Why Are Right Wing Men So Sad?

Post Reply New Topic

You seem to underestimate children. Due process always favors the child accuser. I’ve never known it to be otherwise.

^ I remember that case from the 80s where the parents of a bunch of kids at an elementary school were able to coach their children to make false accusations of sexual abuse.

A lot of people's lives were ruined before it was revealed to be a bunch of bunk.

Also, I imagine it's more difficult for male teachers as there is the prejudice that any man who wants to work with children or teens is a pedo.

Aaaah, I’d forgotten about that! Those things still happen and are commonplace. I had no idea, either, but it’s all kept very hush-hush. Most of the time, though, the accuser is telling the truth. You rarely hear about it in the news because it’s damaging for the school district, plus there’s a lot at stake when it turns out to be false or if a miracle happens and the accused has a solid defense, meaning the accusation happens to be false. There is a certain amount of passing the trash, and it only makes the news when it is exceptionally scandalous. If you believe the news reports in recent decades, you’d think ONLY young, female teachers are sleeping with students.

Well that still was not kids having more power than teachers, it was their parents who did the coaching and exerted power to get teachers fired. If anything sounds like those kids were victims as well.

But yeah I cannot deny things like that do occur.

This is kind of what I wanted. This is the power that a teacher, an adult, can have over a student/minor. Could a minor take away your phone, car, sports, cheerleading privileges and education scholarship? Although, to be honest, I also thought you were going to add in something like physical discipline that a parent might do their child, getting the belt. I assume that the practice in Catholic schools of the cane and similar practices are far gone.

The points I worked on was that teachers and adults can have a huge amount of power over minors, things very important to them, and even if there is an illusion of power. The reason that student are open to be believed in many cases is because there is the real possibility that an adult could abuse these powers to do something to a student, and the minor would have no way to stop it, or could be manipulated into it. Even all those things you said about referrals, the power over a student for something like their shirt being untucked, the power to punish a student possibly for almost no evidence and remove freedoms. And that case of the economics teacher, clearly she must have pushed them so far that they thought the only thing they could do is egg her. What power do they have otherwise?

This discussion is really coming from the topic on whether a minor can consent with an adult, and I stand by these stances that they cannot because the mind of a minor is too at the mercy of an adult to manipulate it, being able to control important things to a minor at that age. And make them feel like they are special because a cool adult is giving them attention while others their age are caring about cheerleading privileges.

And then have sorted of twisted around those parts of not being able to consent to somehow it is the parents that can decide whether their child can consent. Such as if parents have decided to marry their 16 year old daughter off to a 30 year old man in their church, because they totally know what she wants and agrees to with an informed perspective. That it is a parent who gets to decide if a child gets to be gay, what beliefs they are allowed to practice, and if they are even allowed to have relationships. You are saying that teenagers are enough of an adult person that they could agree to be with another adult person, but are still mostly an extension of the will of their parents, who gets allowed to make all the decisions for them.

It was a while now, but you also talked about whether a minor can enter a contract. I have studied contract law, and although it can differ from country and such, I can give a brief understanding what it is here. Pretty much, that a minor can enter a contract, but they don't have to actually be held to it, that they can get out of it any time without penalty, because they might not have been able to understand the terms they signed up for. This in practice could mean a minor could sign up for a phone contract, the business would have to follow it, but if they chose the minor could choose to exit at any time. The phone company could then perhaps look guardians such as parents to get back any money they might be owed, but they cannot legally go after the minor. This is why to sign a contract, they might often ask a minor to have an guardian involved as something like a co-signer, defences could then be cases if there were more deliberate manipulation of the a minor, or the adult was not provided with enough details.

I don't underestimate them, they can be awful I still have issues from childhood because of how I got treated by other kids. And I didn't mean the thing about people who can't stand up to children shouldn't be teachers in a mean way, I for sure couldn't be a teacher because I'd be bad at handling their nonsense. It seems you can handle it better than that other teacher you mentioned that never came back after the egg throwing incident.

Even so though, I don't think students have so much power over teachers that it would ever be justifiable for a teacher to have any sexual contact with a student, even if they argued the student pressured them to.

A teacher being accused of doing such if they haven't though, that is a different matter, but I'd have to figure its not super common for teachers to get falsely accused of that.

The thing about that story is that as Sweetleaf said, it was still an adult manipulating and warping the kids to make those accusations. As an adult that should have known better, she possibly ruined her kids futures by letting them be known as the ones that made a whole lot of fake accusations.

And this culture of expecting some level of false accusations is a thing that can greatly effect the likelihood that women come forward with things like sexual harassment, because there are a lot of people especially on the right that think it could just be a case of wanting to attack a man.

I think you misunderstood me. Students have more power than teachers in the sense that all students have to do is make an accusation or they can just gang up on the teacher, raise a stink with parents who in turn raise a stink with administrators who fire teachers OR WORSE. Consent has nothing to do with it. That’s a separate point.

The point being that it’s illogical to say that young people cannot consent. Young people have sex with each other all the time, so it’s not really about consent. It’s about whether you believe sex with an adult in a position of trust and authority really is safe and acceptable. You’d be surprised how many parents don’t actually care and wouldn’t press charges even if it came to their attention. There was a case in the news about a guy who MARRIED a former student after she graduated AND after he had finished his contract and declined to renew. I can’t remember exactly, but I think the parents ultimately tried for a civil suit while the district revoked his license. TECHNICALLY he couldn’t be said to have done anything wrong, but everyone involved was darned sure going to nail him every way they could. Technicalities and due process always take a back seat when young people are involved.

I also personally know a bd who married a former student. It was no secret that she was interested in him, but in that case he consistently rejected her advances. She later became a band director herself. He quit one job, spent a year training horses, took a new job, and THEN married her after she got her first teaching gig. Nobody ever said a word. If you want to do anything bad enough, there are ways to do it, but you can’t be stupid about it.

Students will generally NOT pursue a teacher “that way.” They are aware of how stupid it would be if they did that. Some students do, but it’s not that common, though teachers sleeping with students is way more common than anybody likes to admit. As I keep saying, don’t touch kids, don’t be stupid, stay visible. It’s expected that adults stay in control of every situation. There are times even I have to be alone with students, and there’s nothing wrong with that. Because I’m an activities teacher, pretty much a coach, I pull my students into a leadership council so that students have to handle difficult situations among themselves. My color guard captains are…well, sadly, I don’t have much kind to say about them. But they need to learn to get along. So I called a meeting with the two of them and asked a senior to sit in on that meeting. I also texted one of the moms to keep her informed. Everything is ok, but my point is that isolating kids never ends well. You can be discrete and have witnesses, too, and it’s good for their emotional and intellectual growth, also. If I said, “I need to see you in my office,” nobody is going to care that I have two windows in there. They’re just gonna say Mr. Rho was in his office with a student. Maybe it is paranoid taking all the extra precautions, but if it happens that they’re going to fire me anyway, the LEAST I can do is make sure THAT isn’t a reason why.

Yeah, and that should extend to all adults. I am really confused of what exceptions you think exist of this that isn't something like a 17 year old who's partner just turned 18.

Also, with this being discussed from I assume that AngeRho being on the Right politically, I think that this should be showing that Mikah's strawman version of the topic being a descriptions of the Left making excuses for pedophilia as ridiculous. This has been Right wing arguments that have tried to say that sometimes a minor can consent with an adult. The consent apparently being determined by a parent, which is super different from the Left wing opinion of consent.

Consent only be made by the person in particular, and only by taking into consideration unjust influences or pressures involved. Whether it is the fact that they are a minor and the other person is not, if their judgement is impeded by alcohol, or in a situation where they might have trouble verbally refusing and not enough effort is taken to get an active affirmation of consent. And a lot of people seem really angry about these standards, where they can't try and manipulate a situation to be more in their favour, because they could get in trouble later.

Bradleigh, you aren’t understanding what I mean. It doesn’t follow that minors lack the ability to consent. Of course they have the ability to give consent. A human being doesn’t stop being a human being when he or she reaches 18, nor do they hatch from a cocoon and become a beautiful butterfly at that age, either. There is no natural phenomena that flips a switch inside a man’s brain when he’s 18 and turns him into some beast who devours 3-year-olds. Nor is there significant enough difference between a girl who is 16 and one who is 18, or a girl who is 14 and one who is 15. Just because you turn 14 doesn’t magically make you mature enough to have sex with adults, nor does it magically make you immature when 14 is AOC in one state and you cross state lines and the age is 18. There are boys and girls at 13 and 14 who are wiser than some adults and there are 21 year olds who still play with Barbie dolls. At what point do we qualify for our consent licenses? Should we take a test and people over 30 who aren’t smart enough are denied their right to have sex or reproduce?

Or…

…can we just agree that AOC is an arbitrary number that only exists for the sake of legally defining one way parents can protect their children by temporarily making those decisions for them and seeking retribution against predators?

It’s not left versus right. It’s just about the parental right to decide how and to what extent to protect their children. If you are abstinence only, you are entitled to raising your kids that way. If you want them to have condoms and the pill, you are entitled to that. All AOC laws do is make sure that parents have the freedom to set sexual boundaries for their children. In Mississippi, girls can marry at 15, boys can marry at 17, both with parental and court permission, and AOC is 16. Minimum marriage age is 21 for men and women. Plus, Mississippi has a Romeo and Juliet law. Regardless of where you are on the political spectrum, these laws grant parents the legal right over their child’s love and sex lives as the parent sees fit and within reason. California law actually permits BOTH children to be charged with statutory if they are both underaged, and California does not have a Romeo and Juliet law.

I do not believe ANY underaged sex is appropriate, regardless of age. Adults should know better.

About 6 or 7 years ago, every Love and Dating thread was a PPR thread.

You say that, but the majority of your post is saying that AOC is just a number, that it doesn't mean they are or not able consent, and I guess defending that 15 year old girls can get married.

I think you are not getting what I am saying. I have said that minors can consent to each other when around the same kind of maturity, but they cannot consent with an adult because there exists power imbalances that make it unethical. Other than possible exceptions where maybe a 17 year old's partner aged into an adult, there should be no other exceptions, especially none left to a parent.

And it absolutely does not exist for parents, to whether they want to press charges or something if something does happen, it is there to create a baseline to stop adults from taking advantage of a minor, because what is otherwise the difference of an adult and teenager. Saying that a 15 year old is actually really mature so it should be fine if they are with a 19 year old, should not be okay. Parents are not their kids, and in many cases parents can the be causes of abuse, from molestation to seeming to think they get to control the sexuality of their child.

Look, I don't think I am not understanding what you are saying, that you think that all kinds of individuals can have variable levels of development of maturity, the argument is probably there that someone underage could be more mentally developed than someone who is older. But really that shouldn't matter in terms of setting boundaries between a minor and an adult, because it is otherwise far too open to interpretation and abuse, not even their parent gets to decide.

Whether it is a Left vs Right debate, you can see the figures where the difference between Left and Right areas where you see things like differences of education such as abstinence only education as a right wing conservative method. And the data shows that it doesn't work at stopping things like unwanted pregnancies. The Left wing attitude is to inform the kids, teach them safe practices, what consent is, and tell adults to not touch people under a certain age, because as a rule they cannot consent. And yet as you said, Mississippi as a conservative area allows 15 year olds to get married.

I’ve never met anyone who let a 15 year old girl get married. The laws are on the books to establish what parents are ALLOWED to do in the way of protecting their kids. It doesn’t establish a requirement that girls get married as soon as they turn 15. To even do that, parents have to get court approval. How easy do you really think it’s going to be finding a judge who’d go along with that? If Mississippi is so conservative, why the heck would anyone in the state even entertain the idea? It’s not impossible, just extremely unlikely.


This is where you are completely wrong. If a teenager is out there having sex with an adult, exactly who do you think is going to enforce the law? Do you think cops are staring in everyone’s bedroom window checking ID’s when two people start shucking off clothes? If parents don’t care, the cops certainly don’t. The cops aren’t even going to know about it until parents name names, press charges, and the cops have to arrest them.

If you really want to see things get interesting, watch what can happen during divorce proceedings when a spouse is cheating. It ain’t over until the judge signs the final decree. I’ve known at least one husband to hire a private detective to follow his wife around and actually catch her in the act. Unless children are doing this out in the open, the laws mean nothing without the parents. I’d prefer to stop it from happening in the first place.

Then why even have the law? In what possibility is a 15 year old being protected in being allowed to get get married? The only answer I can think of is that maybe someone got pregnant or generally found to have been active, and parents don't want it to be a baby born out of wedlock or maybe just saving face from their child living in sin. Either way in those circumstances they are not good reasons to allow a child to get married, and in no way actually protecting that child.

Can you give me one possible scenario that a child would be protected by being allowed to be married at 15, so that the law should be kept on the books?





It could be anyone who could report an adult being with a minor; a teacher, a classmate, a neighbour, and even themselves. It is not limited to a parent to then decide whether they want to make a scene of it, because maybe if it got attention from filing something then it would get out to the community that they raised a slut, or ended the career of a "good man" with a family. Maybe it was found that their 20 year old son was diddling his 15 year old sister, and if it got out they would be known as the family with the rapist son. It shouldn't be up to parents to decide if their child consented.

I don't really care on this topic for what happens in a divorce case, where everyone involved would have been consenting.

I got nothing.

My personal feelings on the matter are this: teenagers are much, much more mature and aware than adults give them credit for. I wish we lived in a society that acknowledged this, that young people can handle being married early and even start their families that early. But as it is, we are more concerned with robbing young people of their childhood that our thinking won’t let us move past this and accept young people as they are. Whether I like it or not, kids have the pressures of college, career, and maybe eventually property ownership, marriage, and family. So if that is the world I have to prepare my children for, then they are keeping their noses in their books until they’re done with school. They have the rest of their lives to work out romance and socializing.

I think sex is probably more enjoyable earlier in life, not that I’d actually know. I was 19 when my gf of 4 years and I lost our virginity together. But to be in the position that they could really enjoy each other and marry for life, I think marriage at that early age might actually be ideal. It’s just not something our society really accepts. It’s cruel to scream “wait for marriage” when you have no intention of letting them marry while they still want to, and then you throw so many requirements like education and career at them. Geez…if conservatives want to know why kids are so immoral, we only have ourselves to blame. So let them get married!

I think that’s the only reason why it’s possible to get married at 17m/15f. It’s for the sake of tradition, and it’s wrong to take that away from people. There might also be religious reasons, too.

As to an actual scenario…as I said, it holds no relevance for me, so I can’t help you there. My purpose wasn’t to justify it, but rather to state a fact. I’d say it allows expression of love in a safe, committed, legal relationship and provides the same legal protections as with adults, such as property division, child custody, and estate rights. When teens have babies, they get thrown into a relationship resembling separated and divorced couples. Having them get married really would save a lot of people a lot of headache.

A dumb@$$ guidance counselor once stuck me with two kids who shared a baby and a seething hatred for each other. They got into it in class one day. I felt like Jerry Springer. Crap like that is just unnecessary.


Well, the point in comparing it to a cheating spouse is that cheating is also against the law, but most guys feel powerless to do anything about it. It’s the same thing. Statutory r4?e laws exist to give parents teeth for fighting predators or even stupid teenage boys keeping score. And there’s more to it than statutory r4?e laws, such as kidnapping when a girl sneaks out, i.e. parents don’t consent to an underaged daughter leaving with her bf.

What you’re talking about goes beyond statutory r4?e. Teachers happen to be required by law to report things like that when we get wind of it, and we can be prosecuted when we don’t. I believe I already told the story about a girl who reported her teacher for rape despite her initiating sex. Incest is already against the law, so that’s easy prison time even if the siblings are consenting twins of adult age—which, I should point out, some countries are actually rescinding those laws. The kinds of things you’re talking about don’t disprove that consensual sex happens between people who don’t belong together because reasons. It’s that when those things happen it is irrelevant that the minor consents. The state declines to recognize that the minor has a legal right to consent for the purpose of the law.

I want it shown for the record that AngelRho has defended child marriage on the basis of religion, and thus as reasoning for the idea that minors can consent (with adults) because: "teenagers are much, much more mature and aware than adults give them credit for. I wish we lived in a society that acknowledged this, that young people can handle being married early and even start their families that early."

It sounds really close to some Muslim majority countries that say such a teenager can be married to a much older person.

The thing is that he did rape her. Even if she initiated it, him taking part in it was raping her. I am still confused from your earlier statement sounding like her reporting him was something that made you feel disturbed.




So, getting this straight, you are indeed of the opinion that it is only by law that the state doesn't recognise there being consent. You think on another basis that a minor can consent to sex with an adult? Perhaps from possibly religious parents recognising their minor daughter being married to an older man?