# Que. school worker outed as porn star, suspended



## 211RadOp (25 Mar 2011)

From The Kingston Whig Standard today

http://www.kingstonwhigstandard.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3043798

*Que. school worker outed as porn star, suspended*
By QMI AGENCY
Posted 6 hours ago
  
LEVIS, Que. -- A high-school clerical worker who moonlights as a porn star had her cover blown when a student asked her for an autograph after he recognized her from a blue movie.

The woman, known by the stage name Samantha Ardente, has been suspended without pay while Etchemins High School near Quebec City decides whether the star of Serial Abusers 2 will keep her day job.

"It's a first in our history," school board spokesman Louise Boisvert told QMI Agency. "Even if she didn't work directly with the students, we have to evaluate the impact that this story will have on her, on the students and on the staff."

The administrative employee was recently confronted by a student who had seen one of her films. She refused his request for an autograph and told him to keep quiet about her double life. He instead told his friends and word eventually got back to the administration.

"What she did was inappropriate," said the teacher, who refused to give his name. "But it's not illegal, either. So we told the students that there's no place for that (situation) here and we'll see what happens next."

The porn star will remain on suspension for two weeks while the school board decides her fate.

Meanwhile, the producer who hired Ardente told QMI Agency he had warned her about the potential risks to her reputation.

"She was very nervous," said Nicolas Lafleur, owner of Pegas Productions. "She didn't want to lose her job and I don't think she told everyone, so it wasn't easy for her."


----------



## HavokFour (25 Mar 2011)

Image - thestar.com


----------



## Journeyman (25 Mar 2011)

:'(   Is there not enough sadness in the world, without _this_ happening?    


                 ;D


----------



## Hammer Sandwich (25 Mar 2011)

HavokFour said:
			
		

> Image - thestar.com



Kinda looks like Alice Cooper...........


----------



## Journeyman (25 Mar 2011)

Hammer Sandwich said:
			
		

> Kinda looks like Alice Cooper...........


   ???   If we ever happen to be out womanizing together, I do NOT want you as my spotter!


----------



## Sig_Des (25 Mar 2011)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> ???   If we ever happen to be out womanizing together, I do NOT want you as my spotter!



The Website of the production company that produced her movie has become overwhelmed with so many hits that as of yesterday, they were only allowing paying members onto the site. Of course, that doesn't mean that her movie can't be found elsewhere. It IS the internet  >


----------



## dapaterson (25 Mar 2011)

Beadwindow 7 said:
			
		

> Of course, that doesn't mean that her movie can't be found elsewhere. It IS the internet  >



Rule #34 seems almost redundant...


----------



## armyvern (25 Mar 2011)

Hammer Sandwich said:
			
		

> Kinda looks like Alice Cooper...........



What!!?? She's hot. 

Alice Cooper -- not so much.


----------



## GAP (25 Mar 2011)

I was, by coincidence, in my grandson's school office the other day......

There wasn't any hotties there.....mind, each could have made two of her in size and age..... :

I wonder if I can change his schools....... :nod:


----------



## medicineman (25 Mar 2011)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> What!!?? She's hot.



Now that is hot!! :nod:

MM


----------



## armyvern (25 Mar 2011)

GAP said:
			
		

> I was, by coincidence, in my grandson's school office the other day......
> 
> There wasn't any hotties there.....mind, each could have made two of her in size and age..... :
> 
> I wonder if I can change his schools....... :nod:



Come hither to Montreal!! I have a spare bed; you can enroll yourself there.  ;D


----------



## GAP (25 Mar 2011)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Come hither to Montreal!! I have a spare bed; you can enroll yourself there.  ;D



A five minute drive down to Broadway at lunch hour and the eye candy is amazing.....


----------



## dapaterson (25 Mar 2011)

She's apparently in Levis, just outside Quebec City, so after your evenings in Vern's (spare) bed you'll still have a 3 1/2 hour drive each way to get to school.


----------



## armyvern (25 Mar 2011)

GAP said:
			
		

> A five minute drive down to Broadway at lunch hour and the eye candy is amazing.....



Yep, it must be spring; the cleavage here was all out yesterday.  ;D


----------



## medicineman (25 Mar 2011)

...and I says pardon??!! 

Oh, you meant downtown Montreal... ;D.

MM


----------



## my72jeep (25 Mar 2011)

I wonder if any where in the contract she signed when hired, said She could not moonlight as a porno star? sounds like a freedom of expression case worthy of the Supreme Court.


----------



## ballz (25 Mar 2011)

I'd guess, since she hasn't done anything illegal, and they have no grounds to fire her, and they likely have nothing in her contract to prevent this, etc... that she's going to get a lot of money out of this...


----------



## GAP (25 Mar 2011)

School Boards are notorious for claiming/firing on "Moral Grounds".....to protect the children....doncha know?


----------



## OldSolduer (25 Mar 2011)

GAP said:
			
		

> School Boards are notorious for claiming/firing on "Moral Grounds".....to protect the children....doncha know?



Even though the one who discovered her on the net was.....a student.


----------



## Haggis (25 Mar 2011)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> Even though the one who discovered her on the net was.....a student.



Was he using a school computer???

I'm just sayin......


----------



## Michael OLeary (25 Mar 2011)

He was obviously traumatized by the experience if he was asking for her autograph.


----------



## GAP (25 Mar 2011)

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> He was obviously traumatized by the experience if he was asking for her autograph.



Ooooh....is that what its' called nowadays?  :nod:


----------



## Michael OLeary (25 Mar 2011)

Ya gotta have some way to start the conversation.


----------



## Nostix (25 Mar 2011)

ballz said:
			
		

> I'd guess, since she hasn't done anything illegal, and they have no grounds to fire her, and they likely have nothing in her contract to prevent this, etc... that she's going to get a lot of money out of this...



Some schools do throw a "Morality Clause" into their contracts.

Let's hope she read the paperwork carefully.


----------



## ballz (25 Mar 2011)

GAP said:
			
		

> School Boards are notorious for claiming/firing on "Moral Grounds".....to protect the children....doncha know?



It'll be cheaper and quicker to just pay her off than try it. And their lawyers will be sure to tell schoolboard that, and probably about how lots of lawyers are calling *her* right now to handle her case (and probably other things... double whammy ;D).


----------



## Hammer Sandwich (26 Mar 2011)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> ???   If we ever happen to be out womanizing together, I do NOT want you as my spotter!



Say Whaaat!?!?!

I'd hate to meet the fella that hates his dick enough to hit _that_......yuck....


----------



## Thompson_JM (26 Mar 2011)

Hammer Sandwich said:
			
		

> Say Whaaat!?!?!
> 
> I'd hate to meet the fella that hates his dick enough to hit _that_......yuck....



Y'know... Not EVERYONE gets to eat Steak for dinner..... 

I could (and have) do MUCH worse then that......


----------



## Hammer Sandwich (26 Mar 2011)

Tommy said:
			
		

> Y'know... Not EVERYONE gets to eat Steak for dinner.....
> I could (and have) do MUCH worse then that......



I hear the "any port in a storm" argument, but, c'mon!!!

A face like Alice Cooper...
Ribs stckin' out....
_Loose panties_ on a hip-less frame...PANTIES AIN'T SUPPOSED TO BE LOOSE!!!!
(Plus....how the hell is she supposed to push a kid outta that weak-as$ narrow pelvis?)

I'm not sure if I'm s'posed to buy a pR0n movie, or sponsor her for "_the price of a cup of coffee a day_"

No way!....gain 30 lbs and call back, darlin'.


I maintain my YUCK-face.


----------



## Thompson_JM (26 Mar 2011)

Hammer Sandwich said:
			
		

> I hear the "any port in a storm" argument, but, c'mon!!!
> 
> A face like Alice Cooper...
> Ribs stckin' out....
> ...



Light switch and a few beers will make almost anything better....  

Remember that while you can drink someone pretty, you cant drink someone thin


----------



## armyvern (26 Mar 2011)

I know there's one out there where someone is drinking a girl thin, but I lost it watching this one ... you'd never see this on TV here.  8)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPs6RMfd_zk&feature=related


----------



## larry Strong (26 Mar 2011)

That's hilarious ;D


----------



## Retired AF Guy (27 Mar 2011)

GAP said:
			
		

> School Boards are notorious for claiming/firing on "Moral Grounds".....to protect the children....doncha know?



Considering the fact that a student recognized her from a porno film he was watching I would say that the school board has failed miserably in protecting their students.


----------



## quadrapiper (27 Mar 2011)

Hoping that's sarcasm.


----------



## Kalatzi (27 Mar 2011)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> I know there's one out there where someone is drinking a girl thin, but I lost it watching this one ... you'd never see this on TV here.  8)
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPs6RMfd_zk&feature=related
> [/quote
> ...


----------



## brainiack-12@hotmail.ca (27 Mar 2011)

this so called "women" should rightfully be suspended without pay she has commited an act of undecency and should not be near kids who can go to any site on-line that offers scantily clad women fornicating for the camera while single or married men watch with lustful eyes especially those who are still in their teens or younger.


----------



## HavokFour (27 Mar 2011)

Watched a video out of curiosity and I gotta say, she's got talent.  8)


----------



## armyvern (27 Mar 2011)

CWO McDonald said:
			
		

> this so called "women" should rightfully be suspended without pay she has commited an act of undecency and should not be near kids who can go to any site on-line that offers scantily clad women fornicating for the camera while single or married men watch with lustful eyes especially those who are still in their teens or younger.



Uhmmmmm, what about married old women; just askin'?


----------



## hugh19 (27 Mar 2011)

No she is a WOMAN not a women, it is indeceny not undecency. On top of that you are extremely self righteous. How did you manage to make CWO without knowing how to spell?


----------



## CEEBEE501 (27 Mar 2011)

CWO McDonald said:
			
		

> this so called "women" should rightfully be suspended without pay she has commited an act of undecency and should not be near kids who can go to any site on-line that offers scantily clad women fornicating for the camera while single or married men watch with lustful eyes especially those who are still in their teens or younger.


  

Boy would you have a Heart attack if you ever went to Europe.......

And I have a friend who worked at a Gentlemens club for a bit and she one of the best people I know around kids and she is currently enrolled to be a pediatric nurse.

My overall belief is: I dont care what you do in your spare time (within reason), or which jobs you have had. If you are good at what you do, I have no problem working with you.


----------



## ballz (27 Mar 2011)

CEEBEE501 said:
			
		

> My overall belief is: I dont care what you do in your spare time (within reason), or which jobs you have had. If you are good at what you do, I have no problem working with you.



While I agree with that for the majority of cases, there are conflicts of interests in certain scenarios that can't be ignored. This may or may not be one of them, and it's can be pretty grey sometimes (like this case is, I believe it is a grey area anyway).


----------



## 211RadOp (27 Mar 2011)

And further to this story, the kid is now suspended, as is his mother who also worked for the board.  But I guess she is not a porn star also.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2011/03/26/17764711.html?cid=cnewsticker

Boy who outed porn star threatened with charges   
By Kathleen Frenette, QMI Agency 

LEVIS, Que. - The 14-year-old boy who outed a clerical worker at his school who was moonlighting as a porn star has been suspended and claims his school administration threatened to press criminal charges against him. 

QMI Agency has also learned that the boy's mother, who teaches at another school, has been suspended with pay for two days. 

The 14-year-old learned the clerical worker's secret when he saw one of her movies. He asked her for an autograph and she refused. The boy then created a Facebook page under her name and uploaded a racy profile picture of the woman in her underwear. 

The boy was suspended on Thursday. 

"They suspended me for an undetermined period and threatened to press criminal charges against me if I don't take down (the) Facebook page within five days," he said. 

But the boy said that he can't close the page because he created it under another name and can no longer access the administration section.  
  
The spokesperson for the boy's school board said that they never threatened any legal action. 

"Yes, he was suspended and we will have a meeting with him and his father on Monday," said Louise Boisvert. "But the school never threatened expulsion or to press charges against him." 

However a memo, signed by the assistant director of the third grade, sent to the boy Thursday demands he find a solution to the problem or risk "being transferred to another school in the school board." 

"This is an attack on my reputation; it's downright identity theft and I never game my consent to have this Facebook page created on my behalf," said the clerical worker who goes by the stage name Samantha Ardente. 

The clerical worker was suspended immediately after she was outed, according to QMI Agency's source. 

QMI was also told that the woman could be transferred to the school board's head office, but the teacher's union couldn't confirm that.


----------



## Occam (27 Mar 2011)

This fella sums up my feelings on the subject quite nicely.



Lorne Gunter: Don’t fire porn-star school secretary

Original link

Lorne Gunter  Mar 25, 2011 – 3:53 PM ET | Last Updated: Mar 25, 2011 3:54 PM ET

It would be easy to advocate firing the suburban Quebec City high-school secretary who moonlights as porn actress Samantha Ardente. If nothing else, now that her secret is out, her dismissal would prevent 300 16- and 17-year-old boys from clogging up the hallway outside the office every morning pressing their noses to the glass for a glimpse of Mademoiselle Hottie.

On the other hand, since news broke of the anonymous secretary’s after-hours exploits, I bet attendance is way up and hooky-playing is way down.

But what did she do that is a fireable offence? She engaged in a legal (though controversial) activity on her own time, involving no students and was not in a position of trust with responsibility for students. She may not be the kind of role model parents would wish their kids’ schools had, but if being a bad role model were enough to get you canned, most pro sports leagues would consist of two second-rate teams populated by monks and nerds.

 Were she a teacher, my opinion might be different, especially if she was extolling the virtues of the porn lifestyle in her lessons. But by all accounts her work — her daytime work — did not bring her into contact with students. And even if it did, even if students needed to approach Ms. Ardente routinely to report absences and lost books, to pick up registration forms and book appointments with guidance counsellors, hers would not be the kind of trust position in which the her personal life might be assumed to have an impact on her ability to discharge her public duty to students. 

This is kind of like finding out that your accountant, Dave, likes to wear wigs, a sequined evening gown and strappy heels and sing show tunes after hours in a drag bar under the name Doreen. It’s a little unsettling, but, hey, can Doreen still find ways to defer tax payments for extra-national dividends received in previous tax years?

I can recall three teachers in Canada who have been fired for holding white supremacist views: Jim Keegstra of Alberta, Paul Fromm of Ontario and Malcolm Ross of New Brunswick. Keegstra’s firing was (or at least should have been) a slam dunk — he taught anti-Semitism in his classroom. He told students as part of their Social Studies lessons that Jews seek to demolish the Christian religion, cause depressions, wars and revolutions just so they can make money. They also staged the Holocaust “to gain sympathy.”

Fromm and Ross were tougher cases. Neither used his classroom as a pulpit: Fromm was a frequent speaker at white supremacist rallies and ran an anti-Semitic website on his own time. Meanwhile, Ross wrote extensively on what he saw as the treachery of Jews and fallacy of the Holocaust, but always away from school.

In 1996, the Supreme Court ruled that Ross’s firing for his outside activities was indeed a curtailment of his right to free expression, but a curtailment that was “reasonable and justifiable” because it was possible to hold teachers to a higher standard. The justices also ruled, though, that his school district was wrong to remove him from the non-teaching job they had transferred him to because, even though he continued his hateful writings in his new position, a) he never did his writing during school board working hours and b) after being removed from the classroom, Ross was no longer in a trust position with students.

I have a 15-year-old son who next fall will enter high school. Would I want him to attend a school at which one of the secretaries was a porn actress after the dismissal bell had sounded? Sure. I wouldn’t go looking for such a school, but so long as the telegenic clerical worker kept her work and private lives separate, I would send our son to her school and not worry once about it.


----------



## OldSolduer (27 Mar 2011)

CWO McDonald said:
			
		

> this so called "women" should rightfully be suspended without pay she has commited an act of undecency and should not be near kids who can go to any site on-line that offers scantily clad women fornicating for the camera while single or married men watch with lustful eyes especially those who are still in their teens or younger.



Who are you?


----------



## GAP (27 Mar 2011)

CWO McDonald said:
			
		

> this so called "women" should rightfully be suspended without pay she has commited an act of undecency and should not be near kids who can go to any site on-line that offers scantily clad women fornicating for the camera while single or married men watch with lustful eyes especially those who are still in their teens or younger.



Whole societies have rallied around stuff like that, in fact, I do believe we have a whole era named after it.....Victorian ring any bells.....


----------



## vonGarvin (27 Mar 2011)

GAP said:
			
		

> Whole societies have rallied around stuff like that, in fact, I do believe we have a whole era named after it.....Victorian ring any bells.....


Well, not entirely true, though the Victorian era is known, IMHO, unfairly for being repressive.  "Conservative" perhaps, but more of a "there's a time and place for everything" type of society, and "in public is not the place" for certain things.

Anyway, this woman broke no laws, and unless her contract stated something to the effect of "thou shalt not have sex and put it on the internet", then I am quite confident that she broke no agreement with her employer.  Why this is even a news item is beyond me.


(Edited to fix grammar and spelling errors)


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (27 Mar 2011)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> Who are you?



Some kid from Oshawa who spelled "brainiac" wrong in his email address so I wouldn't worry about him/her folks,.......just carry on.


----------



## jwtg (27 Mar 2011)

211RadOp said:
			
		

> "This is an attack on my reputation; it's downright identity theft and I never game my consent to have this Facebook page created on my behalf," said the clerical worker who goes by the stage name Samantha Ardente.


You did porn in the era of social media, and you're upset that it somehow got to Facebook?  Doing porn while working at an institution populated by high-school age boys probably wasn't the best idea, either.


----------



## vonGarvin (27 Mar 2011)

jwtg said:
			
		

> You did porn in the era of social media, and you're upset that it somehow got to Facebook?  Doing porn while working at an institution populated by high-school age boys probably wasn't the best idea, either.


It may have not been the best idea; however, this comes down to freedom, specifically, sexual freedom.  Homosexuals have gone a long way to champion their freedom, but it seems that society forgot that heterosexuals like to have sex too.  

But a group name in her name, using her likeness, etc, when you don't have persmission to do so, is still verboten.


----------



## jwtg (27 Mar 2011)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> But a group name in her name, using her likeness, etc, when you don't have persmission to do so, is still verboten.



If the photos/material being used for the facebook profile are from her movies/photos/work of any kind, and are therefore owned by her producers, then I wonder if she has any right to that material at all?  Maybe it's her producers who have legal grounds here, and not her.  They might like the free advertising!

In all seriousness, I'm not condoning the creation of a facebook page without her consent- I'm just saying she probably should have realized the risks before she had sex on camera.

Also, there are many, many, many cases of former porn-stars who contact their old bosses begging and pleading to have their material removed from the internet for all kinds of reasons.  I heard an interview with an ex porn-producer who got out of the industry because of the damage it did to the lives of the performers.  Years later, he still gets letters begging him to remove photos/videos.  People who have moved on from porn to get married, join the military (true example), pursue professional careers or do all sorts of things are finding their videos and photos surfacing in a way that damages their relationship and reputations.  One woman was getting married and her fiancee found her porn on the internet- talk about an awkward conversation.  (Admittedly, there might have been deeper issues in the relationship if they were naive about each others' pasts, but that's niether here not there..)

Anyhow, I hope everything works out for the best for her, but I would be curious to know if she has any legal grounds to demand that the facebook page be taken down, or do those rights belong to her producers?  Generally porn producers make the performers sign away all their rights to any of the material, so if the producers went ahead and made a facebook page, she probably wouldn't be able to do anything about it....

EDIT to add: It is virtually impossible for producers to remove a porn stars material for obvious reasons, even if they wanted to.  Once it's on the NET, it's out of your control....


----------



## ballz (27 Mar 2011)

jwtg said:
			
		

> Anyhow, I hope everything works out for the best for her, but I would be curious to know if she has any legal grounds to demand that the facebook page be taken down, or do those rights belong to her producers?  Generally porn producers make the performers sign away all their rights to any of the material, so if the producers went ahead and made a facebook page, she probably wouldn't be able to do anything about it....



Depends on the wording of the contracts. Most likely, you are correct that pictures of her / videos of her created by the producers would be deemed "property" to which they held the rights (distributing, copyright, etc). The wording could (or could for certain things within the contract) be more along the lines of "grant XYZ permission to sell/distribute/yada yada yada" in which case, since the 14 yr old is not XYZ, she would have a case against him as she didn't grant permission to do squat.

But, it sounds like (since she's saying "identity theft" and "on her behalf") these pictures were used to create a fake profile, pretending to be her, or a "fan page" that represents her. This is identity theft and she would have a case.


----------



## The Bread Guy (27 Mar 2011)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> But a group name in her name, using her likeness, etc, when you don't have persmission to do so, is still verboten.





			
				ballz said:
			
		

> But, it sounds like (since she's saying "identity theft" and "on her behalf") these pictures were used to create a fake profile, pretending to be her, or a "fan page" that represents her. This is identity theft and she would have a case.


And if the school board is reportedly threatening charges, does that maybe mean this was done using school board systems?  Don't know, but just askin'....


----------



## I_Drive_Planes (27 Mar 2011)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> But a group name in her name, using her likeness, etc, when you don't have permission to do so, is still verboten.



I don't really see this being a problem, there are thousands of unsanctioned facebook groups and fan pages dedicated to various celebrities.  If it was a fake facebook account in her name it may be different, but it's my understanding that it was a group (which I can't seem to find on there so it must have been taken down).


Personally I see absolutely no problem with what she does as a side job (as long as she does it well!  >).  She's done nothing illegal and I'm sure that some of the people calling for her dismissal will go home after she's left jobless and watch some of her work, or work like hers.  Most people have sex from time to time, she happens to have sex on camera.  I don't see what the big deal is.


----------



## my72jeep (27 Mar 2011)

[
. 

QMI Agency has also learned that the boy's mother, who teaches at another school, has been suspended with pay for two days. 

. 
[/quote]
What I would like to know now is why was the Mother suspended?


----------



## ballz (27 Mar 2011)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> And if the school board is reportedly threatening charges, does that maybe mean this was done using school board systems?  Don't know, but just askin'....



No (educated) idea to be honest... :-\ I just know a bit about the the business/corporate, contract-type legal side of it. Identity theft is criminal so here's my worthless 2 cents on that:

I don't see how the kid using school computers to create the facebook account instead of his own pc at home gives the school any grounds for any legal action, definitey not on the criminal side of it (perhaps in civil law, if his actions eventually cause the school financial hardship, they could file a claim for negligence), and that's if they could even prove he used their computers. There was also no indication of what these alleged threats were alluding that he would be charged with. Might be something completely unrelated to the identity theft stuff, if they are even true.

I kind of believe the board over the kid when it comes to them threatening legal action. Any serious threats of legal action probably would have come in an envelope in the mail from a lawyer... 

They might have counselled him about the whole cause and effects of being careless, and said "you know, you COULD find yourself in legal trouble for these kinds of thing, identity theft and whatnot" and then the kid takes it as them threatening legal action. Who knows? 1000 possible guesses as to what happened behind closed doors, each has the same 1/1000 chance of being correct.


----------



## armyvern (27 Mar 2011)

MGalantine said:
			
		

> I'm not sure... but it might be a_ Cadet_ Chief Warrant Officer?



I think this forum has a bit about cadets having to put their ranks with a C slash ... such as "C/CWO" --- just so there's no mistaking them.


----------



## armyvern (27 Mar 2011)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> Well, not entirely true, though the Victorian era is known, IMHO, unfairly for being repressive.  "Conservative" perhaps, but more of a "there's a time and place for everything" type of society, and "in public is not the place" for certain things.



Ahhhhhh, you must be a man with man views; back when we women couldn't enter the smoking room in our own house (or smoke!!), couldn't speak if a man were speaking (because it wasn't the time or place), draped the house in black and couldn't leave it while in pro-longed periods of mourning, needed to have a chaperone if going on a date or if a male guest was in the home ... only a man could view that as conservative vice 'repressive'.  


:-*


----------



## armyvern (27 Mar 2011)

jwtg said:
			
		

> If the photos/material being used for the facebook profile are from her movies/photos/work of any kind, and are therefore owned by her producers, then I wonder if she has any right to that material at all?  Maybe it's her producers who have legal grounds here, and not her.  They might like the free advertising!
> ...



Except, in this case, the page is simply titled "Samantha Ardente" ... it's a page posing as hers personally;

It's not a "Samantha Ardente Fan Page", "Like Samantha Ardente", "Support Samantha Ardente", or "Fire Samantha Ardente", page etc.

That`s not on.

PS: I didn`t see anything from her stating she was upset it made it to crackbook, only that she was upset that it was someone posing as her - thieving her identity.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (28 Mar 2011)

jwtg said:
			
		

> If the photos/material being used for the facebook profile are from her movies/photos/work of any kind, and are therefore owned by her producers, then I wonder if she has any right to that material at all?  Maybe it's her producers who have legal grounds here, and not her.  They might like the free advertising!



My understanding is that Facebook doesn't allow any nudity on any of their pages. The other thing is that in Quebec it is against the law to post/publish/profit from someone's images without their permission to do so.


----------



## brainiack-12@hotmail.ca (29 Mar 2011)

Just because you think that I am wrong doesnt mean that i am. Yes to answer someones query i am an EX- cadet squadron warrant officer first class. though that was a good 20-30 yrs ago I am still allwoed to say what i said as stated here 
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
Fundamental Freedoms
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom
of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association.


----------



## jwtg (29 Mar 2011)

EX-CWO McDonald said:
			
		

> Just because you think that I am wrong doesnt mean that i am.


I think I speak for us all when I say 'likewise.'


----------



## agc (29 Mar 2011)

EX-CWO McDonald said:
			
		

> 2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
> ...



Everyone, including the subject of this topic, right?


----------



## armyvern (29 Mar 2011)

EX-CWO McDonald said:
			
		

> Just because you think that I am wrong doesnt mean that i am. Yes to answer someones query i am an EX- cadet squadron warrant officer first class. though that was a good 20-30 yrs ago I am still allwoed to say what i said as stated here
> Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
> Fundamental Freedoms
> 2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
> ...



Yes, you are allowed to state (& have an opinion ~ and that is all that it is); just because you think you're right, doesn't mean that you are (funny how those opinions work eh?). You may also, IAW this private website's policy, add the C/ in front of your user-name to correct the perception that you are giving with regards to even your "ex" rank. It should, properly, read "Ex-C/CWO McDonald" for that is who and what you are.

ArmyVern
Mentor
Army.ca


----------



## krustyrl (29 Mar 2011)

On that note you can please correct your phrase in the "notes" part of your profile, it should read 2 VandenBos Sqn vice vadenbos.  Capt. Mike VandenBos was a personal friend of mine (Snowbird 2) before his untimely death.   

RIP WoodBoot    

Thank you .


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (29 Mar 2011)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Yes, you are allowed to state (& have an opinion ~ and that is all that it is); just because you think you're right, doesn't mean that you are (funny how those opinions work eh?). You may also, IAW this private website's policy, add the C/ in front of your user-name to correct the perception that you are giving with regards to even your "ex" rank. It should, properly, read "Ex-C/CWO McDonald" for that is who and what you are.
> 
> ArmyVern
> Mentor
> Army.ca



fixed it for you Vern. 

I am more interested in his supposed Iran-Iraq War experience....I am betting we have a walt on our hands.


----------



## Journeyman (29 Mar 2011)

Everyone who posts on this site can be judged only by their words. We don't know you; we have only what you choose to share with the world. 

You _may_ wish to give more thought to prior posting. It is, of course, your call.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (29 Mar 2011)

EX-C/CWO McDonald, I'm calling bullshit here,..................you might want to check your Cadet unit timelines Sunshine.

http://forums.army.ca/forums/members/43194
  I am an ex-CWO from 2 vadenbos squadron in whitby ontario. I had been with the squadron for
    8 yrs before leaving on my 19th birthday. I have done fighting in the iran/iraq war in 1988.


----------



## Thompson_JM (30 Mar 2011)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> EX-C/CWO McDonald, I'm calling bullshit here,..................you might want to check your Cadet unit timelines Sunshine.
> 
> http://forums.army.ca/forums/members/43194
> I am an ex-CWO from 2 vadenbos squadron in whitby ontario. I had been with the squadron for
> 8 yrs before leaving on my 19th birthday. I have done fighting in the iran/iraq war in 1988.



And How..... 

http://www.2vandenbos.org/MVan.shtml

The Good Captain Tragically was killed 10 December 1998 ergo, your Cadet Sqn would not have been renamed until post accident...

also a little more Digging shows a WO2 K. *MacDonald * from Sept 03 2003 to Jan 04 2004

http://www.2vandenbos.org/Warrants.shtml


I would highly suggest you start telling us just where your Iraq experience actually came from... maybe a unit you served with there "Walt"....

I would also suggest you do it sooner then later.

I'm on the Bruce Monkhouse Bullshit Bandwagon... Seriously... You dont think we would fact check? The Fail is strong with you laddie....  :facepalm:


----------



## CEEBEE501 (30 Mar 2011)

op:


----------



## vonGarvin (30 Mar 2011)

So.....pr0n star by night?  Anyone?


----------



## my72jeep (30 Mar 2011)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> So.....pr0n star by night?  Anyone?


80's movies for $500 Alex.
Who was a Catholic school girl who attended classes by day and taught tricks at night?


----------



## The Bread Guy (30 Mar 2011)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> EX-C/CWO McDonald, I'm calling bullshit here,..................you might want to check your Cadet unit timelines Sunshine.
> 
> http://forums.army.ca/forums/members/43194
> I am an ex-CWO from 2 vadenbos squadron in whitby ontario. I had been with the squadron for
> 8 yrs before leaving on my 19th birthday. *I have done fighting in the iran/iraq war in 1988.*


Did you fight on the Iraqi or Iranian side?

Barring info corroborating above, I'm joining the "Bruce M. Outs a Walt" Club, too!


----------



## Journeyman (30 Mar 2011)

Grab the torches boys, we're goin' to that castle again   ;D


----------



## GAP (30 Mar 2011)

my72jeep said:
			
		

> 80's movies for $500 Alex.
> Who was a Catholic school girl who attended classes by day and taught tricks at night?



You gotta be specific.....there were whole herds of them.... ;D


----------



## OldSolduer (30 Mar 2011)

Just to derail this even more.....why not nominate her as a candidate in the Federal election??
The party she runs for - Green...they may stand a chance of actually electing someone that way.


----------



## Hammer Sandwich (30 Mar 2011)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> The party she runs for - Green...they may stand a chance of actually eRecting someone that way.



Fixed it for ya.

heeheeheeheehee........


----------



## OldSolduer (30 Mar 2011)

Hammer Sandwich said:
			
		

> Fixed it for ya.
> 
> heeheeheeheehee........



LOL Thanks!!! Too funny!!


----------



## The Bread Guy (30 Mar 2011)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Grab the torches boys, we're goin' to that castle again   ;D


And don't forget the pitchforks!  ;D


----------



## ballz (30 Mar 2011)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> LOL Thanks!!! Too funny!!



I see people are finally embracing the new additions to the OED ;D


----------



## OldSolduer (30 Mar 2011)

The difference between the young lady porn star and the politicians?

She's honest about what she does.


----------



## my72jeep (30 Mar 2011)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> The difference between the young lady porn star and the politicians?
> 
> She's honest about what she does.


No after you get screwed , you still want to smile.


----------



## OldSolduer (30 Mar 2011)

my72jeep said:
			
		

> No after you get screwed , you still want to smile.



Oh boy......lol >


----------



## xena (30 Mar 2011)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Did you fight on the Iraqi or Iranian side?
> 
> Barring info corroborating above, I'm joining the "Bruce M. Outs a Walt" Club, too!



I'm just going straight to the Club and not waiting for any "corroboration".  The timelines don't work, and why anyone with the last name McDonald would be a combatant in the Iran/Iraq war would be beyond me.

But, you never know, he might have been the third guy on the balcony at Prince's Gate...

op:


----------



## my72jeep (30 Mar 2011)

ivan the tolerable said:
			
		

> I'm just going straight to the Club and not waiting for any "corroboration".  The timelines don't work, and why anyone with the last name McDonald would be a combatant in the Iran/Iraq war would be beyond me.
> 
> But, you never know, he might have been the third guy on the balcony at Prince's Gate...
> 
> op:


Mayby he's got the Iran Iraq war mixed up with the crusades that would explain why a McDonald would be there.


----------



## The Bread Guy (30 Mar 2011)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> The difference between the young lady porn star and the politicians?
> 
> She's honest about what she does.


She at least has the potential for some integrity?


----------



## OldSolduer (30 Mar 2011)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> She at least has the potential for some integrity?


She made no...bones....about her occupation.....well maybe she made a few bones...... ;D >


----------



## Hammer Sandwich (30 Mar 2011)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> She made no...bones....about her occupation.....well maybe she made a few bones...... ;D >



 :rofl:

And....we have a winner!


----------



## Fishbone Jones (30 Mar 2011)

EX-C/CWO McDonald said:
			
		

> Just because you think that I am wrong doesnt mean that i am. Yes to answer someones query i am an EX- cadet squadron warrant officer first class. though that was a good 20-30 yrs ago I am still allwoed to say what i said as stated here
> Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
> Fundamental Freedoms
> 2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
> ...



I can't believe you had the audacity to post that on a forum where, the majority of the members are the ones that protect those rights and freedoms for you. Only an ignoramous would presume to lecture us on that point.

You're only getting to stay around so we can see what kind of goofy shit you'll post up next.

As for the rest of your factually incorrect, poorly worded and spelled posts and profile, I call:


----------



## Danjanou (30 Mar 2011)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Grab the torches boys, we're goin' to that castle again   ;D



Ok I'm confused JM before I fire up the outrage bus again who we hunting for here?

- The porn star?
- The repressive O2 thieves at a PQ School Board?
- The Cadet WALT?
- Hammer for wanting to be your wingman?

 ;D


----------



## my72jeep (30 Mar 2011)

Danjanou said:
			
		

> OK I'm confused JM before I fire up the outrage bus again who we hunting for here?
> 
> - The porn star?
> - The repressive O2 thieves at a PQ School Board?
> ...


OK at last some put out a program we can now keep up with who's who.


----------



## vonGarvin (30 Mar 2011)

Gents, please

Of all derailments, this one is a travesty.  After all, we're talking about a pr0n star here!  ;D


----------



## OldSolduer (30 Mar 2011)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> She made no...bones....about her occupation.....well maybe she made a few bones...... ;D >



I personally loved this one......


----------



## armyvern (30 Mar 2011)

Sigh ~~~

I'm going to get me a second job too ... anti-corruption unit. 

This place will be my downfall.

PS Jim: good one!!  8)


----------



## ballz (30 Mar 2011)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> I'm going to get me a second job too ... anti-corruption unit.



The dot dot dot's had me thinking you were going to be a porn star. Well played.


----------



## Teeps74 (30 Mar 2011)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> EX-C/CWO McDonald, I'm calling bullshit here,..................you might want to check your Cadet unit timelines Sunshine.
> 
> http://forums.army.ca/forums/members/43194
> I am an ex-CWO from 2 vadenbos squadron in whitby ontario. I had been with the squadron for
> 8 yrs before leaving on my 19th birthday. I have done fighting in the iran/iraq war in 1988.





8 years?! Retired at 19?! So, he lied about his age to join? As a former cadet F/Sgt I am pretty sure that 11 years old was too young to join any cadet corps (in 1987, I am pretty sure that I had to be 13 to join. The age changed more recently to 12 if I am not mistaken [I have been mistaken in the past, and I will be mistaken in the future]). Navy league, sure. But not cadets.

Anyways, interesting topic. Interesting posts. Nice catch and investigative work Bruce.


----------



## Pusser (30 Mar 2011)

Teeps74 said:
			
		

> 8 years?! Retired at 19?! So, he lied about his age to join? As a former cadet F/Sgt I am pretty sure that 11 years old was too young to join any cadet corps (in 1987, I am pretty sure that I had to be 13 to join. The age changed more recently to 12 if I am not mistaken [I have been mistaken in the past, and I will be mistaken in the future]). Navy league, sure. But not cadets.
> 
> Anyways, interesting topic. Interesting posts. Nice catch and investigative work Bruce.



To add to this he has stated that he was in the squadron 20-30 years ago and that he aged out at 19, after eight years in a squadron that will only celebrate its eighth anniversary in August of this year!  The Squadron was only founded in 2003 and hasn't even existed for eight years yet.  It's obvious.  The Air Cadets now issue Time Traveller Wings!


----------



## Strike (30 Mar 2011)

Guys, he's been silenced and can't reply.  Talking about him up won't provide any solutions to what he's got on his profile so why not stick to the thread topic.


----------



## Thompson_JM (30 Mar 2011)

Strike said:
			
		

> Guys, he's been silenced and can't reply.  Talking about him up won't provide any solutions to what he's got on his profile so why not stick to the thread topic.



Agreed..... Back to the Porn Star....    ;D


----------



## OldSolduer (30 Mar 2011)

Tommy said:
			
		

> Agreed..... Back to the Porn Star....    ;D



I like your attitude.

Are you and I related? ;D


----------



## Pusser (30 Mar 2011)

Does anyone know why the mother of the kid who outed the porn star (isn't that ironic) was suspended from her job?


----------



## OldSolduer (30 Mar 2011)

Pusser said:
			
		

> Does anyone know why the mother of the kid who outed the porn star (isn't that ironic) was suspended from her job?



That is a very good question!!!


----------



## my72jeep (30 Mar 2011)

Pusser said:
			
		

> Does anyone know why the mother of the kid who outed the porn star (isn't that ironic) was suspended from her job?


I asked that question 2 pages ago?


----------



## kuchunwah (30 Mar 2011)

i have to disagree with whoever that said she is hot...

she looks kind of old...


----------



## OldSolduer (30 Mar 2011)

kuchunwah said:
			
		

> i have to disagree with whoever that said she is hot...
> 
> she looks kind of old...



Hey.....be nice now!!


----------



## dogger1936 (30 Mar 2011)

She dont even have hip surgery scars. Shes a youngin!


----------



## Fishbone Jones (30 Mar 2011)

Pusser said:
			
		

> Does anyone know why the mother of the kid who outed the porn star (isn't that ironic) was suspended from her job?



I'm only speculating here, but perhaps it was the mother that put her son up to it. Maybe the two women have met before   - meow!


----------



## OldSolduer (30 Mar 2011)

Maybe Mom lost the starring role??

Oh I am sooooooo naughty!! >


----------



## my72jeep (30 Mar 2011)

Maybe its a Catholic school and they sent her home for lack of moral guidance?


----------



## Mtl432 (30 Mar 2011)

If I had a teacher like that, I may have stayed awake for a least one period a day.


----------



## armyvern (31 Mar 2011)

kuchunwah said:
			
		

> i have to disagree with whoever that said she is hot...
> 
> she looks kind of old...



That was me; I am a chick too. I must be *really* old looking then if she is.

Kudos to her; if I was sitting on a fortune every day ... I'd be considering myself stupid to _stay_ sitting on it if I was hawt & _un_-shy like she.


----------



## Thompson_JM (31 Mar 2011)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> I like your attitude.
> 
> Are you and I related? ;D



Flattered Jim  ;D, but I hope to be Half the Soldier you are one of these days.  



I can certainly say this, If they had women like that working in My High School I would have been sent to the office every damned day!!!


----------



## Sig_Des (31 Mar 2011)

kuchunwah said:
			
		

> i have to disagree with whoever that said she is hot...
> 
> she looks kind of old...



You obviously haven't seen her movie.....She plays hard  >


----------



## Thompson_JM (31 Mar 2011)

Beadwindow 7 said:
			
		

> You obviously haven't seen her movie.....She plays hard  >



Do you have a copy I could obtain for um... research purposes...  :-[


----------



## OldSolduer (31 Mar 2011)

Tommy said:
			
		

> Do you have a copy I could obtain for um... research purposes...  :-[



Yes I need one too. For research...of course....at my age....what else would if be for?? >


----------



## Occam (31 Mar 2011)

You guys need to discover Bittorrent.  It's good for downloading Linux distros....and stuff.   ;D


----------



## midget-boyd91 (31 Mar 2011)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> That was me; I am a chick too. I must be *really* old looking then if she is.
> 
> Kudos to her; if I was sitting on a fortune every day ... I'd be considering myself stupid to _stay_ sitting on it if I was hawt & _un_-shy like she.



Ah yes.. the shyest girl in NATO.....


----------



## Thompson_JM (6 Apr 2011)

Apparently Leno is thinking of bringing her on the show....

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2011/04/05/17882146.html


----------



## JMesh (7 Apr 2011)

Excellent choice of wording below the picture. (FACEBOOK/*HO*)  ;D >


----------



## The Bread Guy (7 Apr 2011)

Pusser said:
			
		

> Does anyone know why the mother of the kid who outed the porn star (isn't that ironic) was suspended from her job?


Could there have been an.... exchange between her and the video starlet that could have led to the suspension for 2 days?


----------



## kratz (8 Apr 2011)

Tommy Trucker said:
			
		

> Apparently Leno is thinking of bringing her on the show....



According to news reports today, the school board has decided to fire Samantha Ardente. With all her spare time, she'll be able to make any televised appearance she wants.

Coming soon to a screen near you.  ;D


from the above news report:


> Board chair Leopold Castonguay said the woman's actions were in violation of the school's mission and values.
> 
> He said school officials offered to transfer Ardente to another position, but she refused.
> 
> As a result, he said, they had no choice but to fire her.


----------



## Journeyman (8 Apr 2011)

> He said school officials offered to transfer Ardente to another position, but she refused.


Now I'm curious what position she wouldn't do     >


----------



## PMedMoe (8 Apr 2011)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Now I'm curious what position she wouldn't do     >



 :rofl:


----------



## The Bread Guy (8 Apr 2011)

kratz said:
			
		

> Coming soon to another screen near you.  ;D


Fixed that for you.


----------



## HavokFour (8 Apr 2011)

This thread makes my eyes feel dirty.

http://eyebleach.com/


----------



## Occam (8 Apr 2011)

> Board chair Leopold Castonguay said the woman's actions were in violation of the school's mission and values.



Wrongful dismissal lawsuit in.......3........2.......1.......


----------



## GAP (8 Apr 2011)

HavokFour said:
			
		

> This thread makes my eyes feel dirty.
> 
> http://eyebleach.com/



Get glasses..... :nod:


----------



## kratz (8 Apr 2011)

...and windex to clean those glasses.  ;D


----------



## OldSolduer (8 Apr 2011)

HavokFour said:
			
		

> This thread makes my eyes feel dirty.
> 
> http://eyebleach.com/



Oh no senor....it is most delightful!! >


----------



## my72jeep (27 Dec 2011)

This new news on an old story
Quebec school employee fired for porn starts her own adult film company



http://ca.news.yahoo.com/quebec-school-employee-fired-porn-starts-her-own-100008790.html


----------



## armyvern (27 Dec 2011)

I'll wager she used to proceeds from the out of court settlement with the school board that fired her to upstart her business. Good on her. You go girl.


----------



## cupper (27 Dec 2011)

Now she can put out the video with the school secretary and the student body. ;D


----------



## Jarnhamar (27 Dec 2011)

Don't really blame the school for making the decision they did.


----------



## armyvern (27 Dec 2011)

Grimaldus said:
			
		

> Don't really blame the school for making the decision they did.



Really?? Read the article ... she was a school secretary who did not have "students" under her wing. The school board* did not* fire her because of her making adult movies. The school board offered her another job in a different school that she actually accepted. Obviously, it wasn't the porn or her actions that bothered the school board then --- just her "fame" amongst that one particular school. F'n hypocrites.

She then (after having accepted the new job at the different school) was advised that, at the new job, she would be subject to "restrictive working conditions", ie no internet access etc etc. She said, no. They said, "then you're fired". She sued; she won ... as she should have. And, I hope it cost them a fortune.

You want to consider the school board innocent and moral in this thing ... then read the actual article and explain to me why, if it has anything to do with "her making of porn not being in line with their values", why the fuck were they so willing to just employ her elsewhere in another board location?


----------



## Occam (27 Dec 2011)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> She then (after having accepted the new job at the different school) was advised that, at the new job, she would be subject to "restrictive working conditions", ie no internet access etc etc. She said, no. They said, "then you're fired". *She sued; she won* ... as she should have. And, I hope it cost them a fortune.



She didn't sue; she filed a grievance.  An out-of-court settlement resulted from the grievance.  I would be surprised if the out-of-court settlement amounted to more than the benefits she would have been entitled to had she quit of her own accord rather than being fired.

I suspect that if there was any hope of a successful lawsuit, she would have had no shortage of lawyers knocking on her door and it would not have been a grievance that she filed.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (27 Dec 2011)

Occam said:
			
		

> She didn't sue; she filed a grievance.



..and speaking as a long-time Union steward, I've grievances settled for stuff that wouldn't have a chance as a lawsuit.


----------



## Occam (27 Dec 2011)

Exactly.  I think the school board held most of the trump cards during whatever negotiations went on...and she likely knew it.  She doesn't seem to have any reservations in her new full-time career, though.   ;D


----------



## Jarnhamar (27 Dec 2011)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Really?? Read the article ... she was a school secretary who did not have "students" under her wing.


Not the point.  It's common sense even if it isn't logical.  Works in a school environment + making pornographic movies means the school is going to find a way to turf her, or like we do int he CF, promote the problem away.
They don't want the publicity. Whether it's a female secretary who has no contact with children or a male math teacher who makes porn with 18 year old legal females, common sense says they will find a way in the system to send her away.

I realize my choice of words probably indicate that I have something against her, I don't, but I also realize the drama that it causes.



> The school board* did not* fire her because of her making adult movies. The school board offered her another job in a different school that she actually accepted. Obviously, it wasn't the porn or her actions that bothered the school board then --- just her "fame" amongst that one particular school. F'n hypocrites.


Semantics if you ask me. The porn (ie her actions) brought unwanted attention so they found a way to remove her ie promote her away.
I agree they are hypocrites.



> She then (after having accepted the new job at the different school) was advised that, at the new job, she would be subject to "restrictive working conditions", ie no internet access etc etc. She said, no. They said, "then you're fired". She sued; she won ... as she should have. And, I hope it cost them a fortune.


  A failed attempted to railroad her.



> You want to consider the school board innocent and moral in this thing ... then read the actual article and explain to me why, if it has anything to do with "her making of porn not being in line with their values", why the frig were they so willing to just employ her elsewhere in another board location?


Like you said, their hypocrites. I know a few teachers and school boards are VERY biased and hypocritical places.

If students are asking her for autographs and fellow teachers, parents of kids and even kids themselves are possibly watching hardcore pornos of her I'm going to guess the work environment is going to be difficult and I can see problems stemming from it.


----------



## Pusser (28 Dec 2011)

The school board wanted her out because they didn't like her extracurricular activities.  Despite the fact that what she was doing was perfectly legal, they had problems with the perceived morality of it.  Distracting?  BS!  If she had landed a starring role in a Hollywood blockbuster, the school board would have been tripping over themselves to cash in on the publicity.  There would have been video clips on the news of kids lining up for autographs and the school board would have loved it.


----------



## GAP (28 Dec 2011)

> There would have been video clips on the news of kids lining up for autographs.



Maybe that's precisely what the school board is afraid of..... ;D


----------



## Pusser (28 Dec 2011)

GAP said:
			
		

> Maybe that's precisely what the school board is afraid of..... ;D



My point being that it is hypocritical to be happy about the kids lining up for autographs for a star of one kind of movie over another kind of movie.


----------



## Jarnhamar (28 Dec 2011)

Pusser said:
			
		

> The school board wanted her out because they didn't like her extracurricular activities.  Despite the fact that what she was doing was perfectly legal, they had problems with the perceived morality of it.  Distracting?  BS!  If she had landed a starring role in a Hollywood blockbuster, the school board would have been tripping over themselves to cash in on the publicity.  There would have been video clips on the news of kids lining up for autographs and the school board would have loved it.


The hollywood example is a great one.  Personally I would seriously think of changing my childs school if one of the faculty became a hollywood star.  Interviews, Paparazzi,  people taking pictures, TMZ snooping around to see if he or she wipes front to back or vice versa, other childrens parents trying to get noticed looking for the next reality TV gig. 

Too distracting IMO.

It's perfectly legal but going back to my example, how about a male custodian (doesn't *teach* the kids) who does group sex scenes with 18 year old girls.  Maybe some bondage or older teacher and cheer leader role play.  It's still legal. What he does on his own time within the confines of the law should be his business but it would would crazy to not expect parents to be in an uproar over it.

It's just how society is. Like  45 year old women lining up for Justin Bebier signed pictures (and going crazy over him) compared to 45 year old men lining up for Selena Gomez pictures. Same same but different  ;D


----------



## GAP (28 Dec 2011)

I like to line up to take some pictures of Selena Gomez. >.....she's a hotty....Bebier doesn't know how good he's got it....


----------



## Jarnhamar (28 Dec 2011)

How would the CF treat this?

It hits the news that Pte Candy who works for the Canadian Forces makes hardcore pornographic films. Would the CoC get involved or just ignore it?  Would it be distracting in the world place or a non-issue?


----------



## Pusser (28 Dec 2011)

Grimaldus said:
			
		

> It's just how society is. Like  45 year old women lining up for Justin Bebier signed pictures (and going crazy over him) compared to* 45 year old men lining up for Selena Gomez pictures*. Same same but different  ;D



Probably best I don't respond to that... :nod:


----------



## Jarnhamar (28 Dec 2011)

lol

You guys love her like a love song. Don't worry no one will judge that!


----------



## aesop081 (28 Dec 2011)

Don't be a hater......i would be in the line up to meet her.


----------



## dimsum (28 Dec 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Don't be a hater......i would be in the line up to meet her.



The porn star or Selena?  Or both?   :bowing:


----------



## Old Sweat (28 Dec 2011)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> The porn star or Selena?  Or both?   :bowing:



Only my seniority and discretion prevents me from imaging threesomes.


----------



## aesop081 (28 Dec 2011)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> Or both?



Either. But both would be fine too.


----------



## jollyjacktar (29 Dec 2011)

Nevertheless, I'll wager the former Secretary enjoys going to work nowadays.


----------



## Journeyman (29 Dec 2011)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Nevertheless, I'll wager the former Secretary enjoys going to work nowadays.


Having glanced.....just momentarily ....at one of her videos (bless you Google), yes, she does seem to enjoy her work.   :nod:


I don't think she's quite ready to be a Volvo-driving soccer mom just yet.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (29 Dec 2011)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Having glanced.....just momentarily ....at one of her videos (bless you Google), yes, she does seem to enjoy her work.   :nod:
> 
> 
> I don't think she's quite ready to be a *Volvo*-driving soccer mom just yet.



Volvo?

Is this a typo?


----------



## Journeyman (29 Dec 2011)

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> Volvo?
> 
> Is this a typo?


Google the band, Everclear, pondering the philosophical question of where do all the porn stars go.


----------



## armyvern (29 Dec 2011)

Grimaldus said:
			
		

> How would the CF treat this?
> 
> It hits the news that Pte Candy who works for the Canadian Forces makes hardcore pornographic films. Would the CoC get involved or just ignore it?  Would it be distracting in the world place or a non-issue?



Is it legal?

A friend of mine was once charged by the CF. She was a stripper after working hours. She won. Kingstonians may recall her. Hard to hold someone accountable for doing something 100 percent legal in this country and claim 'moral standards' when you choose not to hold the opposite sex who also wear the uniform accountable for their viewing the same stuff. If itès not OK for one to do, nor should it be good for the other to watch ... you know 'optics' and all that.


----------



## vonGarvin (29 Dec 2011)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Is it legal?
> 
> A friend of mine was once charged by the CF. She was a stripper after working hours. She won. Kingstonians may recall her. Hard to hold someone accountable for doing something 100 percent legal in this country and claim 'moral standards' when you choose not to hold the opposite sex who also wear the uniform accountable for their viewing the same stuff. If itès not OK for one to do, nor should it be good for the other to watch ... you know 'optics' and all that.


To carry on the tangent, perhaps, and not related to any specific employment, but is having any second job supposed to go through the CoC?  Pizza driver, stripper, whatever?


----------



## armyvern (29 Dec 2011)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> To carry on the tangent, perhaps, and not related to any specific employment, but is having any second job supposed to go through the CoC?  Pizza driver, stripper, whatever?



Yes, you are correct. We have already had a CF member do the porn thing too. Perhaps you met him in Oka as I know you were there too ...  >


----------



## aesop081 (29 Dec 2011)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> but is having any second job supposed to go through the CoC?  Pizza driver, stripper, whatever?



Yes thats how it should work but, IMHO, it would make an interesting legal challenge if the CoC said "niet".


----------



## vonGarvin (29 Dec 2011)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Yes, you are correct. We have already had a CF member do the porn thing too. Perhaps you met him in Oka as I know you were there too ...  >


:rofl:
No, he was on the north side by Oka proper, I was near Kanawake (sp?) on the south shore.  (My story, and I'm sticking to it!)


----------



## dangerboy (29 Dec 2011)

It is in QR&O Vol 1, Art 19.42 - Civil Employment


> 19.42 – CIVIL EMPLOYMENT
> (1) Subject to paragraph (3), no officer or non-commissioned member on full-time service shall engage in any civil employment or undertaking that in the opinion of the member’s commanding officer:
> 
> (a) is or is likely to be detrimental to the interests of the Canadian Forces;
> ...



It would be interesting if this went up against the Charter.


----------



## Jarnhamar (30 Dec 2011)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Is it legal?
> 
> A friend of mine was once charged by the CF. She was a stripper after working hours. She won. Kingstonians may recall her. Hard to hold someone accountable for doing something 100 percent legal in this country and claim 'moral standards' when you choose not to hold the opposite sex who also wear the uniform accountable for their viewing the same stuff. If itès not OK for one to do, nor should it be good for the other to watch ... you know 'optics' and all that.



I couldn't agree more. I'm a huge proponent (Is that the right word?) of everyone being held to the same standard and someone not receiving worse treatment because they fall out of favor with "the crowd".

In the case of your friend I'd support her 100% but I would also remind her offline that while what she is doing may be legal she's going to face an uphill battle at work and if the CoC has it's sights on her because of that every little thing will be blown up.  Me and you could roll in a minute late now and then and no one would really make an issue. She rolls in 30 seconds late and gets a warning. Then they start to pick up on other little things that are all but unlocked in others. Hey are those boots a little dirty? Dress and deportment. Platoon *someone* has dirty combat boots, bring your DEUs in tomorrow for an inspection. (all eyes go to your friend).


----------



## Jarnhamar (30 Dec 2011)

dangerboy said:
			
		

> It is in QR&O Vol 1, Art 19.42 - Civil Employment
> (2) No officer or non-commissioned member on full-time service *shall authorize the use of the member’s name or photograph in connection with a commercial product*, except so far as the member’s name may be part of a firm name.



Would selling pornographic movies/pictures not be in violation of this?


----------



## The Bread Guy (30 Dec 2011)

Grimaldus said:
			
		

> > It is in QR&O Vol 1, Art 19.42 - Civil Employment
> > (2) No officer or non-commissioned member on full-time service shall *authorize the use of the member’s name or photograph in connection with a commercial product*, except so far as the member’s name may be part of a firm name.
> 
> 
> Would selling pornographic movies/pictures not be in violation of this?


Wearing my Barrack Room Lawyer hat, I'd guess this would apply if Pte. Alphonse Bloggins started "Alphonse Bloggins Stick Flix Productions Inc.", but not if he started "Stick Flix Productions Inc."  I stand to be corrected/better aligned....



			
				ArmyVern said:
			
		

> We have already had a CF member do the porn thing too. Perhaps you met him in Oka as I know you were there too ...  >


If we're talking about the same person (someone a LOT of Canadians saw that summer), didn't he get into that line of....  entertainment _after_ he left was shown the door by the CF?


----------



## Journeyman (30 Dec 2011)

Whereas (also as Barrack Room Lawyer, and not remotely qualified otherwise), I read this as saying that "Alphonse Bloggins Stick Flix Productions Inc" is OK -- his name being part of the title is acceptable. 

I _believe_ that the regulation refers to identifying yourself specifically with the military, ie - "_Master-Corporal_ Alphonse Bloggins Stick Flix Productions Inc" is not on, much like said MCpl Bloggins having his photo, in DEU, anywhere in the advertisements be a chargable offence.

Again, just my guess.  :dunno:



Edit: too hasty proof-reading


----------



## The Bread Guy (30 Dec 2011)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Whereas (also as Barrack Room Lawyer, and not remotely qualified otherwise), I read this as saying that "Alphonse Bloggins Stick Flix Productions Inc" is OK -- his name being part of the title is acceptable.
> 
> I _believe_ that the regulation refers to identifying yourself specifically with the military, ie - "_Master-Corporal_ Alphonse Bloggins Stick Flix Productions Inc" is not on, much like said MCpl Bloggins having having his photo, in DEU, anywhere in the advertisements be a chargable offence.
> 
> Again, just my guess.  :dunno:


Makes sense....


----------



## Jarnhamar (30 Dec 2011)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> having his photo, in DEU, anywhere in the advertisements be a chargable offence.



Kinda like going on much music's speakers corners in DEUs I guess.


----------



## Pusser (30 Dec 2011)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> If we're talking about the same person (someone a LOT of Canadians saw that summer), didn't he get into that line of....  entertainment _after_ he left was shown the door by the CF?



I think that's right.  As I recall, he was accelerated to MCpl and then eventually got thrown out for getting involved with drugs (pressure of his sudden fame and new responsibility?).  I believe he got into porn as a second career (I wonder how they cover that at SCAN seminars - "Right folks, we're going to break for lunch now.  Please be back for "Starting Your Own Business" at 1300, followed by "Supplementing Your Income Through Pornography" at 1345").


----------



## armyvern (31 Dec 2011)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> ...
> If we're talking about the same person (someone a LOT of Canadians saw that summer), didn't he get into that line of....  entertainment _after_ he left was shown the door by the CF?



You are, in fact, correct; Patrick Cloutier - _Quebec Sexy Girls II_, 1995. He released in '93 after testing positive for cocaine, being demoted to Pte and visiting Club Ed for 45 days.


----------



## dapaterson (31 Dec 2011)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> You are, in fact, correct; Patrick Cloutier - _Quebec Sexy Girls II_, 1995.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Cloutier


----------

