppage and 31-year-old Megan Gaither took a dramatic turn. Coppage was the first to be exposed when someone shared a link to her OnlyFans account on a local Facebook group. Superintendent Kyle Kruse stated that Coppage was not forced to resign, but she chose to do so.
Gaither, who also served as a cheerleading coach, found herself in a similar situation, despite maintaining anonymity by using an alias and not revealing her face. Both teachers refrained from responding to inquiries from The Associated Press but admitted that their OnlyFans earnings skyrocketed following the publicity.
However, this sudden attention also sparked concerns among parents and students in the district. Some expressed discomfort with the idea that children might come across explicit content involving their teachers. This unease grew when Coppage participated in a YouTube interview with an adult content creator and suggested she would be open to filming with former students.
The question of whether terminated adult content creators have any legal recourse remains uncertain. Employers typically enjoy broad discretion in terminating employees, but the issue revolves around whether such terminations disproportionately affect women and LGBTQ+ individuals, as these groups predominantly engage in adult content creation.
Attorney Derek Demeri, an employment law expert in New Jersey, argues that if a policy, even if not explicitly discriminatory, disproportionately affects a protected community, it may potentially be unlawful. This holds true even when the affected individuals work with children in their day jobs.
In a somewhat similar situation, attorney Gregory Locke, who was dismissed from his role as a New York City administrative law judge due to his OnlyFans account, supports Demeri’s legal reasoning. Locke believes society should stop stigmatizing sex work and acknowledges that many turn to side gigs like OnlyFans to cope with financial challenges.
A lawsuit has already been filed in a similar case. Victoria Triece sued Orange County Public Schools, claiming she was barred from volunteering at her son’s elementary school in Florida because of her OnlyFans presence. Her attorney, Mark NeJame, questions the extent to which schools can intervene in an individual’s private life when morality is the basis for such intervention.
In South Bend, Indiana, Sarah Seales, a 42-year-old science teacher, lost her job after turning to OnlyFans to support her twins financially. While her case has yet to result in legal action, her story highlights the challenges faced by educators who resort to unconventional income sources.
In summary, the rise of adult content creation platforms like OnlyFans has triggered a complex legal debate surrounding the rights of teachers and others who engage in such activities. While employers have significant latitude in handling such cases, questions regarding discrimination and personal freedoms continue to be at the forefront of this contentious issue.
