Located in: Editorial Opinions
Posted on: March 9th, 2014 No Comments

Editorial: Duke student should not stand for moral scrunity over porn stint

Last week, Duke University student Belle Knox “came out.”

Not as a lesbian, bisexual or transgender, but as a porn star in response to harassment she received on social media.

“IF I SEE YOU WALKING ON CAMPUS I WILL KICK YOU IN THE FACE,” a fellow student tweeted at Knox, seen in screenshots attached to a story from the Daily Mail. “The school should either expel her, or we will take matters into our own hands and make this (removed) up suffer.”

It’s up to Duke administration to weigh the gravity of these threats and make appropriate recommendations as how to handle them. It is not up to the school, however, to determine the morality of the methods by which this student chooses to fund her own education. Knox admitted in a column to Duke’s student paper that she used the money she made from her appearances in pornographic films to pay her tuition.

Duke obviously accepted Knox as a student because she met the standards the school holds for admittance.She was not accepted based on the condition that she not work in the porn industry or that she would not, at any point during her academic career, participate in porn.

Knox’s fellow students absolutely have the right to criticize her for her choices, as people everywhere are subject to criticism for their decisions. However, when students begin to advocate harassment, or incite other students to “throw garbage at (removed) every (removed) day!!!” another line is crossed.

There is no doubt that participating in pornography is certainly a controversial activity. The fact that this student chose to use her income from such to fund her education is also certainly questionable. However, it is not illegal.

It’s not unreasonable to assume that students all over the country could be using revenue from drug dealing, the sale of stolen goods or various other methods of illegally making money to fund their education. The difference between these students and Knox is that they are not just participating in a morally controversial activity, they are breaking the law, and that is what they need to be punished for.

This student is a part of the porn industry, and the impact of her choices will certainly garner criticism from certain people with certain standards, but it should not inhibit her ability to receive an education—an education that she has demonstrated she is qualified to receive by her admittance to Duke.

The school’s responsibility is not to question the morality or depravity of Knox’s chosen method of income. It is to protect her from intimidation by investigating threats against her well-being and to provide her the same education it would any of its other students.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

New User? Click here to register