[News] Lucky 13-y-o boy described as 'victim'

[Brovion]

I agree with you, but those posting are (I hope) posting it in the mind of a 13 year old boy.......a large proportion of which at that age are thinking about virtually nothing else than how they are going to get their end away (wasn’t just me was it ?) and it’s the ‘wish that happened to me’ response. If it’s offered on a plate, a lot of 13 yo are very likely accept, and keep going back for more because at 13 they aren’t going to have developed the moral compass or maturity to realise it’s very wrong.

The adult, on the other hand, absolutely knows it’s utterly wrong, and to compound things is in a position of immense trust in relation to a minor, so it’s unforgivable.

So to your point, if my 4th year art teacher had offered it up I’d probably still have a grin on my face now, but my parents would have been horrified. I’d feel the same if it happened to my kids.

O/T: Just wanted to add another point (for those of us who recognise the difference between a child's views and an adult's): This case proves that there is a very good reason why we don't let 13 year olds make decisions that could have a profound emotional effect on the rest of their lives. Something that the Trans lobby could perhaps occasionally bear in mind. #justsayin

 

[jamie (not that one)]

Did they mention if the nudes she sent had made it into the public domain? Asking for a friend.

 

[Napper]

would also be interested to see the nude evidence, just so the case is clear.

Lucky boy

 

[Thunder Bolt]

It is deemed 'okay' (phwooar, lucky bugger, etc) in these posters' ill-thought opinions, purely because she is fit.

If it were a male teacher and a 13 year old girl, they'd consider it predatory and outrageous.
If it were a make teacher and a 13 year old boy, they'd consider it still worse.
Even if it were a fat ugly female teacher in this particular case, they'd consider her actions entirely differently, I'd suggest.

So, so shallow (not you).

A predatory paedophile, but she is fit.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

So, so shallow (not you).

A predatory paedophile, but she is fit.

It is more:

She is fit, therefore anybody (presumably of any age) would WANT to have sex with her, therefore her actions cannot be considered predatory.

 

[jamie (not that one)]

Well, if it's good enough for the President of France and his teacher.....

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...ughter-describes-teenage-macron-fell-teacher/

 

[nickbrighton]

i am amazed at the continued response on here, and slightly disturbed by it! As others have said if this were any other combination of the genders the response would be hugely different. 27yr old Male teacher sodomises 13 yr old boy, 27yr old male teacher repeatedly sexually assaults 13 yr old girl has a very different ring about it doesn't it? There is NO difference between those and this case,yet here its seen a s well "technically its a crime, but good for him"

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

Also teachers aren't allowed to have sex with their pupils - even those over the legal age of consent. I'm not sure if that is a crime in law, but it's an automatic sacking and disqualification offence, I believe.

It's a crime in law under the same Act.

 

[Brovion]

i am amazed at the continued response on here, and slightly disturbed by it! As others have said if this were any other combination of the genders the response would be hugely different. 27yr old Male teacher sodomises 13 yr old boy, 27yr old male teacher repeatedly sexually assaults 13 yr old girl has a very different ring about it doesn't it? There is NO difference between those and this case,yet here its seen a s well "technically its a crime, but good for him"

Some of us have tried to differentiate between our immature teenage selves and our responses as adults.

You're right though, there shouldn't be a difference between any of the cases you've mentioned ... but there is. When a woman is the criminal, leaving aside the teenage male fantasy element of it, there is a sense that "Well the boot's on the other foot for once."

It's a bit like racism. ALL racism is bad, but still the type that draws the opprobrium is white on non-white. When it goes the other way it's dismissed as not a problem, indeed some say it's 'impossible' for non-white people to be racist as racism is the sole preserve of white people. Ditto sex offences. Men are 'always' the aggressors, seemingly the concept that a woman can be a predatory paedophile is not universally accepted.

 

[Triggaaar]

indeed some say it's 'impossible' for non-white people to be racist as racism is the sole preserve of white people.

Obviously anyone who says that is an idiot. Leaving alone the idea of racism towards white people for a second, the suggestion that, for example, black people can't be racist towards Asians is mental.

Back OT however. What if the victim of the crime became a father through these actions. While a 13 year old me might like the advances of said teacher, I wouldn't have been so delighted if I'd become a father, which would have a considerable impact on the rest of my life.

Regardless, it's a crime (although weirdly not rape) and she needs to be punished appropriately.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Obviously anyone who says that is an idiot. Leaving alone the idea of racism towards white people for a second, the suggestion that, for example, black people can't be racist towards Asians is mental.

Back OT however. What if the victim of the crime became a father through these actions. While a 13 year old me might like the advances of said teacher, I wouldn't have been so delighted if I'd become a father, which would have a considerable impact on the rest of my life.

Regardless, it's a crime (although weirdly not rape) and she needs to be punished appropriately.

If the boy had been under 13, then it would be statutory rape. From 13-16 it is classed as Sexual activity with a child.
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidan...xual-offences-act-2003-principal-offences-and

 

[hans kraay fan club]

If the boy had been under 13, then it would be statutory rape. From 13-16 it is classed as Sexual activity with a child.
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidan...xual-offences-act-2003-principal-offences-and

If it had taken place in the UK.

 

[Puppet Master]

What woman would want to bonk a CHILD!?!

The sick fit bitch

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

If the boy had been under 13, then it would be statutory rape. From 13-16 it is classed as Sexual activity with a child.
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidan...xual-offences-act-2003-principal-offences-and

That's a misleading article. It isn't rape. You have to be a man in the UK to be a rapist, irrespective of the gender of your victim.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/5

The lady in this article would be guilty of sexual activity with a child.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/1/crossheading/child-sex-offences

Strangely, she would get a substantially reduced sentence in this country for her crime, compared to a situation where the genders were swapped.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

Some of us have tried to differentiate between our immature teenage selves and our responses as adults.

You're right though, there shouldn't be a difference between any of the cases you've mentioned ... but there is. When a woman is the criminal, leaving aside the teenage male fantasy element of it, there is a sense that "Well the boot's on the other foot for once."

It's a bit like racism. ALL racism is bad, but still the type that draws the opprobrium is white on non-white. When it goes the other way it's dismissed as not a problem, indeed some say it's 'impossible' for non-white people to be racist as racism is the sole preserve of white people. Ditto sex offences. Men are 'always' the aggressors, seemingly the concept that a woman can be a predatory paedophile is not universally accepted.

This is said for a very specific reason - because the law is written to tell us that men are the aggressors. The most heinous of crimes (rape) is only something that men can commit. Sexual education focuses on this fact, putting the blame solely at the feet of men. We hear all the time about the inequalities women face - this is one of the biggest inequalities that men face and the worrying thing is that it sets the tone for society where men are taught that they will always be the sexual aggressors from a young age and women are always painted as the victims. Until the law changes, this wont change.

 

[Triggaaar]

If the boy had been under 13, then it would be statutory rape.

I don't think so. Rape means putting a willy where it doesn't belong. Women can't rape people (unless they're transgender etc).

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I don't think so. Rape means putting a willy where it doesn't belong. Women can't rape people (unless they're transgender etc).

You need to do further study of that CPS article, or perhaps not.

 

[The_Viper]

Yikes this thread makes for some grim and archaic views.

 

[Triggaaar]

You need to do further study of that CPS article

I've looked at it, and everything in it seems to confirm what I said. Could you quote anywhere in it that goes against what I said?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I've looked at it, and everything in it seems to confirm what I said. Could you quote anywhere in it that goes against what I said?

Rape, section 1, and then look at section 2.