• Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    I can sympathize with that idea, but on the other hand, if someone is posting super racist things on Facebook and Facebook shows that they’re a low-level executive at Amazon, that reflects on Amazon and I think it would be reasonable to get rid of an employee on those grounds. But in that case, Amazon customers have Facebook accounts. Even in schools, I don’t know that I would be against firing a history teacher who posted Holocaust denials on Twitter because students can see it and it reflects on how that teacher might instruct students. In this case, none of her students should be on OnlyFans and if they are, it’s illegal. She is an English teacher, so nothing she does on OnlyFans should have an effect on her teaching either. So it’s a different situation in my opinion.

    • cm0002@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      I think there’s room to have some exceptions for extremist content, I mean if people are approaching Companies to tell them about one of their employees, obviously that isn’t good

      But the current situation is rather annoying, you’ve got companies retracting offers or straight up firing just hired people because of a picture they posted of a party they went to 10 years ago or some shit. Or even in extreme cases, companies demanding people’s SM credentials as a condition of hiring. That’s what’s got to change

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        I agree. There needs to be some sort of way of removing truly dangerous or at least damaging people while still preserving the jobs of women like this one.