Yet another Female Teacher...

[Umfriend]

So you guys still a virgin?

[schmosef]

LOL! Sometimes I wish I was. The girl I lost mine to is not someone I look back on with any fondness.

[Brian Ellis]

Originally posted by Umfriend
So you guys still a virgin?

Yes, have been for the last 5 years.

As was usual when we married in 1959, we were both virgins, but that didn't last very long!!!! Reminds me, shortly be our 46th: mustn't forget!!!

[KvHagedorn]

Originally posted by EnglandJoe
I think that people who are 18 shouldn't be in a relationship at all, but I'm a prude I suppose. I also believe in not getting into relationships that aren't love orientated, and don't believe in sexual realtions outside of a relationship, so my views are a little extreme anyway.

I really agree with the last two points you make, but it is unrealistic to set 18 as some sort of arbitrary and perfect watershed moment where you are suddenly 100% more mature than you were an instant before, and therefore entitled to have love in your life and be in a relationship. If you want God's and nature's own truth, if a person has kept himself from feeling these feelings (whether expressed or not) between puberty and 18, that person is a cold dead fish who I would not want to know. The watershed point of maturity really comes at puberty, and no matter what bullshit arbitrary law is enacted, people will all experience this in their own time. Whether at 8 or 18 in the extremes but usually around 12-13, the brain simply becomes rewired, and during a period of about a year or so, one's whole way of thinking becomes different. We learn to forge adult relationships after this, and the only real way is by experiencing them. One can perhaps save full intercourse for marriage if one has this belief, but affection should be expressed, and be allowed to be expressed, not denied by the jealousy of parents or their morbid desire to keep their children in "innocence." In truth, innocence is a state of neutrality. Whether this is changed by good or evil is all that is in a parent's power. If their child has a relationship based upon real love and affection, it should not be denied them. Yes, this sometimes happens with that "old mare one learns to ride upon," but it should still be judged according to its merits. That "old mare" might even have more love for the younger guy than he could find in a girl his own age. She could also be a messed up druggie who wants to share her evil way of life. Innocence is ultimately doomed anyhow, but better to be schooled in the way of a positive, constructive relationship than in a selfish and unhealthy one. Why do people focus on age more than this? Sometimes it correlates, but not always. If these women were sensitive to their younger lover's feelings and did not force themselves upon them, no harm done.. in fact, they brought them out of innocence with the knowledge of how best to treat other people. The parents and the law have done these young men a disservice in this case, and a tragic one, by telling them that this positive experience is somehow evil. That is just wrong wrong WRONG!

[DukeP]

Innocence is ultimately doomed anyhow

...
Argh.

No matter how right you might be KV, thats just one hard to stomach statement.


Im still innocent!
Ive never killed anyone.

Im naive.

~~DukeP~~

[Brian Ellis]

Originally posted by KvHagedorn
Innocence is ultimately doomed anyhow, but better to be schooled in the way of a positive, constructive relationship than in a selfish and unhealthy one.

And if this "relationship", which is statutory rape by US law, started as a "selfish and unhealthy" one by the female? How can you be sure she was not a predator, simply relying on a teenager's inability not to get a stiffy? Certainly, puberty may make changes in a child's mind, but it surely does not engender mental maturity. Having had a taste of the "forbidden fruit", that kid will do all he can to savour it more. I wouldn't mind betting his emotional life is f**ked up for good, simply because he will now think his penis is God's gift to womanhood and he will want to exercise this on any occasion that presents itself (let's hope that he doesn't create the occasions by force).

In any case, a teacher who commits such a crime is obviously incapable of creating a selfless and healthy relationship, if only because she evidently lacks moral judgement over her own acts.

What about a 24 year-old male teacher and a 13 year-old girl? Do your same arguments apply? If not, why not?

[KvHagedorn]

Do not overstate your case. You were not a fly on the wall with God's power to judge this relationship, neither have you any idea whether the young man is "f**ked up for good" or not.

This is a "crime" as made by statutes enacted by the fearful and weak of soul, and are often enforced for political reasons because of the reverse relationship (an older man and younger woman) being a true predatory one where the man has sex with her, gets her pregnant, and then leaves with no feeling of responsibility toward her at all (thank you hispanic culture for ****ing ours up! Another point to bolster my feelings against multiculturalism!) This is then a money problem for society, which must often dole out welfare to the mother. In this worst of cases, therefore, society doesn't even really care about whether the "young slut" was traumatized or not. It's just a made up thing to prevent too many teen pregnancies. Judges usually have no more wisdom than legislatures, but these cases must be judged on their merits, and preferably by those who know the people involved, before it even gets to court. If there was any "great truth" to your indignant insistence upon this as some crime against humanity, then why is every law different in every state and every country? It is only different because there is no great truth here in why this should be judged as a universal crime. Indeed, as I have put forth, it is more a crime against humanity to condemn love as a sin. Is this really where you want to stand?

And yes, even if it was a 50 year old man and a 12 year old girl, if it was based on love and was by her will and he yielded to it (and was responsible enough to not risk her getting pregnant), there is no crime here.

The only questionable point of ethics is where one person's position might coerce the other into submission. In the present case, the woman was not even his teacher, and was staying in his family's home. This makes it less likely that he saw her as an authority figure, so less likely that he felt coerced. But I don't know the case either. We only have to hope that the jury does not get stirred up and rushed into judgement by the likes of you and decide that all "witches like her" must burn.

[spadnos]

Originally posted by KvHagedorn
Do not overstate your case. You were not a fly on the wall with God's power to judge this relationship, neither have you any idea whether the young man is "f**ked up for good" or not.

You weren't there either. (And, quite possibly, neither was God).

This is a "crime" as made by statutes enacted by the fearful and weak of soul, and are often enforced for political reasons because of the reverse relationship (an older man and younger woman) being a true predatory one where the man has sex with her, gets her pregnant, and then leaves with no feeling of responsibility toward her at all

In your opinion. Some people actually do want to protect others (an even more people specifically want to protect children). It's true - the age of consent is arbitrary. There is no reason to believe that someone is suddenly mature in the microsecond it takes to turn 18. Some people will be mature enough when they're 14, and others may never be mature enough, but society has to pick a point when it's just generally "OK" to do certain things. I have no great desire for the government to tell me when or with whom (or in which positions) I may have sex, but I also don't want it to be any easier for a schmoozer / smooth-talker / sleazebag to take advantage of someone who may not be able to recognize the dangers or adequately protect themselves from a predator. The ability to see through facades and to take care of yourself comes with life experience, which is something that a 14 year old hasn't had enough of.

(thank you hispanic culture for ****ing ours up! Another point to bolster my feelings against multiculturalism!)

Um - could you explain your position on this further please? As it sits, this statement gives me the impression that you're a racist, and are just choosing another society to blame for a problem (I'm not even sure what problem). I'd truly like to know what you mean by this and why.

This is then a money problem for society, which must often dole out welfare to the mother. In this worst of cases, therefore, society doesn't even really care about whether the "young slut" was traumatized or not. It's just a made up thing to prevent too many teen pregnancies. Judges usually have no more wisdom than legislatures, but these cases must be judged on their merits, and preferably by those who know the people involved, before it even gets to court. If there was any "great truth" to your indignant insistence upon this as some crime against humanity, then why is every law different in every state and every country? It is only different because there is no great truth here in why this should be judged as a universal crime. Indeed, as I have put forth, it is more a crime against humanity to condemn love as a sin. Is this really where you want to stand?

Well, since none of us know whether or not love was involved, I guess we can't really decide these questions. Hormonal changes that come with puberty don't suddenly make a boy capable of feeling love, they simply make him capable of having intercourse and procreating. Emotion has little to do with it (though emotions do run high during the changes). Also, I'm not sure what society you live in, but I personally don't give a damn about the money - I'm more interested in the people affected.

And yes, even if it was a 50 year old man and a 12 year old girl, if it was based on love and was by her will and he yielded to it (and was responsible enough to not risk her getting pregnant), there is no crime here.

No - there is no moral problem (for some of us), but there is a crime. You have to remember that laws are a form of common denominator. If you take a cross section of people and ask them about a law, you should always get some people that think the law is too lax, others too strict, and others just right. The law is there to make sure that there is a clear distinction between what is legal and what is not legal - it has little to do with what's "moral" or "immoral" (since we all have diferent meanings for that), or "right" or "wrong" (also different by individual).

The only questionable point of ethics is where one person's position might coerce the other into submission. In the present case, the woman was not even his teacher, and was staying in his family's home. This makes it less likely that he saw her as an authority figure, so less likely that he felt coerced. But I don't know the case either. We only have to hope that the jury does not get stirred up and rushed into judgement by the likes of you and decide that all "witches like her" must burn.

The questionable point of ethics is that it's ILLEGAL for an 18+ year old to have sex with a minor - period. If you would refuse to obey this law (because you think it's unjust or silly), then why should your neighbor obey some law that you DO believe in, but he doesn't? If we all start doing whatever we feel - as individuals - is right, then we have no society. It would also be bad for someone like you to immediately acquit because you think she's hot, and you would have banged her if you had been in the same situation. Ideally, the jurors (assuming this gets to a jury trial) will actually listen to the merits of the case, and will vote their consciences.

I agree that this shouldn't be as big a deal as it is being made, but even though I don't agree with this particular law, I want people to have enough respect for the law that they won't just do whatever they want all the time, and will follow the laws that they disagree with as well as the ones they like. She needs to take responsibility for her actions - if the story is true, then she should be convicted of the crimes, and a reasonable sentence should be imposed. Of course, reasonable is a matter of opinion, so we'll just have to wait and see how it turns out.

- Steve

[KvHagedorn]

If you lived in Texas instead of Vermont, you would know exactly what I meant by the Hispanic remark (I should have said Mexican anyhow, since that is the culture I'm talking about.) It's very easy for people in homogenous areas to be aghast at any idea that there is such a thing as culture clash and resort to name-calling toward anyone who brings it up, but you are just being naive. It's part of their macho culture to try and get girls pregnant irresponsibly, and I've overheard Mexican guys talking about it on multiple occasions. I have known MANY instances firsthand where some Mexican guy has impregnated a young girl for the sake of keeping score and high-fiving his vatos about it.. and too many of them are white girls (to which politically correct ****heads expect us to turn a blind eye.) This is nothing but social terrorism, and the social liberals who turn a blind eye to it, yet vilify these young teachers are hypocrites and traitors.

In many cases, age-of-consent laws have been enacted toward the end of reducing teen pregnancy caused by this cultural tradition, because there is no other politically correct way of addressing it.

Here's an article closer to home for you that supports my point.

http://www.hartfordadvocate.com/gbase/News/content?oid=oid%3A1229