Hey, lets make teacher-student SEX legal!

Its such an awesome idea, what could possibly go wrong.

I can't believe someone actually came up with this idea. Apparently she's upset about the case where the girl committed suicide but, the teacher only got 30 days in jail. She says that, if the girl wasn't facing all the stress and embarrassment of having to deal with the trial of her rapist, she wouldn't have killed herself.

The unintended consequences of laws addressing sex between teachers and students

I don’t believe that all sexual conduct between underage students and teachers should necessarily be classified as rape, and I believe that absent extenuating circumstances, consensual sexual activity between teachers and students should not be criminalized.

The point is that there is a vast and extremely nuanced continuum of sexual interactions involving teachers and students, ranging from flirtation to mutual lust to harassment to predatory behavior. Painting all of these behaviors with the same brush sends a damaging message to students and sets the stage for hypocrisy and distortion of the truth. Many teenagers are, biologically speaking, sexually mature. Pretending that this kind of thing won’t happen if we simply punish it severely enough is delusional. If anything, to return to Louis C.K., the indiscriminate criminalization of such situations may deter students struggling with sexual issues from seeking advice from a parent or counselor.

If religious leaders and heads of state can’t keep their pants on, with all they have to lose, why does society expect that members of other professions can be coerced into meeting this standard? A more realistic approach would be to treat violations in a way that removes and rehabilitates the offender without traumatizing the victim. The intensity of criminal proceedings, with all the pressure they put on participants, the stigma, the community and media scrutiny, and the concurrent shame and guilt they generate, do the opposite of healing and protecting the victim. Laws related to statutory rape are in place to protect children, but the issue of underage sex, and certainly of sex between students and teachers, may be one in which the law of unintended consequences is causing so much damage that society needs to reassess.

Washington Post

I love her reasoning; our politicians can't keep their pants on, why expect our students to be any better? In another part, she says all her friends from the '70s had sex with teachers and nobody was even concerned with sexual harassment back then, like those were the good old days when bosses routinely had their secretaries sit in their laps while taking "dictation". I'm sure we'd all like our precious little daughters to have to live through that.

She doesn't think teachers should get off Scott-free, she says teachers caught banging their students should be removed from teaching until they complete some rehabilitation. Then, they could be sent back to the classrooms (because we know this worked SO DAMN well for the Roman Catholic Church right?).

Sometimes I wonder how people can get so dumb. The lady writing this is a former lawyer so you think she would know better. Then again, if she only served as a defense attorney, she's probably used to making excuses for other people's bad behavior.

That's insane to me ... the law is the law, period... some may not agree with arbitrary ages specified by law, but we as a society have to abide by it .. there's no exceptions... you either agree to it, or you find another society.. OR fight to change it.

"But she was only 12!"
"Yeah, but he was her teacher"

"Oh, well that's different!"

What surprises me is the number of cases where it's female teachers with male students.. almost every case I hear of is that way.. but it could just be that it's more shocking so that makes it higher up in the news reporting chain.

can't see it at all. We trust that the teacher won't be taking advantage of our kids. The law should be stricter with teachers than with the general public.

Originally posted by rickymouse

can't see it at all. We trust that the teacher won't be taking advantage of our kids. The law should be stricter with teachers than with the general public.

Exactly! .. it's not like the teacher should get special privilege to abuse the kids because they are educating them..noone has the right to abuse them.. you have to obey the law, work to change the law legally by getting a majority to agree with you, or leave..

You cannot fix stupid. What we need to do is properly teach kids about sex. Not publish this bull and somehow feel like you're helping fix the problem.

Originally posted by Phoenix267
You cannot fix stupid. What we need to do is properly teach kids about sex. Not publish this bull and somehow feel like you're helping fix the problem.

I agree... I think the core of the issue is our government. Most go by the average age of what they deem is sexual maturity .. the fact is some people are sexually mature far earlier, and some far later... there's no set age when you're an "adult".. the problem is human nature and evolution don't always go by laws.. attraction is attraction...

With that said... and with me understanding that.. I still can't excuse it.. we live in a society and you have to go with society rules.. if society rules don't work then they have to be changed.. if one person doesn't agree, or a small group don't .. they either have to suck it up, or move on.. not break the rules

miniatus
you have to obey the law, work to change the law legally by getting a majority to agree with you, or leave..

This is why articles like this are so dangerous; that's EXACTLY what she's trying to do. She's trying to convince enough people that teacher-student sex is OK so that people will vote to change the laws.

Sure, it seems crazy now and there are plenty of folks out there who will oppose this type of thinking with every ounce of their being but, what she's doing is planting a seed that she hopes will grow in time until people become more accepting of teachers banging their children and pedophilia in general.

She's floating a trial balloon to see which arguments strike a chord with the public.

Wow.
In the thread about the suicide a few days ago everyone was screaming that she committed suicide because of the rape.

So, if I understand this right, she was ok with the rape (intercourse) but the stress from the teacher getting in trouble is what made her upset?

Originally posted by FortAnthem

miniatus
you have to obey the law, work to change the law legally by getting a majority to agree with you, or leave..

This is why articles like this are so dangerous; that's EXACTLY what she's trying to do. She's trying to convince enough people that teacher-student sex is OK so that people will vote to change the laws.

Sure, it seems crazy now and there are plenty of folks out there who will oppose this type of thinking with every ounce of their being but, what she's doing is planting a seed that the hopes will grow in time until people become more accepting of teachers banging their children and pedophilia in general.

She's floating a trial balloon to see which arguments strike a chord with the public.

It won't pass.. and I don't think the seed will do much... especially not here in the US .. we're still very conservative about sexual matters .. especially compared to our european friends.. but I think even they would oppose this big time..

It would take a major shift of epic proportions before this could ever be deemed ok

Originally posted by kimish
Wow.
In the thread about the suicide a few days ago everyone was screaming that the committed suicide because of the rape.

So, if I understand this right, she was ok with the rape (intercourse) but the stress from the teacher getting in trouble is what made her upset?

That's not inconceivable to me .. she might have been ok with it ..but the world knows, and it's a hugely embarrassing thing... topic of OBVIOUS ridicule ... that is a ton of pressure...

reply to post by miniatus


Change like this doesn't take place overnight. It took several decades for gays to win acceptance in society. The pedophiles are modeling their "movement" on the way gays gained acceptance and are working to change our attitudes by chipping away at the laws and social mores a tiny bit at a time.

In this article, she tries to use our sympathy for the victim to convince us that decriminalization is best. All rape victims face the same stress when they have to go to trial but, she plays on the young age of these victims and the "arbitrary" laws that made them into victims whether the consented or not. She is trying to convince us that, because the children are so young and emotionally fragile, we should abandon the idea of having them testify against their rapists and send the rapist to counseling instead.

In my opinion, the fragile state of the victim makes these crimes all the more heinous and all the more reason to punish the guilty to the fullest extent of the law. The writer of this article wants us to give up reason and feel for the victim and the stress they will face at trial. She wants us to think the trial will be harder on the children than the crime of rape.

In this little way, she is moving us away from criminalizing pedophilia and towards accepting the perversion.

reply to post by FortAnthem

Dear FortAnthem,

Besides finding my classy avatar, and using "cobra cat" as your own avatar, you are absolutely right in this issue too.

The American Psychiatric Association, who took "homosexuality" out of their DSM a few decades ago, have introduced this change to the DSM:

The clinical significance criteria were revised to clarify that, for Pedophilia, Voyeurism, Exhibitionism, and Frotteurism, if the person has acted on these urges, or the urges or sexual fantasies cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty, then by definition there is clinical significance. For Sexual Sadism, if the person has acted on these urges with a non-consenting person, or the urges, sexual fantasies, or behaviors cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty, then the clinical significance criterion is met. For the remaining Paraphilias, the clinical significance criterion is met if the behavior, sexual urges, or fantasies cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning. Of course, to qualify for the specific diagnosis, the particular pattern of paraphilic arousal must also be present.(Emphasis added)

www.psychiatry.org...

So, if there isn't any impairment or distress, the APA won't deal with it. The article you quoted is an attempt to eliminate distress and impairment.

I guess it's a race to see what's accepted first, polygamy, or pedophilia. My guess is polygamy, but you never know.

With respect,
Charles1952

Originally posted by FortAnthem
reply to post by miniatus

 

Change like this doesn't take place overnight. It took several decades for gays to win acceptance in society. The pedophiles are modeling their "movement" on the way gays gained acceptance and are working to change our attitudes by chipping away at the laws and social mores a tiny bit at a time.

In this article, she tries to use our sympathy for the victim to convince us that decriminalization is best. All rape victims face the same stress when they have to go to trial but, she plays on the young age of these victims and the "arbitrary" laws that made them into victims whether the consented or not. She is trying to convince us that, because the children are so young and emotionally fragile, we should abandon the idea of having them testify against their rapists and send the rapist to counseling instead.


Laws enacted as a knee jerk moralist action are as dangerous as any rapist/murderer. Just for a moment lets think what would happen if there were no laws regarding child sex. Just enforced guidelines.. Firstly there would be no compunction for the rapist, to murder the child to keep them quiet.?
As there is a great difference between mutual pubescent sex and pre pubescent sex. In Pre pubescent sex the child wouldn't have a clue what was going on, it would be a predatory, premeditated act on the part of the offender, and would be far better looked at as a psychiatric condition on the part of the perpetrator ,requiring therapy. As many Paedophiles have been abused themselves, and are stuck with some sort of post traumatic syndrome. With regards to Pubescent females its a different ballgame ,the age of mensturation has, been has been dropping since Victorian times, its to do with nutrition and weight. Everyone is different. If you tell a child that they cant have any sexual activity, (say at 12 years old) until they are 18 in the States and 16 in the UK. Or 14 in France. Then if that same child robs a store, then they can go to the lockup, if they knowingly have underage sex then by the same criterion they should be arrested?.. So if a teacher has sex with a student who happens to be 15, and that student knows the law, why cant they be arrested along with the teacher. I don't know the answer but one size fits all aint gonna work.

edit on 4-9-2013 by anonentity because: (no reason given)

Isn't pedophilia a sexual fascination, or whatever, with pre-pubescent children?
Sorry but being attracted to a 16 year with the body of a 26 year old isn't pedophilia, especially if the age isn't known. It's human nature.

16 year olds in this day and age are way more developed socially and physically than the 16 year olds of fifteen years ago.

Originally posted by kimish
Isn't pedophilia a sexual fascination, or whatever, with pre-pubescent children?
Sorry but being attracted to a 16 year with the body of a 26 year old isn't pedophilia, especially if the age isn't known. It's human nature.

16 year olds in this day and age are way more developed socially and physically than the 16 year olds of fifteen years ago.

edit on 4-9-2013 by kimish because: (no reason given)

Get prepared to be called a pedo for even suggesting that a 16 year old is anything but a baby in diapers!

I think that ladies idea is a bad one, but I can see where she is coming from. Statutory rape is NOT rape. Calling it as such is horribly offensive to people who actually HAVE been raped. Rape is a horrible assault of the body and/or mind. It inflicts terrible damage to the person for years to come. To even suggest that a 16 year old girl sleeping with an older man is ANYWHERE close to that is disgusting to me.

Just because the law (recently) put an arbitrary age of 18 as an acceptable age that people can freely engage in sexual activity doesn't change anything. If tomorrow they raised the age to 21, would you instantly become a perv because you are sleeping with a 20 year old girl? Does nobody see the ridiculousness of this?

Rape is rape, it's forcing someone to engage in sexual activity. If nobody forced anybody, there is no rape. They need to change the laws to reflect reality and respect actual victims. If people truly think it's not OK to sleep with people under the age of 18, unless you are also under 18, then you can still keep it illegal to do so, without attaching the rape charge with it.

Teens are sexually active by choice. That's a fact. People try everything they can to stop teens from having sex, and it doesn't work, because it's totally natural for a 16 year old to want to have sex. They have sex with each other, and we may disagree with that, but we don't call them rapists. If two 16 year old have sex, they should BOTH be charged with rape, based on our current laws. Neither one was able to legally agree to sex, so they should both be charged, right?

People under 18 can be charged with producing illegal pornography if they take pictures of THEMSELVES. So why can't two 16 year old who have sex both be charge with Rape?

Our justice system needs to stop making crimes of things that are not crimes. If a 16 year old boy or girl wants to have sex with someone, it's nobody's business but theirs and their parents. And parents shouldn't have legal recourse to attack their daughter's boyfriend that they don't like.

As for the statement made in the OP's title? Absolutely not! There needs to be a line drawn between teacher and student, and the prohibition of sexual relations is one of them. I do not care if the student is the age of consent.

If a teacher is caught having a sexual relationship with a student? Immediate dismissal, and charges filed if laws were broken. No gray area on this at all! A teacher is an authority figure, and a mentor. Ideals of ethics and professionalism must be maintained. They need to start being good examples for their students as my teachers were for me. If a teacher wants a relationship? Go prowling in a nightclub, bar, or one of those dating sites! I rest my case!

reply to post by James1982


And technically, having sex under the influence of alcohol or other substances is rape too. As per the law that is.

So ladies and Gents, the next time you have a few smokes or a couple of glasses of wine, do not perform coitus, because by law it is rape.

Teachers should not have sex with students. I do agree with this.

It raises an ethical dilemma. A teacher is thought of as an authority figure, so it opens up a can of worms, and rases many coercion type situations. It's the same reason it is unethical for a shrink to be having sex with a patient, even if both are above the arbitrary age line. Same with doctors and patients. It is generally a bad idea, same as sleeping with an employee. Things like this can come back to bite you in the ass in a huge way if the relationship goes sour, and the student/patient/employee is vindictive. They can make false claims to get back at you, and drag your good name through the mud.

I have seen two people go from love to hatred in a blink of an eye, and seemingly normal people turn out to be completely psychotic when a relationship ends.

Originally posted by kimish
reply to post by James1982

 

And technically, having sex under the influence of alcohol or other substances is rape too. As per the law that is.

So ladies and Gents, the next time you have a few smokes or a couple of glasses of wine, do not perform coitus, because by law it is rape.

Teachers should not have sex with students. I do agree with this.

Great example of the extent the law has gone to criminalize normal behavior.

And funny it's almost always the woman who is the "victim" A drunk guy and a drunk girl have sex, the woman regrets it, and the man is a rapist. Why is the man not the victim too, if they were both drunk? It should not be allowed to make someone a rapist because you regret sleeping with them.

When I was younger I was very drunk, at a party, and I messed around with a friend's girlfriend. She instigated it, and I accepted. The next day I felt horrible, and wished I had never done it. I didn't get raped, I made a stupid choice and I have to live with the consequences. But if the tables were turned, and I instigated it, she could easily get me locked up for rape because she was drunk... even though I to was drunk.

Making bad choices doesn't make you a victim, regardless of your age or sobriety level. You are only a victim if the choice has been taken away from you and placed in the hands of someone else.

As far as the girl who killed herself, I feel greatly for her family and it's tragic she ended her life. But the way the media talks about the situation, they would lead you to believe this man brutally raped some poor little girl and then she killed herself because of it.

It's not terribly uncommon for teens to kill themselves over relationships with fellow teens. Hell adults do it to. And she was not raped, she very well could have been taken advantage of, but honestly there is no evidence to prove either story.

I agree teachers should not ever be involved with their students, as this brings a level of power over the student. But to instantly assume that a 16 year old girl and a teacher fooling around means that she is some poor victim and he is a monster isn't right.

Another personal story, in my 8th grade science class there was a quite attractive, young female teacher. Word got around that a few of the "popular" boys had slept with her. Me and everybody I knew was jealous as hell, not once did it cross our minds "oh those poor boys!, how awful it must have been to do something you want to do!"

Looking back that whole situation was obviously not a good one, but there were no victims. All the boys were constantly trying to flirt with her and stare down her shirt, or accidentally bump into her while she was bending over. It's human nature, and it's wrong to try to make people feel like victims because of a choice they made.

I think any time a teacher is found guilty of the rape of a student, (S)He should be severely punished.

Lobotomized and branded on the forehead mandatory.

Then they can get a job somewhere else.