If this gal is a sexual predator, I want to be her prey. What a waste of resources.

When I was 14, about half of the 8th grade boys lusted after this one teacher, fresh out of college in her first teaching job.

I gotta believe the kid was no victim, I mean look at her. Yes, she was the "adult" in the relationship and thus, responsible. But hormones were raging on both sides.

-- Modified on 11/25/2005 7:22:18 AM

it does gove a chance to examin the "double standard" that is often applied to these cases, i.e., what if the teacher was the male and the student the female.
Should we judge that situation more harshly?  If so, why?  Because women are seen as more vulnerable?

Lots of questions, not many answers.

What I find interesting is that when these women are attractive, somehow thier behavior is not seen as what it truly is...  The link below is of another sexual predator, just not as pretty.  Would you pat your 14 year old on the back for fucking her too?  

A 14 year old with fantasies is one thing...acting on them in reality is quite another.  14 year olds rarely have the capacity to process things the way most adults can.  It's one thing for a 17 year old, or even possibly an evolved 16 year old to engage in a relationship with someone in their early 20's, but **not with an authority figure** like doctor, teacher, preist, ect.  As titilating as it may seem, it can fuck up a persons ability to engage in healthy relationships for the rest of their life.  But hey, that's only if you want to look at the big picture, instead of the pretty little one...

The only waste is that she didn't get the jail time she deserves.  Love the arguement by her atty that she's too pretty to be thrown in jail too... :-/

Regards,
Megan

I dont want my kids teachers messing with them,even if she's a hottie, school is a place to get educated not seduced...if it were your daughter how would you feel,it is not ok for an adult to seduce a child,ever!!!you guys are thinking with your dicks... this behavior is just NOT appropriate...especially from someone entrusted to educate your chid.

When you mess around with these scary ladies you'll find out in crunch time what she is all about. And in court, she'll blame the meds on why she dislocated your member. This type of behavior is criminal despite the coming of age action that some horny 14 y.o might get. If she were a man, should would be looking at 10-20. Despite her obvious mental illness, her former husband in a recent inteview seemed to indicate that she was not all that...

-- Modified on 11/26/2005 7:58:13 AM

that I definitely feel conflicted answering that question. My knee-jerk response is, if it were my son who was seduced by a hot teacher. I'd scold both him and her but deep inside it would not offend me. Left to me, I'd probably not pursue prosecution though.

On the other hand, if the situation were with my daughter and she consented? Yeah, that would bother me and I'd feel obligated to pursue it. I can't fully explain why the descrepancy.

I guess, it might be because the girl has the greater risk due to pregnancy. But to be honest, it's probably my upbringing and personal prejudices working on my subconscious. I'm not saying it's right, it just is what it is.

Well, I suppose we do have double standard; I plead guilty. At the same time, looking at this board and this industry, it's 99 percent male out for 99 percent female. So I think the sexual politic seems to say men need it more, must pay the price. Women need to get compensated for the risks. It WOULD be different with a male teacher and female student. Maybe that sounds sexist. But if we're all equal, why are we guys paying for it?


-- Modified on 11/25/2005 9:59:32 AM

-- Modified on 11/25/2005 10:00:15 AM

When it's a fantasy you have as an adult and substitute your own childhood, it's pretty hot, yes.  However, there's no way the kid benefits that way, and there's every likelihood it has harmed him.  The fact that she's so attractive is just going to mess with his mind even more.  Not to mention that his male peers are probably going to treat him with an envy he doesn't deserve.

I like her attorney's argument that she's too beautiful to be in prison.  lol.  I guess prison is only for the ugly: never be an ugly criminal, the law is not blind after all.  However, unlike male predators, I don't think there's much chance of her repeating the offense.  

If you're really interested in her, I hear she's going to be in exactly the same place for the next three years and her location is on the registry of sex offenders.  I don't know if the State has thought that through very clearly...

In popular culture, the difference between predator and prey is an 18th birthday.

Obviously, that's artificial.  Maybe the best we can do, but it's still artificial.

I don't think gender relations can be accurately or usefully characterized as "predator vs prey" in 99% of cases, but we do;  and it's a political and cultural choice.  

While I think mikkimilf is probly closest in this particular case, the way it's treated is probably more tied to fears for girls, and the legal and political pressure to protect women - some of whom are underprotected, and some of whom are over protected, ie, are political or social pawns, or are using others as political & social pawns.  

Perhaps we should treat some of these cases more individually - like this one - and more along covil than criminal lines.

"The Catcher in the Rye" by JD Salinger?  In it there is a scene where a teenage boy, the narrator of the story, is seduced by his young female piano teacher.  I read it when I was a young teenager (and I played the piano, but by teacher was 80 years old) The scene is reportedly autobiograpical and is sympathetic to both characters.  Since then, being seduced by an old woman was definitely a fantasy of mine.  Now that fantasy never came to pass (least not in my teens.) so whether it would "screw up" my life can not be known.  It would be interesting if there was a body of psychological studies of the "victems" of such romances to know whether the energy and time and consequences of these prosecutions are warranted.  Any psych. majors out there that want to chime in?  BTW, the comments I have seen up to this point are as interesting and honest as any I've ever seen on any blog.  Kudos to all who have responded.

that our alternative is to get married.  That puts our resources at considerable risk.  
Remember:  We don't pay to have sex, we pay so that we can NOT have sex.

most men have with this sort of issue just goes to support my belief that many men say they are for liberation for women...as long as either there is something they can get out of it or it doesn't apply to theie daughters.

-- Modified on 11/25/2005 10:20:14 AM

It's the cornerstone, in fact, to all contract law.  You want to throw that out?  You do dangerously blur the lines between consent and slavery then, and not just in regard to sex.  

Artificial?  Yes.  We make artificial arrangements like that so human relations can be something above PLC: plunder, slavery and cannibalism-- which is probably what its more natural state will turn out to be if we get back to it.  

If I take what your saying, I don't think gender relations can be characterized as predator vs. prey in 99 percent of the cases either.  So your point is?  It definitely is in this case.  

I would have made Miki's point in my post too, except she made it quite well.  

I would agree that perhaps we could treat them more individually, but come on!  You're taken in because this woman is attractive.  It was not like this case was a little blurry.  The boy wasn't anywhere near 18, and this was his reading teacher, so I presuem he didn't have the competency near an 18-year-old.

the woman in 'Summer of '42'?
I can understand some concerns, but remember this age 18 consent is pretty much a modern culture thing. Lots of people in old days were married at 14 or 15 .. I wouldn't treat this case as one of being 'molested'

While I would do this teacher in a second - would I wish her tampering with my son's "Sex Education?"  Probably not, but would I prosecute ?  probably not.... if it were my daughter - I would become unhinged!  

'nuff said.

The real issue is power differential in the relationship.  We do use age as a loose way to measure power, hence, the artificial magic age of consent is usually set at age 18.  For situations involving two younger people, most state laws are based on the difference in ages, e.g., a five-year difference in ages is a criminal offense.

Other sexual relationships may be viewed as morally or ethically wrong, even if not legally wrong, regardless of the relationship.  The easiest example is parent-child, even the “child” is age 40.  Others include doctor-patient, priest/preacher-worshiper, and teacher-student.

I, like most males, certainly fantasized about a few teachers.  At age 15, I would have jumped at the opportunity even if I knew it would ruin any future relationships for the rest of my life.  At age 15, a person’s brain still has 15 years of development left.  While the kid may suffer no long-term negative effects, the woman involved took advantage of a power imbalance without regard for the impact on the kid.

Almost the minute I turned 18 I was having an affair with a man who was 10 years my elder *and also* my boss...  In the mix of that and my causal peer fuck buddies (yes, I been a slut all my life...lol), I was also gettin' it on with some 40 and up guys too.  Some of these were positive relationships, some were not.

Crossing the "age of consent" threshold does not necessarily make one ready to handle sexual relationships anymore then assuming that every "underage" male or female would be damaged from having sex with some that is older then them.  What matters are the *details* and how events are percieved by those involved.  Not one of us here knows the true details of this case, nor do we know the intimate details of most sexual abuse cases for that matter.  What we do know is that this woman was in a position of authority though, which is a big no-no in my book when discussing a young person being able to engage consensually in a sexual relationship.  

The affair with my boss was a mistake...obvious reasons, for sure.  At one point we "cooled" it due to his wife finding us making out in his car.  When he wanted to resume our extra curricular activities I didn't really want to...but didn't know how to tell him no as he was a very dominant, tyrant of a chef.  It was my lack of experience, and also being in a situation with an authority figure that left me feeling trapped, and ended with me having to leave that job, which I loved.  In retrospect, I can recognize that it was sexual harrasement, but in the moment of it all happening, I did not have that clarity.  It took me awhile to find that clarity actually...

I certainly had older lovers at that early time in my life that were wonderful also.  When I felt **in control** of what I was doing, they were positive experiences.

I've learned over the years that manipulation is very subtle at times, and manipulation is about **power**.  While I try not to live in the past or have regrets for choices or situations I've been in through life, I also have a strong will and mind, and am very introspective.  I dig to find answers in this world, and have been pretty successful in working through *my shit* (although it's a constant process IMO).  Others in this world are not equipped to dig as deep or handle as much...while some can handle even more then I would ever know.  We all have our own thresholds of hurt and pain and emotional tolerance that are all different then the person next to us, so it is impossible to say that because one person is damaged, so will anyone else in that situation...just like you can't say that because it was good for one person, it would be good for everyone else.

NOT every boy would want such a relationship to happen to him, **even if** he fantasized about it.  Fantasy and reality are not the same thing...there are things I fantasize about that I don't necessarily want to happen in reality, and I'm sure most of us here are bent enough to be able to agree to that. ~  To assume that a young boy would want this type of sexual activity without knowing him or his situation, or due to one's **own personal** sexual fantasies, only contributes to further victimization of those that have truly NOT wanted such things to happen to them.  When boys are socialized that as a male they should want sex from an attractive woman whenever it is offered, no matter the circumstance, or they are not truly a "man"...this can set them up for serious conflicts if they have been in a situation of abuse.  

I please ask that when you see these situations, you seriously think about the possibilities of the above, and speak thoughtfully for those that have been the victim of unwanted sexual advances or molestation.  I'm not asking that you discount your own titilation over it...just be think about what it would feel like if you had ever been abused, then had to read from someone else how lucky they thought you were... :-/

Respectfully,
Megan

OK, so I edited your headline little.   No, I don't mean to suggest dumping age limits.

What's at issue here is not contract, but crime.      This case isn't close in age, and the teacher knows it - but we've all heard of statutory rape cases where the putative victim lied about her age, and was also the instigator.  I've seen such cases.

My point is that consent laws are for the purpose of avoiding unfair damage to a person who needs protection because of their vulnerable mental state.

As several posters note, there's a cultural feeling that there's less coercion or damage to a boy, than a girl.  It's hard to put our finger on why, but I think there's the feeling here that a boy will recover, and a girl may not.   Why do we feel that way?  I think it's a bit of experience, and a bit of expectation.  The girl is expected to have more at stake, anyway you cut it.

My major point is that gender relations are just not simple, and certainly not as simple as saying that what is good for the goose is good for the gander, because of "equal protection".  Equal protection requires people be similarly situated, and for now, the best we can do seems to be to assume that any 17 year old boy doing his week older 18 year old GF is being raped, and hope the DA will have the good sense to not prosecute that one.   Because the actual relationships that we generally assume among boys and girls simply cannot be characterized as readily as "predator & prey" despite strong cultural undertones.  I'm sure you're aware of several academic feminists who equate sex to rape, and if you're a determinist, then there is an argument.

But again, a lot of the damage is not so much around physical harm, as the idea that any sort of non-consensual sex is harmful per se, ie, to the mind; and I cannot think of a comparable concept in the law - eg - so you trespass on your neighbors' lawn, where's the harm?    

So what you see a LOT of in family court is variations on the theme that a couple arguing with each other is "emotional abuse", and instead of a judge saying grow up and solve your problems, and don't come crying to me after you've picked a fight, we instead get psycho-social evaluations that basically come down to equating whoever is more disagreeable with "PLC".  Which can too easily and often become neighbors sticking their nose where it doesn't belong.

IOW, glib answers to boy-girl relations make me uneasy, because it's damnably easy to manipulate social pressures to avoid responsibility and maturity.

No, I'm not taken in because she's attractive.  I'm suggesting that maybe there's not all that much damage to a kid in getting laid before he's supposed to be old enough.

In this particular case, I think if we were really honest, I suspect she's being punished less for real harm to the kid, and more for being a "loose woman" around children.

Yeah, her lawyer talking about her being too pretty to go to jail was pretty funny.  But who knows, maybe he knew his audience?

This is a good point.

The next one is, was power misused to harm the kid?

Who thinks that a 14 year old boy getting laid (by a female) is harmful per se?

Let's assume it was his 18 year old GF, not his teacher.   The statutory rape issue remains identical.

There are a lot of cultural assumptions in there.  While they're all time-tested, I don't know how accurate they are.

and I'm not so anxious to call it a double standard because, face it, boys and girls have different social roles, and to ignore the social impact of equipment is really silly.  

I think if something is to be gained from "equal protection" liberation whatever it's to allow people to avoid confinement to a role, not to hit everybody else over the head in escaping from the usual role.

I think teachers have to stay away from students, period - (though its less clear as they get older, and isolate issues like grades.  Say I'm teaching a professional in a vocational course - no credit or money, just OJT lectures for a few hours.  And she wants to take me out and jump my tiredass bones.  Do I see something wrong there?  No, and most people wouldn't.)

And in the case you mention, I'd feel obliged to report her.   But I seriously doubt the boy would suffer any real damage - his head isn't going to loosen unless it was already too loose.

There have been a couple of high profile cases of female teachers seducing male students, and at least one repeater, with kids involved.  Some woman in WA, and the last I heard was a followup story that that after 2 prison terms, the couple (teacher and student) were living as man & wife.  I don't find that incredible, simply a case where a particular couple got caught in cultural assumptions.   And no, I don't think it's up to me to judge the intangible we call "love" - only to insist teachers keep their hands off minors or go to jail.  Why?  Only because we need a workable legal standard.


I don't think it's your personal prejudice.  I think it's cultural assumptions and experience that are mostly right, but maybe also subject to manipulation.

Women can almost always get laid whenever they want by a reasonable prospect.  We are the giver of life in more ways then just childbirth...beautiful, sensual women have a sexual energy that can inspire men to do great things in the world.  And women that embrace thier sexuality can usually get anything they want as a result.  Even the ones that use thier power to manipulate others...like sexual predators.

Yes, men and women are different, and process the world in different ways.  Our *children* though should always be protected equally, regardless of thier gender.

xoMegan

our inability to explain what we believe.

Almost fathers that I know are as fierce in pushing their daughters' talents as they are their sons - and more inclined to protect them, on the assumption that the boys need to learn to protect themselves.

We can't know all the impacts of our choices down the road, and it's kind of foolish to hesitate because we think that maybe perhaps 20 years from now a child may resent us pushing them one way or another, like pushing them to do their homework or whatever.  It could happen.

The problem in "liberation" is defining it, and once it's defined, then deciding what's good or bad about it, and deciding how we'll get there; and you know what, by the time we've done all that, the people who get the most press are the Catherine MacKinnons claiming that any sexual intercourse is the functional equivalent of rape.  

I suspect that most of this stuff has to be worked out on an individual basis, so I'm sort of skeptical about broadranging prescriptions that are supposed to fit everybody, and yet are so goddmaned vague that they're not a whole lot more than a justification for Oprah boosting her ratings by complaining about men.

I do everything I can to improve my daughters' prospects for control over their lives and prospects, because they are my blood and responsibility; just as I do my son.  But what is best for any 2 people is likely to be different, and that's especially true if there's any big difference, and gender is a big difference.

Predator & prey assumes that one beast is satisfying themselves at the expense of the other.

So we can assume she's satisfying herself, and misusing her position.

But what is the damage to the boy?  Do we assume psychological damage as a matter of law? Do you really think this is something he can't get over?  If so, why do you think that?  

Yeah, I recall fantasizing about hot teachers as early as 5th grade, and had one approached me, I suspect that (a) I might have been smart enough to keep my mouth shut, and (b) I may very well have grown up sooner and smarter.

Her position isn't a necessary issue in statutory rape.  I suspect what we're really going after her for is more along the lines of being a "loose woman".

"manipulation" is an opinion, and in most cases, it ain't at all clear who is the doer, and who is the doee, and happy relationships are those where both parties are ecstatic about being manipulated.   I have at least one part of my body that I'm perfectly happy to be manipulated by any of several hundred women - at least until they change their program, and THAT is the real issue - that cooperation can shade to competition and back again, and what's partners really need is predictability, while competitors want UNpredictability, and couples can easily keep each other off balance either intentionally or ignorantly.

The repeated arguements that the boy in this couldn't possibly be hurt by the relationship (though I do wonder how everyone that doesn't know the boy knows what will and won't effect him).

What about her?  Do her actions and intent mean nothing in this?
_________________________________________________

I posted this on the DC boards, but I'll repost here:

Hmmmmm.....I actually remember being a teenage girl, and yep, I would go with different.

I remember certain girls in school that would do anything they could to get a male teacher worked up, the would flirt, bend over, rub up against, show a "bruise" she got on her upper thigh, talk a little to loudly their friends with the teacher nearby about how she gave her boyfriend a blowjob or whatnot....yep, that is different.

I also knew a lot of girls with crushes on different teachers, that would certainly have had sex with the teacher had he asked, though they were not as bold as the previously mentioned girls in their interactions with the teachers they thought were "Hot".

Here is where the double standard falls apart, for some reason men think they were the only ones in adolescence with raging hormones seeking an outlet...the girls had that to, biggest difference was whereas the guys would have taken a teacher or a girl from class, the girls were more interested in the teachers and not the boys in class...actually from that it could be argued that a male teacher would be less wrong perhaps? *smirk*

The danger of this situation for a girl or boy is that they are immature in most ways still. They are feeling the first rushes of those hormones and the first real forays into emotional ramifications of romantic love, lust, random urges ect. They have an onslaught of desire without an idea of what giving into them may mean, of what those desires entail, what they can lead to ect.  to have an adult, any adult take advantage of that naive sexual impetus is wrong.  The adult that takes advantage of that is using the teenager without an respect or care for that teenager.  

What the arguement here and the mention of a double standard based on gender (since it assumed a girl would be hurt by the same activity with a male teacher) is really argueing is that something is wrong based on loss or harm to the "victim" and not on the intent of the perpetrator.  Since the assumption is made that the boy isn't really "harmed" then there is no reason to punish.  So, to the girls that would try and tempt their teachers, it could be argued that they wouldn't be "harmed" either so would you argue against punshiment for male teacher in that circumstance as well?

Maybe no harm came to the boy in this situation, but does that make the woman's actions right?
Can she get away with disregarding any thought of his well being for her own wants, because he couldn't get pregnant, or because maybe his friends think he's a "stud" because of it?

Can the fact that she used his burgeoning sexualality against him, and her belief that he would do as she wanted without respect for him be so easily dismissed because as boys most men would have wanted to have the same thing with their "hot teacher"?

Hmmmm...and what if she hadn't been a hot, young teacher?  What if she had been what could be considered an unattractive woman? would that have been more wrong?
_________________________________________________
I don't know this woman or her mind, and I wouldn't say she acted with malice to harm the boy...but she sure wasn't worrying about whether or not it would either. An adult, especially one in a position of power that can dismiss the well being of a child or teenager does hold culpability for their actions.

So he may not be permanently or even conditionally harmed by this does that mean it was ok?

I just think it is funny the double standard that people have about their sons and daughters having sex.  I mean, even the pregnancy issue is huge for both (although admittedly larger for the girl).  On things like this, I have to respect the Scandanavians, who de-mystify sex enough that it takes away a lot of the accompanying hypocrisy and double standards.

in general - I agree with your comment about teachers and students....  but one time at band camp....

I have been a teacher - as a grad student with students above 21 yr of age under me....  Ok, I dated them - but not if they were in my class room.....  never bothered me, but I also never forced myself on them.  I also dated a professor in my college as well.... but again  - I was not in her class.

On the other hand - while in high school - once the hottest gal graduated - one of the male teachers hit on her.... that IMHO was wrong... why - the age at which it occurred and experience... in my case - we were all college graduates... just happened to be in school.....


Still it is a difficult call.   I don't pretend to know what the magic answer is - except to say that everything - and I do mean everything needs to be consensual....period - no one forcing anyone with any type of coercion.

the need for consent doesn't apply to crime alone, or change it.

My point was that 'age of consent' laws are made to protect an entire category of people who are assumed to be incapable of making up their minds, AND would thereby be damaged by people taking advantage of them.

Here, we have 2 situations:  (1) she's committed a crime by having sex with a minor; and (2) she's done the boy wrong in the law and culture.

Now, the criminal issue is pretty simple, because it's meant to protect all kids, not this one in particular.

The specific harm to this particular person is more difficult.   There's no suggestion that she actually hurt the kid physically, so we have to assume that any harm is psychological.

My question is, what sort of harm are we assuming?  As others pointed out, 14 year olds have been married in some places and times.

Maybe somebody could say with a high probability what harm this kid is going to suffer - ?  I know people take offense at this, but that is my point - we are not always very articulate about the things we assume ESPECIALLY in gender relations - people tend to make assumptions, and assume that the cultural norm is morally engraved in stone.

My feeling is that if it was, we'd be able to explain it better.

///////////

Next, do her actions and intent count?  Sometimes, sometimes not.  Not in statutory rape.   What you may not see is that it depends on who's making what sort of complaint.  Eg, the DA is responsible  for the county's interest, and if the individual victim has a different interest, then they need private representation.

It's not that the kid *couldn't* be hurt, it's that we assume he WILL be hurt, as a matter of law; and in the absence of bruises, etc, that has to be psychological.    Who suspects what sort of psychological damage?  Whatever it is, eventually comes around to a cultural value, because as I have pointed out, 14 year olds have been married often enough.

The fact that this is a crime does not necessarily establish that this boy was hurt, or that consent laws were needed to protect him from damage.

////////////////////////

The next issue is the "double standard".  Again my point is that it may be more a problem of being unable to explain our experience and values.  Boys and girls ARE different; the real question is, what are we going to make of it?  There are social accomodations that need to be made for the equipment (bathrooms, to be obvious) and all sorts of behavior differences.  

Most of these things we take for granted.  We argue over some, because (a) people see things differently, and (b) things change.

would maintain a value without some reason - maybe a crappy reason, but still a reason.

I just don't know that treating boys and girls differently is all that wrong.  I think the question is, for what purpose?   Obviously, nobody's going to ask girls to pee in a wall urinal.  

The larger question is, what social and behavioral issues do we regard as legitimate accomodations for the different equipment, and one of the most obvious issues is that girls get PG, and boys don't, with all the associated logistical and mental issues for their families.

relations should be consensual.

But you will find a lot of politics around what is consent.   Catherine MacKInnon was teaching law when she - with the support of some other feminists - established the theory that there was no such thing as consensual sex, that it was all rape, basically derived from the idea that a woman's biology put her in an inherently coerced situation.

Now, go into any family court, and listen to couples argue, and you will see VASTLY different ideas of consent and will - the usual pattern is that the wife will contend that she had no choice except do whatever she did, and what she really means is that she was under pressure.   Whether that pressure rises to coercion in a family context is a judgment call that usually goes to the local court psychiatrist, because judges HATE these stupid, endless arguments; and psychiatrists basically do not regard people as making free choices, but rather being influenced by earlier events or bad brain chemistry.  So as soon as a psychiatrist is involved in deciding whether an act was voluntary or not, you have very good chances that it will be regarded as involuntary or coerced.

There is a LOT of politics in this, and eventually it does seep down to affect divorces, and the culture generally.

My feeling is that it might be better to encourage people to try to grow up and work out their own issues as much as possible, instead of trying to manipulate each other by claiming some type of duress.

Now, that works well when the husband stands still and accepts responsibility.  It's an entirely different situation when the husband is nowhere to be found, and guess who often picks up the bill, either directly (welfare) or indirectly (kids winding up in juvenile hall because mom doesn;t have the time or mindset to crack the whip and keep them in line).

So that's how the entire community can get around to being concerned if a young girl starts running around with some idiot who may knock her up and then split.  There are never clear lines in dealing with these things.

I really don't know what happened to him criminally. I still don't know how they found out about it. I do know that he was never going to be allowed to teach. I can also tell you it was 99% my fault. I know it must be hard for a man to resist in a situation like that. I think it might be hard for women to resist when there is attraction, but I'm guessing that biologically it's harder for a man.

Edited to add that tho I seduced him, the contact stopped short of full relations.

Edited agian to add that I felt HORRIBLY that the man's career had been destroyed by my actions.

-- Modified on 11/25/2005 6:50:56 PM

-- Modified on 11/25/2005 6:53:52 PM

it is not an opinion.  People are either manipulated (sometimes agreeably, sometimes not...) or they stand their ground.  Depending on what degree the manipulation is perpetrated depends on the relevance to the situation or person.

Spirited debate of topics such as this include various sides trying to manipulate conversation to favor the individual's point.  Sometimes an employee may take a "yes man" attitude and publicly agree and follow his boss's orders, even when he thinks he's wrong, for the sake of his job or out of loyalty.

But conversational manipulation, or being a "yes man" is not the same as your child's first sexual experience that has a huge impact on how they view sex and relationships involving sex.

I get what you are trying to say, in a sense I think, but don't think it's a relevent arguement when we are talking about children having sex with adults and/or authority figures.  I have a girlfriend that was on a road trip with a guy where, long story short, they ended up stopping off at a hotel, getting signals crossed about who wanted what, ended up that she felt raped...he said it was consensual.  While I can understand how proper communication could have prevented that whole thing, my friend still *felt* violated.  And that is not a feeling you can just rationalize to make it go away.

An older person in authority is supposed to be responsible and understand that a young person cannot communicate or process things in the same manner they do...they are supposed to be the one to make more rational decisions and set an example.  That's what you sign up for when you work with children.

I'm not sure I follow what you are trying to say about cooperation and competition...predictibility and unpridictibility...but agree that partners can manipulate and keep each other off balance intentionally and also ignorantly.  I don't view manipulation as being a healthy trait in any relationship though, so am unsure of what point you are trying to make here.  Please elaborate if you have the time and inclination...  I would love to hear some examples of happy relationships involving both parties being estatic about being manipulated also...or where you making a funny about sexual manipulation, as in manipulating one's genitals?

xoMegan

but the main difference between a 14 year old boy and his 18 year old GF vs. his teacher is that the teacher is an authority figure.  The boy relies on his grades from a teacher, so the issue of power is more predominant in that scenario.

xoM

that the issue is "harm" to one of the parties in the act, usually the younger.  It is established that, barring any physical harm, the harm is psychological.  Maybe it is time to examine that.  Some years ago, I read a psychologist, Fromm I believe, who spoke of "phantom" harm in the sense that whenever you speak to any of the parties involved, the harm was elsewhere.  For example, the young man, in the case at hand, says that he himself is fine with the sexual relationship, but feels badly that his parents are embarrassed.  The parents, for their part say that they don't feel hurt, but feel badly that their son had to go through all the stigma.  The seductress makes similar comments and so on and so forth ad infinitum.  The crime is a kin to peeling an onion.  There is never any "there" there.  Of course this implies that the relationship was truly consentual - and I allow that there is a lot of room for discussion on that point.  I also feel that there must be certain laws that define correct and incorrect behavior with regard to children under a certain age and those who are the postition of authority such as teachers and the like.

My only point here is to further the discussion and to analyze what the nature of the "hurt" is, and to see that it is not an easy target to find.  This should be a focus on what type of attention society should be placing on these behaviors.
And at the risk of sounding obsequious, I thank all who have participated in this discussion.  This is far and away the most interesting blog I have ever come upon.  I intend on reading and rereading this for some time to come as I find it scintillating.

I can see how some men might pat their boys on their backs and say, "Right on, son, you banged a hot lookin' chick . . . and a teacher too."  However, a child is still a child, no matter how grown up or handsome/pretty he/she may appear. I can understand the physical attraction between a teacher and a student, but a teacher should never cross that border.  A teacher should always keep in mind the consequences of his/her actions. Is it okay for a person to commit murder then claim that he/she was feeling angry so he/she had to take it out on someone, but now feels badly about it?

Hugs,
Ciara

But that's the whole point - we're not talking about the law and logic of it, we're talking of ethics.

Any broad law that is not subject to some subjectivity is going to seem "wrong" in cases. That's why we have to count on our law enforment to be selective. If the law is "under 18", we don't want our DAs prosecuting an 18 year old sleeping with his 17 year old GF.

In Lititz PA here, we had a very recent case in which an 18 year old male killed the parents of his 14 year old girlfriend, then abducted/ran off with her. In this case, he can legally screw her now, but not in a year when they are 19/15. What logic does that make? The law (to my understanding) is max 2 years difference if you're over 18. though obviously both these kids have much bigger worries...

faces when a 24 year old man bust a few in their 14 year old daughters. What that woman did is no different. Hormones are hormones, 14 year old boys have them, so do 14 year old girls, but adults have the responsibility to hold the line of decency when a child comes on to them.

What if he had impregnated that 24 year old teacher and was identified as the father? Would that situation be any different from a 24 year old man impregnating a 14 year old girl? Young lives will be ruined in both cases.
Some posters talk about how beautiful the teacher is. I looked at her pictures and cannot deny that, if she was a provider instead of a predator, I would relish a truckload of money on her to spend a night with her. But the point is she is not a beautiful provider that is making a living off her natural gifts, she is a woman that seduces young boys - in that sense, she deserves no more protection than a dropdead handsome 24 year old man that seduces 14 year old girls should get.

I think that every man that looked at that woman's pictures draw instant wood and wish that they were the one with her. For me, if I only look at her photos, she is the drop dead gorgeous, blue eyed young blonde that I relish having sex with. But the reality is that she is an adult that has an unhealthy to at least one young boy. Unlike you, I am not sure that she will not do this again. The issue is a personal one for me in several ways. The first is that I am attractive enough that doing simple things like going to the mall can be a problem for me. Shorts walks to stores to pick up items mean that I will have to avoid one underage girl that wants to take a shot, I avoid and move on because I have that responsibility as an adult. Second, I had serveral chances to test limits with teachers as a child but never took them and luckily, the teachers never crossed the line. I wonder how my determination to ignore the passes of girls would be eroded now if I had been the victim of sexual predation as a child. In a nutshell, my own experience is what makes me feel so strongly that the teacher in Florida should be sent to jail and should never again be in a position to take advantage of a child.

One thing that proper behavior of adults toward children teaches is the meaning of limits. The boy got it on with a beautiful 24 year old teacher, unless something happens in his life he will feel that it is right for him to get it on with a beautiful 14 year old girl when he is a man. I am sure that he will see similarities between the beautiful teacher and the girl, but he will be damaged regardless. The problem with sexual predation of children is that it breeds more sexual predators.

Which I will point out, in agreement, is a corner stone of consensual sex.  We could continue to outflank each other till we're stalemated on that point.  You say it's not about contract but crime: the crime is a having a sexual liaison with somebody who is not competent to give consent, that is to say, acting on an improper contract.  Now, you may attack that on grounds of whether consensual sex could be considered a "contract," but I think the presence of the hobby settles that.

So, you don't suggest dumping age limits.  That's not what I thought you suggested to begin with, but you do agree with at least weakening them.

I've seen such cases to where the girl lied about her age and was the instigator.  In those cases (there were several with one girl) she kept the secret, and if it had gotten out some very prominant guys would have gone down.  I do know of a few other cases with student teachers.  One of which the teacher married his student the year after her graduation.  Times have changed.

There may not be much damage to him getting laid before he was supposed to.  That's not the issue.  The issue really is about an adult using the under-aged to fulfill their fantasies.  Secondary issue: a person abusing their authority and trust for their simple sexual gratification.  The third is equality before the law: you'd have to judge this harshly simply as a necessity to judging men harshly for doing this.

However, I do think the penalties for this for both sexes are too harsh.  Fourteen will get you 20?   It isn't really pedophilia at that age, it's hebephilia.  The person is at the borderline of sexual maturity, or perhaps over it.

Then again, I think all the sentences metted out in this "justice system" are too harsh.  

In the instance where I was a grad student of about 22-25 years old - dating a student of the age of 21-28 was not a problem - Where I draw the line is at 21 or so....   that seems to be a reasonable line to be drawn at....   Even today in strip clubs - I will not let a gal do a lap dance if I suspect that she is less than 21 - easy test - offer to buy them a drink...

lots to think about in these posts... proving that the membership of TER is not what some would think of it as!  would you all agree???

The metaphor "predator" is not a perfect one.  I think I've seldom seen "prey" used with regard to sex predation, maybe it's because the metaphor is imperfect, or maybe it's out of respect for the victim.

At its extreme, however, you do have people who get sexual pleasure from murdering their victims in the end.  Then the metaphor "predator" is very apt, but not perfect.  They didn't personally use the carcass as food, so some other need was being met with their act.  

This is in some ways similar to a person who gets sexual gratification without any regard to the effects on his or her "partner."  However, the partner isn't dead at the end.  It is not a partnership then.  In fact, perhaps even gets a feeling of power from such encounters.  When "predation" is used to describe that, you are not talking about a physical feeding or nourishment.   In the cases where there isn't a murder at the end  of this encounter, it's probably because the said instigator was not  that hungry or didn't have that appetite.

From the little facts that are presented about this case, it seems her need for sexual gratification far exceeded her concerns for the partner.  Moreover, it was gratuitous.  This is a very attractive woman.

For damage: there might be a lot, there might be none.  I could attest to you, though, that when there is damage from this, it is quite real and quite devastating in its effects.  Sometimes the prey survives.

This isn't a crime from the standpoint of its actual damage: this is a crime because the act itself was irresponsible and dangerous.   For example, we don't punish DWI because there was necessarily any damage.  The crime is more like wreckless endangerment.

As for your fantasies about your teachers: I was quite different.  I didn't see adults as potential sex partners. At the age you described,  I was attracted ironically to teenaged girls.  For me, an encounter with a sexual encounter with an adult woman would have been traumatic.

It's often overlooked in this punative system how punishment of your partner for your actions could be much more traumatic than the sex.

The fact is, Rose, you were born in the wrong generation.  In the 70s, I know of a young teacher who was seduced by one of his students-- but she was 16.  It would happen to be one of the best looking girls in that school, too.  They kept it secret, mostly, until the year after her graduation, and then got married.  

It's so understandible for girls to do this.  You're going to be attracted to authority figures, and you're going to want to take your new sex appeal out for a test drive and find out what it could do.  At that age, it must be thrilling to find out that you could melt somebody in authority like that.  That is power.  

It's so understandible, Rose, I'm rather surprised that there aren't more ways for schools to deal with it and help male teachers.  It wouldn't be so much a problem at any rate if sex were easier and more available elsewhere.  

...I agreed with all your points, but then I got to wondering:  What can a father say in this case?  Does he treat it like a trauma?  It may have certainly been traumatic and mindbending for his son.  So is he doing badly by trying to make lemonade from this lemon? Escpecially when his son 1) probably feels guilt for the trouble she is in; 2) is probably going to be treated very badly by his peers, who are going to be so jealous, and by girls who are probably going to be appalled.

Ignoring it or saying the least might be even worse.  However, is there even a good direction for a father to go with this?  For me, it would be a dilemma, and forgive me if I ended up saying: "Right on son..."

(a) that isn't what makes it statutory rape, and (b) the issue of relative power arises in almost every relationship.

What you're saying is that the integrity of the teaching and grading system can be corrupted by side relationships (sex, business, anything) and that's true.

It's still not what makes, or is even relevant to statutory rape.

Now: I'm not suggesting we dump these standards - simply pointing out their limits, and that perhaps we shouldn't extend them beyond where they are now.

http://www.oprah.com/tows/vintage/past/vintage_past_20010810.jhtml

Oprah makes at least one show over the question of whether Betty was the manipulated victim or manipulating harpy.

I can assure you that divorce court is full of the  identical emotions, only the money and bullets are missing.

The point is not who is the victim; the point is that standards are unclear, and probably always will be.  In this particular case, there are plenty of Oprah watchers who believe Broderick was the victim.

Legally, it was hardly close.  She came within a gnat's ass of 1st degree murder.

The point is that the cultural standard for deciding who is the victim, what conduct is right or wrong, is nowhere near clear; and so people wanting to do "the right thing" really have no guidelines.

The basis for Broderick's claim to victimization is essentially that she only wanted to be a supermom; and it depends on the idea that she should not be responsible for (a) controlling her temper in all circumstances, or (b) observing the fact that she drove most of the people around her crazy (kids and husband alike).

The concept is that her feelings should determine what responsibility she has, and Oprah and many others make lots of shows based on comparable ideas.

Of course, law can't function that way.  But they do make allowances, by letting her psychiatrist in to testify that she may have been insane.  After buying a pistol and practicing with it on the range, she broke into the ex's house, and shot him and his wife several times; then she told the court she was planning on committing suicide in front of her ex, but when she came face to face with him, couldn't control herself, and shot him in fear.  (Riiiiiight.)

Of course quite often the gender is reversed - that it's usually the husband who's doing the physical thumping - but the instances when a husband is regarded as merely responding to abuse simply don't exist.  And there's almost always all sorts of head games.   The shrinks usually come down on the wife's side simply because (a) men almost never go to shrinks unless ordered, and (b) if they do, they usually think and speak in mechanical terms - it's very rare that you'll hear a man say he couldn't control himself once he had a pistol or bottle in his hand, and even rarer that anybody would believe him.  OTOH, you have Oprah making a show debating who was the victim, when she's been convicted (beyond a reasonable doubt) of murder.

Now, that is a single well-known example of why I say manipulation is (a) a matter of opinion, and (b) a political football.    You can go down to family court and sit in and hear the same story (minus the bullets and money) a dozen times every day.

-- Modified on 11/26/2005 7:49:01 PM

distinguish between crime (which is a wrong against the community, and does not generally require damage as an element of proof) and tort (which generally does, and is only a wrong against a private party).

Actually, as to Miss Johnson, the hot 5th grade teacher, I had no idea what to do with her.  I just knew she excited the hell out of me, and I knew it had to do with that tight little Marilyn Monroe body of hers.   Had she SHOWN me, I suspect I would have gotten over it easily enough - I've always been fairly resilient [GG]

-- Modified on 11/26/2005 1:46:18 PM

I'm not sure whether a sexual transaction is a contract or not; but I am sure that the aspect we are talking about is statutory rape, a crime.  It's the inability to consent that makes it a crime.

No, I don't agree with weakening age limits.  What might make sense would be to allow mitigating factors in defense, eg, where there is the appearance of what Avalon Rose has described - an alert minor describing a deliberate seduction.  

That person should still never be near children.  But I don't know that a felony sentence is the answer, either.

we have these 2 cases, solely because they do seem to be real:  (1)  the 24 year old female teacher on the 14 year old boy, and (2) the case Avalon Rose describes above, a teacher or TA on a 14 year old female.

So let's assume we're the parent, and a medical exam shows no trauma or disease; and entirely apart from what happens to the teacher, how do you handle the kid?

Legally and culturally, the kid is a "victim"; and yet there's no physical trauma.

I'll tell you what bothers me is the idea that a parent or social worker making a big deal of it would actually create or aggravate whatever harm there is.

I suspect, if I had to make wing it in 10 seconds, I'd probably (a) keep the grief counselors away from my kid, for fear they do more harm than good, and also because I regard them as usurping my role as a parent; and (b) sit down and ask them to tell me what happened, and (c) take it from there.

I think that most of us expect that the girl is going to be more affected than the boy; and even if it's cultural, culture arises for reasons, and the real question is how well it handles the present situation, and it's hard to know without knowing the future.

But of course, there could be differences; Avalon seems to have been very conscious of what she was doing; and the 14 year old boy, who knows?

I think this is a good reason that more attention should be paid to individual cases, than making catgeorical judgments sught unseen.  Maybe we could get Jon Stewart to go on Oprah and tell her she's damaging the nation's social fiber....

but the post I made was regarding the teacher's standpoint not what happens afterward. That's the point!  You shouldn't have to worry about what to do, how to feel, how your son/daughter is feeling, how it will affect him/her later in life. PREVENTION IS THE KEY!

Hugs,
Ciara

hope that I would handle it with grace and do the right thing by my child, but the point is I wouldn't want to be put in this place. It should not happen to begin with, don't you agree? Whether you're a man or a woman, if a student who is underage turns you on, then go home and jerk off instead!

Hugs,
Ciara

so it may be easier to talk about law or logic.

manipulated in a given situation isn't at all clear.  Here, my take would be  (a)  EVERY teacher should know to keep their hands off students, apart from emergency medical care, self-defense, etc; (b) every  person should know to keep their hands off minors.

OTOH, you seem to have been very conscious of what was going on.  I notice you haven't said you were damaged by the contact.

I'm sure I could find a psychiatrist who would point the finger of blame wherever I wanted, and claim anybody's head was impossibly screwed up as a result, so that they'd have to spend the rest of their life in a very expensive institution telling him their sexual fantasies every day, which he would compile and sell under a pseudonym.

But apart from the damage we inflict, everybody seems to get over it pretty quickly.

or anybody's, is a dubious exercise.  The news said she was married.  Maybe her best excuse was "raging hormones" - it also said that she planned on pleading insanity, but I don't think "raging hormones" would be even close to the standard of insanity - it wouldn't affect her understanding, only her ability to control her impulse.


Most crimes are also torts against the victim; BUT the concepts are separate.   Here, the age of consent is intended not to protect morality generally, but to protect the minor.  

The question  I raise here is, how much damage is likely here?  Is he truly "damaged" in learning the wrong lesson, that some women are very horny?

I think what's really going on is that the real damage is to the community's sense of propriety - and I'm not arguing with it, simply identifying it.  If there was some showing of actual coercion, then there would be a different consideration.  And that also applies to Avalon Rose's description.

Perhaps these concerns are best addressed in sentencing.  

in that you focus on what the reality is for the child, rather than the "social norm" that the law prescribes.  Depending on what this reality is, should dictate what then should be done.  It is important that this "reality" not be manipulated by people with axes to grind, which if fear, may be the case with police and/or social workers.

It is best if a parent has an excellent repoire with their child and the child feels comfortable in telling the parent how they feel.

so, tell us about it.

As a parent, I suspect that kids can be influenced, and sometimes you just never know what conclusions they will draw; and kids also have temperaments, ie, they are congenitally inclined in certain ways.

For me, the difficult thing is walking the line between preserving standards, and letting them find out things for themselves, and all the while maintaining a free speech environment, simply because I am much more afraid of NOT knowing what's on their minds, than of hearing it.

I can easily imagine a kid reacting to nonsexual stimulus in a sexual way - ie, dad doesn't pay attention to his little girl, she does what she has to, to get that attention elsewhere.  

As an example, if you've seen the movie "Amelie", they describe the 5 or 6 year old girl having such a strong reaction to her father's rare touch that she's believed to have a defective heart - whether that could or would happen is not the point - the point is that the writer and producer believed it enough to put it in, so it's likely got a basis in their experience.

And I think different kids are likely to react differently.

I had a really odd HS, let me just mention that. The same year that my thing went on, there was an English teacher seeing a 17 or 18 yr old senior whom he later married. I don't know that anyone had proof of it or anything, but I do know that regardless of what their situation really was, he didn't get in any trouble. This was also the same year that 11 out of the 45 girls in my class ended up pregnant. I think it was some sort of national record by percentage of female students in the same grade. Pretty insane.

I think you have very valid points with the authority figure allure. There was another teacher I sort of tried to mess with, but he wasn't that stupid, or that caught up in his own hormones. The student teacher was much younger and therefore probably more likely to be unable to resist the pull of the hormonal tide. I suppose it also seemed less wrong since we were closer in age. The older teacher I flirted with was like 45 or something. I'm not sure exactly why I was so intrigued by him, maybe just because I wanted to see if I could tempt him. That isn't really a good motivator, is it?

Lastly, you're probably also right on target with the thought that there would be less sexual "deviance" going on if there were more of it happening in the first place. You're not so likely to eat a pint of Ben & Jerry's if you've had a healthy, full meal first, are you? I've long said that the world would be a happier, healthier place if people just had more sex. It really would be! I actually get upset with my fellow females for not doing more of their part in making the world a better place for us all!

having fucked up someone's career. But, I was always kind of "different" as far as maturity level across the board including directly relating to my own sexuality. I understand that today, the average age of first intercourse is lower than it was even when I was in HS 10 yrs ago, but I think that has more to do with being "en vogue" than it does with readiness. I was a walking fucking hormone when I was 14 yrs old. I think it was my sexual peak, tho I went through it mostly alone. LOL. I had 22 orgasms in like 30 minutes by myself once. If I had had access to condoms and had a willing partner, I might have disappeared somewhere for a year with him. LOL. The lack of ability to self-protect kept me from engaging in real intercourse until I was 16 yrs old. The other thing that limited me was the fact that for the most part, I terrified the boys near my own age with my advanced development mentally and physically.  As far as teachers and students, and adults and minors, I do agree with you just because to do so prevents more problems than would the lack of those regulations. As always, tho, there will be exceptions to things. A friend I went to HS with actually thinks it's ok that he fucks a girl that just turned 16. This bothers me, and I'm not even really sure why. I know if she is anything like I was at the time, it probably won't bother her developmentally. Maybe it bothers me because it bothers me to think of a young person using any sort of activity or substance to distract them from the serious business of growing up and becoming a truly self-actualized being. I would be upset with my own children for using drugs or alcohol before they were through high school, so I guess an excessive sexual response would bother me for the same reason. Not because I dont' want them to enjoy their bodies, but because it's easy to get lost in the good stuff while losing all of the other very important things that need attention. Wow. That's so cool that I just figured out that's why that bothers me. Thanks!


-- Modified on 11/26/2005 10:37:40 PM

Is a topic that inflames adults across gender, ethnic, religious, and political lines. For some reason, we don't like to think of children as having any sort of sexuality. I haven't researched it myself, but just from having talked to girlfriends growing up, men I've dated, and now other mothers, it's clear that children are sexual in one capacity or another long before puberty, with curious thoughts ranging from activity down to their own equipment. I guess it makes sense, because if it weren't ingrained in us from a biological standpoint, the addition of hormones at puberty wouldn't have quite the momentous effect that it generally does. We also have to keep in mind that we live in a time where sexual images are constantly dumped on us via the media. Would I be bisexual if I hadn't seen my father's Playboys when I was 5 yrs old? I think so, but I don't know for sure. Do I like sex as much as I do because my mother raised me with the knowledge that she herself considered it healthy and enjoyable? I'm sure it played a part on one level or another. Anyway, there are no short or easy answers to a topic such as this. Someday I'd love to go back to school to do deep studies of human sexuality, anthropology, philosophy, and psychology. Then again, I sort of feel I am studying all of that every day, and it never ceases to fascinate me.

nicely said Rose! When are you visting NYC?

or molestation, it is generally the female as the victim (excluding the issue of male-on-male). Can a male be raped by a female? There are a couple of cases but nothing like this here. So the question is about 'seduction' and whether it's wrong for the teacher. Yes, probably. But I don't think it's the kind of criminal activity that is like the forcible rape of a male of a female.

I'm just making the point that it should never happen to begin with, then there wouldn't be any decision about what to do. Teachers shouldn't cross that boundary with a minor.

Hugs,
Ciara

this is what people did when they feel the old attraction kicking in.  Unfortunately, this is not the world in which we live.
Look at the most benign example, one that I am sure occurs frequently. A student, let's say that they are about 16 and mature for their age has a teacher who is in their early 20's (Let's not even speculate on who is male or female.) They each notice an attraction to each other.  They have interesting talks about their course subject matter.  They meet; first at school, then in neutral settings (coffee shop). One things leads to another, first  hand holding, then a peck; you get the idea.  Yes, I would much prefer if this didn't happen, especially with my kids.  But the real question is not: "Did a crime occur", but "Did any harm occur"  I would have to suggest that in at least some situations, the answer is no.  To then stigmatize either individual, and by extention their families seems to me a bigger harm than the alleged harm of their affair.

On the other hand, I don't have a good answer to the question of how do you protect the child who is harmed by a sexual predator.  Perhaps we must always be prepared to throw out some babies with the bathwater.

When a teacher has sex with a student, it is not unclear to me who the victim is...

I understand your point about how different people have varying perceptions of who might be a victim...but that is outside perceptions also, not what an individual might be feeling, which is what is important to me when discussing issues of a young persons sexual experiences...regardless of who they are engaging with.  If they felt victimized, they were.  If they didn't, it should be left alone, with the caveat that they might not be able to discern that one way or another until they are not immersed in the situation or until they are older.  Certainly I don't think anyone should be forcing the idea that someone is a victim down their throat if that is not what they are reporting...  

What I am trying to make a point about is how some victims of sexual abuse are further victimized by the social perceptions that they *aren't* a victim...here specifically (with the original thread comment) with dialouge supporting that all young boys fantasize about being seduced by an older woman/teacher and should welcome that opportunity.  

Again, there are various shades of manipulation and victimization, and IMO, I think it's difficult to compare to adults in divorce court to the circumstances surrounding child molestation, even though there can be some common elements in both.

Regards,
Megan


-- Modified on 11/27/2005 9:23:14 AM

-- Modified on 11/27/2005 9:25:02 AM

...in my other response to your Betty Broderick post.  The ideas I outlined there about perception of victimization I think relate to what you are trying to say about what defines statutory rape, and a relevent flaw in how we define it.  But I would rather err on the side of protecting children and young adults then worry about the few that are perhaps exceptions to the rule.  

xoM

be happy about either being seduced, but know what, if it were my kids that did the seducing I would hope  that they would admit to it... and you are right - temtation is ALWAYS hard to resist...  I prefer (IN THIS ONE INSTANCE I THINK THE EURAPEEINS HAVE IT CORRECT)  to have open - frank and honest discussions about sex, sexuality and the full dynamic of human emotion with my kids.... and I started this a long time ago.  Interesting this is the type of discussion that I used to have with my Dad until he died.  Miss those conversations and he died when I was in my late 30's.  

With respect to the ex ms. Bizarro, her mother had a very strange environment.... sleeping with an Iraqi... "freedom fighter" parading odds and ends of "boyfriends" in front of her kids and using her daughter as bait to lure them in!  it is no wonder that she would wake in the middle of the night screaming.... who wouldn't - but as odd as that was - during the course of our marriage we saw several marriage counselors....  and everytime she was close to a breakthrough with her counselor.... she would quit the therapy... then accuse me of quiting!  go figure...

Women and men respond differently to sexual maturity - and sexual advances - advice to my son, think with your big head always.  Advice to my daughter - never put yourself into a situation that can be "interpreted"!

Things all clear now?  take two aspirine and call Dr. Gonzo in the morning.

about open communication being the only way to go. My mother and I were very open, and I am very thankful for it. I think if my father had been more comfortable talking about those things with me, in fact if he had been more comfortable with the thought of me as a sexual creature at all (I know, dads usually have issues with that), it would have helped me a lot more growing up than the attitude he did have.

Re: your ex-wife... One thing that I find very interesting about the human psyche is the way that people often get most uncomfortable when they are about to learn the most about themselves. One classic literary device is a "magic mirror" or some such, in which a person is dispatched because they are forced to confront themselves as they really are. I think there's a lot of truth to the concept.

They were both males, both in their mid-20s, and both taught at an girl Catholic High School.

It's just that type of niavette of having hetero men in their 20s teach girls in their mid to late teens that got the church into trouble.  

One as I said had married one of his students, but it was apparent who initiated that.  She was a terrifically foxy woman.  He was not too attractive at all, and had bad breath.  They have since had three children and the last I heard they were still together for twenty years.  

I've wondered how she really felt about the fact that she committed herself so soon to a guy who I thought she easily outclassed.

Therefore, I tend to think that even if the girl initiates it, if the affair goes on long enough, he's the one who benefits the most.  How else could that guy have ever attracted a woman who looked that good?  

The other guy managed to get through it without going to jail, but he had all kinds of stories about how the better looking girls would come on to him there.  Now, he was an attractive guy by most ladies' standards, and he was single. His sexual success with women outside of his job made that bearable for him.  It's surprising that he was able to teach and they were able to learn at all.  

Your 11 out of 45 girls pregnant doesn't sound like it would be the record to me, but maybe the news stories I heard (which didn't give percentages) were exaggerated.

Well I agree they shouldn't. But it's a question of what happens if they do. I suppose losing one's job and getting kicked out of the profession is one thing. It's another thing to go to jail for it.

When you fly me out.

Thanks, and thanks for asking.

benefiting the older man in question, as you mention. I did it, too. For some reason, when we are young, we tend to have a smaller view of the world. NOW seems so much more urgent. If we are alone, we fear we will be alone forever. (We being human beings in general.)

I replied to the original post which was not a question of what should happen afterward. The original post was, "Is this a sexual predator."  I didn't respond by saying she was or was not. However, I simply stated my opinion that I thought she should have refrained from doing it altogether. I know there are several answers to the consequences part of the question posted. I wasn't getting involved in that part of the post. I just think she should have known better, but perhaps women think differently on the subject matter. I could spend all day talking about the psychological ramifications of social workers after the fact, etc., but I was not going down that path. I completely get what you guys are talking about, though, and more power to you. Wink!

Hugs,
Ciara

kids from potentially harmful situations.....!  and predicting sociopathic behaviour.

Since I only travel for exclusive engagements.

-- Modified on 11/30/2005 12:57:04 AM