Philosopher Slammed For Claiming It’s Hard To Argue Why Controversial Teacher Should Not Be Allowed Near Kids

 A normally anti-woke professor faced backlash online Tuesday after urging people on social media to make a “good argument” as to why a male teacher in Canada who wears giant prosthetic breasts in the classroom should not be allowed to teach in a public school.

The teacher, who Fox News host Tucker Carlson has covered twice this week on his show, sparked outrage this week after students at Oakville Trafalgar High School in Ontario began posting images of the teacher on social media.

The school district has defended the manufacturing technology teacher, saying that they recognize “the rights of students, staff, parents/guardians and community members to equitable treatment without discrimination based upon gender identity and gender expression.”

Philosopher Peter Boghossian tweeted out an image of the teacher and suggested that most people would have a “difficult” time making a “good argument” as to why the teacher should not be allowed to teach in the school.

“Most people have strong moral impulses about whether this individual should be allowed to teach their children in a public school, but very few can construct a good argument why or why not,” Boghossian tweeted. “It’s more difficult thank you think. Try it.”

Boghossian’s tweet instantly sparked widespread backlash, even though the intended purpose of his tweet was not to defend the teacher.

Notable responses included: 

• Calvin Robinson, political commentator: “Because he’s clearly a pervert, demonstrating narcissistic tendencies, forcing children to partake in his sexual fetish. It used to be okay to say we don’t want sexual deviants teaching children. Why is that no longer enough of an argument? Keep kinks out of the classroom.”
• Helen Joyce, author: “This is fetish gear being worn in front of children. These prosthetics are about getting turned on at the idea of being a woman. The intention is sexual gratification.”
• Mary Harrington, editor at UnHerd: “It’s inimical to the interests of women and children, to allow any male to behave like this. Nearly everyone sees this intuitively. If your definition of ‘good argument’ is hampering your ability to do so, the problem is your definition of ‘good argument.’”
• Dana Loesch, radio host: “Try it in class with a giant prosthetic schlong.”
• Mark Hemingway, writer: “It should be enough to say this person is mentally ill. But more specifically, this person gets sexual gratification from making others confront their own deviancy. That’s pathological, dangerous behavior.”
• Mike Cernovich, political commentator: “Not really. This is a f***ing pervert – a complete deviant playing out a fetish with mannequin tits. If this [whatever pronoun] had a huge fake cock sticking out, no one would act like it’s so hard to draw lines.”
• Jedediah Bila, Fox News: “If you’re confused at all about why this person shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near a classroom, and are seeking further explanation or justification, then you have a serious issue of your own to deal with.”
• Amber Athey, writer: “Most of the time a strong moral impulse is a good enough reason.”
• Rebeccah Heinrichs, Hudson Institute Senior Fellow: “It is 0% hard. I can even tell you why in 2 words.”
• Allie Beth Stuckey, political commentator: “It’s only hard to argue against this if you’re a morally relativistic classical liberal, if you’re a morally deranged leftist. For sane people: It’s wrong & inappropriate for men to dress like women, especially sexual charicatures of them. That should be against dress codes.” She added, “This also constitutes sexual harassment. This person’s hard drives should for sure be investigated.”