The Law Pedophile Avoids Prison!

[Chief]

This is just s**t inside your head. No one on this thread has said that.

You're reading a different thread to me I think.

 

[mantis]

Agree Chief, all the high fiving in this thread is disturbing, while actually missing the point.

Teachers are in a position of power & are employed to educate our children & to look after their safety while at school, not seduce them because they are either incapable of having a relationship with someone their own age, or because they are sexual predators.

Both male & female teachers should be jailed if they prey on their students.

 

[Oakland Raider]

Maybe the case was viewed as receiving unlawful penetration from an underage? Even if he enjoyed and was a willing participant?

It's fairly obvious the courtroom and judges treat women different to men cases. Both of the women mentioned are guilty and have received WAY less a penalty that what would be given to a male, if the role was reversed.
A lot of bottom five-ing it would seem from those in charge of the law and giving out sentence's.

 

[J_Moore]

I mean... the boy's 14. He's sexually mature, right? He can make his own decisions about his sexual partners. High five mate! Bagged yourself a sugar daddy already!

I didn't say any of that, nor imply any of that.

I'm simply saying someone who are attracted to pubescent teenagers - people who are, biologically speaking, sexually mature - probably isn't a paedophile.

I didn't say that there's nothing to worry about here. I didn't say that I can't see any potential harm in a 40 year old woman having sex with a 14 year old boy. I didn't ignore problems with power, trust or anything like that. And I didn't suggest anyone deserves a high five.

I'm just distinguishing it from paedophilia, which I see as a different thing.

 

[bunsen burner]

How would you describe sexual maturity?

I think he was referring to puberty and when their sex organs actually work rather than a mental thing.

 

[bunsen burner]

You're reading a different thread to me I think.

Then you can show me where anyone has said or implied this:

while women are delicate flowers who couldn't possibly want some

This guy missed the point because people aren't saying this. They are saying that women don't like being exploited. No one has said women don't like sex or sometimes aren't the instigators in some cases.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

Both male & female teachers should be jailed if they prey on their students.

Nobody is disagreeing with that. Of course they should. Every teacher that does it should lose their rego and go to jail. I agree 100%. That sex is wrong, exploitive, immoral etc.

What is disputed is the psychological impact on a male student compared to a female. It varies from student to student, but Id imagine as a general rule, the negative impacts on males are far more muted than on a female

 

[bit_pattern]

So if Brad Pitt decides to have sex with 14 year old girls you're cool with that? What about, say, a Hollywood film producer who, while not outrageously attractive, by the standards of women over 18 is quite a catch? What if he had sex with a young girl and nicked off to Europe? All cool?

Indeed. Roman Polanski was quite the looker in his day.

 

[dogupya]

but Id imagine as a general rule, the negative impacts on males are far more muted than on a female

This is not having a go at you at all, but I can safely say that most of the male offenders I work with would strongly disagree with you.

 

[WCEforeverman]

Would everyone feel the same if it was a 14 yr old male student penetrating his 41 yr old male teacher, rather than a female teacher?

 

[bunsen burner]

This is not having a go at you at all, but I can safely say that most of the male offenders I work with would strongly disagree with you.

How so?

Are you saying you work with 30+ year old guys who have been convicted of sleeping with 13-16 girls? And they are saying that the girls they nonced up aren't as affected as similar aged boys who have been nonced up by cougars?

 

[footyfreak]

Would everyone feel the same if it was a 14 yr old male student penetrating his 41 yr old male teacher, rather than a female teacher?

It's equally as bad in this PC world but in my mind it is much worse because the thought of it is sick but if the kid was clearly gay by then (i don't even know if you could fully know by then but you see these gays who say they knew well before that) then it is about the same, it's just personally sicker to people that tolerate homosexuals but think what they do is foul.

 

[Sportman1987]

Not a pedo, but still someone that's taken advantage of a minor sexually. I'd just like to see some consistency between genders. Next time a guy has sex with a 15 year old girl, leave him out of jail too. Will never happen though.

Sexual laws are always against the dudes. There was a case recently where a guy was put on trial for exhibitionism - he was making himself coffee in the nude with the windows open, and a women and her child walked past. You can bet if it was reversed, the guy walking past would have been charged for voyeurism.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

^^

Good point. There is still the perception that male nudity is perverted and female nudity beautiful, that males will go out of their way to see females while females are offended by males. There is probably a lot of truth to that but it isn't a legally binding argument.

I guess it would depend on how obvious it was, how close you were to the window, if a reasonable person would expect that someone would inadvertently look inside and see you.

I'd hate to take the option to walk around your own house naked away. At my house though, the stairs are in the front entrance and my door has heaps of glass panes in it and beside it. Walk downstairs naked and someone about to knock on the door gets a shock or if someone knocks on the door when you are downstairs, you can't get to your clothes upstairs because you have to go past the door. Our place is very private from the road but not if they are standing at the door. My wife is at the most risk of being caught, liberated lass that she is.

 

[dogupya]

How so?

Are you saying you work with 30+ year old guys who have been convicted of sleeping with 13-16 girls AND BOYS? And they are saying that the girls they nonced up aren't as affected as similar aged boys who have been nonced up by cougars?

Yes..

She's not a cougar if she is hunting 13 yr old boys, she is a child sex offender and you can bet your ass that those young male kids are as affected.

 

[bunsen burner]

Yes..

She's not a cougar if she is hunting 13 yr old boys, she is a child sex offender and you can bet your ass that those young male kids are as affected.

There is a vast difference between a 30+ year old male sleeping with a hetro 13-16 yo male and a 30+ yo female sleeping with a 13-16you hetro male.

To be frank, you are totally delusional if you think 13-16 females exploited by 30+yo males would not be more affected than 13-16yo males exploited by 30+yo females.

 

[bunsen burner]

Yes..

She's not a cougar if she is hunting 13 yr old boys, she is a child sex offender and you can bet your ass that those young male kids are as affected.

In context - cougar = 30+ yo female.

I'm not going to argue the definition of what a cougar is but I woulld have thought you would have been able to understand what I was referring to.

ps The word "nonced up" suggest I was referring to them as sex offenders. That's what a nonce is.

 

[Sportman1987]

There is a vast difference between a 30+ year old male sleeping with a hetro 13-16 yo male and a 30+ yo female sleeping with a 13-16you hetro male.

To be frank, you are totally delusional if you think 13-16 females exploited by 30+yo males would not be more affected than 13-16yo males exploited by 30+yo females.

Yeah, because all 15 year old boys are the same, and all 15 year old girls are the same.

You really want judges to take into account "inherent" PSYCHOLOGICAL differences between genders? Maybe judges should be more lenient when it comes to male on male crime. After all, we're just naturally more competitive. We should be better able to deal with violence, and it's more understandable when a guy lashes out.

 

[bunsen burner]

Yeah, because all 15 year old boys are the same, and all 15 year old girls are the same.

Why would you assume I said that? Can you show me where I said or inferred that?

You really want judges to take into account "inherent" PSYCHOLOGICAL differences between genders?

Yep. Why wouldn't they?

You know why it's wrong to hit women, right? It's because men are physically stronger than women. Just because some women are stronger than some men it doesn't mean that this rule should be ignored or that the generalisation doesn't exist.

I could give you a heap more examples, but if you can't grasp the concept by now I'm not sure how you had the abilty to use a computer.

 

[Sportman1987]

Why would you assume I said that? Can you show me where I said or inferred that?

Fine, you implied that there were characteristics ALL boys and ALL women share, since you said there is a huge difference between a 30 year old being with a 15 year old depending on gender. Which is bullshit. Some women wouldn't be affected at all, some men would, and vice versa. You can't split it down gender lines because women all share extremely different personality traits, as do men, which cannot be reduced to gender. There are 'trends' and norms within the genders, sure. But there are also trends within ethnic groups, religious groups, race, sexual orientation etc. Should the law take into account these trends and treat these groups differently when judging a case? No, not in my opinion. One of the basic tenets of a liberal democracy is equality before the law regardless of gender, race, orientation etc.

You know why it's wrong to hit women, right? It's because men are physically stronger than women. Just because some women are stronger than some men it doesn't mean that this rule should be ignored or that the generalisation doesn't exist.

I could give you a heap more examples, but if you can't grasp the concept by now I'm not sure how you had the abilty to use a computer.

I don't believe it's wrong to hit women. Plenty of men are weaker than me, and plenty are stronger. Gender and strength don't come into but the level of the threat.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

At my house though, the stairs are in the front entrance and my door has heaps of glass panes in it and beside it. Walk downstairs naked and someone about to knock on the door gets a shock or if someone knocks on the door when you are downstairs, you can't get to your clothes upstairs because you have to go past the door. Our place is very private from the road but not if they are standing at the door. My wife is at the most risk of being caught, liberated lass that she is.

So what's your address again, ODN?

On a serious note, Mantis hit it on the head with her post. Teachers have a duty of care to teach, and if they breach that then what good are they as educators?

 

[bunsen burner]

Fine, you implied that there were characteristics ALL boys and ALL women share,

Nope, just a case of you being a total homo and making a vastly incorrect assumption.

Take these common statements:

Men are stronger than women
Women can't read maps
White men can't jump

When people say these comments they don't mean that ALL men are stronger than ALL women. When people say that it is assumed that they are generalising.

But when I generalise you act like a total homo and assume I'm claiming all. Why is this? Stupid? You're an opportunist? Or is that you're just a knob?

since you said there is a huge difference between a 30 year old being with a 15 year old depending on gender.

Do you not know what "all other things being equal" means?

Which is bullshit.

I don't think you'll find many psycologist that agree with you.

If you really think you have a semblance of a valid point here then I pity the fool.

 

[Sportman1987]

Nope, just a case of you being a total homo and making a vastly incorrect assumption.

Take these common statements:

Men are stronger than women
Women can't read maps
White men can't jump

When people say these comments they don't mean that ALL men are stronger than ALL women. When people say that it is assumed that they are generalising.

But when I generalise you act like a total homo and assume I'm claiming all. Why is this? Stupid? You're an opportunist? Or is that you're just a knob?

Do you not know what "all other things being equal" means?

I don't think you'll find many psycologist that agree with you.

If you really think you have a semblance of a valid point here then I pity the fool.

Homo? Did you join this site when you were 4?

I agreed that there are "trends" or "norms" within genders, but that these (should) have absolutely no relevance in a court of law. I explained why I believe this is in my previous post.

There are 'trends' and norms within the genders, sure. But there are also trends within ethnic groups, religious groups, race, sexual orientation etc. Should the law take into account these trends and treat these groups differently when judging a case? No, not in my opinion. One of the basic tenets of a liberal democracy is equality before the law regardless of gender, race, orientation etc.

You really want the courts to take into account your generalizations when sentencing? Lol.

 

[bunsen burner]

Homo? Did you join this site when you were 4?

I agreed that there are "trends" or "norms" within genders, but that these (should) have absolutely no relevance in a court of law. I explained why this is in my previous post.

You actually interpreted what I said as meaning "all". If you are too dumb to understand the nuances of the English language and insist on taking everything literally then there isn't really much more that can be said. Except maybe, get a clue. Idiot.

 

[bunsen burner]

Homo? Did you join this site when you were 4?

You never seen question time? Calling people names is fun. And Australian.