I don’t understand what all the fuss is about. It seems to make major headlines that a teacher was once a porn star. (Here’s an article from a few years ago.) And there’s ongoing media frenzy over a Duke coed that is paying for her tuition by doing porn.

But my question is why there is such a problem with teachers – ex or current – that want to do porn or even students that want to take nude selfie’s and send them out to all their friends. I was under the impression that this is the sort of thing that is just “normal” and “no big deal” and that only extremist religious prudes get bend out of shape over it.

Just look at this case of a Virginia teen that is being charged with child pornography for taking nude selfie’s and posting them to Twitter. A recent article reports:

“According to WAVY, the unnamed 16-year-old suspect took ‘selfies’ in which she was not wearing clothing, then shared them online at the end of last month…A school resource officer was informed of the then-publicly available photographs’ lewd nature, and talked with both the teen and her mother about the situation. Authorities then confiscated her phone and charged her with one count of distribution of child pornography.”

It seems silly to charge a teen with child pornography for just taking a nude photo and posting it online. After all, Kim Kardashian has posted lots of nude photos; either intentionally or they were “leaked.” Kim Kardashian is held up as a “strong, confident” woman that is successful in business and admired around the world. So if she can do it, why not a teen from Virginia?

And who really cares if a teacher wants to also do porn? As long as she, or he (because I’m not sexist) does on his or her free time and not school time what does it matter? Porn advocates the world over have repeatedly asserted that it is protected by the First Amendment as speech and that freedom to “express” oneself by doing porn is a healthy way of personal expression.

If somehow being a teacher means you can’t do porn, what other professions limit one’s personal liberty and freedom to engage in “perfectly normal” means of self-expression?

Seriously, have we so quickly forgotten the “performances” of the likes of Miley Cyrus and Beyoncé? Their most recent performances which include foam fingers, little clothing, and gyrating against men are, in essence, pornographic performances. They imitate sex in a realistic fashion leaving nothing to the imagination. Those performances were cheered by millions, including the many underage girls and boys watching live and via television. If doing porn or even watching porn is illegal for someone under 18 years old, why aren’t Miley Cyrus and Beyoncé being arrested for contributing the delinquency of a minor?

I mean, sure, a pornographer’s daughter recently shared a candid interview about how disturbing it was to experience sexual imagery as a child. She said:

“I saw [the customers] all sink into this disgusting depravity where every woman in the room becomes a target. It became this entitlement that the men had and it made me sick,” she said in an interview with Salon.com. “I experienced firsthand how confusing it can be to be exposed to sexual imagery as a child.”

And yes, the article goes on to say that exposing children to pornographic images at a young age is detrimental. According to the National Coalition to Prevent Child Abuse and Exploitation:

“…exposure to pornography on young people can have many negative side-effects, including objectification, fostering positive attitudes towards violence against women and other types of sexual aggression, cynicism, sexual uncertainty, and other sexual and relational dysfunctions. Additionally pornography exposure prior to age 10 was significantly correlated with felony assault, general delinquency, felony theft, drug sales, alcohol use, drug use, robbery, public disorderly conduct, and property damage.”

But just because such statistics exist, does it mean the “free speech” of others, like Miley Cyrus and Beyoncé’ should be limited?

Can we really trust those stats when some of the most “reputable” organizations in the country, like Planned Parenthood, are using graphic sexual imagery in order to teach our kids about sexuality? Surely these wonderful groups that only want the best for our children would not do anything to harm our kids. The graphic sexual imagery they use have an “educational” purpose and therefore will have no ill effects on any child. Right?

So even though the claims of some that a school district in Tennessee is using a sexually graphic book to teach 4^th graders about sex seem to be false, even if they aren’t we shouldn’t worry. The book in question, according to one report shares this information:

“…schools were using the book “It’s Perfectly Normal,” as part of the official curriculum for fourth graders. It’s easy to see why inclusion of the book in the fourth grade curriculum would be offensive to many people: The book features dozens of illustrations of naked people in sexual positions. One chapter teaches kids how to masturbate — and depicts naked cartoon characters giving visual demonstrations. Another discusses the proper technique for putting a condom on a penis using detailed pictures.”

Why would that be offensive? Why shouldn’t the school use it? Planned Parenthood and GLSEN have long sought to teach young students in public schools all about sex. In fact, schools in Chicago will start teaching sex in Kindergarten. That book seems to be a great resource that will really enhance their education. Every 6 and 10 year old needs to know how to masturbate and put on a condom. Right?

Ok, you see my point. The level of hypocrisy in our culture is absurd. If pornography is protected free speech then on what grounds can a teacher not be a teacher by day and porn star by night? It’s her life, her business, and not hurting anyone, right? Feminists are deafeningly quiet when it comes to porn and the women that are degraded by such evil.

And sure, if you’re Miley Cyrus or Beyoncé you can basically have sex on stage on live television and get applauded for it, but if you’re an anonymous Virginia teen that wants to send nude selfie’s you’re breaking the law.

And don’t you dare expose children to sexually graphic materials or you will be in violation of all kinds of decency laws. Well, unless you’re Planned Parenthood or GLSEN or some other group doing so in the name of “education.” In that case you can show anything you like to kids and the government will promise to defend you.

The absolute lack of logic, consistency, or moral fortitude in these examples is obvious. If being a porn star is legal, then anyone should be allowed to do so. If it’s illegal to show sexually explicit material to minors then no one – Miley, Beyoncé or Planned Parenthood, should be allowed to do so.

And if you don’t believe that parents need to be vigilant in their efforts to defend the innocence and virtue of their kids you’re sadly mistaken and most likely at greatest risk. If our society is willing to be so hypocritical then the responsibility of parents becomes even greater. If we fail we have no right to complain when our child’s Kindergarten teacher slash porn star reads Playboy to the class for show and tell.