Tumbling coach banned from high school for appearing in gay porn

[The Straight Story]

Tumbling coach banned from high school for appearing in gay porn

BREESE, Ill. A tumbling coach who worked with cheerleaders at Mater Dei Catholic High School in Breese has been banned from the campus because principal Dennis Litteken learned the 22-year-old gymnast had starred in gay porn videos.

Josh Weast of O'Fallon was not a school employee, but for the past three years he had been allowed to use the Mater Dei gym to coach about 40 girls and boys.

Weast said yesterday he regretted making the videos, but he said he made them about a year ago at a time when he needed the money badly. Still, he said his private life should have no effect on his coaching activities.

http://www.wqad.com/Global/story.asp?S=4682686&nav=1sW7

Friggin insane.

[monktonman]

1. how did the principle find out in the first place?

[joeybee12]

9. He watched them!

It's the only explanation. It's the school's right to do what it wants, but the guy never would have been found out had a bunch of mincing, closeted homosexuals weren't principals at such schools.

[Botany]

2. Gay male gymnasts!

What is next ..... hair dressers? ice skaters? female softball players?

Although making porno movies and then working w/ kids is a little problematic.

I wonder how the Principal Litteken found out? Family gone and getting "locker room
work out," on line?

[Occulus]

25. deleted

Nevermind.

[acmavm]

3. How do you mean 'friggin insane'? Not that I don't agree, I do. I just

wonder how you mean it. That is was totally insane believe that if this came out the results wouldn't be exactly what they are? He was using a gym at a Catholic facility. What did he expect to happen if someone stumbled on his secret?

That this concerns his 'private' life is irrelevant. No one with any functioning brain cells would expect to be able to carry on as normal if anyone found out about the gay porn. Hell, any porn for that matter. Catholics are very hypocritical about that stuff. (Don't bother bitching at me, I'm Catholic. Or was rather. Lapsed now.) They forgive a murder before they forgive sins concerning the genitalia.

[The Straight Story]

4. Sorry

Meant it in the way that what they did to him was wrong.

I don't have a problem with his porn video, as long as it was not one that involved kids of course. Sex is something pretty much everyone does, whether it is on video or not is irrelevant.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

7. Here's my take on it..

If these are high school kids, and if there is a video out there of their coach/teacher, they WILL find it. They WILL watch it. They will probably publish on their website. And that puts Coach in a whole different light that maybe Coach doesn't need to be in in the minds of kids 13-19.

[DBoon]

5. No prob. He can become a white house correspondent

pays better, too

[TallahasseeGrannie]

6. I'd like to be a nice open-minded Dem on this

but I just can't. If I were a parent in this school and my kids' coach was discovered in porn of any sort, gay or otherwise, I'd be very concerned.

Some careers just don't jive with one another. Pornography and coaching are two.

Even my teachers' union could not save my job if I were discovered starring in porn. (stop laughing...grannie porn, maybe?) I would be gone within a week.

Even Oscar Wilde (not known for prudishness) said "Morality, like art, means drawing a line somewhere."

[joeybee12]

8. Grannie porn is very big these days....

...I still want to know how people found this out. What priest watched the video?????

[TallahasseeGrannie]

11. Fat granny porn?

I AM getting ready to retire soon. Hmmmm.

[joeybee12]

13. If you type in something like "fetish videos" into google, I'll

bet you can find lots of career opportunities!!!

[Occulus]

26. here ya go

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22fat+granny+porn%22&btnG=Google+Search

I just had to.

[sui generis]

30. TG you crack me up

:rofl:

:hi:

[Botany]

What is the link?

Grannieporn.com

"Hot Flashes and Hot Teachers" Does it take pay pal? :rofl:

[joeybee12]

12. Yuk, yuk!!!!!!!!

I assume you're making a living writing titles for movies???

[Botany]

10. Dupe

[wain]

14. He made the choice while active as a coach

Not only was he active coaching, but he was coaching for a Catholic HS. Doesn't strike me as real good at decision making.

[Huskerchub]

18. NO He was Not...

"Josh Weast of O'Fallon was not a school employee, but for the past three years he had been allowed to use the Mater Dei gym to coach about 40 girls and boys."

He was using the facility. Sounds to me that he had his own business, or worked for someone, who leased space to train at the school.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

20. That puts a different light on it

all together. Now it is an issue for the parents to choose whether to send their kids to him or not.

[davidinalameda]

21. from what I understand

he was a free-lance cheerleading coach for the school

the school has every right to deny him entry

I think it sucks but since it is a private school, they have the right to do this

[The Straight Story]

27. Having a right to do something does not make it right to do

I am not questioning their right to do it, I just think it was wrong.

[mitchtv]

15. as much as I'd love to jump right in as a pot smoking liberal

and try to defend him I can't. It was real stupid; and it is a private, RC school. Even my extraordinary skills as a shop steward would be hard pressed to save this guy's job. Gays should deny their considerable talents to all aspects of Roman Catholicism. IMO

[sui generis]

17. eh, he's a coach -

it's just a shame that we are so prudish that it would matter at all. He didn't have a "career" in porn. He had a temp job. If he was a good coach and he was bringing wins to the team and the kids liked him, that's all that matters. Now, instead of nobody knowing they had been coached by someone who did this for money, now all the kids know it. Some adult had a vendetta, and didn't think of the consequences. Mighty christian of them.

Some of us would cut off our own genitalia to spite our faces - it's hard to imagine that someone would go about making it public to begin with.

And for his part it would certainly have been easy enough to deny - just say that it wasn't him. With over 10,000 porno videos out there of every kind under the sun, under every pseudonym under the sun, including grannie porn, it wouldn't be difficult to say it was merely somebody who looks a lot like him.

I'd give him a job if I thought he was a good coach and the kids liked him. That's all that's relevant and the only thing that should matter.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

22. And here we shall

have to agree to disagree. I do hold people who work with children to higher standards than the rest of the population. For example, I would not be comfortable with a woman who works as a party girl at night teaching during the day. I don't believe that porn actors would be any more likely to molest children, but in our society (at the present time) this information, if made public to parents, would lead to headaches for any school...and in a private school, withdrawn kids, etc.

I'm a teacher and I'm a good teacher and the kids like me, but it is not all that is relevant in my career.

Now, this could easily be a generational issue. I'm really not a prude. But I just can't fatham the situation. Although an earlier thread has made it clearer that this fellow just rents space from the school, and that puts it in a different light.

But the whole thing makes me think hard about morality, role models, etc.

I'm wondering, sui G., what activities, lifestyles, etc., would you deem unsuitable for working with kids. Obviously, sexual predators would be number 1. Where is YOUR line?

[sui generis]

29. complex question you've asked

Adults tend to enjoy sex with adults. Adults who have sex a lot are no more likely to have or desire to have sex with minors than you or I are.

An adult who has done something in his past, likely under a pseudonym, and not marketed in his current circumstance deserves to not be judged by it. Somebody went out of their way to ruin this guy based on an irrelevant fact. So we certainly disagree on this one - I care much more about what's in front of me than what's behind someone else.

Where is my line? I wouldn't let a fundamentalist christian anywhere near mine, under any circumstances. They can't help themselves - sooner or later they'll be doing something to try to rot my kids' brains, and whereas kids generally know what's right and wrong concerning their bodies when an adult is being predatory, it's much harder for them to distinguish from someone who has an agenda based on proselytizing faith.

Where is my line? I don't think someone who is unqualified to teach should be teaching. I also don't think that someone who is qualified and is actively a porn star should be teaching my kids. But someone who did it once under a pseudonym, I could care less. In the real world, color happens but people grow, circumstances change, and judging someone exclusively by their past in this case is narrow minded and teaches narrow mindedness.

My line is, what are they today. If I can't discover that and trust that from observation, and from the interview process and from making sure they have reasonably crime-free past and decent character then I'm just as silly and prudish as the people who ONLY judge by sex, no matter how I frame it.

In truth if someone said, "I did a porn video once" I would think twice and harder about that person, but it would also be my least criteria. But if I knew that "porn video" was not intended as a career move and not intended for discovery, then I could no more be judgemental about that than I could about someone who had been a door-to-door salesman or had been to drug rehab or was taking anti-depressants or had been a wild-eyed fundie in the past.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

32. I do believe I agree with you on just about all of it

And yes, this fellow was outted and that is unfortunate. I agree this appears to have been a youthful indescretion on his part. For example, I think that a woman who was once a prostitute, if she gets out of the life and gets an education and has the inclination..I think she should be able to teach. Same with a drug addict. And I personally take antidepressants, so I can't criticize THAT! I would probably look a little longer and harder at a person to make certain they were stable, if I were in a hiring position.

Now, I do teach with a few fundies but none of them are wild-eyed crazies likely to evangelize. Actually, I don't know that they are truly fundamentalists. But they ARE Republicans and go to McChurches. I guess that counts. So far they don't appear to have damaged any young brains, but they wouldn't DARE (with our parent base) step over the line.

I'm enjoying this discussion. Makes me think.

[dsc]

16. a couple of things

first he might not be gay. Their is a small percentage of people who make these films despite being straight. It was monumentally stupid of him to think this would be considered private life. These tapes were public and virtually any school would have fired him for this.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

23. Now let me make it clear

that I don't have a problem with his being gay, if he is. That is a sexual orientation.

I am thinking maybe I'm an old fogie.

[ruggerson]

24. no, you're not

I totally get where you are coming from. Having said that, I probably would not mind him coaching my kids - I'm sure both you and I were taught at one time or another by people who did just as kinky things as this guy - the only difference is they didn't do them on camera.

IMHO, it was a very poor judgement choice on his part, *IF* he knew that he possibly wanted to have a coaching career in the parochial school system.

[pnwmom]

38. He knew quite well what he was doing. He'd been coaching for 3 years,

and just made the videos last year.

[davidinalameda]

19. he has no case

it's a private school

[Meldread]

28. Not sure if I really disagree.

To be frank, if I had children I wouldn't have a problem with him. I wouldn't have a problem with any porn star teaching children, because frankly - I don't think it is something that really effects job performance. (Of course, if they were currently starring in porn - it might distract them from their teaching duties. :P)

One could debate about role-models and the right/wrong about porn all they want. I don't really see anything inherently bad about porn or those who act in porn movies. Hell, what really separates them from a R Rated Movie with any sexual conduct now-a-days? The fact that they actually go through with the deed and it is displayed for all to see? I rate it right up there with acting in a R Rated Movie. Of course, I think it might be a generational issue with some here, I'm in my 20's so I might be more desensitized to this type of stuff than others.

All that being said, I can't really say I disagree with the schools decision. While I might feel the way that I do, it is a private school (so they can do as they please), but on top of it all they need to keep the parents of the school happy so that the children stay enrolled. Obviously, there are a great many parents who would have a problem with it. So politically speaking for the school it's a no-win issue. They'd have to drop him if they'd want to stay in business, and what's more they are a RELIGIOUS school on top of it all. I don't know what he was thinking when he showed up there, but he had to see this coming if they found out.

He should probably just go back to doing porn movies. He'd probably make more money anyway.

[ThomCat]

31. I just don't understand the concern

about appearing in porn. It's legal, it's consensual, there were no kids involved, and if you don't like it then don't watch it.

Given the volume of porn that's made these days, tens of thousands of people have appeared in porn at some point, somewhere. Why should they be banned from working with kids as long as they keep their clothes on?

More religious bullshit.

[pnwmom]

39. Are you a parent? n/t

[ThomCat]

40. No. But I consider your implied argument moot.

The whole idea that "only a parent could undertand" is laughable.

I'm gay. People have said for decades that we should not be allowed to work with children, because someone we will corrupt them. Somehow we are a danger to them. And when we way that this isn't true we get,

"well, you're not a parent so you don't understand."

Bullshit.

[pnwmom]

45. It is not about people who are gay, it is about people who

are porn stars.

You seem to be assuming that the reason he was fired was that he was gay. I'm positive they would have fired a hetero porn star, male or female.

[ThomCat]

47. I'm not assuming it's because he was gay.

I'm saying it's the same bias for the same reason.

[pnwmom]

48. On edit: I'm not following you. I know you're not saying that all

gay people are porn stars, but I'm not sure what you are saying.

In any case, I disagree that being gay is morally equivalent to being a porn star.

[ThomCat]

49. People used to say that

anyone who had ever had a gay experience was inherently dangerous. They could not be allowed around kids. They didn't have to be out-gay. They didn't have to be flamboyant. A simple rumor that a guy had once had sex with a guy was enough.

This is similar. Anyone who has ever had sex on film is inherently dangerous. They cannot be allowed around kids. It doesn't matter if it was once, or if it was years ago, or what the circumstances are. It's a sex thing that immediately brands you as permanently unfit to be around kids.

It's all based on paranoia about sex. And it creates false targets that distract everyone from people might truly be dangerous around kids.


Edit: I agree that being gay is not the moral equivilent of being a porn star. But I think being in porn is an overblown moral issue.

[pnwmom]

50. But this guy was starring in porn films during the same period of time

he was working with kids. It wasn't something in the distant past. And it seriously makes me question his judgment, at the very least.


I don't think the concern is that this guy will be a molester. (Although obviously I can't know why exactly the school made him leave.) I think it's more a question of the values that he conveys. Pornography is about using people, not loving them.

Parents have an assumption that the people who coach and teach their kids at a Catholic school share their values -- that's why they send their kids there. From the Catholic point of view, pornography is immoral because it promotes seeing, and treating, people as objects. Rather than as people who deserve to be loved.

[ThomCat]

52. Perhaps.

I agree that people at a Catholic school have assumptions (and the right to make some of those assumpions) about the lives of the people who work there. But would this have really been any different if he worked at a public school?

And does it honestly matter when he was in that porn film? Is it worth branding him for life as unfit to work with kids? It appears he was a good coach.

I do not agree that porn is inherently about using people. I think that is a rediculous conclusion. It seems that for many people in Porn it's just a job. They're getting paid to have sex on film. So who's getting used?

Yes, I know some porn is exploitative. (LionessPriyanka makes the point on an earlier thread that maybe the people in porn should be required to be over 25 years old to avoid that exploitation of the young and naive.) But categorically stating that porn is about using people is just wrong.

Corporate America is more inherently about using people.

[LiberalGuy000]

33. he should milk it!

If he enjoys sex and being an exhibitionist, he should go full-time in the sex industry and milk this for all its worth! (at least that's what I would do ;) )

[bigscott]

34. jumpin jesus

do you have any idea how much i would have paid to see my gym teacher in a movie like that?? WOW!! If only i had a role model like that when i was in high school :woohoo:

[BR_Parkway]

35. Without having seen the movie, that's hard to say - it could be that

he doesn't have a career in that field either

But the school can certainly say who can use their facilities, even if the guy wasn't an employee. Especially since it is church property and they have a known thing against anything gay. That's what they believe - and I actually would rather they stuck to their principles over it vs glossing it over so they didn't lose whatever rent money they got from him. I don't have to agree with a principled stand in the least bit to respect it.

Now it's up to the parents who enrolled in the guy's gymnastic classes to decide for themselves if they mind his past activities and however they think it relates to his working with their children now. Some will drop, some will stay - assuming he can secure a space to work in.

I don't think I'd have a problem with it. I think with as many home videos, camera phones and places to post amatuer porn, that many people are going to have this type of thing come back and bite them in the ass later on in life. Fortunately, when I was at the age/point in time - they didn't have as many things to record my stupid decisions on

[The Straight Story]

36. LOL

Fortunately, when I was at the age/point in time - they didn't have as many things to record my stupid decisions on

You and me both :)

[gunsaximbo]

42. Ohhh. He's probably seen the movie.

I haven't read the story yet, but how did he find out about the movie in the first place?

Gunsaximbo

[gunsaximbo]

43. As I said below. I know D.L. Well - I went to school w/him

He may have watched them. I am in no way accusing him of being gay, however.

gunsaximbo

[pnwmom]

37. Who's friggin insane? The porn star/teacher? Or the school?

I don't think this is an issue for gays to jump on. I'm sure that very few private schools (Catholic or not) would want to have a female, heterosexual teacher who is also a porn star on their faculty!


How did the parents find out? Probably one of his students googled him.

[sui generis]

54. probably one of the faculty googled him. Us real ones

tend to take care of our own.

Anyway, smoking cigarettes under your real name is okay if you don't do it in front of the kiddos.

Smoking sausage on film under a pseudonym is not okay because . . . . ?

(sound of impatiently tapping foot)

People who think whether I wipe my ass north to south or south to north means anything are insane, as a general rule, and I don't hold what people do with their weeners (or hooters) on their own time to make one bit of difference.

Really - this is a progressive board, not a hysterical weener freakout board.

[gunsaximbo]

41. HAAAAA! I know Dennis Litteken

I went to college with him. It doesn't surprise me that he would do this.

[xchrom]

44. my problem with this? -- we ALL have pasts.

we all have secrets we don't want to judged by -- they are small corners of our lives -- and don't reflect on the majority of our relationships and careers.

if we are going to start firing people for having pasts -- then lets fly with it.

let all the teachers and principles expose the interior of their lives -- get their dirty laundry out and let it be judged.

and btw -- we live in a media age -- lots and lots of people are going to have done things on camera they don't want bandied about the dinner table.

[pnwmom]

46. It wasn't really his past. He did it last year, while he was also working

with children (which he started three years ago).

[xchrom]

51. we are continuously creating a ''past''.

no one is perfect -- 95% of people are just good people who do things that might be of questionable judgement now and then.

so are we going to always throw open the curtains of peoples private lives and judge them?

very slippery slope.

[sui generis]

53. but this is different WEENERS WERE INVOLVED!!!!

weeeeeeeeeners! that changes everything!

lions and drag queens and bears, oh my. yawn.

So, we're not supposed to smoke cigarettes in front of kids, not a firing offense, but smoking sausage on film under a pseudonym -- yer gwine ta hell fer that!

Oh what a world, what a world . . .

[xchrom]

55. lol -- weeners!

if you'll forgive -- but i'm gonna be all over that for a week!

:rofl: