epidemic of teacher-student sex?
on 07/16/2006 at 05:54 AM
Oh Christopher,what you started.
Peiper,
I rather agree with Bob. There truthfully is no difference, whether boy or girl.
There are plenty of 13 year old girls out there having sex.
A fact that I find, quite frankly, appalling.
When a child - I do not care how well developed or mature they appear to be, consents to having sex - there is a problem.
Impulse control, both on the part of the adult seducing the child - and the child acquiesing - is in question. Teens have poor impulse control. Particularly pubescent males. The ADULTS in the teen’s life are supposed to guide and protect the teen, even if it is from him/herself, not take advantage of their vulnerable state of development.
Pedophiles prey on children in this age category, BECAUSE of this vulnerability.
I read this article that Christopher led us to. I happen to agree with the Mr. Kupelian. The “sexual revolution” has led us down paths that in almost all cases lead to destruction. Whether it be the spiritual death, the death of morals in this country, the death of marriage and family or literal death from disease.
Just ask the young girl that acquired AIDS in high school. The young boy that becomes a father at age 14.
What about the gay marriage issue and the literal pushing of acceptance of the gay lifestyle? (No, I am not a homophobe).
Is a teacher, a trusted individual, guilty of a crime, even if the sex is consensual?
You betcha!We are sexual beings. Despite all the laws and moralizing, children crossing the line of puberty get horny, are capeable of and often desire sex. Crude and plain, but that’s reality. If you as a parent haven’t prepared your child to understand, accept and deal with their own sexuality when it blossoms, then you are seriously derelict in your duties as a parent. It is foolish to pretend that the child remains an asexual infant until their 18th birthday. The age issue here is nearly irrelevant.
This is a question i’ve often asked in discussions on this topic: Say a 14-year old girl is having consensual sex with a 14-year old boy. They practice safe sex (practice makes perfect, right?) and both enjoy it. I know. Shudder. Is the 14-year old boy guilty of rape?
Now let’s say that same 14-year old girl has consensual sex the next day (yes, shudder again, but i hear this type of thing actually happens. Who knew?) with a 25-year old guy. They both enjoy it. Is the 25-year old guy guilty of rape? If so, please explain the difference between the sexual acts with the two males.
It is a gray area, though the law is black and white. As much as I despise legislating from the bench, I agree quite a bit with this judge.
This student/teacher stuff is happening more and more. I think it’s time we as a nation got off our puritanical high horse and looked honestly at the teenage sexuality thing. And that will be hard to do, because few parents will want to admit that their daughters and sons are more sexually precocious at 14 than they were at 18 ... and today’s parents of kids this age were probably born in the mid to late 60s. I’m a few years older than them, and when I was in high school in the mid 70s most of the girls had done it by sophmore year. That’s about 16 years old. There may have been one or two who were virgins at graduation, at most. There were lots of them who started earlier; I knew dozens who were sexually active as young as 12. And I grew up in a nice middle class suburban town. These girls were not coerced, forced, raped or excessively pressured. They had sex because they wanted to, and the guys they wanted to have sex with were almost always older than they were. Today’s kids appear to be a lot more sexually aware than we were then.
So maybe we should get more real about the whole thing. OTOH, maybe part of that new reality should be setting up some kind of legal differential for consent? Say, perhaps, that if there is more than a 10 year difference in age then its statutory? Maybe a sliding scale: 12 and 16 is Ok, but 12 and 18 isn’t, 15 and 22 is Ok but 15 and 25 isn’t, 17 and 26 is Ok but 17 and 30 isn’t? Just an idea. Another idea would be that screwing your students gets you fired if you’re a teacher, period. Maybe there wouldn’t be legal ramifications, maybe there would. But the ethics would be part of the job, not part of the law.
Yes Drew, I’ll agree that a teacher messing with a student should lose his or her job. Authority figures (cops, teachers, bosses, etc.) should not use their position to get laid. It’s unethical at best.
btw I’m about 10 years older than you and there weren’t many virgins in my high school class either - basic reality says that sex is more fun than abstinance.
The thing is, this crap is the outcome of the slipery slope we leaped on a sled and flew down at warp speed, starting around 1960 or so.
We as a nation—in general—have lost all self-control. Men need to learn to look away, and women need to stop thinking that their tits are the only reason they have value, and put some clothes on. Too few people do either anymore.
I don’t give a crap about how it “feels” to you. The law is there to protect the innocence—whatever little of it they still have left—of the kids, and it should be 100 times tougher. If you are in a position of power and even look lustfully at a kid you should be fired. And if you actually touch them, your arse should be put in the ground without possibility of commuting or pardon. Furthermore, the bullcrap about “but they’re going to do it anyway” is just that, bullcrap. Teach them NOT to do it while you still can. Stop exposing six year olds to sexual concepts and sex ed that they are not physically or mentally ready for. Outlaw pornography (again). And watch this epidemic wither away within one or two generations.
RH
Right on, RH, not to mention the fact that the “sexual revolution” was lost by everyone except the microbes....
Peiper,
I’ll tell you the same thing I told my 14 year old son.
No one has ever died from a sperm clot!
