http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/bronx/bx_teach_admits_an_ex_hooker_H As5wQMrW8KdcAfpgrK3WP
Bronx teacher admits: I'm an ex-hooker
By KEVIN FASICK and YOAV GONEN
Last Updated: 5:03 PM, September 27, 2010
Posted: 1:20 AM, September 27, 2010
Meet Melissa Petro -- the teacher who gives a new twist to "sex ed."
The tattooed former hooker and stripper has been teaching art in a Bronx elementary school for three years, The Post has learned.
Calling herself a "former sex worker," the well-liked teacher has been shockingly up front about her past -- posting online accounts of her sexcapades in Mexico and London.
But in her boldest move, the 30-year-old posted an essay this month claiming she also had been a prostitute.
"From October 2006 to January 2007, I accepted money in exchange for sexual services I provided to men I met online in what was then called the 'erotic services' section of Craigslist.org," wrote Petro on The Huffington Post, using her real name and picture.
The attached bio identifies Petro, who has an MFA in creative nonfiction from The New School, as a "former sex worker, researcher, writer, educator, and feminist."
It appears she managed to keep her shenanigans a secret from parents at PS 70 -- who were stunned by the revelation.
"I don't want nobody that used to do that to be around my kid," said Grace Ventura, whose son is in third grade. "People like that should not be allowed to be anywhere near children."
Yocelyn Quezada said perhaps Petro had managed to turn her life around, but she still fumed that a former money honey was teaching two of her three kids.
"She's not a good role model. I do not want my daughters to find out about this," Quezada said, "and I do not want my daughters to be around that kind of person."
Despite predicting in one online posting that "that this would be a conversation I'd someday be compelled to have," Petro declined twice to speak with The Post.
Principal Kerry Castellano referred questions to the Department of Education's press office, which said Petro had been reassigned to administrative duties pending an investigation.
But Petro's posts show she was warned by at least two school staffers -- including one administrator -- that her refusal to be more cautious about her history could land her in hot water.
"In an off the record conversation, a sympathetic administrator kindly asked if I couldn't publish under a pseudonym. I wish, for her sake, I could," Petro recently wrote on The Rumpus, an online magazine.
Petro, who earns $61,000 a year, also wrote that a co-worker had warned her that some of her colleagues were beginning to Google her.
"There have been lots of rumors going around about her for a while now," one school worker told The Post. "I wouldn't want my kid to be in a school where she is."
- Natalie Reign
- 09-27-2010, 11:18 PM
- TexTushHog
- 09-27-2010, 11:58 PM
- TxBrandy
- 09-28-2010, 09:27 AM
The comments left by some of the readers crack me up...
- Chica Chaser
- 09-28-2010, 09:33 AM
So the way I read this is she was a CL hooker for 3 months, for whatever reason quit that and became an elementary school teacher...and now can't keep her mouth shut about her 3 month past?
Now he parents of the children this lady teaches are totally up in arms about "a woman that would do THAT".
My take is this: Who the fuck cares that she was a temporary hooker for 3 months, several years ago? Does that disqualify her from having a brain to get the required degrees and teaching credentials? Does that make her some piece of shit that has no business even being around children let alone teaching them? How many of the Dad's of these children are currently clients of various providers? I'm tired of hearing about how people on both sides of our fence in this biz and thought of a second or third class citizens of society.
Parent Quotes
On the other hand, she definitely should have kept her mouth shut and avoided the entire controversy. She knew that she would never win the war of public opinion. Perhaps that was her goal, who knows?
Now he parents of the children this lady teaches are totally up in arms about "a woman that would do THAT".
My take is this: Who the fuck cares that she was a temporary hooker for 3 months, several years ago? Does that disqualify her from having a brain to get the required degrees and teaching credentials? Does that make her some piece of shit that has no business even being around children let alone teaching them? How many of the Dad's of these children are currently clients of various providers? I'm tired of hearing about how people on both sides of our fence in this biz and thought of a second or third class citizens of society.
Parent Quotes
"I don't want nobody that used to do that to be around my kid," said Grace Ventura, whose son is in third grade. "People like that should not be allowed to be anywhere near children."" She's not a good role model. I do not want my daughters to find out about this," Quezada said, "and I do not want my daughters to be around that kind of person."People like that? This kind of person?
On the other hand, she definitely should have kept her mouth shut and avoided the entire controversy. She knew that she would never win the war of public opinion. Perhaps that was her goal, who knows?
- TxBrandy
- 09-28-2010, 09:47 AM
*waves at Chica* Hey babe!
I agree with your take. Some of the commentators got it right though IMO when discussing the "role" model side of it. Here is a woman who decided for whatever reason to rent herself out by the hour as a sex-worker on CL. INSTEAD of becoming a stereotype, i.e. a drug addict, abused, raped, pimped out, stuck in a life of crime and organized crime and gang activity, riddled with STD's, etc - She pulled out and became successful at a legit profession, helping children with art and education.
But perhaps society doesn't want the public to know the success stories, hmmmm? They want everyone to believe all of the negative so that if you try it you'll be stuck in that lifestyle forever (kind of like making a face and having your parents tell you that your face will be frozen like that forever).
On your other hand, if more people DID speak up and tell it like it really is from our side maybe people will start to listen. I do believe the tide is starting to turn based on prostitution news stories and the comments from the general public in regards to the stories. More than half now say what's the big deal, if people choose to freely do this let them, or something along those lines.
I agree with your take. Some of the commentators got it right though IMO when discussing the "role" model side of it. Here is a woman who decided for whatever reason to rent herself out by the hour as a sex-worker on CL. INSTEAD of becoming a stereotype, i.e. a drug addict, abused, raped, pimped out, stuck in a life of crime and organized crime and gang activity, riddled with STD's, etc - She pulled out and became successful at a legit profession, helping children with art and education.
But perhaps society doesn't want the public to know the success stories, hmmmm? They want everyone to believe all of the negative so that if you try it you'll be stuck in that lifestyle forever (kind of like making a face and having your parents tell you that your face will be frozen like that forever).
On your other hand, if more people DID speak up and tell it like it really is from our side maybe people will start to listen. I do believe the tide is starting to turn based on prostitution news stories and the comments from the general public in regards to the stories. More than half now say what's the big deal, if people choose to freely do this let them, or something along those lines.
- anita
- 10-01-2010, 01:04 AM
She is trying to move on with her life,they should give the girl a break.
- pyramider
- 10-02-2010, 08:49 PM
Do the terms that President Clinton taught us mean anything anymore? Deny, deny, deny.
- ANONONE
- 10-03-2010, 07:42 PM
MONEY HONEY???????
- LadiesFan
- 10-03-2010, 07:55 PM
- ANONONE
- 10-03-2010, 09:59 PM
- Maggie McNeill
- 10-03-2010, 10:57 PM
Good catch. . .Because judging by terms like "shenanigans", "sexcapades" and "money honey" used in a straight (i.e. non-editorial) article, the journalistic standards of the Post are just a little below those of the National Enquirer.
I wonder why the NY Post didn't use the [sic] mark to point out the mistake. Originally Posted by ANONONE
- Guest052611
- 10-04-2010, 01:01 AM
Things like this make me wonder where our society is going as far as "political correctness" goes.
I got out of the military last year, and have been in a hole financially since due to the economy. I honestly couldnt tell you what I might have been willing to do to put food on the table for my kids. Does that mean I shouldnt strive for a better life just because I fell on hard times?
Judging is pretty easy now adays.
We will reach a point in this life where we will be told that we cant senators, or congressman becuase our credit score fell below 600 when we were in college.
I got out of the military last year, and have been in a hole financially since due to the economy. I honestly couldnt tell you what I might have been willing to do to put food on the table for my kids. Does that mean I shouldnt strive for a better life just because I fell on hard times?
Judging is pretty easy now adays.
We will reach a point in this life where we will be told that we cant senators, or congressman becuase our credit score fell below 600 when we were in college.
- ANONONE
- 10-05-2010, 03:44 PM
Because judging by terms like "shenanigans", "sexcapades" and "money honey" used in a straight (i.e. non-editorial) article, the journalistic standards of the Post are just a little below those of the National Enquirer.Good point, but I did love the phrase money honey. Somebody ought to put that under their avatar on here for giggles.
- Maggie McNeill
- 10-05-2010, 07:12 PM
Good point, but I did love the phrase money honey. Somebody ought to put that under their avatar on here for giggles.I freely admit to liking it as well, but it certainly doesn't belong in a news article. But don't you find that phrase,and indeed that whole article, has the unmistakable odor of the gay male sense of humor?
- TexTushHog
- 10-05-2010, 11:42 PM
Because judging by terms like "shenanigans", "sexcapades" and "money honey" used in a straight (i.e. non-editorial) article, the journalistic standards of the Post are just a little below those of the National Enquirer.What do you expect? It's owned by Rupert Murdoch. The same guy who owns Fox News and the Wall Street Urinal.