18
   

They’re 18 for Gods sake

 
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 19 Aug, 2012 01:38 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Sure Roger is right, but we cant have individual schools or school boards deciding such things, as there is too much chance they will go soft on the forces of evil!
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Reply Sun 19 Aug, 2012 01:38 pm
@aidan,
Quote:
Yeah, I don't know Roger. I only read the article that was linked, so I'm not quite sure why she's getting jail time if all of the students were over 18- although she was in a position of trust which she abused pretty much as ridiculously blatantly as anyone possibly could.

Maybe there's some legal caveat about that.


In most respects, Aidan, this issue actually reduces to what you said here. The sexual relationship between consenting adults is not the problem. The problem is that the woman, a teacher, may have abused her position. (We really do not know that!) Do we really want to be a people who will send a person to prison for 20 years for abusing a position of trust????

Christ, there are people who are sentenced to less than that for murder.

These were boys who could be sent off to war to kill people. She allowed them to **** her. She may have been misguided, but really...prison time...and 20 years at that!

The thing that disturbs me most is that although I find the legislators of Texas revolting for passing legislation that could end up with a result like this...I am ten times more repulsed by the people here in A2K applauding the action...actually suggesting this punishment was too lenient!
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 19 Aug, 2012 01:39 pm
@roger,
I agree with that.
0 Replies
 
aidan
 
  3  
Reply Sun 19 Aug, 2012 01:42 pm
@Frank Apisa,
I think if you read what I said, you'd see that I said I didn't understand why she was getting jail time.
I am not advocating jail time unless she tied these boys down and raped them. But I do think she should lose her teaching certificate for life - and be barred from working with children or vulnerable adults in any capacity.

Also, the article I read said she would get five years. I don't know where this 20 year figure is coming from. Maybe there's just alot of misinformation and confusion about what happened and what she actually is facing.
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Reply Sun 19 Aug, 2012 02:18 pm
@aidan,
Quote:
I think if you read what I said, you'd see that I said I didn't understand why she was getting jail time.
I am not advocating jail time unless she tied these boys down and raped them. But I do think she should lose her teaching certificate for life - and be barred from working with children or vulnerable adults in any capacity.


I did read that...and I think I was acknowledging that in my remarks, Aidan. The thrust of my post was that I agree with what you were saying.

The 20 years was my mistake...something I heard from someone else that I did not check on. I should have...and I apologize, although 3 - 5 years for this bothers me just as much as 20 would have.

The woman had group sex with 4 of the young men (members of the football team). It truly does not sound as though she were forcing them against their will. This is Texas after all...and one would think they would be more understanding of the needs of High School footballers. Unless, of course, there were other factors that may have been involved. Not all footballers are considered equal in Texas!
spendius
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 19 Aug, 2012 02:21 pm
@aidan,
Where does this leave the so called "pro-choice" brigade? Don't they claim that a woman has a right to do what she wants with her body? And nearly 50 million abortions have been legally performed at some profit since the gallant Roe/Wade decision on the basis of that argument, and another equally silly one that the unborn are not human life, and here we are with mature adults old enough to die in Afghanistan having a bit of fun with one lady operating pro-choice without endangering any forms of human life.

I think the issue is the shock of finding out that women might like that sort of thing and send signals to that effect by enjoying discussing it.

I would have more trouble with some of Olga's attitudes as displayed on A2K being given out in classrooms as I fancy they might well be. Saving the whales, saving the reef, saving Assange, saving 18 year old blokes from predatory women and saving A2K from sinking into a pit of degradation and gross moral turpitude which Jimmy Edwards defined as indecent behaviour with 144 women.
contrex
 
  2  
Reply Sun 19 Aug, 2012 02:31 pm
@aidan,
aidan wrote:
I don't know where this 20 year figure is coming from.


I think it might be a maximum term; like in the UK the maximum sentence for arson is life but you won't get that for setting light to your neighbour's garden shed, if it was a first offence, nobody was hurt and the damage didn't extend to anything else.

In the UK recently, a female teacher got 15 months jail for having an affair with a 15 year old female student who, she said, had 'pressured' her into it.

Quote:
The five-month affair included an overnight stay at her home and a romantic weekend in Paris.

Their forbidden trysts remained a secret until the school, which cannot be named for legal reasons, received an anonymous tip-off about what was happening.

Care workers were immediately contacted and police alerted.

When officers raided the teacher's housing estate maisonette in Thornham Street, Greenwich, south east London, they arrested the 26-year-old and seized various sex toys including vibrators and "fluffy handcuffs".

Goddard, a former child music prodigy, admitted six sample counts of sexual activity with the girl between February and July this year.

The disgraced teacher, wearing a white blouse and a black waistcoat and trousers bowed her head and repeatedly wiped tears from her eyes as Judge Anthony Pitts said: "This is a difficult case.

"The evidence showed you were having a full-on sexual relationship with the girl for many months.

"She has made it clear that the sexual contact between you was consensual and she says in her statement that in fact it was instigated by her.

"But the particularly aggravating feature evident here of course is that you were her music teacher throughout this period and from well before the sexual relationship started."

That meant a relationship such as theirs remained illegal until after the girl turned 18.


This is the teacher...

http://img.metro.co.uk/i/pix/2009/08/helengoddard_175x125.jpg

Also a female religious education teacher in Manchester was jailed for 32 months for having sex with a male pupil of 15 she seduced on Facebook.

It seems that the Metro (free) newspaper is particularly fond of this type of story.
contrex
 
  1  
Reply Sun 19 Aug, 2012 02:33 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:
Jimmy Edwards


The Battle Of Britain pilot turned actor, who starred as the headmaster in "Whack-Oh!" and never married...
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 19 Aug, 2012 02:40 pm
@aidan,
Quote:
I am not advocating jail time unless she tied these boys down and raped them.


Ever hear of the American beauty queen, Joyce McKinney?

Quote:
A young Mormon missionary named Kirk Anderson went missing in 1977, in Ewell, Surrey, after he was abducted from the steps of a meetinghouse of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. A few days later a freed Anderson made a report to the police that he had been abducted, driven to Devon, and imprisoned against his will, chained to a bed in a cottage, where Joyce Bernann McKinney (b. August 1949) — a former Miss Wyoming World— had abducted, attempted to seduce, and then raped him. The case became known by many sobriquets, including "The Mormon sex in chains case" and "The Case of the Manacled Mormon."


It was said that the case "cheered up Britain no end". We all wondered why she was granted bail but when she skipped we sort of guessed that a trial in open court with all the technical details would have been too embarrassing to contemplate and that she was actually deported unofficially to avoid it.

A case like this here would also cheer up Britain no end if anybody was daft enough to make a big deal out of it Vance-style. How do you think all these young ladies get their PhDs and Honours Degrees?

It's ironic really. The feminists trumpet how equally clever at academic work women are and deplore the procedure by which the effect is produced.

What about the casting couch?

spendius
 
  0  
Reply Sun 19 Aug, 2012 02:45 pm
@contrex,
That case is irrelevant contrex because the girl was under age.

I remember a Duchess being interviewed on TV in her mature years and she was asked what she thought her greatest mistake was. She replied not having had the Edinburgh rugby team when she had had the chance at 18.
0 Replies
 
aidan
 
  4  
Reply Sun 19 Aug, 2012 02:48 pm
@spendius,
spendius - I don't know why you're asking me these questions. I said that I wouldn't be any more upset about what this woman has done than I would if it had been a man doing it.

The fact of her gender doesn't make me feel any worse or better about what she did. I don't excuse her any more than I would a man.

I have a daughter and a son - I don't want any teachers using boys or girls as sex toys.
But if an eighteen year old adult gives consent and engages, I can't really advocate jail time for either a man or a woman who also engages - I can however say I don't think they have shown good judgment and should be placed in a position of trust with young people and vulnerable adults. And that's what I've said.
spendius
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 19 Aug, 2012 02:57 pm
@aidan,
Quote:
I have a daughter and a son - I don't want any teachers using boys or girls as sex toys.


When they are 18 it doesn't matter what you want. I can't speak for 18 year old girls but I'm pretty confident that most 18 year old lads would jump at the chance of a 26 year old educated woman using them as a sex toy.

The blokes being footballers would obviously call forth some evolutionary atavism at the visceral level.
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Sun 19 Aug, 2012 03:02 pm
@aidan,
You might call an 18 year old female a girl as you wish but an 18 year old male is not a boy.
0 Replies
 
aidan
 
  3  
Reply Sun 19 Aug, 2012 03:03 pm
@spendius,
Okay, so let me get this straight...you're saying that you don't see anything at all wrong, morally or otherwise, with a teacher, who is also a married twenty-eight year old mother of three, engaging in group sex with her students?
Frank Apisa
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 19 Aug, 2012 03:23 pm
@aidan,
Quote:
Okay, so let me get this straight...you're saying that you don't see anything at all wrong, morally or otherwise, with a teacher, who is also a married twenty-eight year old mother of three, engaging in group sex with her students?


My guess: She reveled in it...probably had a long-lasting, extremely intense orgasm...perhaps several of them. The young men probably had several extremely intense orgasms also.

The morality of the situation is up for grabs.

Who determines what is and what is not moral?



aidan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 19 Aug, 2012 11:52 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
My guess: She reveled in it...probably had a long-lasting, extremely intense orgasm...perhaps several of them. The young men probably had several extremely intense orgasms also.


Ha, ha - funny. And those orgasms cost three children their mother - although maybe they're better off in the long run if that's what she puts ahead of their welfare.

Quote:
Who determines what is and what is not moral?

Yeah, I don't know. I just know I was taught it is immoral to be selfish and self-serving, especially when you have children depending on you.
FOUND SOUL
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 02:29 am
@aidan,
Quote:
Yeah, I don't know. I just know I was taught it is immoral to be selfish and self-serving, especially when you have children depending on you.


Agree. It's the "risk taking", knowing something will happen if caught that sometimes excites a person and they don't think of the consequence at all. I bet now she is... All be it too late. Some people's personalities as risk takers can't stop taking risks no matter at what the consequence.



0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 03:30 am
@aidan,
Quote:
Quote:
My guess: She reveled in it...probably had a long-lasting, extremely intense orgasm...perhaps several of them. The young men probably had several extremely intense orgasms also.


Ha, ha - funny. And those orgasms cost three children their mother - although maybe they're better off in the long run if that's what she puts ahead of their welfare.

Quote:
Who determines what is and what is not moral?

Yeah, I don't know. I just know I was taught it is immoral to be selfish and self-serving, especially when you have children depending on you.


And I was taught it is immoral to gloat and delight in the misfortune of other people. I was taught it is immoral to be overly judgmental about others.

Frankly, there seems to be lots of this going on by many people discussing this issue.
Setanta
 
  4  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 03:51 am
This woman betrayed a trust, and she knew at least that what she was doing was in contravention of the ethics of her profession. Frank, you are peddling some of the most ridiculous and disgusting bullshit here. What she did can be condemned on the bases i've already mentioned, as well as on the basis that she acted selfishly for her own gratification, apparently without regard to the consequences.

Then you come along with all this bullshit about what society used to do. Leaving aside that i haven't seen you provide one shred of evidence that that was once true, hoary old tradition is hardly a basis upon which to reocmmend a practice. People used to conquer their enemies with bloody war, kill all the men, rape the women and sell the survivors into slavery. Do you find that moral because it was once culturally acceptable? Really, Frank, you've gone off the deep end on this one.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 04:04 am
@Setanta,
Quote:
This woman betrayed a trust, and she knew at least that what she was doing was in contravention of the ethics of her profession. Frank, you are peddling some of the most ridiculous and disgusting bullshit here. What she did can be condemned on the bases i've already mentioned, as well as on the basis that she acted selfishly for her own gratification, apparently without regard to the consequences.

Then you come along with all this bullshit about what society used to do. Leaving aside that i haven't seen you provide one shred of evidence that that was once true, hoary old tradition is hardly a basis upon which to reocmmend a practice. People used to conquer their enemies with bloody war, kill all the men, rape the women and sell the survivors into slavery. Do you find that moral because it was once culturally acceptable? Really, Frank, you've gone off the deep end on this one.


Thank you for this wonderful analysis of what I have said and what I meant, Setanta. I am now more confident that I am correct than ever. Especially interesting getting a lesson in being moral from someone like you.
 

Related Topics

Sexual freedom is sexual degeneracy - Discussion by Luxin
Harvey Weinstein: Git, ya varmint. - Discussion by edgarblythe
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 06/18/2024 at 10:36:50