Exploding from AOL news and many other media outlets all over the internet, we are informed that Carlie Christine, a former "Cybergirl of the Week" featured in the Playboy Cyberclub in February was recently condemned by her workplace for having posed nude.Athough the choice of posing nude for Playboy is a legal choice for a woman of 18 years or older, and though she has broken no law, officials at Casa Robles High School in Orangevale, CA seem to think Carlie Christine's actions are unacceptable behavior for a cheerleading coach. Yet she was not fired in a social and political vacuum, as a number of parents were disturbed by her Playboy affiliation. According to AOL news:
" 'The girls are supposed to look up their coaches,' says one concerned parent at Casa Robles High School."
How did the school discover Carlie Christine's involvement with Playboy, one may wonder? Perhaps students employed the highly effective search engine known as Google in the midst of their internet porn and "nudie" escapades. Though one can easily imagine a young teenaged boy writhing in open-mouthed surprise in response to seeing the local cheerleading coach naked at the click of a mouse, the ones who actually came forward with the images with the intent to destroy were the parents.
Curiously, the parents and students responsible for Carlie Christine's banishment refuse to identify themselves, especially since they reportedly pointed the finger only after some particular girls did not achieve positions on the cheerleading squad due to a few minor delinquencies, specifically unexcused absences. Perhaps to punish her for rightfully rejecting their daughters as cheerleading contenders, a few parents went out of their way to make copies of the model's ostensibly attractive coed images from Playboy in order to deliver them to the principal of the school (see AOL news).
And the rest is history: she was fired for making a legal choice over her adult body, one that did not affect the student body in any way other than exciting the sensibilities of the people -- old and young -- who knew and worked with her.
As much as one can understand how most parents would not want their teenaged daughters aspiring to take off their clothes for Playboy, nor would many of them want such an idol so readily accessible at school, their prejudices should not affect a woman's equal opportunity to employment based on this kind of choice. Treating her like a sexual predator solely because of her nude appearance in Playboy is absolutely unacceptable and inappropriate. Simply because a woman's body is visible to the world in a glamorized fashion does not give anyone the right to preclude her integrity, deem her unworthy of respect, or rob her of employment.
Like all women who appear in Playboy or swimsuit calendars or even disrobe for movie roles, they are not "bad" because of it. Yet, a large percentage of society still seems to think so, which provokes the question of how far we've really come from our stifling puritan heritage.
Some of you may know that I am particularly biased in this matter, based on my career involvements. Notably, if all former Playboy models and the like can be condemned in this way and discriminated against for their nude appearances, then none of us would ever have a job anywhere. Blessedly, this is not the case, as most companies or places of hire are guided by common sense and are relatively aware of how discrimination laws may apply. Nevertheless, women who choose this path inevitably invite judgment and ridicule in some manifestation. As a former Coed of the Week, Coed of the Month, special editions model, and Playmate to boot, I have personally experienced the complicated reality of how women's controversial choices can affect their entire lives and the lives of others (see www.juliettefrette.com to learn more about my upcoming book on Playboy and feminist issues).
In any case, the 'alternative' choices of my Playboy-affiliated contemporary are irrelevant in terms of qualifying or disqualifying her from her former job. A project completely separate from her cheerleading coach position, her artfully contrived photographs do not directly affect the well-being of her students -- though some disgruntled parents may claim that her mere identity indirectly poisons the innocent young minds of their children. Yet ironically, they are perfectly accepting of their daughters bouncing around and cheering in skimpy outfits for all of the football players.
Alas, hypocrisy perseveres. Nevertheless, let us remember how Carlie Christine's dismissal was primarily ignited by vengeful discarded cheerleaders who managed to manipulate the double-edged controversial tool of stigmatized nudity to achieve their ends.
No comments:
Post a Comment