news Gay Judge fired for Onlyfans

[Katamari]

1 hour ago, Park Jinyoung said:

He was posting videos about jerking off on the clock, using his professional status as a draw to create sex content, having sex in public and some of y’all think he did nothing wrong 

A total deviant and got what was coming to him. Probably got off on the rush too  

[Chris]

1 minute ago, AcidPrince said:

Small dick omg

Really?

[Katamari]

On 3/26/2023 at 12:53 AM, Cheers said:

Go off, P!nk!

[Katamari]

On 3/25/2023 at 9:30 PM, BeenTheShit said:

This is the illegal stuff he was doing and posting publicly for those claiming he wasn't doing anything wrong.  I don't think any employer in the public or private sector would allow this.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Click at your own risk.

NSFW 1

NSFW 2

NSFW 3

NSFW 4

NSFW 5
 

 

Lmao. The last vid is crazy. Not him being buck ass naked and the cars driving by got an eyeful I’m sure

 

we love a PIG but he was truly not smart

[The7thStranger]

21 hours ago, PoisonPill said:

yes someone's poor judgment and unprofessional choices in his "private life" (which is inaccurate because he publishes his sex acts for the world and earns money from them) does impact his judgeship and the validity of his rulings

I won't defend his legitimately inappropriate behavior insulting others online. But I really want to hear more of this argument. How does him publishing sex acts on the internet impact the validity of his rulings? In what specific way?

[The7thStranger]

1 hour ago, Phantom said:

Read a few pages, and yikes...

 

Let's be clear. You can literally do any job and still do sex work as a side-hustle, and vice versa. It DOES NOT affect your competence or qualifications, are some of you being for ******* real? Like most of you conservative weirdos could not even articulate why it is "wrong" for him to be a judge and an OF model. Spoiler: because it isn't. You can get railed by a traffic cone or w/e and go to work next day and submit a thesis published in a journal, ZERO correlation. 

 

It also outs most of y'all as being almost delusionally out of touch because how many literal public figures - we're talking politicians - get caught up in some freaky **** on the regular? Do y'all think only certain professionals are kinky and wild in their personal lives, or? I hate to break it to y'all

 

Now, whether he needs the income from sex work is a separate discussion, well, it is not really a discussion because it is none of my business. Nothing posted so far indicates he was doing it out of financial duress, and hell, he doesn't have to.

 

What I am glad he got fired for is because it seems there are many instances of him literally breaking the law, i.e. public sex, and in that case YES, it actually raises a litany of questions in regards to whether you can actually meaningfully perform your job (upholding the law) competently when you, in your private life, fetishize and straight up break it. That warrants a firing. As does his unprofessional conduct towards other elected officials, made on literal public channels/platforms (Twitter, I'm guessing?)

 

To those of you who said "how can you judge the law? You *ghasp* have sex on camera??? And are kinky???" - please find help. 

All of this.

[bjorn]

1 hour ago, Phantom said:

Read a few pages, and yikes...

 

Let's be clear. You can literally do any job and still do sex work as a side-hustle, and vice versa. It DOES NOT affect your competence or qualifications, are some of you being for ******* real? Like most of you conservative weirdos could not even articulate why it is "wrong" for him to be a judge and an OF model. Spoiler: because it isn't. You can get railed by a traffic cone or w/e and go to work next day and submit a thesis published in a journal, ZERO correlation. 

 

It also outs most of y'all as being almost delusionally out of touch because how many literal public figures - we're talking politicians - get caught up in some freaky **** on the regular? Do y'all think only certain professionals are kinky and wild in their personal lives, or? I hate to break it to y'all

 

Now, whether he needs the income from sex work is a separate discussion, well, it is not really a discussion because it is none of my business. Nothing posted so far indicates he was doing it out of financial duress, and hell, he doesn't have to.

 

What I am glad he got fired for is because it seems there are many instances of him literally breaking the law, i.e. public sex, and in that case YES, it actually raises a litany of questions in regards to whether you can actually meaningfully perform your job (upholding the law) competently when you, in your private life, fetishize and straight up break it. That warrants a firing. As does his unprofessional conduct towards other elected officials, made on literal public channels/platforms (Twitter, I'm guessing?)

 

To those of you who said "how can you judge the law? You *ghasp* have sex on camera??? And are kinky???" - please find help. 

Well in this case is actually did affect his competence 

[Specter]

11 minutes ago, bjorn said:

Well in this case is actually did affect his competence 

I mentioned why specifically in this case. 

 

Had he not posted those public/exhibitionist videos and made those tweets, there would be no cause to fire him.

 

Judges, politicians, police officers are not elected/employed because they uphold some arbitrary moral purity. That...is just not how any of this works.

[DammnBaby]

3 hours ago, Phantom said:

Read a few pages, and yikes...

 

Let's be clear. You can literally do any job and still do sex work as a side-hustle, and vice versa. It DOES NOT affect your competence or qualifications, are some of you being for ******* real? Like most of you conservative weirdos could not even articulate why it is "wrong" for him to be a judge and an OF model. Spoiler: because it isn't. You can get railed by a traffic cone or w/e and go to work next day and submit a thesis published in a journal, ZERO correlation. 

 

It also outs most of y'all as being almost delusionally out of touch because how many literal public figures - we're talking politicians - get caught up in some freaky **** on the regular? Do y'all think only certain professionals are kinky and wild in their personal lives, or? I hate to break it to y'all

 

Now, whether he needs the income from sex work is a separate discussion, well, it is not really a discussion because it is none of my business. Nothing posted so far indicates he was doing it out of financial duress, and hell, he doesn't have to.

 

What I am glad he got fired for is because it seems there are many instances of him literally breaking the law, i.e. public sex, and in that case YES, it actually raises a litany of questions in regards to whether you can actually meaningfully perform your job (upholding the law) competently when you, in your private life, fetishize and straight up break it. That warrants a firing. As does his unprofessional conduct towards other elected officials, made on literal public channels/platforms (Twitter, I'm guessing?)

 

To those of you who said "how can you judge the law? You *ghasp* have sex on camera??? And are kinky???" - please find help. 

This is all highly idealistic, and is not the way the world actually works. If I aspire to be CEO of a Fortune 500 company, I am not going to be permitted to have a very public OnlyFans account because I am the face of said company for shareholders and for the public, and my image is closely intertwined with a brand. Regardless of my competencies, perception management is a part of the job, and matters more - and many of my stakeholders (rightly or wrongly, that is not the point) will not perceive sex work as a demonstration of leadership, values or character. This is why most employment agreements for senior leaders have distinct morality clauses that enable an employee to be quickly jettisoned if their private activities are deemed to damage an organization or brand.

 

In this case, let's put aside for a moment (and as you right pointed out) the fact that this judge castigated public officials online and demonstrated highly unprofessional behaviour that would be grounds for dismissal regardless of OF. Rather, consider that this judge is immediately made more vulnerable to extortion, blackmail and other corruption by virtue of activities in their private life that they have made highly public - to the point where their judgements (and I'm talking all previous judgements) could be easily called into question by any lawyer with half a brain. That is not tenable in the legal system.

 

For any job that is accountable to the public and/or any position of authority at an organization that has a brand, reputation and investors to protect, this kind of BS is not going to be tolerated.

 

 

 

Edited March 27, 2023 by DammnBaby

[PoisonPill]

1 hour ago, The7thStranger said:

I won't defend his legitimately inappropriate behavior insulting others online. But I really want to hear more of this argument. How does him publishing sex acts on the internet impact the validity of his rulings? In what specific way?

There are different rules and codes of conduct for public government positions that are paid with taxpayer money. He also tweeted from court about wanting to get bred by an attorney in a case he was presiding over... which obviously disqualifies any ruling he makes. Anyone he ruled against in the past could appeal and have that ruling overturned.

 

I promise you he is not being persecuted for being a ho... People in his position have been fired and disbarred for much, much less.

 

Edited March 27, 2023 by PoisonPill

[Chris]

Guys, people literally used his mouth as a toilet.....

[Specter]

8 minutes ago, DammnBaby said:

This is all highly idealistic, and is not the way the world actually works. If I aspire to be CEO of a Fortune 500 company, I am not going to be permitted to have a very public OnlyFans account because I am the face of said company for shareholders and for the public, and my image is closely intertwined with a brand.

This isn't idealistic, because this post and the rest of your post are largely talking about liability due to an implied harm caused by something.

 

Can you tell me how the "image" of the law (?) gets harmed by a judge with an OF? Can you also then tell me the overlap (again, as you said, ignoring the sex-related laws he was breaking) between doing sex-work and making sound legal judgements?

 

The morality clause you mentioned would likely trigger in case of actual or implied crimes. How is consensual sex under this category? The close/recent example I can think of is when one of the Try Guys got fired for cheating, which effectively was doom for a family-focused content channel. And in that case, it was with another employee, which is usually baked-in to contracts as a strict no-no.

 

14 minutes ago, DammnBaby said:

(rightly or wrongly, that is not the point) will not perceive sex work as a demonstration of leadership, values or character.

Except this IS the point, which is what I was responding to based on the comments you see in here. Someone literally said "imagine being convicted and then seeing your judge get railed" as if that...person literally going to jail becomes "superior" to someone because....kinky anal sex?

 

And that in this F500 example sex work will not be viewed as a demonstration of those things is again, kind of the point. It's not related to leadership, values, or character. It's a little weird that you called my view idealistic and then this is also a part of your post. Can you tell me what sex-work - or sex at large - have to do with any of those? You say that this is very idealistic and yet in corporate culture people are notoriously getting down with infidelity, drugs, orgies, etc, as literal open-secrets.

 

Your blackmail example is also weird, because as you noted this individual has made things brazenly public. Why you would then speculate that someone could theoretically extort or blackmail this judge over literally public information is  Surely you would have a stronger case if this individual was secretive about this?

 

I get the broad strokes of the optics/perceptions argument you are making, and though I don't exactly agree (because quite literally, every other week you get rather open-secret'd stories about depraved **** going on in BROAD daylight in megacorporations, harassment, assaults, and the likes), the bulk of my post is responding to the blatant sex-negativity (that would be absent in bit if this was a top) in this thread.

 

I'm not "into" any of the...let's just say...colourful **** this person is up to, but unmistakably a lot of the anger at this and accusations of mental illness (????) come from a view steeped in sex-negativity and viewing people engaged in sex work a certain way. You may never want to see your boss get down on all fours and wear a ballgag, but most people understand that people have sex outside of their work.

[getfree2017]

4 hours ago, PoisonPill said:

I think it stops being "private life" when you're earning income from the activity, publishing the content to the entire world, and breaking laws by having sex in public places.

Omg this is the most succinct and incisive explanation until now. Kudos.

[PrettyHurts]

15 pages of discussion over a gay being thotty? this aint even news

[#Beautiful]

5 hours ago, Chris said:

IS THAT BELLA GOTH IN YOUR AVI?

 

technically speaking its not Bella, sims 1 had only entire heads as choices and that was one of them. the sim in their avi is the same sim on the sims 1 basegame artwork

 

ot: he should've sat there and ate hid food instead of condom piss

[imabadkid]

OMG i do not wanna have to go through these 15 pages but i know it's a mess

i will say he's cute.

[getfree2017]

3 hours ago, AcidPrince said:

Small dick omg

Incredibly small!! 
 

 

 

 

(and he’s not a looker tbh)

[Chris]

7 minutes ago, #Beautiful said:

technically speaking its not Bella, sims 1 had only entire heads as choices and that was one of them. the sim in their avi is the same sim on the sims 1 basegame artwork

You're correct. It looks very much like her.

 

And truth be told, Bella would not approve of this judge and his wild antics.

[imabadkid]

On 3/25/2023 at 6:54 PM, Nano said:

 

Yeah, it's definitely narcissism.

it's always the cute ones who have literal rocks for a brain... EVERY SINGLE TIME.

[JustHoran]

On 3/26/2023 at 5:53 PM, ryoncé said:

newsflash, if you "drink urine by night" and promote it online, im going to judge you because its repulsive. That aint gonna change anytime soon.

 

you can support the gay community without having to support people who drink the remaining fluids in a condom, literally get some class and stop supporting the bottom of the barrel.... 

 

Some of these people don't love themselves, and it shows 

Edited March 27, 2023 by JustHoran

[imabadkid]

On 3/26/2023 at 12:45 AM, LadyDiana said:

I am appaled how normalized is sex work among gay men. What happened to the dream of a gay president? Gay astronaut? Gay mayor? Are they all now on only fans selling their videos? Is that what we aspire now?

the problem is and will always be that men think with their d*cks that's just a fact but then when u get to gay men who have easy access to sex (literally one click on an app) due to not needing a woman in the mix it is an utter disaster. unfortunately I feel it's going to get farrrrr worse, we're still new to the OF and social media era in general

[bjorn]

1 hour ago, DammnBaby said:

This is all highly idealistic, and is not the way the world actually works. If I aspire to be CEO of a Fortune 500 company, I am not going to be permitted to have a very public OnlyFans account because I am the face of said company for shareholders and for the public, and my image is closely intertwined with a brand. Regardless of my competencies, perception management is a part of the job, and matters more - and many of my stakeholders (rightly or wrongly, that is not the point) will not perceive sex work as a demonstration of leadership, values or character. This is why most employment agreements for senior leaders have distinct morality clauses that enable an employee to be quickly jettisoned if their private activities are deemed to damage an organization or brand.

 

In this case, let's put aside for a moment (and as you right pointed out) the fact that this judge castigated public officials online and demonstrated highly unprofessional behaviour that would be grounds for dismissal regardless of OF. Rather, consider that this judge is immediately made more vulnerable to extortion, blackmail and other corruption by virtue of activities in their private life that they have made highly public - to the point where their judgements (and I'm talking all previous judgements) could be easily called into question by any lawyer with half a brain. That is not tenable in the legal system.

 

For any job that is accountable to the public and/or any position of authority at an organization that has a brand, reputation and investors to protect, this kind of BS is not going to be tolerated.

 

 

 

Tell ha 

[HASHTAGPOW]

Well let me subscribe 

[TaggedGalaxy]

1 minute ago, HASHTAGPOW said:

Well let me subscribe 

Hope you like SCAT !!

[RunUpDoneUp]

The floor in here sure is sticky from the masturbatory posts that just won't end.