The Firing of School Choice Advocate Corey DeAngelis Is Classic Cancel Culture
Shame on the LGBT activists who falsely insinuated that school choice must be anti-gay—and shame on the conservatives who act like it is.

Corey DeAngelis, an education researcher known for his vigorous advocacy of school choice, has been fired by his primary employer, the American Federation for Children (AFC), a person familiar with the situation tells Reason. (DeAngelis is also a senior fellow at the Reason Foundation, which publishes this website.)
DeAngelis regularly feuds on social media with supporters of the education status quo, including Democratic politicians, media figures, and teachers union leader Randi Weingarten. But he is currently at odds with some allies who have turned on him following revelations that he previously performed in a pornographic film for gay audiences.
The trouble began on September 20, when the conservative Substack Current Revolt called attention to his history with the porn industry. Several conservative organizations then rescinded invitations for him to speak, and AFC fired him.
"Corey is no longer at AFC," a spokesperson for the group told Reason in an email. "We wish him well in his next endeavors, and we remain focused on our mission to expand educational opportunity for families, particularly lower-income families, across the country."
DeAngelis declined to comment, but he wrote on X: "As an activist for parental rights and school choice, my passion is personal. Just like everyone else, I have made mistakes throughout my life, learned from those mistakes, used that as an opportunity to grow and tried to channel that experience into something positive. I was a victim of poor decisions and poor influences. I have turned that experience into the fuel that fires me to save young people from being put in the same position I was put in and to help parents protect their children. I will never stop fighting for what is right."
What's happening to DeAngelis is a classic example of cancel culture: He is being punished for a regretted incident from his distant past that has nothing to do with his current job. Conservative organizations may well have morals clauses in their contracts, and they are free to hire and fire at will. But any institution that purports to oppose cancel culture, yet refuses to work with DeAngelis on this basis, is engaged in hypocrisy.
Ironically, it is DeAngelis being accused of hypocrisy—wrongly—by the progressive left. Left-leaning gay media outlets, including The Advocate and Pink News, are reveling in DeAngelis' cancelation; both led with headlines describing him as an "anti-LGBTQ+ activist" who has been exposed as a gay film actor. The clear implication is that there is some tension between his past work and his present political views—akin to an anti-gay religious figure or Republican politician who has been caught in a sex scandal.
Of course, neither outlet does the work of demonstrating that DeAngelis is in fact an "anti-LGBTQ+ activist." Some critics even imply that favoring charters, vouchers, or education savings accounts is de facto evidence of anti-LGBTQ sentiment, a flatly absurd claim.
It's true that DeAngelis has worked alongside groups and individuals that are often described as anti-gay, such as Moms for Liberty and PragerU. These groups often object to being characterized that way, instead claiming that they are merely opposed to the ways sexuality is discussed in schools. Their misleading claims about the widespread infiltration of "groomers" into the school system, however, can plausibly be read as evincing some anti-gay prejudices. School choice advocates should consider whether such associations do more harm than good. But it's intellectually lazy to presume that these prejudices are shared by everyone who has ever agreed on some aspect of a broader education reform agenda.
Take Sarah Kate Ellis, president of GLAAD, who told The Advocate: "Corey DeAngelis is yet another public figure whose anti-LGBTQ extremism already makes him deeply unqualified to be an expert in improving safety and education at school. Latest news on DeAngelis further reveals his baseless, hypocritical attempt to profiteer and score political points. DeAngelis is a sideshow charlatan."
Again, one might have expected these LGBTQ-aligned organizations and media voices to provide some evidence of the charge of hypocrisy. Instead, they pointed to several statements he made on Fox News and X in which he criticized "the woke mind virus" and adopted the conservative framing that public schools are indoctrinating kids. It's fine to disagree about whether this is actually a problem in public schools; it's not fine to casually assert that any criticism of social justice or sexual themes being introduced in classrooms is, by default, anti-gay.
The purpose of school choice is not to force the curriculum to be more or less LGBTQ-friendly. The point is to empower families to make choices that best fit a child's education needs. Supporters of school choice do not want to fight a war to decide which single, universal standard will be applied to all students; that's a recipe for disaster, since not everyone will agree on what content is appropriate for their children. The solution is to let individual schools make those decisions and compete to attract young people who are aligned with their views. Many schools in such a system could well be even more progressive and affirming of gay kids.
Conservatives who were happy to work with DeAngelis before but are participating in his cancellation now should reconsider. There is no tension between DeAngelis's decision, a decade ago, to appear in a gay pornographic film, and his current work calling for more freedom in education.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
But he is currently at odds with some allies who have turned on him following revelations that he previously performed in a pornographic film for gay audiences.
Glad Robby was able to get to the bottom of this. Coming soon to Reason, Nick reviews said film after having watched it eleven times.
Shame on the LGBT activists who falsely insinuated that school choice must be anti-gay—and shame on the conservatives who act like it is.
There's a LOT to unpack in this sentence.
The reason "conservatives" "act" like "it is" is because LGBTQI2MAP+ activists have explicitly told us they're coming for our children, and teachers keep publicly telling us "it is".
Apparently, there was some unpacking in the film.
There has been a bit of a long tradition of people involved in schools getting fired for having Onlyfans, acting in porn films etc, I'm not sure firing this guy is anti LGBTQI2MAP+.
It takes a couple of years to grow that to six figures darling.
Following the revelation of Coppage’s not-so-private life, another English teacher in the school was caught and placed on leave due to her own account on the internet subscription service site.
Good goddamn! From my little cliche, backwoods, 400 person Jr.-Sr. High School that had only maybe the one teacher worth paying to see naked (NSFW) vantage point, hiring *two* almost doesn't seem like an accident.
+1 The culture that predates Cancel Culture by 2000 yrs. suddenly became Cancel Culture and is pouncing.
"War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is Strength." - Orwell
"Having a morals clause that you refuse to compromise on is hypocrisy." - Soave
However, much you hate them, it's not enough.
"Shame on the LGBT activists who falsely insinuated that school choice must be anti-gay—and shame on the conservatives who act like it is."
The sentence should read, "Shame on the LGBT activists who falsely insinuated that school choice must be anti-gay—and shame on the conservatives who for letting the LGBT activists get away with their bullshit."
“Shame on the LGBT activists who falsely insinuated that school choice must be anti-gay—and shame on the conservatives who act like it is.”
Reread that sentence 4 times and still haven't figured it out.
Any of this surprises Soave how, exactly?
It would be difficult going forward with a spokesman who has done porn, especially gay porn, and that becomes common knowledge, because it is going to be used against the organization as a cudgel forevermore. As to the LGBTQ activists, this is intersectional politics. You oppose one aspect of the progressive agenda, the you are the enemy of all of them and they can accuse you of anything, whether it makes sense or not.
I like how in a story about a conservative being cancelled by conservatives, the real villain is the outside observers laughing at it.
Also, seriously Soave, read your own comment sections. A lot of your most vocal readers are anti-gay.
You can tell cause they won't even vote for Oliver!
Unless you live in a Ranked-Choice state Oliver is just a spoiler vote.
Never-mind he chose to supported Obama.
Never-mind he use to be a Democrat.
The covid masking virtue signaling.
The identity politics.
And a resume that is bereft of successful, sustained executive experience.
"Ranked Choice" is political Monkey Pox.
A lot of your most vocal readers are anti-gay.
In true libertarian fashion, they're not "Ban all new ICEs in the state by 2030." anti-gay or "No smoking in public buildings or spaces or buildings or spaces open to the public and a consumption tax on tobacco *and* your risky behavior is fair game to alter your insurance costs." anti-gay but, you know, they won't summarily banish the FDA in a moments' notice on the sole reason that people who can't stop buttfucking each other for two weeks can get vaccinated to stop monkeypox.
You know, the way your average fast food chain is against you because when you walk into their dining area, sit down, and demand to be served even though they're notoriously self-serve, they toss you out on your ear rather than serve you.
Robbie Suave & Deboner ought to stick to talking head gigs. Writing--especially scolding--is not his forte.
He almost didn’t appear in the film as he was holding out for more than they were offering. At the time, the producers stated he wanted to charge them up the ass. They eventually worked things out and he got what he wanted in the end.
I hear he got hosed.
Critics reviewing the performances of the actors said he came in the rear.
Well he was a top tier bottom guy.
Are you suggesting he was being cheeky?
He had to reach around to put himself in a better bargaining position.
There was some push back until they compromised through give and take.
Well it's been reported that he came out on top but the X video is so heavily pixelated no one knows where the asses end and the elbows begin.
He said to even get that position, it was a grind due to the competition being stiff. He felt lucky to be a valued member of that cast. He’s happy doing other things now because staying in that profession may have rectum.
Well after a thorough analasses of the evidence that was probably a happy ending for him.
The cream usually rises to the top but in this case, perhaps the bottom.
He’s disappointed that he’ll no longer be working with little squirts.
Touche sir. And...I'm out. Perhaps to bout another day.
This is just something he will have to swallow.
As a Gay Jew, I state that Jews and Gays want the same thing. They do not want to be discriminated against because they are Jewish or Gay, nor do they want any special rights because they are Jewish or Gay. All they want is to enjoy their individual inalienable rights of Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness. Screw Wokeism as inherently as polarizing and anti-individual inalienable rights.
Chase Oliver disagrees. Wants special protections for identity.
don’t care who does who on film whether for money or giggles but the figurehead of the American Federation for Children should probably not require a safety filter for children on the googles.
A stain on his reputation as an educator.
The reality is that it's virtually impossible for any porn performer gay straight or otherwise to crossover into polite society. It shouldn't be that way but it is. A lot of these people have very profitable careers in porn but I suspect that those who don't succeed live to regret their involvement. I know nothing about this guy but I assume he's not stupid. But the internet and cancel culture were fully entrenched a decade ago when he went down that road so I really have to question how he figured he could walk away unscathed.
He put his future ass on the line when going down that path and after it reared its ugly head it may have resulted in some butt hurt.
Sometimes it’s not great when people recognize you.
He used to be coming and now he is going.
They recognize him doing both. Kind of embarrassing. For them. I doubt he's embarrassed.
He sure blew that.
Along with their imaginations.
This whole thing is frot with controversy.
He was on tip of everything.
He pulled out or they squeezed him out.
Are those things mutually exclusive?
It could be a stretch.
Then where are porn productions supposed to get their workers from? People who commit early to the business and stay in it until retirement? My friend Greg went to film school at NYU and figured it'd be easiest to start his career making pornies to get experience; I nadn't realized that could be such a dead end. He wound up not doing so, but actually not making movies period, and indeed not doing much of anything, so it didn't matter.
You had Greg pegged for bigger things?
This is the hypocracy I expect from Robby. When it's leftists censoring the right he's out in front defending them with "private companies" but suddenly an org protecting their image is now cancel culture and beyond the pale. Fuck off you leftist shill.
Canceling means getting someone fired.
There's a difference between whatever it is you mean by censorship, and taking away someone's livelihood. Use to be something one would associate with the left. Canceling that is.
Guess it's ok now because Democrats did it first.
Ugh.
Just like everyone else, I have made mistakes throughout my life, learned from those mistakes, used that as an opportunity to grow and tried to channel that experience into something positive. I was a victim of poor decisions and poor influences.
OK, so this is something that always seriously annoys me about people – especially those in the limelight – when they fall from grace. They acknowledge the mistake. They apologize (or fauxpologize). They babble about how it was a learning experience or whatever. But…
Well, before I tell you what the problem with this is, in the interest of being candid and equally-applied, let me preface this by telling you that it’s something that also bothers me – as a Catholic – about Christian pastors and preachers (both in wrongdoing, AND just in general proselytizing). Especially non-Catholic ones, but I’m not pretending Catholics aren’t guilty of it as well at times.
It’s not enough to say you’re sorry. That doesn’t cut it. From a religious perspective, it’s called “repentance.” Not only are you apologizing for it (whatever “it” may be), but you’re going to make every effort human will allows to STOP doing it. AND, in doing so, you’re going to encourage others to avoid it as well.
In a social context – and in this particular one – what’s missing from “I made mistakes, I’m trying to channel that experience” is this: explaining in very clear and precise detail to everyone listening WHY his mistakes WERE mistakes, and teaching/encouraging others not to make the same ones.
Here’s the thing: if you are admitting that something was a mistake, that’s your acknowledgment that it was wrong. Morally, socially, culturally, whatever. If you’re claiming that you learned from it, share that lesson with everyone else. Otherwise, all you’re really apologizing for is the fact that you got caught.
The reason this made me think of Christianity is because Christianity has been lacking something in its message in recent years. And that something is this: “Evil is real, and we know how to tell it from Good, and we know how to fight it.” They’re not emphasizing the existence of evil enough. What it is, how to identify it, and how to combat it. And that’s why this dude made me think of it, because he isn’t either.
Dude was in a gay porno? So be it. We all make mistakes. God can and will forgive him, and the rest of us can and should as well. But if you’re TRULY going to overcome those mistakes and make amends for them, you have to acknowledge why “gay” and “porno” are both a problem.
Otherwise you’re not really owning it, are you.
And, y’know what, I could go on even longer at the whole, “I was a victim of…” bit. But making excuses is just as bad as refusing to acknowledge the WHY of a wrong, and owning it as a cautionary tale for others that might go down the same dark path.
American society has stopped teaching Right from Wrong. Probably because, as moral relativism and utilitarianism sank in its claws, it forgot how to tell what it is. If we aren’t socially and culturally dedicated to fixing BOTH of those problems, then all we’re ever going to get are these, “Sorry I was caught” stories. Which they’re probably not even really genuinely sorry for anyway.
You’re suggesting that he didn’t get dicked over? Well, there may be video evidence to the contrary.
Yea, but it probably wasn't shot straight therefore we'll learn nothing from it.
Actually I give him some respect for the fact that his statement was NOT an apology. none of the usual "I deeply apologize and pledge to do better and educate myself and do the work...."
It was still an acknowledgement of a mistake, without acknowledging why it was a mistake and absent any messaging to others of how and why to avoid such mistakes.
I read some more about this.
Dude is a Project 2025 contributor. The anti-gay accusations are spot-on.
It’s really kinda overtly and more hypocritically sexist to assume that all opposition to porn is anti-gay and/or religious opposition to homosexuality.
I mean, the religious conservatives against it might have contracts or personal/moral justifications about their religious convictions but forcing mothers to just accept gay porn actors as defenders of their children out of shame, even for no other justification than they find it icky, is really sociopathic, anti-equality, and anti-liberty.
It's entirely possible women wouldn't want a straight man who jacked off on tape for money lecturing them about their child's education either, but then, you don't actually care about what they think and are more concerned about your narrative(s) aren't you?
Do you actually read the posts you respond to, or just see a username you don't like and roll the dice on what rant you'll through out this time?
Why do you say "anti-gay" like it's a bad thing?
He could hire an attorney and try to stuff it up their ass.