Yeah, he’s 15. If he was 15 and she 20, that would be one thing. But she isn’t; she’s way, way older and with commensurate experience. It would be skeevy under the best of circumstances. As it is, with her in a position of power and authority over him, it’s fucking wrong.
It’s every bit as creepy and wrong as the 15 year old cashier at the McDonald’s “voluntarily” fucking her fiftysomething manager.
(oh, the comparison in my second paragraph there was a hypothetical, by the way)
I know I’m a girl, but I’ve never heard about this! I have heard about using the vacuum cleaner - is this real too or a myth?
Good question. I would say, off the top of my head, that the pumpkin technique, at least offers a lower likelihood of injuring oneself, as long as one remembers to blow out the candle beforehand.
I’m a guy, and I’ve never heard about it, either. The closest thing is my cousin’s story of how his cat would go into heat, climb on a pumpkin, and spin around on the stem, like some kind of desperate, perverted top.
You totally missed my point. We’re on the same page, that the teacher never should have let the boy have sex with her. She should have said NO. It’s her responsibility to assume control, and she’s bound to the consequences for letting it go as far as it did. (Mainly because of the authority thing. To use your “hypothetical” example, it’s equally inappropriate for a 50-year-old manager to fuck his 35-year-old employee – sexual relationships & authority don’t mix, period.)
My point is, everyone’s throwing around words like “rapist”, “abuse”, and “victim” as if the kid was some truly helpless kindergarten student. I’m just saying, we shouldn’t ASSUME that this teenager was forced into something he didn’t want to do. Kids are far more devious & clever than adults give them credit for.
I will admit, the kid’s got issues. I mean, LOOK at her. Would you fuck that? I sure wouldn’t. He must be myopic, or have a secret fetish for basset hounds.
This one may not be. As I mentioned upthread, I can’t find an Internet cite for it, but the paper did remark that he’s a pupil (and she a teacher) at a special-needs school, which may mean his IQ doesn’t trip the third digit or he’s got a severe inability to relate to his peers, or both.
Careful, you’ll have Shoshana after you to remind you that people who don’t come up to your standards of beauty are still allowed to have sex.
I’m still ticked-off over how Fairhurst’s next move, after denying everything, was to cry rape on the kid. :rolleyes:
Well, thank goodness for British Justice.
The way the judge was going on in the original link, it was hard to tell what fate was portending. “The only likely outcome…is a custodial sentence”.
<Monty Python> No one ever expects a custodial sentence. </mp>
It’s like the easy way out or something. Never mind how many aspersions it might cast on the next person to cry rape, legitimately.
You already used the rolleyes, so I don’t need to.
Damn, I sure did, didn’t I? I swear I really can read. :smack:
freudian slip, anyone?
Um…someone ‘beat’ you to it.