Hot teacher who banged student sentenced to 9 months

[Darth Wong]

In the case of these various combinations of man/woman vs boy/girl how would you have handed out sentances?

I would ask for more information than "man/woman vs boy/girl". Why do you think they have "victim impact statements" at criminal sentencing hearings? Barring something like murder, sentencing is not something you do based on a one-line summary of the crime you read on the Internet, for fuck's sake.

[Lord Zentei]

In the case of these various combinations of man/woman vs boy/girl how would you have handed out sentances?

I would ask for more information than "man/woman vs boy/girl". Why do you think they have "victim impact statements" at criminal sentencing hearings? Barring something like murder, sentencing is not something you do based on a one-line summary of the crime you read on the Internet, for fuck's sake.

I'm cool with that. With my second post I was considering similar prior relationships between fucker and fuckee as in the OP case with the possibility of possible pregnancy and loss of virginity not being an issue (as per some of the special considerations in my first post) - perhaps I should have been more clear on that.

The thing is, I have seen several people harping on the fundamental difference between sex between an adult male and teenage girl on the one hand and an adult woman and teenage boy on the other - hence I was wondering just how important this particular issue was in and of itself.

[SAMAS]

IoW, females theoretically have more to lose from sex?

Yes. This is an objective fact; a female's body is permanently altered by the loss of virginity and it is also potentially subject to pregnancy: two things that don't happen to males.

Yeah, I kinda thought so.

Why the fuck are people denying that the consequences of sex are different for males and females? I can't recall the last time I've seen such ideologically correct ostrich-style head-in-sand bullshit.

I think it's because people tend to equate equality with... similarity... Not sure if that's the right word for. They think that to treat two different things equally, you have to treat them identically.

Problem is. that tends to lead to stupid stuff like lowering physical standards for firefighters to ensure that more women pass.

[Enigma]

On the age of consent thing, does this mean if that if a 28 yo teacher has sex with a 14 year old female student of his in Canada, there would have been no statuary rape case at all beyond some sort of "abuse of authority" charge?

<snip>

Actually to be more precise anyone can screw a 14 year old boy or girl as long as they are not in a position of authority. Other than that, the highschool is your oyster.

[Surlethe]

You're equating male and female with no justification. Why do you think a female would respond to a sexual encounter identically to a male?

I doubt they would react the same way. I also doubt that all females would react the same way. Or that all males would react the same way.

What I'm equating is the predatory behavior of the authority figure who is supposed to be responsible here.

The predatory behavior has indeed been punished; but harm compounds predatory behavior: and since some types of predatory behavior result in less harm than others, equating the predatory behavior in both cases is an evasion.

It doesn't bother me that the judge gave her a lesser sentence because he didn't deem that much harm had been done to the student. What bothers me is that I suspect the teacher would have had a harsher sentence had she been a man who engaged in, say, consensual oral sex (both ways) with a 13-year-old girl.

That is precisely the purpose of determining the amount of harm; unless you'd like to claim equal harm results from sex with a minor male and sex with a minor female, kindly cease equating predatory behavior when no logical reason exists to do so.

It doesn't matter how much the student wants it, he or she is/would be 13 years old and the teacher's got to keep her/his goddamn pants on.

Nobody's disputing that. What we are disputing is the moronic notion equal predatoriness = equal harm.

The great majority of 13-year old boys would be willing to have sex with a hot woman.

I don't suppose we should expect anything other than anecdotal evidence of this? I'm not saying you're wrong, but it seems like everyone's making assumptions here.

Were you ever a 13-year old boy?

[The Guid]

(Actually to be fair, I think this generalisation that all 13 year old boys want sex is wrong. I didn't - I developed late. I just wanted to point this out though there is no way to know whether it is applicable in this case - it should not be assumed either way by us. The Judge will have known the details however and he handed out an appropriate sentence as he saw it)

http://reason.com/cy/cy060402.shtml


Thanks for this whoever gave it. It does seem that there is a gender disparity here. Is this justified to the extreme that some of the cases have been shown? I personally think that boys can be very vulnerable at early ages in terms of their sexuality - I certainly was and I am wondering where the burden of proof lies. To people have to prove that boys are capable of being harmed by pre-consent sex or do people have to prove that they are not harmed? Any neutral parties want to suggest which side of the argument needs to prove its case?

[Kamakazie Sith]

Thanks for this whoever gave it. It does seem that there is a gender disparity here. Is this justified to the extreme that some of the cases have been shown? I personally think that boys can be very vulnerable at early ages in terms of their sexuality - I certainly was and I am wondering where the burden of proof lies. To people have to prove that boys are capable of being harmed by pre-consent sex or do people have to prove that they are not harmed? Any neutral parties want to suggest which side of the argument needs to prove its case?

In the previous thread I said that there should be an investigation, and the burden of proof will always lie with the prosecution. Thus, if there was harm done to the 13 year old the prosecution failed to produce evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.

[Darth Wong]

Any neutral parties want to suggest which side of the argument needs to prove its case?

What difference does it make if someone is supposedly a neutral party? Ad-hominem much?

The fact is that the people claiming to overrule the judge's far more informed decision are the ones who bear the burden of proof, because their case must be much stronger in order to declare that the judge was wrong.

[The Guid]

I see your point on the specific case, I have tried not to criticise the actual decision. I am just more disturbed by the fact that people think all 13 year old boys "want sex" or suchlike and therefore it won't do any damage to them - and that was what I was looking for some kind of evidence for. Though I was checking to see whether it was I who should provide the evidence that the boys are in fact damaged. If it is right to do so I will start a new thread - I seem to becoming rather bad at knowing when to do that.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Any neutral parties want to suggest which side of the argument needs to prove its case?

What difference does it make if someone is supposedly a neutral party? Ad-hominem much?

The fact is that the people claiming to overrule the judge's far more informed decision are the ones who bear the burden of proof, because their case must be much stronger in order to declare that the judge was wrong.

It's a safe bet that the prosecution explored how much harm was done quite throughly considering it'd be a critical part of their case.

[Kamakazie Sith]

I see your point on the specific case, I have tried not to criticise the actual decision. I am just more disturbed by the fact that people think all 13 year old boys "want sex" or suchlike and therefore it won't do any damage to them - and that was what I was looking for some kind of evidence for. Though I was checking to see whether it was I who should provide the evidence that the boys are in fact damaged. If it is right to do so I will start a new thread - I seem to becoming rather bad at knowing when to do that.

Given the psychological mindset of teenage boys yes the burden of proof is on you to show that there stands a reasonable chance that harm was done to him even though he consented to the act.

[The Guid]

I see your point on the specific case, I have tried not to criticise the actual decision. I am just more disturbed by the fact that people think all 13 year old boys "want sex" or suchlike and therefore it won't do any damage to them - and that was what I was looking for some kind of evidence for. Though I was checking to see whether it was I who should provide the evidence that the boys are in fact damaged. If it is right to do so I will start a new thread - I seem to becoming rather bad at knowing when to do that.

Given the psychological mindset of teenage boys yes the burden of proof is on you to show that there stands a reasonable chance that harm was done to him even though he consented to the act.

I'm not neccesarily talking about the specifics of the case (which is why I asked if I should make a new thread about it) but about the assumption that indeed you have made that the psychological mindset of a thirteen year old boy is the right one for sexual activity and indeed that all 13 year old boys want sex - presumably if they are "normal". I am not challenging the specific case because I don't think I qualify to challenge a Judge.

[Kamakazie Sith]

I see your point on the specific case, I have tried not to criticise the actual decision. I am just more disturbed by the fact that people think all 13 year old boys "want sex" or suchlike and therefore it won't do any damage to them - and that was what I was looking for some kind of evidence for. Though I was checking to see whether it was I who should provide the evidence that the boys are in fact damaged. If it is right to do so I will start a new thread - I seem to becoming rather bad at knowing when to do that.

Given the psychological mindset of teenage boys yes the burden of proof is on you to show that there stands a reasonable chance that harm was done to him even though he consented to the act.

I'm not neccesarily talking about the specifics of the case (which is why I asked if I should make a new thread about it) but about the assumption that indeed you have made that the psychological mindset of a thirteen year old boy is the right one for sexual activity and indeed that all 13 year old boys want sex - presumably if they are "normal". I am not challenging the specific case because I don't think I qualify to challenge a Judge.

It doesn't have to be about this particular case. The burden of proof is still on you to show that harm would be done when a 13 year old male consents to an act.

As for an assumption. I'm not making any. It's observation based off my experience as a 13 year old and numerous others. Cases like yourself are the exception and not the rule.

[Surlethe]

I see your point on the specific case, I have tried not to criticise the actual decision. I am just more disturbed by the fact that people think all 13 year old boys "want sex" or suchlike and therefore it won't do any damage to them - and that was what I was looking for some kind of evidence for. Though I was checking to see whether it was I who should provide the evidence that the boys are in fact damaged. If it is right to do so I will start a new thread - I seem to becoming rather bad at knowing when to do that.

That's actually a distortion of the general argument in the thread; people are actually claiming 13-year old boys want sex; thus, the damage is less than that which would have been done to a 13-year old girl. This is in response to cries of "OMG DISPARITY NONEQUALITY!!11" coming from the "treat all persons the same regardless of differences" crowd.

[Akhlut]

Edi and Wong: I cannot find sufficient evidence to provide support for my arguments. I thus concede my points on equal harm done against juvenile males and females (in the case of Edi) and equal sexual agressiveness for adolescent males and females (in the case of Wong).

[Anguirus]

You're equating male and female with no justification. Why do you think a female would respond to a sexual encounter identically to a male?

I doubt they would react the same way. I also doubt that all females would react the same way. Or that all males would react the same way.

What I'm equating is the predatory behavior of the authority figure who is supposed to be responsible here.

The predatory behavior has indeed been punished; but harm compounds predatory behavior: and since some types of predatory behavior result in less harm than others, equating the predatory behavior in both cases is an evasion.

The predatory behavior IS the same in both cases...it's up to the judge to determine sentencing based on both that and the harm done.

I think this woman recieved a fair sentence. I just said that I have a hard time seeing a male get off that light for a very similar crime. I didn't find any conclusive proof for that, and i don't know what this judge was thinking.

That is precisely the purpose of determining the amount of harm; unless you'd like to claim equal harm results from sex with a minor male and sex with a minor female, kindly cease equating predatory behavior when no logical reason exists to do so.

What do you mean, no logical reason exists? Both behaviors are EQUALLY predatory! And in the case of my hypothetical scenario oral sex only) than I do claim that equal harm results from doing it with a minor male and with a minor female, assuming it's "consensual" and that no one's hurt.

Nobody's disputing that. What we are disputing is the moronic notion equal predatoriness = equal harm.

Why are you disputing it when no one has made it?

I don't suppose we should expect anything other than anecdotal evidence of this? I'm not saying you're wrong, but it seems like everyone's making assumptions here.

Were you ever a 13-year old boy?

Yes, I was. And once again, you're giving me anecdotal evidence (not even that). One of the first things I turned up on my Google search was statements from child psychologists maintaining that many sexually abused male teenagers do have serious psychological problems. Here's an example:

But the impact of sex abuse on boys can be just as devastating as it is for girls.

"There's a betrayal of trust (by) an adult who violated boundaries," says Louis Schlesinger, a forensic psychology professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York City.

Effects of the abuse can vary, he and other psychologists say, from difficulty forming healthy relationships to sexual problems. Boys may also suffer among their peers.

"They're subject to humiliation and being made fun of in ways that a female victim may not be," Schlesinger says.

From http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/200 ... rime_x.htm

Anyway, when I was thirteen years old, I was able to seperate fantasy from reality. If a 30-year-old teacher who I was attracted to started coming onto me, I would have gotten the fuck out of there and notified her supervisor and my parents. If she had seduced me and taken advantage of me, I doubt I'd remember it with fondness today.

I guess I'm just not the kind of fellow who will brag about losing my virginity to a teacher, because I'm smart enough to know that she wouldn't be banging me because I'm some sort of tower of virility. I'm thirteen fucking years old and there's no way I'm giving this woman the best sex she's ever had. Conclusion: she's preying on me.

[Edi]

Edi and Wong: I cannot find sufficient evidence to provide support for my arguments. I thus concede my points on equal harm done against juvenile males and females (in the case of Edi) and equal sexual agressiveness for adolescent males and females (in the case of Wong).

Thank you.

Edi

[Anguirus]

Goddamn it, the quotes are fucked up.

Sorry, everyone who tries to read my post above.

My comments that are new to that post are:

"The predatory behavior IS the same in both cases...it's up to the judge to determine sentencing based on both that and the harm done.

I think this woman recieved a fair sentence. I just said that I have a hard time seeing a male get off that light for a very similar crime. I didn't find any conclusive proof for that, and i don't know what this judge was thinking."

"What do you mean, no logical reason exists? Both behaviors are EQUALLY predatory! And in the case of my hypothetical scenario oral sex only) than I do claim that equal harm results from doing it with a minor male and with a minor female, assuming it's "consensual" and that no one's hurt."

"Why are you disputing [the assertion that 'predatoriness' equals harm] when no one has made it?"

"Yes, I was [a 13-year-old boy]. And once again, you're giving me anecdotal evidence (not even that). One of the first things I turned up on my Google search was statements from child psychologists maintaining that many sexually abused male teenagers do have serious psychological problems. Here's an example:

But the impact of sex abuse on boys can be just as devastating as it is for girls.

"There's a betrayal of trust (by) an adult who violated boundaries," says Louis Schlesinger, a forensic psychology professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York City.

Effects of the abuse can vary, he and other psychologists say, from difficulty forming healthy relationships to sexual problems. Boys may also suffer among their peers.

"They're subject to humiliation and being made fun of in ways that a female victim may not be," Schlesinger says.

From http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/200 ... rime_x.htm

Anyway, when I was thirteen years old, I was able to seperate fantasy from reality. If a 30-year-old teacher who I was attracted to started coming onto me, I would have gotten the fuck out of there and notified her supervisor and my parents. If she had seduced me and taken advantage of me, I doubt I'd remember it with fondness today.

I guess I'm just not the kind of fellow who will brag about losing my virginity to a teacher, because I'm smart enough to know that she wouldn't be banging me because I'm some sort of tower of virility. I'm thirteen fucking years old and there's no way I'm giving this woman the best sex she's ever had. Conclusion: she's preying on me."

[Lord Zentei]

Sorry for harping on about this, but: to back up my earlier post regarding the age at which kids attain sexuality, here is a link from the NIH (and anyway, sexual maturity - physical and psychological - strikes me as being more important than sexual agression per se):

When a healthy child is somewhere between 9 and 16 years old, he or she will enter puberty. The exact age depends on factors such as heredity and nutrition and whether the child is a boy or girl. On average, boys enter puberty 2 years later than girls. At this time, the pituitary and hypothalamus glands in the brain (endocrine glands) begin sending out new hormones that trigger the changes of puberty.

PS: On the note of agression, there is the following amusing anecdote:

Boy band incites 'girl frenzy' at mall

Sunday, November 13, 2005; Posted: 10:39 a.m. EST (15:39 GMT)

BROOKLYN CENTER, Minnesota (AP) -- Police shut down a suburban shopping mall Saturday after screaming fans of the boy band B5 rushed the stage during a free concert, grabbing at the band members' clothing and overwhelming the small team of security guards.

"Things were falling off the stage, girls were falling off the stage, girls started fighting," said Theresa Curtis, who was working at a store near the stage.

Some of the girls grabbed one of the boys in the band, said Tamy Johnson, another store employee. "He ran to the back. Another boy, he just ran. Security escorted some of the boys out the back," she said.

Four people were treated at a hospital for minor injuries, and five others were treated at the mall, police said. There were no arrests.

More than 2,000 fans, mostly teenage girls, had converged on Brookdale Center mall for the show, sponsored by the local Radio Disney station, KDIZ-AM. The band had made it to the second song when the chaos broke out.

"It just seemed like a girl frenzy," said Christopher Taykalo of Radio Disney.

The 10 mall security guards assigned to the concert and the radio station staff were overwhelmed.

Seventy officers from 23 area Minneapolis-area communities responded to the chaos. It took about 15 minutes for them to get the crowd under control and another 30 minutes to clear out the mall. The mall reopened later Saturday evening.

"I've never seen anything like it in my life," Jennifer Fullbright, 49, of Cottage Grove, told the Star Tribune of Minneapolis. She had brought her daughter and her friend to the see the band.

Curtis said her store took in a few girls who had lost their parents amid the ruckus.

B5 is a group of five brothers from Atlanta -- Dustin, Patrick, Kelly, Bryan and Carnell Breeding -- ages 10 to 17. Their debut album, "All I Do," came out this summer, and they toured with the BET cable network's "Scream Tour IV."

It seems teenage girls can be pretty agressive too

[Durandal]

Teenage girls are insane. I will consider myself blessed when I have kids regardless of gender, but I really hope I have a boy.

[Mr. Coffee]

I'm fairly glad I have a son and not a daughter. Don't get me wrong, I'd love my child regardless of their sex, but I'd be the most paranoid asshole in the world when she starts finding boys interesting. The every boyfriend she brought home would be introduced to Mr. Remington 870 and Mr. Shovel, show the five acres of land out back, and be given explicit instructions to have her back by 9pm.

[Mobius]

like that?

[Illuminatus Primus]

Fuck off. She's a sex offender and should have been sent to Pound-Me-In-The-Ass Federal Penitentiary for a long-ass time with all the other sex offenders. "She's an attractive woman" should not enter into the sentencing equation.

I see reality is irrelevent. Thanks.

If a kidnap victim develops Stockholm Syndrome should the sentence for the offender be reduced because the victim has affection for him?

How does brainwashing compare at all to this circumstance, dipshit?

An eighteen year old calling me "kid" on my 21st birthday. That's fucking priceless, by the way.

I will wager right here right now that I have done more adult things in the past three months than you have in your entire fucking life. I would challenge you any day in any way to interacting with adults and see who comes out ahead. Some people value the ability to interact successfully with attractive women and popular people because it is generally healthy and fun to do so.

And yes, I'll call you a "kid" because throughout your consumate whining you've proven to be an irresponsible college student such that your mommy and daddy had to take your computer away - a problem I do not face one way or another because my presence and life here at UF is not financially dependent on my parents, because I take responsibility for myself.

You are not qualified to talk about sex in some sort of educated or knowing manner, and I am. That, also, is part of being an adult, and a characteristic repetatively emphasized by Mike and others. Grow up Pink, and stop being such a sniveling little shit.