Teacher who had sex with boy, 15, spared jail after judge says: He touched you first

[rld]

Gee, JustSex, last time I checked logic was just logic and not in need of adjectives to give it meaning. Stretch and intuit that, you ninny.

You keep talking about a small sample population, but I wonder how many rapists do you require for being a rapist to be a problem? Yes, many male kids have sex and do not become rapists, but that is because not many kids become rapists, not because being sexually assaulted by an adult is irrelevant to the small set of kids who become rapists. You have to keep your correlations straight.

I will make it as simple as possible for you. For arguments sake, I will just accept your figures: 53% of males have sex as minors, and 1% of the male population are rapists. The correlation the reports are claiming is NOT that having sex as a minor makes you a rapist. As you note, if this were true, we would have alot more rapists. The correlation being claimed is that of the small set who do become rapists, 60-80% report having been sexually assaulted by an adult. Given that one is trying to understand the effect on a sub-set of the population, rapists, 60-80% of that sub-set sharing a similar experience is statistically significant.

Hence the common claim being made in the thread that boys getting laid by an older woman has no effect other than getting the kid off is factually wrong, as there is evidence saying it is a statistically significant shared experience in the small set of males who go on to rape.

But again, saying boys consent because they want it while girls are victims of male exploiters just fails to extend to boys the same protections from sexual predators we extend to girls. The only thing that is phoo phoo dust about that conclusion is the material inside the brains of the JustSex's of the world, who can't appreciate it.

I love numbers games, they are so much fun.

So if your logic is correct, than we could reduce rapes by 60% or so by preventing minors being sexually assualted.

Therefore stat rape laws are a win-win. You protect minors and you protect adults.

 

[latinboy]

There is a lot of sicko's at there

 

[JustSex]

just because you are sexually active in no way makes one a adult at 15..

We are talking about an arbitrary calendar assignment to determine sexual maturity while I would argue that it should be more oriented toward behavior. Equating a sexually active 15 year old to an 8 year old 'child' in sexual response and behavior is obviously wrong. A little fairy doesn't flit around and bang an 18 year old on the head and say - 'yesterday you were a child - in the 5 minutes since mid-night - you are an adult'. It is a gradual process and people have different rates of maturity such that while we can say 15 year old girls are generally more innocent 'child' (as you would know better than I), 15 year old sexually active males certainly are not adversely affected by the age of the pussy they seek out. I can tell you as a male, that after scoring a pussy when you are 15, it really has no impact what age other than perhaps you crave the knowledge that an older girl could provide.

I would also suggest that even the legal system has accepted the blurred distinction of adulthood when they try juveniles in adult courts & on adult charges.

BTW: For the record, if we were debating this point in person in the same format indicated by your signature photo, I would agree with everything you say.

 

[dirtyharry555]

But again, saying boys consent because they want it while girls are victims of male exploiters just fails to extend to boys the same protections from sexual predators we extend to girls.

I respectfully disagree. We protect young males and females from Male adults equally. If the accused had been a male, he would be locked away for taking advantage of a teenage boy even if the boy initiated the encounter.

Fact is, men are far more predatory than females when it comes to sex, and young males and females need protection from them. Additionally, there is often potentially real physical trauma to the body (as opposed to fictional lifelong psychological trauma sustained by young males who wish to have sex with their female elders) that needs to be considered when an adult male engages in penetrative sex with either male or females as well.

I believe that if a true comparison was made, and it was a sexually promiscuous 15 year old female that initiated and had sex with the accused female adult, the judge would have ruled in exactly the same way.

 

[dirtyharry555]

But to not realize some teens would benefit from the affair is to ignore the truth in order to burn witches

Absolutely right. The social sciences tell us that males benefit socially and psychologically from sexual experiences as teenagers while early sexual experiences have adverse effects on females.

Males and females are very different, therefore we are not dealing with double standards. Apples and oranges are both fruits, but we treat them differently when consuming them. One is eaten whole while we peel the skin from the other.

 

[dirtyharry555]

Yoga Face, Libyan freedom fighters had zero say in the construction of the laws they now dissent from, unlike the UK population. Apples and oranges, so spurious argument.

If being made aware that 60-80% of male rapists report being sexually assaulted as minors gives you pause in your macho 'ah, the young lads like it' talk, then I don't know why you go on to babble about burning witches. I don't think the Children's Rights Council is burning witches, it seems they're trying to protect children from sexual predators.

As for drawing a line between predators and non-predators, you are right, a line is needed. But do we draw it in an after-the-fact way, for instance asking a minor 'so, did you like it'? If they say no the damage is already done and we have failed in our adult duty of care. So it seems saying a sexual predator is any adult who has sex with a minor seems the way to draw the line. And note the woman was convicted. She is a predator. She just walked away with less punishment than she deserves because our society doesn't treat male victims in the same way as female victims.

Define 'sexual assault' and 'minor' according to the studies. The teenager in this case was not assaulted. He may be a minor under the law but he is not a child. The distinction is important. He's an adolescent with sexual experience under his belt.

 

[2canchew]

He's a flippen minor, his under 16, that makes him a minor. A 15 yo that got REALY lucky and banged someone alot older than him...congrats to him but under the law he is a minor!

 

[dirtyharry555]

You mean apart from the link provided above, to the Canadian Children's Rights Council, which discusses a number of studies showing links between abuse victims and rapists?
And I guess you mean aside from the link to the report titled 'The Invisible Boy' (on the site just noted), which in Chapter 3 details studies showing evidence of links between sexual assault on teen boys and various forms of emotional trauma, acting out, low self esteem, sex offences, and so on. http://www.canadiancrc.com/The_Invisible_Boy_Report.aspx
And I guess you mean aside from a whole book on the topic, which includes testimony from male victims about how it negatively affected them? Here is a review http://mensightmagazine.com/reviews/Svoboda/donttell.htm

There. I complied with a reasonable request. Will any evidence sway JustSex and his lot from their unfounded conviction that sexual abuse of boys is just plain good for the little dudes?

With all due respect, JustSex's point stands firm. The studies you cited show a link primarily between men who sexually abused young boys. Most of us would agree that such abuse will cause trauma and that's why boys and girls, and adolescents, need protection from male adults. Abuse is tough to get over and homosexual abuse is doubly hard for boys to deal with.

JustSex's point is that a sexually active adolescent (not a child), who is not sexually assaulted or abused (the 15 year old in this case was neither abused or assaulted by the woman), who initiates sexual contact with an older female is worlds apart from men abusing male children or females abusing male children.

 

[dirtyharry555]

I agree that not all horny teen males would benefit from having sexual relations with older women. It's certainly possible for women to exploit and abuse teenage males. However I didn't see anything that would lead me to believe that's what occurred in this case. I believe the judge made the correct ruling given the facts of the case.

If you were to parse out the data in the aforementioned studies, I wouldn't be surprised if in fact the number of teenage males negatively impacted by sexual relations with older females is indeed insignificant. Homosexual abuse, for most, at any age, is a different animal altogether.

 

[JustSex]

If you were to parse out the data in the aforementioned studies, I wouldn't be surprised if in fact the number of teenage males negatively impacted by sexual relations with older females is indeed insignificant. Homosexual abuse, for most, at any age, is a different animal altogether.

I have stated this from the beginning but Sw1tch likes the figure 60% - even if the actual number of individuals (sexually active 15 yr old boy) that it applies is one in a million. It is a favorite ploy for alarmists - take a statistic out of context - apply to everything.

In the isolated examples thrown up to defend a crumbling position 'sexual assault on teen boys' - as you pointed out - this is consensual sex initiated or mutually agreed to by the sexually active 15 year old. With Sw1tches logic - the physiological trauma suffered by women who was raped is a good reason to make intercourse with all women illegal.

Bottom line - there is no trauma - and as an active participant that lived through this stage of life - I can't imagine the frustration I would have suffered if do gooders such as Sw1tch banned my sexual experiences until my 18th birthday.

Done - Finished - Que sera sera - adios - on to another thread

 

[Yoga Face]

I repeat The Canadian Children's Rights Council are witch hunters

There are 3 kinds of statistics
1 lies
2 more lies
3 more damn lies


They lump all abuse together then define abuse in extremely loose terms IE someone feels depressed after the affair . Are they are depressed because the affair is over? Because of damning religious views as now they will be tossed in to the eternal lake of fire ? Teens go through depression stages all the time so they must prove causality which they do not

Most damming of all they never state if affairs are ever beneficial. My guess is most affairs as described in the case at hand are beneficial - until they become public for becoming public is the traumatizing factor because they are now declared witches !

 

[Yoga Face]

I agree, YogaFace, that when you make your views public it is a source of trauma for many.

???????????????? I am simply stating not all such affairs are harmful

The Canadian Children's Rights Council is stating one side of the story only and lumping everyone together

I fail to see where I am wrong


And ............ oh well, forget it

 

[JustSex]

Is by being a very unintelligent person.
I suspect one reason for under-age sex laws is to protect minors from adults who think like JustSex, for whom it is all in the name (no thinking, just sex).

You are such a myopic idiot. No support - just clinging to the loose and arbitrary definitions that cannot distinguish a 6 month year old toddler (minor) from a 17 3/4 year old male (minor). It is all just black or white - sad but if it makes the world easier to comprehend - you stick to it.

Odd you are worried about my approach with minors when the only thing that prevents you from distinguishing a 12 year from a 21 year old is their drivers license.

 

[Yoga Face]

without an age cut-off known in advance about what constitutes a minor, there are no minors to be protected from adults, just adult-adult sex, which clearly exposes many minors to all kinds of exploitation and abuse. Of course there is a difference between 6 months old and 15, it's just that drawing a distinction between them in laws protecting minors excludes them from being minors and thus might not extend to them sufficient protection from predators.

I think your point is well made but needlessly encompassing of all juveniles

It is unjust to lump all ages together and does not serve the principle of caring for children to the best of our ability

I doubt allowing for the integrity of both the "child" and the adult to be the deciding factor in a fifteen year old relationship will open the door for greater exploitation of other fifteen years old but what it will do is open the door for such relationships that are beneficial



If The Canadian Children's Rights Council did their job without bias and publicized what it must know - that some older boys benefited from the affairs then we could have a more educated social discussion on what the laws should be


If it turns out that only a tiny percent of such relationships are beneficial then I will defend your beliefs but if it turns out a large majority of such relationships are beneficial then your argument is weakened but we are not privy to such data because it is a which hunt

 

[JustSex]

By your own definition, they are both minors.

I was being sarcastic lumping a 17 3/4 as the same sexual maturity as 6 month year old because because most intelligent people can distinguish a difference.... I guess I'm was overly presumptuous/ optimistic.

Nice to see a little back peddling from the application of the 60% traumatized rape victims applied to 15 year old sexually active teens. Add a few more pages of this thread and maybe everyone will forget why people objected to your alarmist trivia followed by the 'end of story', 'I have spoken' close.

 

[JustSex]

Note how you confuse the statistical claim. A number of studies were cited, showing that of male rapists, 60-80% report having been sexually abused as minors. You converted this in to a claim of 60% of sexually active teens being traumatized. If you cannot see your error then you lack sufficient intelligence to truly comment.

Are you on a registry anywhere?

Keep back peddling - the topic concerned sexually active 15 year old males and you offered up a statistic to imply that sexually active 15 year olds had a real danger of becoming a rapist. If the report wasn't implied to sexually active teens, why would you bring it up ?

When your condescending holier than thou pronouncements from the pulpit were called out as the meaningless bullshit they are, you scramble backwards implying that everyone who disagrees with you is a child rapist - a predictable immature response from someone with nothing intelligent to offer.

I was a 15 year old active sexual teen hunting pussy where ever I could find it. I was not alone as my friends and I were trading porno mags just dreaming of what we would do if we could get one of the girls in it. I can say first hand that any sexual liaison that I was lucky to have did not cause me harm nor do I (or my friends) turn into rapists.

To repeatedly infer that I am a pedophile for calling you out and relating my own experiences is tragically sick and just another indication of your total irrational paranoia on this topic.

BTW: You might want to watch some Charlie Sheen videos - you both seem to share the same attitude regarding your superior intellect over us common folk. Further proof that idiots with good vocabularies are still idiots.