Female teachers having affairs with students

Reward · 11-01-2011 10:26pm

28064212 wrote: »

The typical mistake is not realising that the two are not mutually exclusive. Just because it might be the teenager's dream does not mean it's not a predatory adult. Report's presenting it from one point of view does not mean the other is not true. If there was a 15 year-old fully-developed cheerleader who used her charms to get an attractive older man, there would be plenty of people saying she was opportunistic. It doesn't make what he did any less wrong

Well, a 15 year old fully developed female is the same as an average 17 or 18 year old male so she is capable of making decisions IMO. Me, when I was 15 I was seeing a 25 year old and I have fond memories of those times so there is no reason why a 15 year girl couldn't too, I honestly think that pedo hysteria and political correctness stops us from being able to process these things properly and rationally.

What bothers me is the reporting, male does it = evil, female does it = seduction, romance, affair.

11-01-2011 10:28pm

Reward wrote: »

Well, a 15 year old fully developed female is the same as an average 17 or 18 year old male

No, she's not

Reward wrote: »

so she is capable of making decisions IMO. Me, when I was 15 I was seeing a 25 year old and I have fond memories of those time there is no reason why a 15 year girl couldn't too, I honestly think that pedo hysteria and political correctness stops us from being able to process these things properly and rationally.

So any age with any age is fine once they've hit puberty?

Reward · 11-01-2011 10:36pm

28064212 wrote: »

No, she's not

So any age with any age is fine once they've hit puberty?

Don't put words in my mouth, I'm saying that in an era of hysterics about sex crimes and the lynch mob mentality its difficult for people to be rational about these things.

I don't know how to multi quote here, females don't mature for as long as males and females are supposedly 2 years ahead of males in terms of maturity in the teens so 15 year old girl = 17 year old boy.

metrovelvet · 11-01-2011 10:47pm

Reward wrote: »

Well, a 15 year old fully developed female is the same as an average 17 or 18 year old male so she is capable of making decisions IMO. Me, when I was 15 I was seeing a 25 year old and I have fond memories of those times so there is no reason why a 15 year girl couldn't too, I honestly think that pedo hysteria and political correctness stops us from being able to process these things properly and rationally.

What bothers me is the reporting, male does it = evil, female does it = seduction, romance, affair.

Not true. What does 'fully developed' mean? Do you mean breasts and menstruating? That happenned to my friend when she was 7.

Typically women in my family dont start menstruating until 16.

No offense reward, but no one can know how that 25 year old affected you. It would be the last thing I would want for my son if it meant he would end up having some of the perspectives and opinions of women you have.

Reward · 11-01-2011 10:58pm

28064212 wrote: »

No, she's not

So any age with any age is fine once they've hit puberty?

metrovelvet wrote: »

Not true. What does 'fully developed' mean? Do you mean breasts and menstruating? That happenned to my friend when she was 7.

Typically women in my family dont start menstruating until 16.

No offense reward, but no one can know how that 25 year old affected you. It would be the last thing I would want for my son if it meant he would end up having some of the perspectives and opinions of women you have.

Well a typical woman in your family at 16 is different from a fully developed sexually precocious girl of 16.

When it comes to sex crimes its insane, in one breath you have a women here talking about calling the police because of a man changing on the beach, in another there are demands to criminalise sex with prostitutes and all the while women have a similar status to what the priests had, their pedophilia and child abuse is taboo, cougars are applauded and when they sleep with their students its "an affair".

In an atmosphere drenched in magical thinking and double standards, its difficult to be objective, thats all Im saying.

As for my opinions, I reject backward feminist dogma and double standards, which makes me a "misogynist" - a term which means little these days other than someone who is disagreeing with feminist dogma and double standards.

metrovelvet · 11-01-2011 11:07pm

Reward wrote: »

Well a typical woman in your family at 16 is different from a fully developed sexually precocious girl of 16.

When it comes to sex crimes its insane, in one breath you have a women here talking about calling the police because of a man changing on the beach, in another there are demands to criminalise sex with prostitutes and all the while women have a similar status to what the priests had, their pedophilia and child abuse is taboo and when they sleep with their students its "an affair".

In an atmosphere drenched in magical thinking and double standards, its difficult to be objective, thats all Im saying.

As for my opinions, I reject backward feminist dogma and double standards, which makes me a "misogynist" - a term which means little these days other than someone who is disagreeing with feminist dogma and double standards.

Thats not what makes you a misogynist.

You also failed to address my friend's capacity for consent when at 7 she was menstruating and fully developed.

I would also say that the women in my family are further advanced intellectually at 16 than most other 16 year olds.

While you have positive memories of your trist with the 25 year old my friend who was molested by a priest when he was 14 also says he enjoyed it.

My point is your criteria is a little ridiculous.

ANd plenty of feminists agree with you about prostitution btw.

11-01-2011 11:09pm

Reward wrote: »

Don't put words in my mouth, I'm saying that in an era of hysterics about sex crimes and the lynch mob mentality its difficult for people to be rational about these things.

Most people on this thread have been perfectly rational

Reward wrote: »

females don't mature for as long as males and females are supposedly 2 years ahead of males in terms of maturity in the teens so 15 year old girl = 17 year old boy.

That's a commonly stated "fact". I've never seen any evidence for it. It's true that women (on average) physically mature earlier than boys (on average). There is no evidence I'm aware of that says women are more mentally capable of a sexual relationship

Reward wrote: »

As for my opinions, I reject backward feminist dogma and double standards, which makes me a "misogynist" - a term which means little these days other than someone who is disagreeing with feminist dogma and double standards.

True feminism is about equality. Misandry is the word you're looking for, which is equally as wrong misogyny, and very little of it has been displayed on this thread

Reward · 11-01-2011 11:14pm

metrovelvet wrote: »

Thats not what makes you a misogynist.

You also failed to address my friend's capacity for consent when at 7 she was menstruating and fully developed.

I would also say that the women in my family are further advanced intellectually at 16 than most other 16 year olds.

While you have positive memories of your trist with the 25 year old my friend who was molested by a priest when he was 14 also says he enjoyed it.

My point is your criteria is a little ridiculous.

ANd plenty of feminists agree with you about prostitution btw.

I'm ignoring your comment about the 7 year old because is stupid and Ill ask you not to insinuate that I'm a pedophile, how typical of you to try to insinuate that.

You, going by your other posts are fairly illiberal and judgmental about sex, I'm fairly the opposite so perhaps you and I had better not discuss it.

And if I have positive memories of learning about sex, which I was having anyway and partying with a 25 year old when I was 15 who do are you to say otherwise, totalitarian ideologues don't, despite their beliefs to the contrary, get to define other peoples realities.

11-01-2011 11:16pm

Reward wrote: »

I'm ignoring your comment about the 7 year old because is stupid

It's not

Reward wrote: »

and Ill ask you not to insinuate that I'm a pedophile

She didn't

Reward · 11-01-2011 11:18pm

28064212 wrote: »

It's not

She didn't

Let her speak for herself.

metrovelvet · 11-01-2011 11:20pm

Reward wrote: »

I'm ignoring your comment about the 7 year old because is stupid and Ill ask you not to insinuate that I'm a pedophile, how typical of you to try to insinuate that.

You, going by your other posts are fairly illiberal and judgmental about sex, I'm fairly the opposite so perhaps you and I had better not discuss it.

No it is not stupid nor is it implying you are a pedophile. You seem to think fully developed girls are capable of consent. That is what you said. I'm giving you the example of an underage fully developed girl which you wont address.

The fact is sex with a minor CAN BE exploitative and co-ercive. It is NOT ALWAYS, but it CAN be which is why these laws are in place. The laws are not defining, they are there to be utilised in context when appropriate.

Reward · 11-01-2011 11:27pm

metrovelvet wrote: »

No it is not stupid nor is it implying you are a pedophile. You seem to think fully developed girls are capable of consent. That is what you said. I'm giving you the example of an underage fully developed girl which you wont address.

The fact is sex with a minor CAN BE exploitative and co-ercive. It is NOT ALWAYS, but it CAN be which is why these laws are in place. The laws are not defining, they are there to be utilised in context when appropriate.

No 7 year old is fully developed, its stupid to suggest that early onset puberty is fully developed or to use that as an example.

You seem to think I'm arguing against AOC, Im not I'm arguing against hysteria, double standards and magical thinking.

You self identify as a feminist, so belong to a group that is active in protecting female pedophiles and female abusers, while crying sex crime when adults trade sex for hard cash, you don't get the high ground here.

metrovelvet · 11-01-2011 11:34pm

Well, she was fully developed at 7. I know her. You dont.

I dont self identify as a feminist. And while we are on the subject, what is a feminist? And where do they want to protect female pedophiles? Where do you come up with this stuff?

Its very hard to discuss things with you when you don't actually read my posts.

I never argued for or against prostitution or criminalising it or not, I objected to your positing that all heterosexual relationships carry with them an element of prostitution with them as women use sexual favour as currency towards obtaining secondary goals. That is what I objected to. I never actually said where I stood on legalising it.

11-01-2011 11:36pm

Reward wrote: »

No 7 year old is fully developed, its stupid to suggest that early onset puberty is fully developed or to use that as an example.

But there are certainly fully developed 13 year-olds. And I have no doubt that some of them were more mature than you were at 15. Does that make it ok?

Reward wrote: »

You self identify as a feminist, so belong to a group that is active in protecting female pedophiles and female abusers,

Source? Where are these "ultra-feminists" that are crying out for double standards?

Reward wrote: »

while crying sex crime when adults trade sex for hard cash, you don't get the high ground here.

Many feminists are pro-prostitution, and there are a tiny, tiny minority that are against a woman selling themselves but are for a man selling themselves, so I fail to see the relevance

metrovelvet · 11-01-2011 11:45pm

I fail to see what prostitution has to do with teachers having affairs with students.

Reward · 11-01-2011 11:49pm

28064212 wrote: »

Source? Where are these "ultra-feminists" that are crying out for double standards?

Feminist advocacy research is fraudulent, it lies by omission and abuses statistics to create the illusion that one of the big lies that the ideology is based on - that abuse is gendered, is true. There is a post about that in the GL called "How we were stereotyped".

28064212 wrote: »

Many feminists are pro-prostitution, and there are a tiny, tiny minority that are against a woman selling themselves but are for a man selling themselves, so I fail to see the relevance

What followers of feminism think is largly irrelevant unless they are effective against the radical top which they are not, they tend to believe that abuse is gendered and feminism is all about equality, followers of catholicism thought many things, what matters is the actions at the top the movement and the top of the movement is using fraudulent information about prostitution and sex trafficking to oppress adults that want to engage in the consensual sex trade. The existence of followers that don't get that or stand idly by is irrelevant.

11-01-2011 11:55pm

Reward wrote: »

Feminist advocacy research is fraudulent, it lies by omission and abuses statistics to create the illusion that one of the big lies that the ideology is based on, that abuse is gendered is true. There is a post about that in the GL called "How we were stereotyped".

All research that says men aren't evil is fraudulent. See what I did there? Made a statement with absolutely no evidence and presented it as fact

Reward wrote: »

What followers of feminism think is largly irrelevant unless they are effective against the radical top which they are not, they tend to believe that abuse is gendered and feminism is all about equality, followers of catholicism thought many things, what matters is the actions at the top the movement and the top of the movement is using fraudulent information about prostitution and sex trafficking to oppress adults that want to engage in the consensual sex trade. The existence of followers that don't get that or stand idly by is irrelevant.

Ehh... what's the "top" of feminism? It's not a church, there is no hierarchy. You might as well say all men are responsible for the misogynists that exist

parker kent · 11-01-2011 11:55pm

Reward wrote: »

What followers of feminism think is largly irrelevant unless they are effective against the radical top which they are not, they tend to believe that abuse is gendered and feminism is all about equality, followers of catholicism thought many things, what matters is the actions at the top the movement and the top of the movement is using fraudulent information about prostitution and sex trafficking to oppress adults that want to engage in the consensual sex trade. The existence of followers that don't get that or stand idly by is irrelevant.

Ignoring the extremely dodgy logic behind all that you are saying in that post, what exactly does that have to do with teachers or students?

Reward · 12-01-2011 12:03am

parker kent wrote: »

Ignoring the extremely dodgy logic behind all that you are saying in that post, what exactly does that have to do with teachers or students?

It was to demonstrate hypocrisy, double think and hysteria on sex crimes.

On the one hand we live in a society where female abusers and sex criminals have a similar status to that priests had, all taboo and kept underground, on the other we have totalitarian extremists demanding that the consensual sex trade be criminalised...

It ties in to reporting female teacher with students as "romance" and "an affair" while presenting male teachers with their students in quite a different way.

My point is that in an atmosphere in which most people unknowingly embrace this sort of insanity as reality, its difficult to have a rational conversation about such things.

parker kent · 12-01-2011 12:13am

Reward wrote: »

My point is that in an atmosphere in which most people unknowingly embrace this sort of insanity as reality, its difficult to have a rational conversation about such things.

Most people on this thread are agreeing that the female teachers should be treated the same as males.

Reward · 12-01-2011 12:21am

parker kent wrote: »

Most people on this thread are agreeing that the female teachers should be treated the same as males.

Well I disagree, we are irrational and hysterical when it comes to males, if we treat women the same way - constructing these female teachers that sleep with male students as always evil and the students as always the victim of some terrible thing, we are just adding more irrationality and lynch mob mentality to the situation.

There is middle ground between inviting these women on Oprah as victims and losing our minds when men do it.

parker kent · 12-01-2011 12:28am

Reward wrote: »

Well I disagree, we are irrational and hysterical when it comes to males, if we treat women the same way - constructing these female teachers that sleep with male students as always evil and the students as always the victim of some terrible thing, we are just adding more irrationality and lynch mob mentality to the situation.

There is middle ground between inviting these women on Oprah as victims and losing our minds when men do it.

Read the thread. There is no lynch mob. My point is still correct, most people are agreeing that the female teachers are in the wrong and should be treated the same as a man.

You are trying to create a male/female conflict where there is none in this thread. On a societal level, there are issues. But that is not what I just referred to in my previous post.

Reward · 12-01-2011 12:32am

parker kent wrote: »

Read the thread. There is no lynch mob. My point is still correct, most people are agreeing that the female teachers are in the wrong and should be treated the same as a man.

You are trying to create a male/female conflict where there is none in this thread. On a societal level, there are issues. But that is not what I just referred to in my previous post.

If we treated them as we would a man it would mean panic and hysterical voices baying for blood.

This is not the answer either, IMO.

parker kent · 12-01-2011 12:38am

Reward wrote: »

If we treated them as we would a man it would mean panic and hysterical voices baying for blood.

This is not the answer either.

Where did I or anybody else say that panic, hysteria and baying for blood was the correct response? What response there actually is for males in similar cases is another debate. All I am saying is that the consensus on this thread is that there should be similar punishments for men and women.

I thought that would have been extremely clear from my last post. Again, there is no need to misrepresent what people are actually saying into what you may think they are saying.

Reward · 12-01-2011 12:45am

parker kent wrote: »

Where did I or anybody else say that panic, hysteria and baying for blood was the correct response? What response there actually is for males in similar cases is another debate. All I am saying is that the consensus on this thread is that there should be similar punishments for men and women.

I thought that would have been extremely clear from my last post. Again, there is no need to misrepresent what people are actually saying into what you may think they are saying.

Oh similar punishments for similar crimes, I agree with that, completely. I wouldn't agree with introducing the hysteria and the lynch mob mentality that is there when men do it and I would like to see equal reporting in the media, it shouldn't be "an affair" or "romance" when its women and something else entirely when its men, IMO.

If you have equal reporting and equal levels of hysteria or non hysteria and baying for blood or not, the equal sentencing follows, get me?

Wibbs · 12-01-2011 1:02am

Reward wrote: »

If we treated them as we would a man it would mean panic and hysterical voices baying for blood.

This is not the answer either, IMO.

You know what Reward, this record of yours is beginning to look, sound and read broken. You've been warned more than once about pushing your agenda. Fine, take it to humanities or AH or tGC(though I doubt same record will not be top of the charts in those forums either) but here it's enough. Change the tune or at least the melody or like I say take it elsewhere. This is the Ladies Lounge and frankly this stuff is getting real old(and not just from you). You can chose to see this as misandrist and good luck to you, but when a right chauvinist pig unreconstructed male such as me is getting a tad bored with it? Like I said change the tune. Last warning. If you dont pull your head in and expand your argument, your quest for male martyrdom will be accommodated

Reward · 12-01-2011 1:06am

Wibbs wrote: »

You know what Reward, this record of yours is beginning to look, sound and read broken. You've been warned more than once about pushing your agenda. Fine, take it to humanities or AH or tGC(though I doubt same record will not be top of the charts in those forums either) but here it's enough. Change the tune or at least the melody or like I say take it elsewhere. This is the Ladies Lounge and frankly this stuff is getting real old(and not just from you). You can chose to see this as misandrist and good luck to you, but when a right chauvinist pig unreconstructed male such as me is getting a tad bored with it? Like I said change the tune. Last warning. If you dont pull your head in and expand your argument, your quest for male martyrdom will be accommodated

Less of the personal attacks.

And if a male calling for true equality as opposed to pandering to gynocentricism and inequality thats just labelled equality is what you call a chauvinist, you are showing your true colours.

"unconstructed male" indeed, traveled male more like, Ive seen more backward attitudes here in the ladies lounge than I have in a long time.

Silverfish · 12-01-2011 1:11am

Reward wrote: »

Less of the personal attacks.

And if a male calling for true equality as opposed to pandering to gynocentricism and inequality thats just labelled equality is what you call a chauvinist, you are showing your true colours.

"unconstructed male" indeed, traveled male more like, Ive seen more backward attitudes here in the ladies lounge than I have in a long time.

Permabanned.

Nevyn · 12-01-2011 11:26am

The tread title is "Female teachers having affairs with students " they should not be having affiars with students it is unprofessional and where the student is under age illegal.
It's that simple.

CDfm · 12-01-2011 1:08pm

Thaedydal wrote: »

The tread title is "Female teachers having affairs with students " they should not be having affiars with students it is unprofessional and where the student is under age illegal.
It's that simple.

Simples

Female teachers having affairs with students

Comments