36 year old female teacher had sex with 14 year old student

Page 12 of 13 [ 182 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next

JanuaryMan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jan 2012
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,465

28 Oct 2013, 10:58 am

Sorry MCalavera but I agree with Jono. You are lacking logic in this argument and you are using an appeal towards emotion to win it.
Fair enough, you think what happened in the report was okay for your own reasons but there are obviously laws in place. You may not agree with those laws but that particular law is very similar across the civilized world. If you consider that to be groupthink, however, I'm sure there are plenty of men that visit Cambodia or Thailand every year that will gladly side with you on it.



MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,602

28 Oct 2013, 11:05 am

JanuaryMan wrote:
Sorry MCalavera but I agree with Jono. You are lacking logic in this argument and you are using an appeal towards emotion to win it.
Fair enough, you think what happened in the report was okay for your own reasons but there are obviously laws in place. You may not agree with those laws but that particular law is very similar across the civilized world. If you consider that to be groupthink, however, I'm sure there are plenty of men that visit Cambodia or Thailand every year that will gladly side with you on it.


You didn't pay attention at all to my argument, so no surprise you resorted to a cheap shot there about Cambodia and Thailand.

Also, aren't you appealing to emotion as well? Look at your last two posts. You have made no rational case for why it's unacceptable for a person capable of enjoying and desiring sex to have consensual sex with an older person. If it's ok for a 40 year old to have sex with a 19 year old or an 18 year, why is it a problem when it's 17?

We are not talking about little prepubescent children, nor are we talking about actual abuse, so your cheap shot was unwarranted.

Come at me with logic and reason rather than snide remarks.

EDIT: This is the problem with groupthink. It makes you go against your usual standards of judgement and forego rational thinking when it comes to matters you know the group as a whole would disapprove of if you go against its ideals. In other words, "sucking up".



JanuaryMan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jan 2012
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,465

28 Oct 2013, 11:16 am

My case was it's law. Much like to me it makes no sense to have cannabis laws as I personally find it harmless, I too have to accept the laws and customs of each nation or go somewhere with laws and customs I accept. I understand you feel differently about this but personal opinion cannot override law. That is my logic.

And trust me, you don't need groupthink to lose rationalization of thought.



MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,602

28 Oct 2013, 11:23 am

JanuaryMan wrote:
My case was it's law. Much like to me it makes no sense to have cannabis laws as I personally find it harmless, I too have to accept the laws and customs of each nation or go somewhere with laws and customs I accept. I understand you feel differently about this but personal opinion cannot override law. That is my logic.

And trust me, you don't need groupthink to lose rationalization of thought.


I was wanting to probe into why it's morally unacceptable and why the legal punishment must be too harsh. There wouldn't be an argument if the punishment fit the deed in this "civilized" world.



JanuaryMan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jan 2012
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,465

28 Oct 2013, 11:31 am

The reason ages of consent exist is to protect children, I'm sure you know this but simply disagree with it. Physical and emotional maturity are not one and the same. Adults are or should be in a responsible position to say "No" when they are being seduced or in a situation to press on or do the right thing. If an adult is vulnerable there have been exceptions made such as in rape cases when children have raped adults but that's another story. Needless to say, putting your own view ahead of a wellbeing system in law that has been established over a long time simply because it's what you agree with is not sufficient enough argument to challenge something like the case in this thread if you ask me.



MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,602

28 Oct 2013, 11:42 am

No, I don't disagree with setting ages. What I disagree with is the black or white thinking that is often exhibited by the public or by law enforcers. As I said before, it should be a case by case scenario. And a lot more empathy should be displayed for those cases where no abuse occurred.

Anyway, if the woman mentioned in the OP is not being punished by the law, then the law apparently supports it. But the problem then is more with the public in such case.

All that said, just because something may be quite bizarre to you or me or anyone else here, as long as no abuse happened, it does not make it morally wrong. If neither side is a victim, why force one of them to become one and waste years in prison for one trivial mistake?

A 40 year old having sex with 15 or 16 year old may not be normal, but so is a 40 year old having sex with an 18 year old.

By the way, the law seems to also assume free will as well. That's the biggest problem I have with current renditions of the law.



JanuaryMan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jan 2012
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,465

28 Oct 2013, 11:48 am

MCalavera wrote:
No, I don't disagree with setting ages. What I disagree with is the black or white thinking that is often exhibited by the public or by law enforcers.
Law has to exist in black and white context as to be absolute.

MCalavera wrote:
A 40 year old having sex with 15 or 16 year old may not be normal, but so is a 40 year old having sex with an 18 year old.

By the way, the law seems to also assume free will as well. That's the biggest problem I have with current renditions of the law.

So you don't agree with setting ages? Or is it the ages that have been set?



MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,602

28 Oct 2013, 11:57 am

I agree with setting ages (even if it has to be 18 ) but only as guidelines, allowing for flexibility for cases that don't warrant such harsh penalties. Some adults can be vulnerable enough to fall into them without being predators or even trying to prey on underage teenagers. They may be mentally ill or not cognitively aware enough to and the teenager might be manipulative and know how to get what he wants, it should not equal doom for the adult in such a case.



MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,602

28 Oct 2013, 12:00 pm

JanuaryMan wrote:
MCalavera wrote:
No, I don't disagree with setting ages. What I disagree with is the black or white thinking that is often exhibited by the public or by law enforcers.
Law has to exist in black and white context as to be absolute.


One other thing, why then must you think in terms of black or white? If it's the law's nature to be that way, what's your own reason?



GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,139

28 Oct 2013, 12:41 pm

So, where do we draw the line?

Last time I checked, the age of consent (AOC) in the "civilized world" (Go home, Saudi Arabian age of consent law. You are drunk... and evil) varies between 13 and 18 years of age.

To make things even more complicated, several countries have:

- "Romeo and Juliet" clauses which eliminate or reduce penalties when the age difference of participants is low, and
- "Power differential" clauses with increase the age of consent (or the penalties) when one participant is in a position of power.
- Different ages of consent depending on the sexual activity (although - in general - these countries are less likely to be in the "civilized category")

How do we resolve this? Well...

1. We could focus purely on the "physical maturity" aspect, in which case most contemporary age of consent thresholds would likely be too high.
2. We could focus purely on the "mental maturity" aspect, in which case - given the rule of thumb about the brain only being fully developed at the age of 25 - most people would be guilty of child molestation.
3. We could design a legal system with the necessary legal tools to appropriately punish true offenders and appropriately protect true victims (=an age of consent), and the necessary flexibility to avoid rigidly applying these tools in unwarranted cases (=judicial discretion)

We also need to realize that the legal age of consent likely has a limited impact on the actual age of first intercourse. Other factors might be more important.

Here is part of a graph from a study made by Durex in their 2005 "Global Sex Survey", reporting the average age of first sex in a number of countries. Total N = 317,000+:

Image
Source (see page 5 for the full ranking): http://www.durex.com/en-jp/sexualwellbe ... result.pdf

My chosen cut-off point (Spain) has a lower age of consent (13) than every country in the study having a lower age of first sex than it.

Oh, and Portugal (AOC=14] had the same age of first sexual intercourse as the US (AOC=16-18) in the study.


_________________
Our comforting conviction that the world makes sense rests on a secure foundation: our almost unlimited ability to ignore our ignorance.

- Daniel Kahneman


Jono
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,465
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

28 Oct 2013, 2:14 pm

MCalavera wrote:
Jono, do you really want to censor free speech by suggesting the mods do something about the last video I posted? Why did you do that? Trying to impress?

Here's another video for you (I dare you to report it):

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lw8GKJ5buHk[/youtube]

Well, Jono, looks like the rumors about her are untrue. So who's lying? Them or her?

Watch the whole video and tell me if she's saying anything inappropriate. She states she is not advocating preying on children, and that the things they say about her are lies.

But now, of more concern for me personally, is why you reported the last video when it did not contain any inappropriate speech advocating anything to do with pedophilia? And why even suggest at the probability that I be warned by the mods for posting it?

Do you really want to go that far just to be a goody-two-shoes, Jono?


No, I'm not going to report it. Also no, believe it or not, I was not trying to censor you or even get you into trouble. If you did, then I apologise. I also did not even do it out any moral convictions either. In fact, I do not want to censor anyone who disagrees with me, whether it's in moral convictions or otherwise. The truth is that I was spooked when I googled her name and discovered several websites directly accusing her of being a child molester and pro-peadophilia. Something, which I didn't know then but I do now, is apparently she was convicted of a misdemeanour and not a felony, in which case I actually with her position to some degree that being put on the sex offender registry with people who actually do commit felonies is quite stupid. Now, I wasn't so much worried about that particular video than I was about future information being posted on this forum arguing for pro-paedophilia, which I thought was potentially harmful, not only because it has children on it but because it's an autistic community forum where some could be naive and literal-minded enough to take such arguments at face value. I thought that trying to prevent such future would also be protecting other members. Now, you don't have to accept my apology, but there it is, take it or leave it.



Jono
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,465
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

28 Oct 2013, 2:23 pm

MCalavera wrote:
I agree with setting ages (even if it has to be 18 ) but only as guidelines, allowing for flexibility for cases that don't warrant such harsh penalties. Some adults can be vulnerable enough to fall into them without being predators or even trying to prey on underage teenagers. They may be mentally ill or not cognitively aware enough to and the teenager might be manipulative and know how to get what he wants, it should not equal doom for the adult in such a case.


In that case, I think that there is already some flexibility. The thing is that then the laws have to be made more complicated in order to account for mitigations and exceptions. There are already clauses that contain close of age exemptions ("Romeo and Juliet" clauses), "power differential clauses", I've even heard of defences where the accused had mistaken the age of the alleged victim (depending on country).



pawelk1986
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Apr 2010
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,767
Location: Wroclaw, Poland

28 Oct 2013, 2:54 pm

MCalavera wrote:
I agree with setting ages (even if it has to be 18 ) but only as guidelines, allowing for flexibility for cases that don't warrant such harsh penalties. Some adults can be vulnerable enough to fall into them without being predators or even trying to prey on underage teenagers. They may be mentally ill or not cognitively aware enough to and the teenager might be manipulative and know how to get what he wants, it should not equal doom for the adult in such a case.


I also agree the the teacher may deal with teenage version of Dr. House :D a manipulative egocentric jerk :D



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,721
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

28 Oct 2013, 5:38 pm

thomas81 wrote:
I've always preferred older women generally ever since I was old enough to appreciate women. Its what happens when you attend a boys only school and your teachers are the only non-related females you come into contact with on a regular basis.


My age preference was 25 when I was in my late teens and it is still 25 today even though I'm nearly 60.



MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,602

28 Oct 2013, 8:25 pm

GGPViper wrote:
So, where do we draw the line?

Last time I checked, the age of consent (AOC) in the "civilized world" (Go home, Saudi Arabian age of consent law. You are drunk... and evil) varies between 13 and 18 years of age.

To make things even more complicated, several countries have:

- "Romeo and Juliet" clauses which eliminate or reduce penalties when the age difference of participants is low, and
- "Power differential" clauses with increase the age of consent (or the penalties) when one participant is in a position of power.
- Different ages of consent depending on the sexual activity (although - in general - these countries are less likely to be in the "civilized category")

How do we resolve this? Well...

1. We could focus purely on the "physical maturity" aspect, in which case most contemporary age of consent thresholds would likely be too high.
2. We could focus purely on the "mental maturity" aspect, in which case - given the rule of thumb about the brain only being fully developed at the age of 25 - most people would be guilty of child molestation.
3. We could design a legal system with the necessary legal tools to appropriately punish true offenders and appropriately protect true victims (=an age of consent), and the necessary flexibility to avoid rigidly applying these tools in unwarranted cases (=judicial discretion)


I like option 3 the best if I understood it correctly. Sure, it might be more work for those in charge, but it also means less severe penalties for those not deserving it.

I agree that power differentials are important to consider when it is actually the case. It is easy for a preying teacher to use that for his own gain to get sex from a vulnerable student. But even then, I think this applies for ages above 18 as well. So the issue here is more to do with power than with age. And we shouldn't just go by mere nominal position because it could be the case that the student is being the dominant one and the teacher turning out to be a naive vulnerable person (for whatever psychological reasons they may be).

And as your data shows, the law doesn't stop underage sex from happening regularly anyway. But then again, this is to be expected (drug use is a similar matter as well). Personally, I think it's the national attitude towards sex that helps. Less peer pressure and all that. I don't know if that's the case for Spain.