When I first started reading the "Ms. Wilson" thing, I was thinking the same thing. Where the hell were these teachers when I was a kid? I remember one replacement teacher we had for a half a year...
But then I started reading some of the comments, and it did make me wonder. One in particular: (a paraphrase) This was rape. He claims he didn't want it. If the genders were reversed, most of you would be saying how sick this is, and calling for the teachers head.
Which is actually pretty true. Interesting indeed.
The Following User Says Thank You to WhiteTiger For This Useful Post:
When I first started reading the "Ms. Wilson" thing, I was thinking the same thing. Where the hell were these teachers when I was a kid? I remember one replacement teacher we had for a half a year...
But then I started reading some of the comments, and it did make me wonder. One in particular: (a paraphrase) This was rape. He claims he didn't want it. If the genders were reversed, most of you would be saying how sick this is, and calling for the teachers head.
Which is actually pretty true. Interesting indeed.
Even at sixteen years of age, I could still kick the crap out of a 28 year old woman if I was in an unwelcomed situation, (such as rape).
Except I wouldn't have called it rape, I would have called it "scoring with a hot teacher". We know that this is viewed differently when we flip the genders around, but often it's because we know that men and women tend to approach the subject of sex differently, which is why I have to wonder if there's an ulterior motive for claiming that this is 'rape' - civil suit after the criminal charges?
Certainly it could be genuine, but I'm pretty apprehensive to believe it.
__________________
-James
GO FLAMES GO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
Typical dumb take.
Last edited by TorqueDog; 05-05-2012 at 04:37 PM.
Reason: Spelling error - where were you on that one, AutoCorrect? HUH?!
Even at sixteen years of age, I could still kick the crap out of a 28 year old woman if I was in an unwelcomed situation, (such as rape).
Except I wouldn't have called it rape, I would have called it "scoring with a hot teacher". We know that this is viewed differently when we flip the genders around, but often it's because we know that men and women tend to approach the subject of sex differently, which is why I have to wonder if there's an alterior motive for claiming that this is 'rape' - civil suit after the criminal charges?
Certainly it could be genuine, but I'm pretty apprehensive to believe it.
What was is the legal age where it happened? If he's below the legal age, isn't it called rape regardless of it being mutual?
__________________
"An adherent of homeopathy has no brain. They have skull water with the memory of a brain."
What was is the legal age where it happened? If he's below the legal age, isn't it called rape regardless of it being mutual?
Statutory rape, yes.
That's another problem. We can attribute minors with having the capacity for knowing right from wrong enough to try them as an adult for criminal infractions, but not the ability to consent to sexual activities? That does not make any sense.
That's another problem. We can attribute minors with having the capacity for knowing right from wrong enough to try them as an adult for criminal infractions, but not the ability to consent to sexual activities? That does not make any sense.
Then I don't think there has to be some kind of ulterior motive if that's legally what it's supposed to be called.
__________________
"An adherent of homeopathy has no brain. They have skull water with the memory of a brain."
Then I don't think there has to be some kind of ulterior motive if that's legally what it's supposed to be called.
The law differentiates between rape and statutory rape, and there's a significant difference between the two, as well as our perception of them.
Statutory rape applies whether consent was given or not. Rape applies when consent is withheld or the person is in a condition in which they could not give consent (eg: intoxicated).
When someone says "I got raped", it typically refers to the act of rape where consent isn't given. This is just me, but if I were in this kid's place, I wouldn't use the same word to describe consensual sex with my teacher. And it would be consensual, given that all you can really think about as a 16 year old male is sex. Hell, as a 26 year old male, I evidently haven't changed much. He's painting himself as a victim and in the enthusiastically litigious United States, I immediately think he's been instructed by someone to take this position for potential gain... such as suing the school district as we've seen in the past.
It's a cynical way of looking at it, but I can't help but draw a parallel to how I was at that age... and unless the female teacher had been a sea donkey, it would have been game on.
The law differentiates between rape and statutory rape, and there's a significant difference between the two, as well as our perception of them.
Statutory rape applies whether consent was given or not. Rape applies when consent is withheld or the person is in a condition in which they could not give consent (eg: intoxicated).
When someone says "I got raped", it typically refers to the act of rape where consent isn't given. This is just me, but if I were in this kid's place, I wouldn't use the same word to describe consensual sex with my teacher. And it would be consensual, given that all you can really think about as a 16 year old male is sex. Hell, as a 26 year old male, I evidently haven't changed much. He's painting himself as a victim and in the enthusiastically litigious United States, I immediately think he's been instructed by someone to take this position for potential gain... such as suing the school district as we've seen in the past.
It's a cynical way of looking at it, but I can't help but draw a parallel to how I was at that age... and unless the female teacher had been a sea donkey, it would have been game on.
I immediately have to think his parents probably want the school to pay up, not necessarily out of greed, but out of anger (though it could still be just pure greed, ha). I'd be pretty pissed too if I were the kid's parent, and not just at the teacher. I would only assume he would be getting coaching from them -- he is only 16. Perhaps he doesn't believe it was rape, or didn't originally, but those in authority have a way of swaying kids to their side. . . . I pretty much guarantee, if you were in this kid's shoes, you'd be using the words your parents told you to use in a situation like this, especially with the cops involved scaring the #### out of you. He likely doesn't even know what the word statutory means.
But, anyway, besides all that, looking at the article again, I don't actually see where he calls it rape, unless it's in a different one not posted here.
__________________
"An adherent of homeopathy has no brain. They have skull water with the memory of a brain."
Last edited by HPLovecraft; 05-05-2012 at 09:09 PM.
As for rape, at least here, 16 is of age. Exceptions are people of influence and authority. Like teachers. The point is not the act of sex itself, but the manipulation.
But ignoring age for a second. There are many young girls that willingly had sex with older people where it is called rape. Why should we make it harder to be a male? Why should males have to make wiser decisions? Just because it's your fantasy, should that make it worse for a male who was manipulated and regretted it later? Or had it mess up his life?
If adult is in a position to take advantage of a child for there own sexual purposes, it's wrong. Male or female.
Now getting back to the subject at hand. This case is ridiculous. The only way the suspension makes sense to me is if this boy has been hard to control for a while. Been rude and pestering other students for a while. As far as the sexual harassment charge, I don't believe any child should ever have to face that. How can you be charged with that if you aren't even a sexual being yet? Let the law makers figure out an actual age (and it will probably have to be 11 or so, cause girls get their periods early) but sex laws and kids are pointless. Who didn't sneak a kiss, or chase someone around? It just kids being kids. It's a normal and maybe even an important part of growing up. Break it up, give them an apology to do if needed. But don't suspend them.
Lastly, as this song is everywhere, and even M&M's are dancing to it, how can we not expect this kid to copy the behavior? So stupid.
The Following User Says Thank You to Daradon For This Useful Post:
