There is no difference. Equal time for equal crimes. If she didn't want to go to prison for 15 years then she wouldn't have gotten 16 year olds dunk and then raped them.
Ok, I'm not trying to pick an argument with you here, (and I agree that the teacher is not anyone I'd care to defend as a decent person in society) but I have a question for you, and I'm open to having my mind changed about this, since I could very well be speaking from incredible ignorance. But, isn't there a clear difference between say, for example, a 30 year man having consensual* sex with a 16 year old girl? And lets say that they're in "love" and have been sleeping together for a while. Now lets say another 30 year old man who gets a 16 year old girl drunk and forcibly holds her down to have sex with her as she screams in pain as she tries to push him away.
Now, both are bad, but one is worse. In the first case, I'd question why a 30 year old is going to after a 16 year old girl. I'd make the assumption that he's a definite creeper and manipulator that has issues if he's going after someone at age 16. I also would be surprised if this doesn't cause issues and emotional problems for the girl. In the second case, I'd assume the man has extreme emotional issues, is violent, ect and has caused an extremely, horrible, traumatic event in this girl's life, no question.
So, although, both of the above cases are defined as rape by law, shouldn't there be some distinction between the two? Both involved, I'd say, severe manipulation from the 30 year old men. But one was physical abuse against another human being against her will. While the other was perhaps a case where the man manipulated the girl into thinking that sex with him was was something she should do. Now as I write this, I actually think I'm understanding your point of view. But, still, I feel the "rape is rape" statment is not always accurate. For another hypothetical, the Hank Moody scenario for instance; is a man still on the same level of all other rapists if he unknowingly had sex with a minor? I'd say no. The context is different and it changes the circumstances.
Anyway, my stance is actually kind of changing on this issue right now, since both of the men I presented in my hypotheticals are not exactly great guys who deserve defending. But I'd like to hear yours or someone's input on this.
*not "legally" speaking, but as in the victim was willing to engage in intercourse as well, no matter how naive and manipulated that victim may or may not be, e.g. If the girl said, "no" to having sex, the man would not have pushed it