Oi, who’s impersonating me? There’s only one of me, gigantic twatbasket that I am.
Seriously though, what the hell? I mean, I could imagine maybe a teenager not understanding this, but an adult? Someone who has been alive for over 60 years? That’s got to be the most pathetic, dishonest excuse I’ve ever heard.
I think I always knew, it never struck me in terms of realization suddenly, I always knew. Even at age 10 I would have known it was weird for an adult to have sex with a kid. Now I have heard so many stories of teacher-student sex, but back then the thought of having sex with my teacher or any grown up was weird.
I should add that(I just remembered)my mom once told me that if anyone adult touched me inappropriately that I should tell her. In 1998 when I was 11 I was taking karate lessons and one of the instructors told us openly that he thought I was very attractive, in that I could have passed for a girl, that is how “attractive” I seemed to him. But he was all safe, and he was open and just thought I was attractive, not that he wanted to do anything criminal. Great guy he was! He gave me hugs, but that was all.
So I always knew, heck I would have found it very bizarre if a teacher made moves on me, no matter how hot she was.
Like why would a 25 yr old teacher want to sleep with a boy?
Your comment makes perfect sense, sometimes we underestimate kids.
What age are we talking about?
I definitely remember fantasizing about female teachers, adult women friends of my relatives, etc. when I was about 14-15, and no doubt if they’d propositioned me I probably would have said ’ yes’. (NB: that is of course not a reason for it to be legal: we often want things that are bad for us, for others or for society).
Now I would say yes, but then no. Did I have some crushes, yes.
OK, momentarily going Mr. Literal and addressing the title question, (a) I figured there was something wrong and “bad” with “naughty touching” between adults and with prepubescents (little kids) pretty early on; but (b) at the time AOC in my jurisdiction was 14, and the whole notion of “people in more empowered positions should not have sex with those less empowered” was barely getting initial traction, so growing up the legality of sex with people as young as 14 was a non-issue and I only learned how it was an actually legislated felony to cross that threshold even if there were well-developed and rarin’-ta-go 13 year olds() when I actually read* about it later. But by then I had worked out that it must be a crime when it’s with the actual little children just on the abuse count.
(*And oh, yes, there were quite a few of those. Of both sexes and a few different orientations… it would have been unethical and unlawful but they were very damn well eager and willing)
Now that we have that set aside…
**
What *&^% place and time did this guy come from to not KNOW this by the time he was a *&^% diocesan official?? **:smack: Really…? Talk about the State Of Denial.
I definitely knew by the time I was actually an adult. It actually factored into a relationship I was in with someone just beyond the Romeo and Juliet law.
The earliest I can remember not knowing would have been in eighth grade, where I didn’t freak out when a girl friend told me about having an college aged boyfriend. Then again, at that point, I didn’t so readily connect sex and dating as I had been brought up that you dated for a long time before sex.
Well, once again, ignorance fought. Thanks SD!
This seems to be the Excuse du Jour.
A complete load of horseshit of course.
I think that the question and answer establish that the Archbishop does not feel obliged to tell the truth at a deposition. It is not in fact a good idea to say “I don’t know” or “I don’t remember” to every inconvenient question at a deposition. The truthful answer to that question, as everyone knows, is that “I can’t remember when I didn’t know that, I’ve always known that.” When you answer otherwise, you show your contempt for the process. I always tell my clients that they must answer the question truthfully, as their personal credibility is the number one object of maintaining at the deposition.
Leading up to this exchange, they’re specifically talking about Thomas Adamson molesting Greg Reidle, who was 13 when the abuse began.
Damn it, Bricker-You’re not the Archbishop’s lawyer. Can you shut off the legal obfuscation for two seconds and not pretend you don’t know what is meant by kid in this context?
Even worse, he has voted in this poll four times, when he knows perfectly well that once is the limit.