Conquer Club

Sasha Grey, a one-time adult-film star who more recently appeared in such mainstream shows as HBO's "Entourage," was photographed reading to young children at Emerson Elementary School.

She later tweeted that she participated in "Read Across America Compton."

The Compton Unified School District, however, released a statement saying they had no record that Grey participated, according to KTLA News.

KTLA quoted several parents questioning whether having Grey at the school was appropriate.

"They could not find a fireman or a police officer?" asked parent Dudley Wheaton. "They had to get a porn star?"

Added Mahdi Ali: "It's definitely a big concern."

Link



At what age did you have your first boner?

She can read me bedtime stories any evening of the week.

Did she waltz into the class introducing herself and her occupation? Doubt it.
What is wrong with this? She wasn't promoting herself, her videos, or her profession.
Should she not try to help out her community in her spare time?

JRock

One time porn star?

I call bullshit on that one. I've seen tons of videos with her. She's what you might call an "anal queen." Her asshole is gaping...

As for her reading to kids, who cares? As long as somebody reads to the kids...that's all that matters, right?

I doubt that image is what she was wearing at the time,
and I have no problem with it.

So what the f*ck is the big deal here?

Are they worried that because she works in porn, she'll somehow contaminate the kids by here mere presence? She'll teach the little girls to be sluts and moral panic ensues?

tkr4lf wrote: "anal queen."

So is the anal king a guy that fucks girls in the butt or a gay guy that...well...you know?

tkr4lf wrote:One time porn star?

I call bullshit on that one. I've seen tons of videos with her. She's what you might call an "anal queen." Her asshole is gaping..

I second this

So which kid did she bang?

I can't stand over-sensitive parents. They're a dime a dozen and they're often irrational. However do they not get a voice? (Besides the standard you don't have to send your kids to school that day answer?)

If private education was like the free market then this and other issues like it would be non issues. Furthermore, society or sub societies would have limited power to brand persons like Grey who may just be trying to do good.

tkr4lf wrote:One time porn star?

I think they mean she was once a porn star, now she aint. You know what they say though, you can take the star out of the porn, but you can't take the porn out of the star.

- 'Who are they?' -

Bugger off you brolly.

Personally I'm outraged by this. Where the f*ck was my porn star when I was in Elementary school?! Typical. The only visit we got at our school was from cops and their lameass puppet. I think it was called buttons.

This is pretty much non-news. People need to relax.

Saxi is no prude but I'm opposed to this.

I would be okay if she were tutoring students, etc., but - from what I read - the point of "Read Across America" isn't to read to students (these sessions happen during class time - IIRC, most American school teachers are literate and capable of reading to their own students) but to have people in aspirational occupations read to students - e.g. actors, athletes, astronauts, politicians (?), etc. - to show you need to read to "follow your dreams" and all that crap.

If the emphasis, therefore, is less on the actual act of reading and more on presenting a person in an aspirational occupation, one has to - logically - agree Grey's presence was either:

• (1) Negative - students shouldn't aspire to be MMMMFFF gangbang specialists
  
  (2) Neutral - Grey isn't identified to students by her occupation negating the actual purpose of the program

However, her presence was definitely positive for Grey. She's been trying to legitimize her career and get out of porn with really marginal success and obviously her publicist thought volunteering for a whopping 45 minutes doing this would help.

nietzsche wrote:At what age did you have your first boner?

In answer to nietzsche's second question - 27 years old.

I'd lost my virginity at the age of 18 during the 1962 World Festival of Democratic Youth in Helsinki, however, it wasn't until a few years after that which I experienced my first erection. LET ME TELL YOU, the act of copulation got MUCH EASIER at that point.

This wasn't really that unusual among the other males in the small town of Freiberg in which I grew up, however. Perhaps it was just because we were a small country town with not as much of the go-go sexy-sex TV and such of the big cities. Here's a beautiful pic of Freiberg at sunset:

they missed the main detail; she was reading to them the kamasutra, that s why parents got mad.

saxitoxin wrote:Saxi is no prude but I'm opposed to this.

I would be okay if she were tutoring students, etc., but - from what I read - the point of "Read Across America" isn't to read to students (these sessions happen during class time - IIRC, most American school teachers are literate and capable of reading to their own students) but to have people in aspirational occupations read to students - e.g. actors, athletes, astronauts, politicians (?), etc. - to show you need to read to "follow your dreams" and all that crap.

If the emphasis, therefore, is less on the actual act of reading and more on presenting a person in an aspirational occupation, one has to - logically - agree Grey's presence was either:

• (1) Negative - students shouldn't aspire to be MMMMFFF gangbang specialists
  
  (2) Neutral - Grey isn't identified to students by her occupation negating the actual purpose of the program

However, her presence was definitely positive for Grey. She's been trying to legitimize her career and get out of porn with really marginal success and obviously her publicist thought volunteering for a whopping 45 minutes doing this would help.

Why shouldn't people aspire to be porn stars?

I can understand, Saxi, since you're an old man and everything, maybe you still have some prejudices about pornstars, but these days, we live in progressive times and being a porn star should be just as valid career choice as being a fireman or astronaut.

natty_dread wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:Saxi is no prude but I'm opposed to this.

I would be okay if she were tutoring students, etc., but - from what I read - the point of "Read Across America" isn't to read to students (these sessions happen during class time - IIRC, most American school teachers are literate and capable of reading to their own students) but to have people in aspirational occupations read to students - e.g. actors, athletes, astronauts, politicians (?), etc. - to show you need to read to "follow your dreams" and all that crap.

If the emphasis, therefore, is less on the actual act of reading and more on presenting a person in an aspirational occupation, one has to - logically - agree Grey's presence was either:

• (1) Negative - students shouldn't aspire to be MMMMFFF gangbang specialists
  
  (2) Neutral - Grey isn't identified to students by her occupation negating the actual purpose of the program

However, her presence was definitely positive for Grey. She's been trying to legitimize her career and get out of porn with really marginal success and obviously her publicist thought volunteering for a whopping 45 minutes doing this would help.

Why shouldn't people aspire to be porn stars?

I can understand, Saxi, since you're an old man and everything, maybe you still have some prejudices about pornstars, but these days, we live in progressive times and being a porn star should be just as valid career choice as being a fireman or astronaut.

1. There are many occupations that, while legitimate, should not be promoted to children as "aspirational." I believe working as a car wash attendant is a legitimate occupation. However, I question the pedagogical benefit of having a car wash attendant presented as an occupation to which children should aspire.

2. At the age of the children reported, Grey - if she were identified by her career (which I doubt she was, ergo, negating any benefit in her appearance) - would probably have been the first formalized exposure to the topic of sex for these children (California isn't heathen Finland). Perhaps that's topic for a different thread on reproductive health education in the tightly-wound, English-speaking countries, but, regardless, describing the career of a porn star should not be the initial point-of-entry for children in learning reproductive health (again, though, I doubt her career was explained which would negate the benefit of her appearance).

Army of GOD wrote:

tkr4lf wrote: "anal queen."

So is the anal king a guy that fucks girls in the butt or a gay guy that...well...you know?

I've never really thought about it...I suppose it could work either way. Or maybe even a gay guy who takes it a lot...

saxitoxin wrote:1. There are many occupations that, while legitimate, should not be promoted to children as "aspirational." I believe working as a car wash attendant is a legitimate occupation. However, I question the pedagogical benefit of having a car wash attendant presented as an occupation to which children should aspire.

What is wrong with promoting the occupation of car wash attendant as aspirational? The world needs car wash attendants. Without them, all our cars would be dirty as shit.

On that note, why should any occupations be promoted as more "apirational" as others? It just reinforces the cultural meme where people (mainly, men) are judged by their career choices and "social standing". It sends the message that unless you get a job as one of these things that we consider "aspirational", you're a total loser and failure in life. Shouldn't we instead be teaching kids that any profession they want to do is ok, and it doesn't decrease their worth as a human being even if they become a garbage man or a toilet cleaner?

saxitoxin wrote:2. At the age of the children reported, Grey - if she were identified by her career (which I doubt she was, ergo, negating any benefit in her appearance) - would probably have been the first formalized exposure to the topic of sex for these children (California isn't heathen Finland). Perhaps that's topic for a different thread on reproductive health education in the tightly-wound, English-speaking countries, but, regardless, describing the career of a porn star should not be the initial point-of-entry for children in learning reproductive health (again, though, I doubt her career was explained which would negate the benefit of her appearance).

Well, on that point I can agree with you, but I see it as symptomatic of a larger cultural failure: withholding sex education from children. The cure should not be banning porn stars from speaking to children, but instead offering better sex education.

natty_dread wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:1. There are many occupations that, while legitimate, should not be promoted to children as "aspirational." I believe working as a car wash attendant is a legitimate occupation. However, I question the pedagogical benefit of having a car wash attendant presented as an occupation to which children should aspire.

What is wrong with promoting the occupation of car wash attendant as aspirational? The world needs car wash attendants. Without them, all our cars would be dirty as shit.

On that note, why should any occupations be promoted as more "apirational" as others? It just reinforces the cultural meme where people (mainly, men) are judged by their career choices and "social standing". It sends the message that unless you get a job as one of these things that we consider "aspirational", you're a total loser and failure in life. Shouldn't we instead be teaching kids that any profession they want to do is ok, and it doesn't decrease their worth as a human being even if they become a garbage man or a toilet cleaner?

Technically, aspirational should be something that's hard to get or do, but that we dream of getting right? It takes some amount of effort, will, work and even faith that one will accomplish the goal.

It doesn't take much to be a car wash attendant. Perhaps what they trying to communicate to kids is that there are loftier things to do, that this is a person who as achieved that and that you can see her pride and her social success, we are very very social animals. We as kids would pick up rather quickly the admiration our teacher has over the guest reading.


I have NOTHING against pornstars, in fact I'm in love with Tera Patrick, but I will have to agree with saxi here. I'm no one that hides his deep will for I am Nietzsche and I understand too well the power of the will, thus I also declare that I like saxi more than natty because natty never came back to the thread I in which trapped him.

On the surface it doesn't seem like the greatest idea to have a former porn star as a celebrity classroom reader, but I'm all for people improving their lives, so I think there's a way to spin this so its a lesson to kids. But yeah, in the age of Google, it's only a matter of hours before the kids start learning she did porn.

squishyg wrote:On the surface it doesn't seem like the greatest idea to have a former porn star as a celebrity classroom reader, but I'm all for people improving ...

She was actually quite good. Only thing she needed to improve on was turn the volume down a little.

squishyg wrote:On the surface it doesn't seem like the greatest idea to have a former porn star as a celebrity classroom reader, but I'm all for people improving their lives, so I think there's a way to spin this so its a lesson to kids. But yeah, in the age of Google, it's only a matter of hours before the kids start learning she did porn.

There will likely be kids that learn of porn earlier b/c of the event.

ViperOverLord wrote:There will likely be kids that learn of porn earlier b/c of the event.

Kids learn about porn when they learn about porn. Is it that big a deal if they learn of it sooner?

Before their sexual awakening, kids aren't likely to think of porn as anything but this weird thing adults like. Even if they see porn, they're likely to be looking at it in groups and giggling, rather than looking at it in their rooms in secret and getting aroused.

nietzsche wrote:Technically, aspirational should be something that's hard to get or do, but that we dream of getting right? It takes some amount of effort, will, work and even faith that one will accomplish the goal.

Technically, aspirational should be something you aspire to do. It's different for everyone, because everyone aspires to do different things.

ViperOverLord wrote:

squishyg wrote:On the surface it doesn't seem like the greatest idea to have a former porn star as a celebrity classroom reader, but I'm all for people improving their lives, so I think there's a way to spin this so its a lesson to kids. But yeah, in the age of Google, it's only a matter of hours before the kids start learning she did porn.

There will likely be kids that learn of porn earlier b/c of the event.

Does this have to do with that adage about every problem looking like a nail when all you've got is a hammer?

If so, what is the problem?

The irony is that the 'public outrage' will more likely alert the children to her past occupation than if it had been given the zero media coverage it deserved -