And... you don't see why your idea would be... unfortunate?
Two adults have consensual sex, Texas is going to send one to jail!
- Thread starter Coins
- Start date
- Status
And... you don't see why your idea would be... unfortunate?
Blackace
if you see me in a fight with a bear, don't help me fool, help the bear!
Jailtime is totally unjust.. she would have lost her career anyways...
How does the teacher-student relationship become any more "inherently coercive" than say that of a woman older and more financially sound than a younger male partner?
Just because a teacher is in charge of a student's grade does not necessarily place them in a position of power. Assumed power, maybe.
You're arguing metaphysical properties here. Thoughts. You want to put some one away for twenty years based on the assumed incapability of an eighteen year old to think for himself?
I would be offended if someone told eighteen-year-old me that I couldn't possibly handle the decision of my hot teacher wanting to fuck me.
Twenty years for "it can," ladies and gentlemen.
That being said, I completely understand why it is a law. Given the nature of the possible situation, it may be "best" to corral all instances of such a relationship under the same blanket of punishment. It has a high potential for abuse, and can be difficult to prove one way or the other.
But the rigidity of the law and extremity of the punishment can certainly be argued, as shown in this thread.
This is why we have judges and why mandatory sentences are stupid.
In Texas a second-degree felony is punishable by up to 20 years in prison, but it's up to the judge to decide what the proper amount of jailtime, if any, is required.
Waste of taxpayer money. Overcrowds our prison system. I'd say it does those two pretty well. Also more likely to make her a criminal again.
NathanMcMahon
Banned
According to some very agitated posters in here it puts an obviously guilty rapist whee they belong which is behind bars.
There are people that say the same bolded thing about same sex relationships and interracial relationships. Sometimes people with age gaps have relationships too. They're adults and it's none of your business.
Also the person in question is not a child.
ConfusingJazz
Member
That's why they have sentencing, so a judge can give leniency due to circumstances. The law isn't minimum 20 years, but maximum.
Not really? I think the government having a say in who can and can't be in a relationship is an awful thing that only encourages the type of bigoted thinking like the last person I just quoted.
Wafflecakes
Member
This part is totally BS. Of course its inherently coercive. Of course grades is a position of power.
Thats not the question
The question is whether that is enough reason for it to be illegal.
Blackace
if you see me in a fight with a bear, don't help me fool, help the bear!
which is why being black and doing crimes is such a bad idea in Texas..
Wafflecakes
Member
Yeah hardly anyone is saying that. (aka no one that I have seen) You are the one coming off overly angry and confrontational.
In this case, maybe. Not familiar with this case's particulars. Not in all cases, though. Which, for the purpose of the debate, would mean it's not inherent.
Because there, the power is all voluntary and basically illusory. Whereas an employer, a teacher, or a prison guard all have direct ability to apply punitive and undue pressure to an uncooperative sexual partner. The reason the poster mentioned that some colleges allow professors to have relations with adult students (NOT IN THEIR CLASS) and with disclosure is that sunlight can eliminate the risk of coercion, and banning a relationship with a student in your class prevents favoritism AND coercion. The key is disclosure of a relationship and that the person not be under your direct supervisory authority because otherwise you're giving an incentive for people to grossly abuse their authority and then go the extra mile to prevent them telling anyone it is coerced.
She is in a position of power; but that doesn't mean she necessarily used coercion to have sex with the student. It's only coercion if she actually leveraged her position of power in order to obtain sex from the student. Which is an assumption, without the facts. That's why the law is poor. If it can be proven that she leveraged her position of power to receive sex from an otherwise unwilling person, then she should be punished by the law; and this should be the case in any instance where there is a relationship and one person has a "position of power" over another person.
NathanMcMahon
Banned
Nvm.
I'm pretty sure they drill the "don't have sex with your students" thing into teachers heads in every school district now, regardless of state.
Is it just me or does it seem like one of these stories pops up every week or so now. Why is this becoming so popular or was it always popular and just not reported?
I bet this goes on more than you think, especially in areas that rely on Teach for America teachers, etc... Kids 22 & 23 years old, fresh out of college teaching high school students who are 18. 23 to 18 isn't a big difference at all and would be totally fine if they were both on the same college campus, etc...
***EDIT***
I'll add that my wife just mentioned that during her first year of teaching she ran into some of her students at a bar. They had gotten in via fake IDs. It was very uncomfortable and she evidently turned around and walked out of said bar ASAP.
VelvetMouth
Member
So because there are people in the world who are bigots we should completely supports adults grooming kids for sex because you know it would be cool like that and it's nobody's business if a teacher tells a 17 year old student that he'll change her grades for her if she blows him, the day she turns 18 of course. Or how about that coach or high school councilor who's there for the kid when she has trouble at home but the day she turns 18 he starts fondling her tits in his car when he's giving her a ride home. That's completely OK because she can trust him because he's been there for her since she was 16. What a prude I am for not thinking it's OK behavior from an adult in a position of authority.
Wafflecakes
Member
No. I am simply pointing out that you are pretty much making shit up when you talk about what others have posted.
(See that rather than proving me wrong by quoting where people actually said what you claim they said you attacked me instead. Implied guilt?)
Do you also feel that if a person under the legal age of consent can be shown to be particularly responsible for their age, that charges of statutory rape should be dropped?
NathanMcMahon
Banned
You're right.
kiunchbb
www.dictionary.com
Texas take their professional relationship seriously! The teacher should know about that law, this is not the first time stuff like this reported in the news, and government workers are required to take training on those subjects annually or semi-annually.
This is the same reason psychologist cannot have a relationship with their patient.
I am more curious about adult night school or college teacher, can those teachers have relationship with the students? Let's say both party is over >30 of age.
This is the same reason psychologist cannot have a relationship with their patient.
I am more curious about adult night school or college teacher, can those teachers have relationship with the students? Let's say both party is over >30 of age.
I think it is because it can affect so much in a person's life. Your grades at the college level determine if you graduate and cost you thousands of dollars besides, maybe even a scholarship if you're on one.
In highschool it's just as bad. You could LOSE an opportunity at a scholarship, you could lose admittance to a more selective college... a teacher pressuring with the threat of bad grades if you don't put out... that's rape because the risk is it eliminates the ability to consent, at least as long as the teacher in question has authority over you.
LizardKing
Member
Seems like the people who are in favor of this law have a problem with the fact that the student can be coerced. But that is an assumption, and it's a bad idea to make a law based on an assumption. Shouldn't it be sufficient that coercing someone to have sex with you is illegal? Wouldn't that be enough to alleviate your fears about students being coerced? Why legally punish those who are acting as normal consenting, non-coerced adults?
Edit: And no, there is no "inherent coercion." That is ridiculous. In order for someone to be coerced they have to feel coerced. You cannot make that assumption that every student feels that way.
Edit: And no, there is no "inherent coercion." That is ridiculous. In order for someone to be coerced they have to feel coerced. You cannot make that assumption that every student feels that way.
K
kittens
Unconfirmed Member
So the fuck what? Doesn't mean the law is okay or should be respected.
Duhhhhh
Wafflecakes
Member
I think the discussion comes in that some people. In their reaction to the unjust law. Made it seem like what she was doing is perfectly ok. Which many people disagree with.
Why would it be? Politicians have NO direct authority or control over voters. The problem with a student-teacher relationship is that while the student may not be your student they easily could be depending on schedules.
There's no conflict between a politician and a voter. One vote is minuscule in pool of voters while a teacher has very real and immediate power over an individual student.
It's not based on an assumption of coercion, it's based on the imbalance of power being inherently a coercive environment. It doesn't matter whether coercion occurs, the crime is statutory rape. That's why, even though it's possible for a 15 year old to WANT to have sex with a 35 year old say, that would be a crime even if the 15 year old "consented" (at least in most states)
SnakeswithLasers
Member
Texas, as much as it wants to be, is not its own country. I really don't see how this is constitutional. In fact, Arkansas's Supreme Court recently overturned a similar law: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/30/us-usa-crime-arkansas-idUSBRE82T00G20120330
I believe the constitution just headshotted our resident libertarian named Gaborn.
(Edit: I haven't been following closely, I've just been skimming, but I'm pretty sure Gaborn has been defending this nonsense law.)
JustinSane
Neo Member
LOL America.
Happens all the time.
For example, laws or rules regarding 'conflict of interests.'
ReturnOfTheRAT
Member
Especially if you're both adults in Texas.
Wafflecakes
Member
Hey stop making Juniors look bad -.-
I'm actually ok with something Texas has done. Teacher student relationships need to be strongly discouraged, regardless of age (college might get a slide). There are a lot of bad things that can come up with these things. So I'm fine with it being punishable by jail time.
That said, I can see what the AR court has said. Either way, teachers that do this need to be punished harshly. As in banned for life, and perhaps repaying salary.
That said, I can see what the AR court has said. Either way, teachers that do this need to be punished harshly. As in banned for life, and perhaps repaying salary.
Bumblebeetuna
Member
One is a teacher, one is a student. Seems simple enough to me.
She won't get 20 years.
She won't get 20 years.
VelvetMouth
Member
That 17 year old girl in your class is turning 18 on Wednesday, time to get your dick wet. It should be your constitutional right to fuck that just turned 18 year old you gave a B to in your class. You're a teacher. You deserve the added perks of grooming your kids for sex.
I think that in all likelihood she won't face jail time. The law does not state that there is a minimum of twenty years, or mandate jail time at all. It is punishable with up to twenty years, and that's for any relationship between educators and students of any age. I think that up to twenty years is fine for an upper limit, though I think most of us would agree that twenty years is too high in this particular instance and that something like probation would be more appropriate.
But this is two consenting adults. It's different. If you can't see why then you support a bigoted law.
They're not kids, they're consenting adults.
Doesn't make it right. People should not be able to be prosecuted based on an assumption.
VelvetMouth
Member
So you have no problem with an adult in an authority position grooming a child for sex as long as the adult waits until that child turns 18 to fuck them? To you it's like taking a kid on several dates or extended foreplay until the clock strikes twelve then they become fair game.
You should become a foster parent. Raise your own potential sex partners.
Wafflecakes
Member
I think the point is that States have always regulated what you can or cannot consent to and who can or cannot consent.
Can you explain to me who this law is bigoted against? That is not clear to me.
I also don't understand why you are hammering home the point that they are consenting adults. The issue is not their age, but the nature of their relationship. I think that there's a reasonable case to be made that, regardless of age of consent, the state has a compelling interest in discouraging relationships between students and teachers. It oughtn't be particularly difficult to wait 9 months until the student has graduated in order to begin a sexual relationship with him or her.
I agree that 20 years is overmuch, but I also don't think that's what we should be expecting her to get.
And I've already explained why this is wrong.
Surely the situations involving minors below the age of consent are covered by other general sex crime statutes with adequate penalties. This law extends criminality, and this large penalty, to edge cases like this one.
Wafflecakes
Member
Probably wrong morally. I agree.
Legally they are covered though.
I don't think it should be a crime. She should totally lose her career though.
There's already enough discouragement. A teacher knows damn well that when they get found out they'll lose their job and most likely never teach again.
There's no reason for the state to come up with a law like this. Just seems like overreaching.
- Status