Support NeoGAF

[Valnen]

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.

This is a separate crime entirely. It's illegal to try and coerce a minor into sex, which is what you're describing, even if you tell them it can wait until their 18th birthday.

It's not illegal to hit on an adult in most situations unless they tell you to stop at which point it becomes harassment.

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.

There's a huge difference between discouraging such relationships and outlawing them. I'm adult, I should be allowed to have sex with another adult if they consent. Even if that person happens to be my teacher/college professor/boss/whatever. The government should not be able to arrest the person I had sex with when I wanted it in the first place. That's just nuts. I find this law bigoted because it's essentially giving the government the ability to decide who can and can't be in a relationship.

If the government can arrest any "sexual deviant" they want, well we already know the results of that from history.

 

[Wafflecakes]

There's a huge difference between discouraging such relationships and outlawing them. I'm adult, I should be allowed to have sex with another adult if they consent. Even if that person happens to be my teacher/college professor/boss/whatever. The government should not be able to arrest the person I had sex with when I wanted it in the first place. That's just nuts. I find this law bigoted because it's essentially defining who can and can't be in a relationship, much in the same way people want to do to same sex couples or other situations.

Just in case you are wondering. Bigoted and Bad are not synonyms. Hence why you are confusing the hell out of people.

 

[MWS Natural]

Does stacking apply here as well? She should get charged for every time she molested him. 2,000 years in prison sounds about right.

 

[SapientWolf]

Inappropriate, but not 20 years in prison inaproproate when both are consenting adults. That law seems way too harsh.

If the two people involved are both of legal age then that punishment is insane.


And I'm not sure how much authority the teacher has after starting a physical relationship. At that point student has the power to completely ruin their life.

 

[Valnen]

Just in case you are wondering. Bigoted and Bad are not synonyms. Hence why you are confusing the hell out of people.

It's bigoted because the one of the main reasons these laws exist is because they find large age gap relationships to be "icky" and thus want them outlawed. This was made pretty clear from someone I quoted earlier.

 

[Wafflecakes]

Does stacking apply here as well? She should get charged for every time she molested him. 2,000 years in prison sounds about right.

What I read (correct me if I am wrong):

"I disagree with the sentence so therefor I am going to blow it out of proportion to the point that what I post is actually irrelevant to the discussion at hand so people know just HOW MUCH I disagree with the law."

It's bigoted because the one of the main reasons these laws exist is because they find large age gap relationships to be "icky" and thus want them outlawed. This was made pretty clear from someone I quoted earlier.

Age gap has nothing to do with it #1

You are still using Bigoted incorrectly either way.

 

[Valnen]

Age gap has nothing to do with it #1

You are still using Bigoted incorrectly either way.

It has everything to do with it, whether people want to admit it or not. The teacher probably would not have been arrested had the student been 25 years old and this was college or something.

 

[Wafflecakes]

It has everything to do with it, whether people want to admit it or not. The teacher probably would not have been arrested had the student been 25 years old.

I think that you would find that you are VERY wrong.

People hold the Teacher/Student relationship to a different level similar to Doctor/Patient and Parent/Child.

 

[Big Baybee]

It has everything to do with it, whether people want to admit it or not. The teacher probably would not have been arrested had the student been 25 years old and this was college or something.

Yes, she would have because of the law in Texas. If he was still in HS. College probably not.

 

[Valnen]

Also, how am I using bigot incorrectly? We're talking about people so intolerant and disgusted of this teacher they want her locked up, even though she had sex with a consenting adult. That's bigotry any way you slice it.

 

[VelvetMouth]

This is a separate crime entirely. It's illegal to try and coerce a minor into sex, which is what you're describing, even if you tell them it can wait until their 18th birthday.

It's not illegal to hit on an adult in most situations unless they tell you to stop at which point it becomes harassment.



There's a huge difference nuts.

So you think these teachers who have sex with their students sit around and wait for their 18th birthdays before the make a move on them? They don't make passes at them when they're 17 but the day they turn 18 that kid turns into a mature adult overnight which makes it all good.

 

[CornBurrito]

What's the issue here? They're two LEGAL adults.

Student/Teacher, Doctor/Patient, and other similar relationships are probably illegal because there can easily be a degree of manipulation involved.

 

[Wafflecakes]

Also, how am I using bigot incorrectly? We're talking about people so intolerant and disgusted of this teacher they want her locked up, even though she had sex with a consenting adult. That's bigotry any way you slice it.

Ya except it isn't. By your definition anyone who wants anyone else locked up is bigoted against that person.

Bigotry is to be intolerant/persecute/etc against a person for who they are or what they are such as sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, race, ethnicity, nationality, region, language, religious or spiritual belief, personal habits, political alignment, age, economic status or disability.

The teacher CHOSE to have sex with a student. When someone dislikes her for that it is not bigotry.

 

[Valnen]

So you think these teachers who have sex with their students sit around and wait for their 18 birthdays before the make a move on them? They don't make passes at the when they're 17 but the day they turn 18 that kid turns into a mature adult overnight which makes it all good.

If you can prove they were making a move on a minor, arrest them. But you don't arrest people based on assumptions.

 

[ConfusingJazz]

God damn it.

20 YEARS IS THE MAXIMUM FOR THE CHARGE. SHE HAS NOT BEEN CONVICTED, NOR SENTENCED.

She probably won't get it. Its on the books in case she was really fucking him for grades.

 

[Valnen]

Ya except it isn't. By your definition anyone who wants anyone else locked up is bigoted against that person.

Bigotry is to be intolerant/persecute/etc against a person for who they are or what they are such as sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, race, ethnicity, nationality, region, language, religious or spiritual belief, personal habits, political alignment, age, economic status or disability.

The teacher CHOSE to have sex with a student. When someone dislikes her for that it is not bigotry.

In this case people are being intolerant because they don't approve of a 30 year old having sex with an 18 year old.

 

[FStop7]

This is why all police officers are sworn to celibacy.

 

[Wafflecakes]

In this case people are being intolerant because they don't approve of a 30 year old having sex with an 18 year old.

Thats not bigotry though. Intolerance /= bigotry either. I am intolerant of bad drivers.....I am not bigoted against them.

And its not about that....its the student/teacher relationship believe it or not. I know I would react the same way whether the teacher was 24 of 94.

 

[nateeasy]

In this case people are being intolerant because they don't approve of a 30 year old having sex with an 18 year old.

UMMM no. They take issue with a high school teacher fucking a high school student.

 

[VelvetMouth]

If you can prove they were making a move on a minor, arrest them. But you don't arrest people based on assumptions.

And you're assuming that an adult woman who has to patrol the school yard for sex really cares if a kid is 17 or 18.

 

[cousins]

Spoiler

two consenting adults, right?

 

[Valnen]

And you're assuming that an adult woman who has to patrol the school yard for sex really cares if a kid is 17 or 18.

You're assuming she "has to" and it's not something that just happened.

Stuff happens between consenting adults. You can't seem to handle that. There's no proof she was basically molesting the fuck out of this man as you seem adamant on thinking.

 

[Devolution]

In this case people are being intolerant because they don't approve of a 30 year old having sex with an 18 year old.

I'm intolerant of a teacher grooming her student to be her fuckbuddy when he turns 18. I assumed others would be as well. Guess I was wrong.

 

[Wafflecakes]

You're assuming she "has to" and it's not something that just happened.

Stuff happens between consenting adults. You can't seem to handle that. There's no proof she was basically molesting the fuck out of this man as you seem adamant on thinking.

And you can't seem to handle that people think its inappropriate for a teacher to sleep with a student.

 

[Evlar]

I'm intolerant of a teacher grooming her student to be her fuckbuddy when he turns 18. I assumed others would be as well. Guess I was wrong.

It would be nice if the state had to actually prove an allegation like that to get a sentence.

 

[Captain Sparrow]

Position of power my ass.

There's 1001 ways that an older partner can "coerce" someone younger.

 

[Devolution]

It would be nice if the state had to actually prove an allegation like that to get a sentence.

You mean by telling teachers explicitly to keep their hands off students?

 

[Evlar]

You mean by telling teachers explicitly to keep their hands off students?

... That is not proof.

 

[Valnen]

I'm intolerant of a teacher grooming her student to be her fuckbuddy when he turns 18. I assumed others would be as well. Guess I was wrong.

So a 30 year old adult meets an 18 year old, and they're complete strangers. They decide to have sex and that's perfectly fine.

But because they know each other and an environment you're not personally comfortable with them getting together in, it should now be illegal. Uh, no. That's dumb.

 

[cousins]

Such double standards. Also, Valnen, you're giving me douche chills.

 

[Devolution]

... That is not proof.

Why should the state give the benefit out of the doubt to someone who is a teacher and had contact with the student before they even turned 18?

So a 30 year old adult meets an 18 year old, and they're complete strangers. They decide to have sex and that's perfectly fine.

But because they know each other and an environment you're not personally comfortable with them getting together in, it should now be illegal. Uh, no. That's dumb.

You mean plenty of people aren't comfortable with? Unless you like the idea of teachers trolling the school to fuck your kids.

 

[Loofy]

Parents dont want their kids in high school getting fucked by the teachers. Why is this an argument?

 

[Evlar]

Why should the state give the benefit out of the doubt to someone who is a teacher and had contact with the student before they even turned 18?

Yet they do exactly that. If this 18 year old was a sophomore in college Texas would do zilch about this tryst. If this had been a private tutor, or a band camp instructor, again: zilch.

 

[Wafflecakes]

So a 30 year old adult meets an 18 year old, and they're complete strangers. They decide to have sex and that's perfectly fine.

But because they know each other and an environment you're not personally comfortable with them getting together in, it should now be illegal. Uh, no. That's dumb.

No its a environment where one person has significant power and authority over the other.

 

[Big Baybee]

I'm intolerant of a teacher grooming her student to be her fuckbuddy when he turns 18. I assumed others would be as well. Guess I was wrong.

Is that what happened though? Article says she started messing with him in Feb. Was he already 18 at that point? We can't just assume she was "grooming" him without any info to back that up. That would change my feelings on it if that was the case.

 

[Evlar]

Parents dont want their kids in high school getting fucked by the teachers. Why is this an argument?

Kid is 18 and could move across state lines if he wished. That's why.

 

[bishoptl]

Don't fuck your students. There. Done.

Jeopardizing your gig over some tail is for dummies.

That said, jailtime is a bit OTT. Fire her ass and move on.

 

[Kusagari]

Parents dont want their kids in high school getting fucked by the teachers. Why is this an argument?

Pretty sure the parents can't control what their 18-year-old wants to do.

 

[cousins]

Yet they do exactly that. If this 18 year old was a sophomore in college Texas would do zilch about this tryst. If this had been a private tutor, or a band camp instructor, again: zilch.

That has more to do with having the authority to do something and less to do with a lack of care. People still frown on it. Also, why would sleeping with a private tutor matter if they weren't being paid by the kid's parents? Tutors don't grade their students, they help them.

 

[nateeasy]

If you want to fuck high school kids then don't get a job at a high school.

 

[cousins]

Who likes sleeping with jailbait any way? Christ.

 

[VelvetMouth]

You're assuming she "has to" and it's not something that just happened.

Stuff happens between consenting adults. You can't seem to handle that. There's no proof she was basically molesting the fuck out of this kid as you seem adamant on thinking.

I'm sure this kid is like fucking Romeo or something and this adult woman just couldn't help herself from having sex with him. Sex that's not just morally wrong but is also illegal and it can send you to prison. Pro tip, it's not normal for adult women to fuck over their entire lives to have sex with a kid they have authority over. Even the ugliest and obese women can find men outside their high school class to fuck around with. This teacher prays on kids because that's what gets her off.

 

[ShironRedshift]

I'm intolerant of a teacher grooming her student to be her fuckbuddy when he turns 18. I assumed others would be as well. Guess I was wrong.

Of course I would be intolerant of that. I'm also however intolerant of making up scenarios and then arresting and convicting people based on nothing more than your imagined worst-case scenario. Innocent until proven guilty--that's what our system of justice is based on, after all. Coming up with a possible motive/scenario and convicting people indiscriminately simply because that's a possibility is entirely illogical, as it sends people to jail over situations you haven't proven exist outside of your head.

Now of course, in situations where that's actually proven to be the case, of course that's an entirely different scenario. But that doesn't seem to be the case here, nor should that be some sort of default assumption and defendants should require to prove their innocence against it, so I don't understand why that's getting brought up as if it has already been proven or something. The guilty-until proven-innocent attitude here is really bothersome: no matter how heinous a crime a person is accused of, that should never be the case.

 

[SnakeswithLasers]

Why is everyone ignoring the fact that a similar law was already struck down this year in the Arkansas Supreme Court for failing to pass strict scrutiny?

The Arkansas law is as follows:
Second degree sexual assault
(a) A person commits sexual assault in the second degree if the person:
...
(6) Is a teacher in a public school in a grade kindergarten through twelve (K-12) and
engages in sexual contact with another person who is:
(A) A student enrolled in the public school; and
(B) Less than twenty-one (21) years of age.

It didn't pass muster. What makes jail-happy GAF think this is any different?

 

[Loofy]

Pretty sure the parents can't control what their 18-year-old wants to do.

Doesnt matter. K-12. Rules apply to all students or none at all.

 

[HeySeuss]

Kid is 18 and could move across state lines if he wished. That's why.

You're letting the fact that he's 18 get in the way of logical thinking. He is still in high school. He in all likelihood still lives with his parents. His parents entrust the school with his safety in their absence. The school basically acts as his parent while he is in school and is responsible for his care and custody. The fact that he is 18 is irrelevant.

 

[Wafflecakes]

Why is everyone ignoring the fact that a similar law was already struck down this year in the Arkansas Supreme Court for failing to pass strict scrutiny?

The Arkansas law is as follows:
Second degree sexual assault
(a) A person commits sexual assault in the second degree if the person:
...
(6) Is a teacher in a public school in a grade kindergarten through twelve (K-12) and
engages in sexual contact with another person who is:
(A) A student enrolled in the public school; and
(B) Less than twenty-one (21) years of age.

It didn't pass muster. What makes jail-happy GAF think this is any different?

Was it struck down on constitutional grounds? State or US? What grounds?

Without this information bringing it up is pointless.

 

[Captain Sparrow]

Parents dont want their kids in high school getting fucked by the teachers. Why is this an argument?

Parents wouldn't want their kid fucking anyone that is double their age.

Pretty much every situation puts the older person in a higher position of power and authority. Even though we call 18 as an "adult", few kids are that mature at that age.

 

[nateeasy]

Why is everyone ignoring the fact that a similar law was already struck down this year in the Arkansas Supreme Court for failing to pass strict scrutiny?

The Arkansas law is as follows:
Second degree sexual assault
(a) A person commits sexual assault in the second degree if the person:
...
(6) Is a teacher in a public school in a grade kindergarten through twelve (K-12) and
engages in sexual contact with another person who is:
(A) A student enrolled in the public school; and
(B) Less than twenty-one (21) years of age.

It didn't pass muster. What makes jail-happy GAF think this is any different?

Maybe because the Arkansas Supreme Court isn't the US Supreme Court?

 

[Devolution]

You're letting the fact that he's 18 get in the way of logical thinking. He is still in high school. He in all likelihood still lives with his parents. His parents entrust the school with his safety in their absence. The school basically acts as his parent while he is in school and is responsible for his care and custody. The fact that he is 18 is irrelevant.

This is rather an important point. No one sends their kid to school thinking the teacher is gonna be the one fucking their kid. Other students maybe but an authority figure? It's predation. Pure and simple.