Re: all these older teachers and young boy cases

Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share
61

I won’t call you bigoted, or a hypocrite, or whatever. I’ll just say that I’m guessing you’re wrong about this. See, here’s the thing. I’m guessing you’re a straight male, right? I don’t know how old you are, but let’s say you were 14 in, I don’t know, 1986. Remember Ferris Beuller’s Day Off? Remember Mia Sara in her bikini toward the end of that movie? Remember how, at 14, you looked at that sort of thing and got - well, turned on, a little nervous, knowing you wanted to do something with her but just the tiniest bit shaky on the details, confused by what would come after and what it would all mean? Remember?

Well, somewhere in your class that year, there was a 14-year-old boy (let’s call him Bob) who went to see Top Gun and had exactly the same feelings watching Tom Cruise with his shirt off.

Neither 14-year-old you nor 14-year-old Bob should be having sex with your teachers. Both of you know next to nothing about sex, about what it is, about how to do it well, about what impact it can have on your emotional development. Neither of you can grasp the long-term consequences that sex with your teacher might entail.

14 is too young to have a meaningful understanding of your own sexuality in any direction. It is too young to say, with certainty, “I am gay;” it is likewise too young to say, with certainty, “I like sex with girls.” It is therefore incumbent on adults to refrain from banging kids, in order to keep from confusing the issue even further and creating grown-ups with adolescent attitudes toward sex (cf, GuyWithBlueJeans).

Well, first of all, I’d take issue with your statistics. I believe that considerably more than 60% of the girls, and considerably more than 30% of the boys, would be harmed by a sexual encounter with a teacher. I think meaningless sex with a teacher, even if it doesn’t explicitly make you “sad,” can alter your perspective on sex in ways you might not even recognize; this altered perspective could easily reduce the amount of enjoyment you derive from sex for the rest of your life. It would have done so for me.

But let’s say your stats are correct. They would still be a compelling argument in favor of legally barring sexual relationships between minors of any gender and adults of any gender. What of the 30% of boys who would be harmed by sex with an adult teacher? Do they deserve no protection? Or do you imagine that there is some way to screen for which boys will be damaged by the act before it occurs?

I think the number of cases in which a 26-year-old woman creates a sexual relationship with a 14-year-old boy without there being some degree of manipulation is vanishingly small. He is 14. He is easily manipulated.

Why? If Colonel Evil McWickedpants forcibly rapes someone, at knifepoint let’s say, and afterward it is determined that the woman he raped suffered no actual physical injury and was emotionally basically OK with it, should Col. McWickedpants escape punishment?

62

So, how do you know a 14-year-old knows he’s straight,* and if he turns out not to be, isn’t he harmed by having had sex with an older female teacher?

Regards,

5

  • There seems to be an assumption here that, because the social structure says he *ought * to be straight, then there are automacially mitigating factors which pertain only here and do not apply if he is not straight.
63

Ah, yes, I did a poor job of communicating that point. My argument (and I probably subconsciusly sabatoged it because I know I’m gonna’ get nailed for this) is that not all inappropriate sex is necessarily rape. Without getting all bollixed up in discussions of of date rape, no-means-no, etc., I am talking about cases where it is obviously just flat wrong – like when an adult has sex with an underage person (we’re talking about teachers and junior high or high school kids specifically.) Even if the youngster initiates the sex, perhaps even seduces the older person, it’s the teacher’s responsibility to know better and prevent it. It’s wrong, it’s an abuse of responsibility, it’s even criminal. But it just isn’t rape. There needs to be a different classification or terminology for sexual offenses that aren’t coerced or forced.

64

In a fashion there is, it’s statutory rape.

65

Hm. Well, let me start with a preliminary question:

In your mind, is it rape if:

(1) a 26-y-o man has sex with a 14-y-o girl
(2) a 26-y-o man has sex with a 14-y-o boy
(1) a 26-y-o woman has sex with a 14-y-o girl
(2) a 26-y-o woman has sex with a 14-y-o boy

If your answers to all of the above question are “no,” please skip the following paragraph.

If your answers to any of these questions is “yes,” then why? What is it about the particular gender relationship you’ve identified as “rape” that makes it rape while the others are not?

If your answer to all four questions is “no,” then it seems to me that you are proposing a completely new definition of the word “rape.” My question is, to what end? We already have a pretty workable definition of the word - if you have sex with someone who does not give consent, you have raped them. Any ancillary crimes or threats thereof are incidental; if they didn’t give consent, it was rape. Kids can’t give consent by definition, nor can the comatose. If you’d like to redefine the term to include only cases where physical coercion occurs, why? What benefit would there be to that linguistic change?

66

I think there’s still an oz. or two of content in this trainwreck of a thread. But I think the point is being ENTIRELY missed.

Sex, at any age, can be a life altering thing. Some folks can have it at 14 and some at 21 and both will come out the other side different. There was GREAT tonguewagging when the Olsen Twins came of age. You think they were ready to hop in the sack with someone 10 years older than them? There were plenty of older men that were willing to try, I’ll bet.

As a kid, today, you’re taught that losing your virginity is a Big Thing. I can tellya, I didn’t miss losing it at 21, but the emotional complications of doing so had FAR REACHING consequences. Even at 21. I don’t think it matters WHEN it happens, there may be a power imbalance, there may be the wrong reasons, and it may or may not be a mistake.

IMHO if a 24 year old is WILLING to have sex with a 15 year old, I’ll think they’ve got some issues. But they’re surrounded by 15 year olds EVERY single day and come into contact with thousands of them over the course of a career. Tell me a dry spell, with external stress, no support structure, and a curious inviting student that increases your pulse rate wouldn’t tempt a person?

Okay, step back from THIS particular example. Kids are kids later today then they EVER have been in the past. There was a time where a Boy would be married, have kids, and be an active member of the community at 17. Biologically, it’s doable.

Now take that same biology and BOMBARD THE LIVING CRAP OUT OF HIM/HER AT EVERY TURN WITH SEX. But make it illicit. You can’t haaaave it yet. You shouldn’t be thinking about it yet. Godforbid you were to masterbate, that’s EEEEEVIL. Heaven forbid you had tuggings towards someone of the (gasp) same sex!

No sex til marriage, keep your virginity as if it’s made of money, and don’t ever spank the monkey.

This society is so sexually fucked up it’s not even funny.

67

According to the many accounts I’d heard about during the time, he had the cops hot on his trail and went nuts with a baseball bat on her.

When we was being led to the death chamber, by guards on both sides of him, they said he was so overcome with fear that his legs turned to jellow, causing the guards to have to carry him.

68

I think you may be technically right. :smack:

69

It’s funny that you say I’m “kooky.” Because some years ago, I’d done a naughty thing and had snail-mailed a certain porno lady, basically inquiring of her whether she’d ever consider doing a movie with a certain theme that centered on a fantasy that runs through my mind a lot. And so, as I recall, she basically wrote back telling me where to stick it (or at least I think it was her that did that, or she was one of those that did reply negatively…) but then some time had passed and God showed me in a dream what she was up to, and it wasn’t nice.

In this clear, kinda watery dream, I found myself standing away from her and those she was with, watching in secret as they surrounded a coffin that looked like it was full of what appeared to be black water. And so as I watched and listened, I heard a male voice (which I took to be Satan) say to them from the depths of the water, “Guynbluejeans is dingy.”

Apparentally, she had inquired on me using my letter as all that she needed.

When I got up and went about my day, I reflected on the insult and didn’t like it that I was characterized that way; I felt slighted by anyone making that kind of judgement, like I deserved better than being so reduced. But after I thought about it for a while, I thought, “Well, sure, so I’m ‘dingy.’ Who wouldn’t have a few dents in their psyche if they’d gone through the kind of crap I’ve been through starting from day one in this screwed up world?”

So I thought you might like to know that you and Satan (and a few others, I guess) are (somewhat) in agreement on something. :cool:

70

I think you should chat with this guy. That is, if you don’t know him already. :wink:

71

I admit I was being a little obnoxious with that bit about forgiving people.

I read a little about the threads you posted and see that you’re gay. I owe you an apology for some of my remarks. I honestly don’t hate gays at all (and can’t say any of my comment suggest that I do), as I’ve know several men that were gay and I very much liked them as human beings. :slight_smile:

I specifically shouldn’t have said that thing about showering with gays, as that was crossing a line in its offensiveness. I’m sorry for that, Antinor01, please forgive me.

By the way, if you ever get a chance, give a listen to Rod Stewart’s song called “Georgie” (or maybe it’s “The Ballad of Georgie,” not sure). It’s a very beautiful and touching song about a gay fellow that gets knifed and dies (as “someone just pushed their luck a little too far that night”). It came out in the '80s, I think, but seldom gets any air-time.

This thing called sex is very strange. Methinks it’s like what Jim Morrison (the character) said about it in the movie ‘The Doors’ … . :confused:

72

:rolleyes: :smack:

So because I’m not gorgeous or lusty I’m not special? Thanks for supporting the messages that girls get everyday in popular media which leads to anorexia, bulimia, and general low self-esteem. These problems can lead to women being in less than healthy relationships… but then again, according to your thinking, they don’t deserve healthy relationships 'cause they aren’t “hot”.

I certainly hope you don’t have kids, especially daughters. If this is the message you would send to your daughters, I hope your daughters would send you their therapy bills when they get older.

BTW, beauty is only skin deep, ugly goes to the bone. You, GuyNBlueJeans, are one of the ugliest people I have encountered in a long time.

73

Cite for the baseball bat? Whose accounts were they?

74

It’s not cool when its a 17 year old boy and his history teacher.

It’s very, very cool when it’s a 17 year old boy and the secretary, though. Or the woman who sold him car insurance.

We are doing the right thing by punishing people who abuse their authority for sex. Police, public officials, and teachers shouldn’t be allowed to use their authority to get laid.

75

:rolleyes:

76

In response to both Antinor and Storyteller, I have to say, “It depends.”

I’ve always thought calling socially unacceptable sexual practice any kind of rape, statutory or otherwise, was oversimplification and unnecessarily inflamatory. Maybe, a long, long time ago, young girls didn’t understand what sex was all about. Maybe there was a time when a teen-age girl was old enough to get pregnant but too young to understand how it could happen. That day has long since passed.

Laws governing sexual practice are going to be based on a certain “ick factor” among the religious and socially conservative, and that describes the overwhelming majority of Americans, myself included. So adults having sex with children (assuming we insist on overly simple categories of people and settle on only those two) will always be unacceptable.
I think there’s a difference between forcing someone to have sex and using socially unacceptable enticements – and in my fevered imagination, that includes payment for sex. It comes down to a matter of choice. If the victim has no choice --she is forcibly restrained or is otherwise threatned or coerced (“I will kill your family if you don’t submit.”) – that’s rape. Age shouldn’t be a factor in rape.

77

As one person said to the group (about me), “He’s so ugly, he’s yougly.” :frowning:

78

The only problem with that is that you had to see there was a gay person reading what you yourself admit was offensive before apologizing for it. Perhaps you should try not to say things you know are offensive before saying them. Having said that, I do forgive you for that comment this time.

Actually though, those bits were the least of my objections with your premises in this thread. It’s mostly your blatant misogyny and casual attitude about (what is legally defined as) rape that I take issue with. Knowing little about you except what you’ve said here it seems that you view women as nothing more than sex objects and if they don’t fit your definition of sexually attractive then they are written off. I really hope I’m wrong.

79

My situation with women and men is that I am so homely that NO ONE wants to be seen with me. All that’s left for me on this desert island that I’ve been locked on for decades now is “FANTASY.” :eek: Any semblance of dignity for me at this stage of life is a joke, as too many cheapshot artists and hatefreaks took care of that.

So please forgive this poor, broken, dejected, singed mutt for getting by with a few porn-driven scraps of “FANTASY” in this thing called life. Perhaps in the next world those in the too-cool-for-you crowd whom delight in rubbing salt into the wounds of us uglies will get a taste of what they’ve given out, I don’t know. But if so, they’re in for one hell of a time, I can say that much. :frowning:

By the way, for the record, from my hellish perspective, this business of people thinking that women tend to “only care about a guy’s heart” (and not his looks or wallet) is a total joke. Members of the distaff have shown me little quarter.

Or if that’s not the case, then I guess someone forgot to tell that attractive young lady that was with lots of her friends, who shouted at me (while a goodly distance from the door that I’d just exited), “You ugly motherfucker! Thanks for holding the door open for us!” Or those two very attractive young ladies that were sitting in a room alone with me before Bible class and started laughing and carrying on about what an ugly piece of shit I am. Or the time when a lady job-placement rep commented (when I made a self-deprecating comment about my looks), “So that’s how you deal with it?”

Or the time a (female) night-class teacher … .

Ultimately it’s all about karma, so no one should blame anyone for their situation. But for those folks that hit the good-looks lottery in the gene department, they are well advised to be thankful and not screw up by laughing and ridiculing us suffering losers that are paying our karmic debt in this world in this life time now, as the Laws of the universe have no favorites.

Being ugly is of the highest and deepest pain but, again, never kid yourself that women place little value in a guy’s face and bod, 'cause they sure as heck do, just ask me. :smiley:

80

Perhaps they take personality into consideration as well?