legend or not ???

Whitewinged · 02-10-2015 01:23PM

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Fúck me, is that blonde the teacher?
She can abuse me anytime and that's the truth.

Well you sound about the right age!

sbsquarepants · 02-10-2015 01:26PM

I'm 42.
When I was 15 I'd have jumped at the chance.
I'm not condoning what she done, I'm just saying I personally would have jumped at the chance, that's all.

Duggy747 · 02-10-2015 01:37PM

I like how "Niiiiiice" is always brought up on these threads since the joke is a parody on how people never take these kind of cases seriously when it comes to female sex offenders.

TravellerOg · 02-10-2015 01:44PM

At 15 years old in this day & age, young boys are young boys and IMO, I believe they know what they are doing, especially after 50 times.

In saying that, it's worrying that a woman is resorting to a 15 year old for sexual pleasure. If the shoe was on the other foot, a man would be labelled a paedophile and on the sex offenders list as well as a long stint in prison. Suppose it goes to show how messed up the system is.

Where do you draw the line...?

One eyed Jack · 02-10-2015 01:59PM

TravellerOg wrote: »

At 15 years old in this day & age, young boys are young boys and IMO, I believe they know what they are doing, especially after 50 times.

In saying that, it's worrying that a woman is resorting to a 15 year old for sexual pleasure. If the shoe was on the other foot, a man would be labelled a paedophile and on the sex offenders list as well as a long stint in prison. Suppose it goes to show how messed up the system is.

Where do you draw the line...?

That's a nonsense claim really. You can't possibly state how any case would play out based on nothing more than the gender of the perpetrator. Maybe you weren't aware of cases like this one -

Judge criticised after claiming 16-year-old pupil groomed teacher

02-10-2015 02:03PM

Regardless of how attractive this woman is or how good it is perceived for the boy, she's a paedophile. Has she been signed on the sex offenders register?

Whitewinged · 02-10-2015 02:15PM

TravellerOg wrote: »

At 15 years old in this day & age, young boys are young boys and IMO, I believe they know what they are doing, especially after 50 times.

In saying that, it's worrying that a woman is resorting to a 15 year old for sexual pleasure. If the shoe was on the other foot, a man would be labelled a paedophile and on the sex offenders list as well as a long stint in prison. Suppose it goes to show how messed up the system is.

Where do you draw the line...?

So you think 15 year old boys in this day and age "know what they are doing" in these circumstances therefore do you not believe that she should be labelled a pedophile and put on the sex offenders list?

Mickeroo · 02-10-2015 02:22PM

She's either a hebephile or an ephebophile, not a paedophile as far as I know.

TravellerOg · 02-10-2015 02:24PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

That's a nonsense claim really. You can't possibly state how any case would play out based on nothing more than the gender of the perpetrator. Maybe you weren't aware of cases like this one -

I wasn't aware of this article but thanks for showing me, the man is still on the sex offenders list right which is correct as he was with an underage girl.

However, it's amazing to see the judges actions (You can even see in the headline how he was criticised) as he seen that maybe this man was emotionally unstable and weak at the time and carried out the act.

It was a wrongful act as he was in a position of trust and the girl took advantage of it.

I'm just saying that even the news headline and any comments online about the above article, societies perception will see him labelled as a 'paedophile' where as the woman in the previous article may not be seen in the same light. She should have been punished further as she's in a position of power (and the sex offenders list)

I just think there may be more to this story from the boys point of view..

The Corinthian · 02-10-2015 02:28PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

That's a nonsense claim really. You can't possibly state how any case would play out based on nothing more than the gender of the perpetrator. Maybe you weren't aware of cases like this one -

Judge criticised after claiming 16-year-old pupil groomed teacher

Ironically you've highlighted the double standard in another manner. The article you've linked to appertains to the criticism that followed a suspended sentience where the perpetrator was male. What criticism was reported in the OP's article? None.

That you even found a case doesn't really prove what was said was nonsense - to do that you'd have to show that male and female perpetrators are treated equally in law, and we both know that this won't happen - there's plenty of evidence (at least in the UK) that shows that women across the board in criminal law are treated more leniently.

And of course in Ireland, such discrimination is written into law. A woman cannot be charged with rape, so can only be charged with the lesser crime of sexual assault. For rape you apparently need to posses a penis - even a strap on won't do it, I'm afraid.

Not to mention our glorious Romeo and Juliet laws that mean that when underage, girls are immune from prosecution, but boys are not.

So, when you take the facts into account, it looks more like nonsense your claim that no case would play out based on nothing more than the gender of the perpetrator.

Tarzana2 · 02-10-2015 02:55PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Because full grown men that have sex 15 year old girls are also legendary.

Am I doing this right? I mean.. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

*sigh*

You do know that the "legend" nonsense is most likely uttered by other males, right?

Tarzana2 · 02-10-2015 03:01PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

That's a nonsense claim really. You can't possibly state how any case would play out based on nothing more than the gender of the perpetrator. Maybe you weren't aware of cases like this one -

Judge criticised after claiming 16-year-old pupil groomed teacher

Yes, in their feverish indignance, people seem to forego fact-checking.

Paramite Pie · 02-10-2015 03:18PM

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Fúck me, is that blonde the teacher?
She can abuse me anytime and that's the truth.

When I was a 15yr old I had a crush on a male teacher who was 26(ish). Would it have been okay for us to have sex in your eyes? We're both male.

Genuine question.

One eyed Jack · 02-10-2015 03:25PM

TravellerOg wrote: »

I wasn't aware of this article but thanks for showing me, the man is still on the sex offenders list right which is correct as he was with an underage girl.

However, it's amazing to see the judges actions (You can even see in the headline how he was criticised) as he seen that maybe this man was emotionally unstable and weak at the time and carried out the act.

It was a wrongful act as he was in a position of trust and the girl took advantage of it.

I'm just saying that even the news headline and any comments online about the above article, societies perception will see him labelled as a 'paedophile' where as the woman in the previous article may not be seen in the same light. She should have been punished further as she's in a position of power (and the sex offenders list)

I just think there may be more to this story from the boys point of view..

According to the article in the opening post, the woman was punished, in a similar way in which the male teacher in the article I linked to was punished -

Berriman pleaded guilty to two counts of sexual activity with a child and a further charge of sexual activity with a child by a person in a position of trust. Her punishment was a two year sentence, suspended for two years.

This refutes the claim I highlighted in your post.

The Corinthian · 02-10-2015 03:38PM

Tarzana2 wrote: »

Yes, in their feverish indignance, people seem to forego fact-checking.

Ironic. And if you bothered to read my post, turns out it was One eyed Jack who forewent that fact-checking. But I suppose then you would be fact-checking if you had...

One eyed Jack · 02-10-2015 03:43PM

The Corinthian wrote: »

So, when you take the facts into account, it looks more like nonsense your claim that no case would play out based on nothing more than the gender of the perpetrator.

I didn't claim any such thing though. This was my claim -

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You can't possibly state how any case would play out based on nothing more than the gender of the perpetrator.

I used that case to refute the point that poster made about the whole reverse the genders nonsense and if the perpetrator had been a man he would have received a lengthy prison sentence. Clearly in the case I highlighted, he didn't. He received a suspended sentence in spite of pleading not guilty. The woman in the opening post plead guilty.

One eyed Jack · 02-10-2015 03:45PM

The Corinthian wrote: »

Ironic. And if you bothered to read my post, turns out it was One eyed Jack who forewent that fact-checking. But I suppose then you would be fact-checking if you had...

I didn't forego any fact checking. The point of my posting that article was to refute an assertion made by a poster who hadn't checked their facts.

Tarzana2 · 02-10-2015 03:49PM

The Corinthian wrote: »

Ironic. And if you bothered to read my post, turns out it was One eyed Jack who forewent that fact-checking. But I suppose then you would be fact-checking if you had...

I'm currently I hospital receiving chemo so yup, as of now, I haven't done much reading. I did see your post though. The case was in the UK, and he another UK case. You started wittering on about Ireland.

The Corinthian · 02-10-2015 04:00PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I didn't claim any such thing though. This was my claim.

'Any case' in English means any case. This means that you were denying that any case would play out based on nothing more than the gender of the perpetrator. And oddly enough there's plenty of cases that would play out based on nothing more than the gender of the perpetrator.

I used that case to refute the point that poster made about the whole reverse the genders nonsense and if the perpetrator had been a man he would have received a lengthy prison sentence. Clearly in the case I highlighted, he didn't. He received a suspended sentence in spite of pleading not guilty. The woman in the opening post plead guilty.

Problem is that you're implying that the law is blind to gender and the reality is it's not. Whether you did so by accident, ignorance or deception is another matter.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I didn't forego any fact checking. The point of my posting that article was to refute an assertion made by a poster who hadn't checked their facts.

And neither did you as I pointed out.

Tarzana2 wrote: »

I'm currently I hospital receiving chemo so yup, as of now, I haven't done much reading.

And this strengthens your argument how?

I did see your post though. The case was in the UK, and he another UK case. You started wittering on about Ireland.

I also addressed the UK. You've not read very carefully.

02-10-2015 04:04PM

Tarzana2 wrote: »

You do know that the "legend" nonsense is most likely uttered by other males, right?

Would those males have sex with a 15 year old?

One eyed Jack · 02-10-2015 04:15PM

The Corinthian wrote: »

'Any case' in English means any case. This means that you were denying that any case would play out based on nothing more than the gender of the perpetrator. And oddly enough there's plenty of cases that would play out based on nothing more than the gender of the perpetrator.

I was pointing out that you had said I said 'no case would play out based on gender', when I hadn't. I said that you can't make a claim like that about any case, based only upon the gender of the perpetrator. When I linked to that case, the poster then tried to point out all the mitigating circumstances, and what they were doing was basically shooting a hole in their own argument, because as you point out, all the facts (of any case) must be taken into consideration.

Problem is that you're implying that the law is blind to gender and the reality is it's not. Whether you did so by accident, ignorance or deception is another matter.

I didn't imply anything about the law, I stated as fact that the posters claim was nonsense, and backed my opinion up with an example to show why it was nonsense. There was no implying anything there, I was pointing out a fact.

I also addressed the UK. You've not read very carefully.

I think the point is that both cases were in the same jurisdiction, so the law in any other jurisdiction is irrelevant. Otherwise when you point out Ireland, someone else could build on your strawman and point out how sexual assault is treated by society in India or any other country you'd care to mention, and where would that get anyone? At least can we restrict ourselves to similar cases within the same legal jurisdiction?

Liamario · 02-10-2015 04:18PM

I'm very interested in the psychology of the case. This is a common fantasy amongst teenagers, but obviously the reality has had a negative impact on this kid. Why is that? Why has his confidence been shattered?

One eyed Jack · 02-10-2015 04:20PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Would those males have sex with a 15 year old?

That's an impossible question for that poster to answer, not to mention that it's also irrelevant. The question should actually be - would those males when they were 15 have had sex with a woman in a position of authority?

Even whether they would or they wouldn't is irrelevant, as they wouldn't be breaking the law, the person in a position of authority who chooses to commit sexual assault against them is the person who would be and should be held accountable for their actions.

One eyed Jack · 02-10-2015 04:23PM

Liamario wrote: »

I'm very interested in the psychology of the case. This is a common fantasy amongst teenagers, but obviously the reality has had a negative impact on this kid. Why is that? Why has his confidence been shattered?

He learned the difference between fantasy and reality, and learned that more often than not, they are two completely different things once they go past the realm of individual fantasy in the person's head, and the reality of involving another person in their fantasy, who has their own ideas about how they want their fantasy to play out.

Liamario · 02-10-2015 04:25PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

He learned the difference between fantasy and reality, and learned that more often than not, they are two completely different things once they go past the realm of individual fantasy in the person's head, and the reality of involving another person in their fantasy, who has their own ideas about how they want their fantasy to play out.

Do you think that it was a maturity (he wasn't emotionally ready) thing and he found himself out of his depth?

The Corinthian · 02-10-2015 04:27PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I was pointing out that you had said I said 'no case would play out based on gender', when I hadn't.

You did. If one argues that it is nonsense that "any case" be judged so, then they're arguing that no case is. And I showed you cases where, black and white, the gender of the perpetrator alone is the deciding factor.

Please stop trying to piss on us and tell us it's raining.

I didn't imply anything about the law, I stated as fact that the posters claim was nonsense, and backed my opinion up with an example to show why it was nonsense. There was no implying anything there, I was pointing out a fact.

So no case, but excluding the law in that case? Heh. Seriously, you're going through some serious acrobatics here to cover your ass.

I think the point is that both cases were in the same jurisdiction, so the law in any other jurisdiction is irrelevant.

Why? Because you say so? Another caveat because your claim turned out to be nonsense?

Look - you said something that was rubbish. You got called out. Be a big boy and take it.

OneOfThem · 02-10-2015 04:27PM

Liamario wrote: »

I'm very interested in the psychology of the case. This is a common fantasy amongst teenagers, but obviously the reality has had a negative impact on this kid. Why is that? Why has his confidence been shattered?

Probably less to do with the sex, and more the fact she did things like coerce him into having unprotected sex with her, then lied to him that she was pregnant. Got her two year old daughter to call him dad. And then asked him to run away with her and told him if he didn't it'd break her daughters heart.

More than just a bit of riding went on tbh. She sounds like a bit of a wacko.

Tarzana2 · 02-10-2015 04:30PM

The Corinthian wrote: »

'Any case' in English means any case. This means that you were denying that any case would play out based on nothing more than the gender of the perpetrator. And oddly enough there's plenty of cases that would play out based on nothing more than the gender of the perpetrator.

Problem is that you're implying that the law is blind to gender and the reality is it's not. Whether you did so by accident, ignorance or deception is another matter.

And neither did you as I pointed out.

And this strengthens your argument how?

I also addressed the UK. You've not read very carefully.

Simply pointing out that I'm hardly going to be doing in-depth reading on my phone in a hospital ward. Read between the lines, for God's sake.

Liamario · 02-10-2015 04:30PM

OneOfThem wrote: »

Probably less to do with the sex, and more the fact she did things like coerce him into having unprotected sex with her, then lied to him that she was pregnant. Got her two year old daughter to call him dad. And then asked him to run away with her and told him if he didn't it'd break her daughters heart.

More than just a bit of riding went on tbh. She sounds like a bit of a wacko.

She did all of that? If so, my question is answered.

DEFTLEFTHAND · 02-10-2015 04:31PM

OneOfThem wrote: »

Probably less to do with the sex, and more the fact she did things like coerce him into having unprotected sex with her, then lied to him that she was pregnant. Got her two year old daughter to call him dad. And then asked him to run away with her and told him if he didn't it'd break her daughters heart.

More than just a bit of riding went on tbh. She sounds like a bit of a wacko.

Yep she sounds totally unhinged. Imagine trying on all that psycho manipulation crap on a 15 year old boy, it's disgusting behaviour.

legend or not ???

Comments