18
   

They’re 18 for Gods sake

 
 
roger
 
  2  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 03:03 pm
@aidan,
Frank, of course, can speak for himself. I don't believe he's saying it's no big deal. I do think he fails to see why relations between consenting adults is being criminalized.
edgarblythe
 
  3  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 03:06 pm
It's not simply sex between consenting adults. It's sex between consenting students and their consenting teacher. Which not only should be illegal, but it is. The only question in my mind is the severity of punishment. I see no harm in assigning jail time, but more on the order of a few months or weeks, rather than twenty years.
aidan
 
  2  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 03:12 pm
@roger,
Frank said:
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.


as if this is a relevant consideration in the scheme of things.
I don't believe it is. I think it belies a cavalier attitude to what is a serious and sad situation.



BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 03:13 pm
@aidan,
Quote:
But you seem to be saying that you don't think she did anything wrong. If she didn't do anything wrong, why do you think she should be fired


You are not reading all my postings as many times I stated that I think that her morals and judgments and actions as a teacher leave a lot to be desire. At least enough to fired her.

No everything however that I think is morally wrong or reasons to fired someone should be punished by the criminal law with special note in this case when it punish consensus sexual relationships between adults.

0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 03:17 pm
@contrex,
Quote:
I can adduce my dad in support, because he flew Halifaxes and Lancasters in Bomber Command from 1942 to the end of the war.


Nobody called you effete.

Quote:
I try to keep an open mind about the Women’s Liberation Movement, as about all the other exciting and wonderful things that are happening in the modern world. As soon as its leaders can show me a race of women who do not scream and climb up the wall every time they see a mouse, I might even start taking them seriously.


And here is a lady who didn't scream and climb up a wall when she saw a mouse and they gave her 5 years. Who is sexist now? Warning to women not to get too uppity. It's okay talking about it but not doing it.

The laugh is secularists getting moral indignation. You've seen nothing yet. All these secularists want is to be able to get divorced, have sex before marriage, have abortions and homosexual marriage. That's to be all and end all of their position.

Frank Apisa
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 03:19 pm
@aidan,
Quote:
Quote:
Re: roger (Post 5083060)
Frank said:
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.


as if this is a relevant consideration in the scheme of things.
I don't believe it is. I think it belies a cavalier attitude to what is a serious and sad situation.


It is a relevant consideration of this issue...very relevant.

I understand that you do not believe it is. There are people who "believe" the Earth is flat. That does not make the Earth flat...and your belief about the relevancy of what I brought up does not make it irrelevant.

There is a very serious and sad situation here...and I am not being cavalier toward it. I am attempting to discuss it reasonably and intelligently.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 03:20 pm
@roger,
Quote:
Frank, of course, can speak for himself. I don't believe he's saying it's no big deal. I do think he fails to see why relations between consenting adults is being criminalized.


You spoke for me quite nicely here, Roger. Thank you for understanding where I am coming from on the issue.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 03:21 pm
@edgarblythe,
Sorry the state had no business deciding what group of adults can not have consensus sex with each other by way of the criminal law.

Be the classification a teacher and a student, a black and white persons, two people of the same sex.

All the above Texas had put on their law books and two out of three had been removed by the courts and the third one is likely to be.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 03:30 pm
@aidan,
Quote:
How is she supposed to stand in front of a class and teach her subject, whatever it is, when there are videos and stills of her engaged in sex acts circulating the school?


You could have classes which are not hung up about such things. I agree that if they are all hung up it is a problem. Married teachers are going home to Lord knows what.

Quote:
while this teacher is affecting the lives of other peoples' children and thus, other people.


18 year old athletes children?? What a piece of sophistry. And judges of the USSC are responsible for the officially approved abortions. Leading lights in the same profession that has perped this evil sentence. Prurience.

I'm sure glad I don't live in Texas. Bloody witchfinders imo.
0 Replies
 
contrex
 
  3  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 03:40 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:
The laugh is secularists getting moral indignation. You've seen nothing yet. All these secularists want is to be able to get divorced, have sex before marriage, have abortions and homosexual marriage. That's to be all and end all of their position.


Oh, you're some kind of rightwing creation-science Jesus freak. Well, goodbye... Oh, can I suggest you pour yourself a big tall glass (or chalice) of STFU?

msolga
 
  2  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 04:42 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
Beth, you and Ms. Olga can have whatever take on this issue you want. I respect that...and I recognize, as I have mentioned that reasonable people can differ substantially on the issue.


No, you didn't respect my "take", Frank.
You avoided answering the question I asked you, claiming the answer was obvious & not worth your time to explain. And that, because I hadn't quoted your whole comment, just the part I was interested in, that I'd somehow taken your comment out of context.
I disagree.
I'd still be interested in your response, if you can be bothered.:

Quote:
I'm curious about why hold this view, Frank.
You've talked about the benefits of young males being initiated by older women in different cultures. But let's stick to the culture we live in ( I'm not living in the same culture as you, though not too different)

Anyway, why is it acceptable to you that young males be initiated into sexual activity by older women (teachers in this case), while you feel more "troubled" by female students receiving similar treatment from male teachers?
And why (by your reasoning) would male teachers "initiating" male students worry you more than the situation that's being discussed here?
Personally, I can't see the difference. I wonder why you do.


In a more recent post you said:
Quote:
I recommend you read some of Spendius' posts on this issue rather than Ms. Olga. His make much more sense.


You think so?
That's interesting.

OK, so could you point out which part of the one comment I've posted here doesn't "make sense" to you?
Here's the rest of my post to make it easier for you:

Quote:
I'm a teacher. Have been for most of my adult life.
Here's my perspective, if you're interested.
Students & their teachers are not "equal", in so many ways .... nowhere near it!
Teachers are adults (or at least expected to behave as adults), with a whole lot more experience of the world than their students have.
The thing is, there's a big power imbalance between adult teachers & their students.
I think it's critical that teachers, assuming they actually have the maturity to understand this, say nothing of the rules that govern their profession, respect that & behave ethically.
It is perfectly normal for adolescents to develop "crushes" on particular teachers. I could certainly tell you a lot of stories from my own earlier teaching days! Teenage boys with rioting hormones ...
But .... you don't take advantage of adolescent infatuation by actually ******* your students! Because it is a totally unequal power situation.

And personally, I believe that any teacher who takes advantage of that power imbalance should not be teaching. It's simply a matter of being mature, or "grown up" enough, to understand that adolescent sexuality is one thing, but your respect for your students & the job your are required to do (education) means that you don't take advantage.
As if you'd want to, knowing all that, as a reasonably well adjusted adult, say nothing of being a teacher!


.
spendius
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 04:49 pm
@contrex,
Quote:
Oh, you're some kind of rightwing creation-science Jesus freak. Well, goodbye... Oh, can I suggest you pour yourself a big tall glass (or chalice) of STFU?


Stumped for words again eh contie?
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 04:58 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:
All these secularists want is to be able to get divorced, have sex before marriage, have abortions and homosexual marriage.


What a weekend that was.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 05:12 pm
@ehBeth,
Quote:
I know that there are still a number of employment contracts that make it clear what will happen as a result of power-differential relationships - the end of the employment relationship.


What's a poor girl with ambition gonna do with that?

All the old bats and the "I've got a headache" brigade are nicely fixed up with a geezer who gets a birfday and wedding anniversary (7 minutes in duration in the USA according to an international study) treat in return for being a good little boy and has no worries about any power-differential challenges because they are blocked off by the courts staffed by old bats or males, biologically defined, who dare not step out of line for fear on being disgraced.

Barbara Stanwyck neutralised. (My only problem is finding a way to play my fortieth fallen female in a different way from my thirty-ninth.)

The comfort zone. Feminists!!!????




0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 05:14 pm
@ehBeth,
Quote:
Spendy has never been a female teacher.


Too right I haven't. I've shagged a few though. They didn't seem to mind in the least.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 05:18 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
You are in delusion here, Beth.


You are correct Frank.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 05:22 pm
@Rockhead,
Quote:
you are ok with police officers picking their sex partners from folks they write traffic tickets to?


I am as long as the lady has committed a traffic violation and that it is her free choice to choose the option.
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 05:24 pm
@aidan,
Quote:
But you seem to be saying that you don't think she did anything wrong. If she didn't do anything wrong, why do you think she should be fired?


Because the educational authorities have the right to employ people they think it is right to do but not the right to give them five years.
0 Replies
 
Rockhead
 
  2  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 05:25 pm
@spendius,
these rules are what keep students and lady speeders with large racks and short skirts safe from being coerced.

it's pretty simple really...

no matter how many juicy details you voyeurs wish to hear and imagine.
ehBeth
 
  2  
Reply Mon 20 Aug, 2012 05:32 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Inappropriate? only if honesty is inappropriate and I don't think it is in cases like this.

You were a young man. The world has changed considerably since you chatted up go-go dancers. Go talk to some young men. I talked to two of them about this yesterday. Their responses did not reflect your guesses.

and yes, it does seem like you have some old-guy romantic fantasy of a young/but older woman hitting on 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 07/22/2024 at 05:14:20