TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Why ARE so many women teachers seducing boy pupils? All child abuse has to be viewed in the same way and treated as a crime even if it’s committed by a pretty 24-year-old female teacher.

TR6Cool

June 4, 2015
330 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3109796/After-shocking-confession-colleague-former-teacher-asks-women-teachers-seducing-boy-pupils.html
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Why ARE so many women teachers seducing boy pupils? All child abuse has to be viewed in the same way and treated as a crime even if it’s committed by a pretty 24-year-old female teacher.
Author

TR6Cool

Upvotes 330
Comments 75
Date June 4, 2015 9:27 AM UTC
(11 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/38hwrm/why_are_so_many_women_teachers_seducing_boy/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/why-are-so-many-women-teachers-seducing-boy-pupils.978516
https://theredarchive.com/post/978516
Top posts by TR6Cool

Native American inmates in Alabama lose battle to wear their long hair due to 'security and hygiene reasons' but all female inmates across the USA are allowed long hair. Blatant gender discrimination.

3847 upvotes
August 7, 2015
/r/MensRights

Female Babysitter, aged 21, spared jail after having sex with boy aged 11, when he had day off school.

3125 upvotes
October 5, 2015
/r/MensRights

Mother who beat her three-year-old son to death is living in a luxury jail cell with ensuite shower and her own KEY. Whilst men are locked in a cell for 23 hours a day.

2732 upvotes
December 19, 2015
/r/MensRights

'Kind, funny and bright' student, 17, hanged himself after being falsely accused of rape and finding it 'difficult to cope with the investigation'

2603 upvotes
October 1, 2015
/r/MensRights

The male Pill is coming - and it's going to change everything. New forms of male contraception are estimated to hit the market in two years and - unlike women's options - most won't contain hormones.

2221 upvotes
June 18, 2015
/r/MensRights

School sends 11-year-old boy home because of his long hair - which he's growing to raise money for cancer charity. 'It is gender discrimination and sexism. Girls can have short or long hair, why can't boys?

1926 upvotes
September 25, 2015
/r/MensRights

Justin Bieber's penis has held a mirror up to our alarming double standards on privacy. If this hadn't been Bieber, but a female celebrity, would the reaction have been the same?

1581 upvotes
October 10, 2015
/r/MensRights

Feminist outrage over new phone app which allows users to video their date agreeing to sex to protect them against rape claims

1500 upvotes
July 13, 2015
/r/MensRights

Comments

[+][deleted] 11 years ago* (9 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points14 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They can't compete with actual mature adults. How much control does the fact that these students being graded by these predators figure into the dynamic? A lot, I would expect. This is the coward's way.

"I was lonely." is only half the story. The other part is "I was fucking selfish as hell and this minor suited my simple emotional needs. Damn him and any effects I may have on his future, unless caught, in which case-- We're SO in love."

[–]ExpendableOne 21 points22 points23 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

It's easier because we live in a society where boys pretty much grow up being told that all things female are wonderful and good, and where girls are pretty much told that all things male are gross and evil. If boys were raised to have the same disdain, fear and contempt for women that girls are raised to have about men, then you'd probably see women having a lot harder time trying to seduce boys and vice-versa.

[–]Sanguifer 24 points25 points26 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Don't overthink it.

It's easier because teenage boys want sex and have a harder time getting it than teenage girls.

[–]xNOM 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This exactly.

[–]ExpendableOne 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

Right... but nothing starts from nothing. Nothing really exists without reason. You can't dismiss the chain of causality that leads to things being the way they are.

[–]Sanguifer 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes. The causality being that females do the sexual selecting in almost all sexually dimorphic species.

This is a biological prerogative. Cultural factors merely enhance it.

[–]xNOM 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

IMO, this happens over and over because to a large fraction of women, sex is about power over men. This is why we have to listen to this crap about "normal" rape having nothing to do with sex.

In a large fraction of these cases there is emotional text drama, then alcohol or pot, then blowjobs. That is all. Imo, this is a clue that perhaps it's more about women who either cannot get men to put up with their shit, or who have control issues.

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That is debatable. I recall a study looking at adolescents and their study showed among minors having sex with adults it was consensual slightly more often with girls. I'm on my phone atm but I can fish it out when I get home.

[–]Vegemeister 30 points31 points32 points 11 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

Given that this article is from the Daily Mail, it is necessary to ask, are they?

Every now and then I see a feminist talk about the rising rape epidemic, even though, like all violent crime, rape is on the decline and has been for a while. We must not make the same mistake.

[–]TechnoSam_Belpois 13 points14 points15 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I think that the event itself isn't becoming more common, just the reporting and prosecuting of the event.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

In my High School, I knew of only one case of a teacher sleeping with a student when I went there.. it was a young female English teacher, and she slept with 4 students before they let her go. This was the late 70's.

[–]xNOM -4 points-3 points-2 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

I don't understand this hate on the daily mail. They do not lie more than the BBC or the nyt. There were like 3 cases a few decades ago? The mail is just a tabloid. They just cover fluff. That is their job.

[–]anonymouslemming 9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The do not lie, but they pick the facts that they publish and they use very specific wording to push their sales tactic - angry readers.

[–]xNOM 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That's more or less par for the course at media outlets with no taxpayer support these days. The broadcast networks in the US used to lose money on news. It was a public service. They have to make money now. Fox is also angry. ABC, NBC, and CBS go more "human interest."

[–]anonymouslemming 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I recall reading something about the Daily Mail founder choosing the strategy of making his readers angry as a way to sell papers many years ago. I'm not saying it started with them, but it is part of their operating model.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

As a tabloid, they trade in sensationalism and hyperbole. Admittedly the BBC appears increasingly intent on sliding down this path as well in recent years, especially with respect to their lefty biases regarding feminism, but it's clearly still nowhere near as bad as a tabloid like the Mail.

[–]xNOM 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

As a non-Briton, I see no difference in the accuracy of their reporting. Only the subject matter.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Perhaps. I have seen truly bad science reporting from the BBC, but I still much prefer to get news from a source that at least pretends toward maintaining the kind of dispassionate, unbiased reporting attendant to high journalistic integrity.

A lot of bias in media, the great majority I would argue, is simply a matter of what topics an outfit chooses to cover; eg. you are never going to see a truly critical story on the violent, anti-gay nature of Islam that gets it right on NPR, and you'll rarely see anything about a topic like gay relationships on Fox news. In this subtle manner, media companies cater to the preconceptions and political leanings of their readerships.

[–]i_literally_died 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

They are the FOX News of the UK. Right leaning, biased, scurrilous and quite often straight out racist.

[–]xNOM 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

We're not supposed to link to them because they're not left wing? LOL Left wing media is even more overrun by feminist propaganda. You can't have it both ways.

BTW, the actual news part of Fox News lies no more than other networks. It's the "news analysis" part that is full of crazy.

[–]i_literally_died 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Not saying don't link them, just that they are ridiculous. In the same way Bill O'Reily is ridiculous.

That is why people 'hate on' them.

[–]xNOM 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Bill O'Reilly is simply too dumb to get any reliable information out of.

[–]raskren 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

As usual, "Predators" not "rapists."

[–]Sanguifer 23 points24 points25 points 11 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link

Because they can.

Remember, sexual power dynamics don't magically go away just because the people involved are legal minors.

Look, I'm not saying every teenage boy begs to be statutory raped. I AM saying that those teenagers probably jerk off multiple times a day and watch more porn than anything else. Yeah yeah, generalization, yadda yadda. It's a cliché 'cause it's true in most cases.

Most teenage boys DO want to get laid. No, they don't want to get raped, but yes, they do want sex. It's a physiological drive, and a powerful one, especially during puberty and late teens. And it's harder for them to get sex because of sexual power dynamics.

So when a hot teacher not only is willing to give them what their bodies crave anyways, but actively seduces them... well, I know many MRAs have a problem with the "lucky dude" double standard, but when the teenagers themselves consider themselves lucky when it happens - well, there's Your answer.

[–]CriticalThinker007 27 points28 points29 points 11 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

"It's a physiological drive, and a powerful one, especially during puberty and late teens. And it's harder for them to get sex because of sexual power dynamics."

Which is all the more reason for adults to leave them alone.

Look, children and adolescents may want to do lots of things that are stupid ideas... that is why they need guidance and are not considered to be fully independent.

Why is it that I only ever see this type of argument when it comes to adolescent boys and sex with adult women?

I have yet to see someone argue that child kidnappers should be let off the hook because the children willingly went into their van because they were offered ice cream and candy... and we all know how much little kids enjoy sweets. In that scenario we recognize it for what it is, an adult taking advantage of someone much younger than they are by using manipulative tactics that appeal to their biological drives.

I'm not going to excuse a kidnapper because the kid willingly followed them for candy... and I'm not going to excuse a statutory rapist because the young adult willingly went with them for sex.

Adults should know better, it isn't really that difficult.

[–]Sanguifer -4 points-3 points-2 points 11 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Where have I said that the adults shouldn't know better?

Your comparison is invalid. Aside from the fact that people actually DO argue like that for, say, parental kidnapping - someone who lures children into his van with candy can be safely assumed to have malicious intent. Someone having consensual sex with a teenager cannot necessarily be assumed to have malicious intent. After all, teenagers are perfectly capable of having consensual sex with each other.

The higher sex drive in teenage boys combined with the realities of the sexual dynamics between gender is absolutely sufficient to explain the perceived higher rate of female teacher / male student sex.

And before anyone gets on my case, no, I do not automatically assume it's rape when the genders are reversed, either, so I'm not a hypocrite by calling it merely 'having sex'.

[–]paragonofcynicism 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

It's a piss poor argument because it's not a matter of willingness. It's a matter of the law being they are not legally capable of consenting. I personally don't have a problem with it, the way I see it is, biology has prepared them for this kind of relationship arleady there's no reason to not let them make use of what nature has prepared them for.

But a line has to be drawn somewhere, and society has drawn the line where it has and that line has to be enforced until society decides the line can be changed. The gray area of that line is decideed by the judge in sentencing not in whether the crime was committed.

[–]Sanguifer 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

So when they pass the laws that make drunk sex rape (but only for the man, of course), will You be standing here saying "It's a matter of the law being that a drunk woman is not legally capable of consenting"?

Yes, society has drawn the line where it has. And like with many of its previously drawn lines, it's been drawn in the wrong place for the wrong reasons.

[–]paragonofcynicism 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

No, and at no point did I say the line was drawn in the right place. I'm merely stating that your argument is bollocks because you're arguing for a change in law in response to a person saying people should not be excused for breaking the law because it's the kids fault or was willing.

The COURT is not a place to decide if laws should be changed the court determines if the law is broken and sentences based on the severity of the crime.

[–]Sanguifer 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

This is not a court. It's a discussion boards, and I don't know any better place to discuss unfair or illegitimate laws than a Men's Rights boards.

[–]paragonofcynicism 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Congress is a better place. (or w/e the UK version is, parliament? house of lords? Fuck if I know) probably the best place really. You really don't have much of an imagination.

[–]Sanguifer -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Oh, right. Let me just excercise my patriarchal power and arrange a meeting.

No, wait. I'm a polish immigrant living in germany. I don't even get to vote. But thanks anyways.

[–]paragonofcynicism 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I didn't say you could. You just said you can't think of a better place for the discussion to happen and I disagreed. You're very defensive and have poor reading comprehension skills. So why would anybody want to have a discussion with you?

[–]CriticalThinker007 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

"Where have I said that the adults shouldn't know better?"

You have implied that in some sense what is going on in these scenarios is not a crime or at the very least shouldn't be treated as such.

"Someone having consensual sex with a teenager cannot necessarily be assumed to have malicious intent. After all, teenagers are perfectly capable of having consensual sex with each other."

The point is that adults cannot have consensual sex with minors. This is the part that you are glossing over with your analysis.

The notion of malicious intent is also immaterial, when an adult takes advantage of a minor they may not have any malicious intent, they may simply be acting out a a desire for sexual gratification... that isn't an excuse for the inappropriate behavior with a minor.

Look, parents will sometimes leave an infant unattended in a car on a hot summer day as they run errands... that doesn't mean they had malicious intent, but they sure as hell were negligent in their care of that child and as a result can and should be held accountable if something happens to that child. They are the adult and they are responsible.

That teenagers can have sex with one another and no crime has been committed is immaterial... both parties are minors in that scenario, the degree to which we hold children responsible for their actions is different than the degree to which we hold adults responsible.

That is the key difference between being an adult and being a minor.

If two 13 year old kids get into a fist fight on school grounds no one will be arrested. If an adult gets into a fist fight with a 13 year old, that adult can and should be charged with assault assuming they were an active participant in the fight as opposed to trying to escape the altercation or they were only acting in self defense.

The same way it is inappropriate for adults to fight minors (even though we give a pass for children having fights with one another) it is inappropriate for adults to have sex with minors (even though we give a pass for children who have sex with one another).

That is the whole point... adults are expected to be more responsible than children, that is what makes them adults.

[–]Sanguifer 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You have implied that in some sense what is going on in these scenarios is not a crime or at the very least shouldn't be treated as such.

No. I have implied that in many cases, what is happening is a crime that is different from rape, and therefore should not be treated the same as rape.

The point is that adults cannot have consensual sex with minors

By law. Except for all the cases where they can.

That is the crux of the problem. Go fuck a 16 year old in Alabama - perfectly legal. Now travel to Arizona: You're a pedophile and a rapist. Except if You're married to the person You fucked - then it's legal, and suddenly, consensual. Note how a person under 18 in arizona cannot consent to sex with an older person, but CAN consent to MARRIAGE (with parental consent, but still), which as every MRA knows is actually kind of a bigger deal than a blowjob. And after You're married, suddenly, magically, You are able to give consent.

As You can see, I am not glossing over that. I am saying the law is ridiculous, internally inconsistent, and does not reflect the realities of life.

The notion of malicious intent is also immaterial

I absolutely disagree on that. Mens rea is an important element in mediation. Especially so in cases where it's a third party that seeks redress.

That is the whole point... adults are expected to be more responsible than children, that is what makes them adults.

The funny thing is that You Yourself made exceptions for that:

If an adult gets into a fist fight with a 13 year old, that adult can and should be charged with assault *assuming they were an active participant in the fight as opposed to trying to escape the altercation or they were only acting in self defense.

So there's an exception for physical assault, but not for sex? See, You aknowledge that it is entirely possible for a 13 year old to be the aggressor in a fight with an adult: You say it is possible for the adult to be acting in self defense.

Similarly, it is entirely possible for an underage person to be the sexual aggressor - so to speak.

Aside from that, the hell we do. If a 13 year old breaks another 13 year old's arm in a fight or kicks his teeth in, You can be damn sure we call the cops. However, if the 'victim' in this case was to say 'It's okay, we had a fight, it escalated, we were both aggressive, no hard feelings, it was an accident', we don't have mandatory prosecution laws.

Because quite frankly, mandatory prosecution laws are deeply, deeply immoral by design. Imagine the above situation - a teenager has a fight with his best friend over some triviality, gets shoved, falls over, breaks a leg. Shit happens. But You know what would be even more shit? His best friend going to jail for that. Against his wishes.

And now imagine it's not Your best friend, but Your lover that goes to prison for something You wanted him to do, because someone else defined him or her as a rapist and to hell with Your wishes. Because... reasons.

And yes, an adult, especially a teacher, should know better. But an adult is still a living, breathing person with feelings. They're not mere utilities. I can absolutely understand when an adult who should know better goes 'To hell with that, we're in love, we both want it, why should we care what anyone else thinks?'. People are not machines.

How about we don't meddle with people's sex lives unless they explicitly state they want us to, i.e press charges? Wouldn't that be a novel idea?

[–]CriticalThinker007 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"No. I have implied that in many cases, what is happening is a crime that is different from rape, and therefore should not be treated the same as rape."

The crime is called statutory rape.

What you seem to be implying is that even though the behavior is illegal, we should somehow give these adults a pass even though they are breaking the law and taking advantage of minors.

You can disagree with the law all you like, but let's not pretend that a crime hasn't been committed and that this crime isn't statutory rape... because that is what it is.

"By law. Except for all the cases where they can.

That is the crux of the problem. Go fuck a 16 year old in Alabama - perfectly legal. Now travel to Arizona: You're a pedophile and a rapist. Except if You're married to the person You fucked - then it's legal, and suddenly, consensual. Note how a person under 18 in arizona cannot consent to sex with an older person, but CAN consent to MARRIAGE (with parental consent, but still), which as every MRA knows is actually kind of a bigger deal than a blowjob. And after You're married, suddenly, magically, You are able to give consent. As You can see, I am not glossing over that. I am saying the law is ridiculous, internally inconsistent, and does not reflect the realities of life."

Yes... you are glossing over things. Notice how you conveniently said "with parental consent, but still" as if that wasn't an important distinction.

As adult doesn't need permission from their parents to enter into contracts, and marriage is a contract.

It is also immaterial if you can shop around to find laws that are different from region to region. Adults are still obligated to follow the law and if they break the law they have by definition committed a crime, and that crime is determined by the law that they happened to break.

Just to demonstrate how silly you are being (even though I agree that the laws between states are not exactly consistent) in Connecticut it is legal for a minor to possess and consume alcohol so long as they are accompanied by a parent, guardian, or spouse who is over the age of 21.

If that same minor travels to New Hampshire and they are served alcohol for their consumption, a crime has been committed because there are no exceptions in that state.

"Mens rea is an important element in mediation. Especially so in cases where it's a third party that seeks redress."

Mens rea is not the same as "malicious intent". Furthermore, the notion of a "guilty mind" is only viewed as a necessary element for some crimes, not ALL crimes as you are trying to put forth.

Statutory rape is an issue of strict liability within the criminal statute for many states... Mens rea doesn't come into play in those situations regardless of how you would prefer the law to be written.

A good example of a strict liability offense would be drunk driving laws... people who star driving drunk do not generally have malicious intent, they don't get into the car with the intention of running someone over or getting into a serious car accident. Yet if a drunk person runs someone over and kills them, they are still guilty of vehicular manslaughter regardless of the fact that they never intended to kill anyone.

"So there's an exception for physical assault, but not for sex? See, You aknowledge that it is entirely possible for a 13 year old to be the aggressor in a fight with an adult: You say it is possible for the adult to be acting in self defense.

Similarly, it is entirely possible for an underage person to be the sexual aggressor - so to speak."

Not "so to speak"... for the teenager to be the sexual aggressor the adult would have to not be an active participant, the adult would have to have been unwilling to engage in the sexual activity. Under those circumstances the adult has not committed a crime.

However I don't think this is quite what you are talking about when discussing sexual aggression... I think you mean who initially pursued who... in which case the adult is still on the hook because they are the adult.

[–]Cruxxor 14 points15 points16 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

I know many MRAs have a problem with the "lucky dude" double standard, but when the teenagers themselves consider themselves lucky when it happens - well, there's Your answer.

Yeah, but teenage girls are also attracted to older men, and often crush on their teachers. A teenage girl sleeping with 30 years old man, is considered lucky by her friends, just as much as teenage boy sleeping with 30 years old woman. So this argument really isn't valid in this case. Double standard here lies only in adults preception of such act.

[–]enjoycarrots 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

A teenage girl sleeping with 30 years old man, is considered lucky by her friends, just as much as teenage boy sleeping with 30 years old woman.

I don't think that's the case. We socialize boys and girls to approach sex differently, and I imagine the teenage girl is far more likely to have at least some of her friends consider it rape and not "you're so lucky!" material. Even if he's the "hot teacher" that all the girls talk about (and they do). My experience in classrooms is that the girls will regularly gossip about the male teachers, sharing stories about which ones look at them, which ones are (according to them) perverts, which ones they can bat eyelashes at to get out of trouble. Boys don't really do that.

[–]Sanguifer 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

This is contrary to my perceptions, so I can't really say. I do not doubt that there are a lot of teenage girls who quite enthusiastically consent to sex with older men, but I'd argue that the reverse is more often the case simply because of the aforementioned sexual dynamics. But I freely admit that I might be wrong on that.

In either case, if a teenage girl considers herself 'lucky' to have scored with an older guy, I'd argue the same way - it's not rape. It might be misuse of trust or maybe even coercion, but I'll always maintain that You can't rape a consenting person.

[–]CastAwayVolleyball 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

You can't rape a consenting person.

Minors can't be consenting persons.

[–]Sanguifer 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Except for all the cases where they can, like when they get married first.

This is not even a case of de facto =|= de jure, this is a case where even the law has all manners of exceptions built in.

[–]CastAwayVolleyball 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Except that, as you said yourself (but somehow managed to gloss over), minors need parental consent to get married. Minors cannot by themselves consent to adult things. That's what makes them minors.

[–]Sanguifer 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Are You daft or just acting that way?

Once they DO get married, they CAN give consent. They don't need parental consent every time they fuck their wives or husbands. And in any case, it's obvious that their own consent must be taken into account too, else they could be married to someone against their will if their parents say so. So yes, they can and do consent to 'adult things'.

[–]CastAwayVolleyball 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

They can't get married (the prerequisite to legal underage sex with an adult) without a parent's consent. That's the thing you're missing. For them to be in a relationship in which sex happens with an adult, they have to have the parent's consent, and it has to be a marriage, which the parent consents to.

[–]Sanguifer 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I'm not missing it. The crux of the issue is that marriage still requires the assent of the child in question.

That is the absurdity of it. What is assent? Well, assent is like consent, except it cannot be called consent because the law defines it differently so it has to be called something else.

So, in other words: -"I wanna fuck that guy". -"Nope, You can't. Not even if Your parents would allow it." -"Okay. Um... can I marry him and then fuck him?" -"Sure, as long as Your parents are okay with that."

But, of course, that person can't consent because the law calls it something else. Right. He or she can only ask to be able to consent at will, and if the parents greenlight it, then he or she can consent. But of course minors can't consent! They can only ask their parents to sign a contract that will allow them to consent.

If You don't see the problem with that, I have nothing more to say to You.

[–]CastAwayVolleyball 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That's fine. Your absurd reasoning doesn't interest me, either.

[–]Whisper 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The problem is not that our society thinks that teenage boys are often enthusiastic participants in sex with older people.

That's absolutely true.

The problem is that it thinks teenage girls never are.

Thus, it displays nuanced thinking when dealing with the first situation, and conducts legally-sanctioned lynching when confronted with the second.

[–]Sanguifer 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Amen to that.

[–]Sour_Badger 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

You are glossing over the psychological power that these women are using. Just like spousal rape or coercive rape they have sway over these young men being in a position of authority and they use it to ensnare victims who can't give consent. It's almost a direct comparison between coercive rape and these types of cases.

[–]Sanguifer 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I am not glossing over that, I am simply giving teenagers more credit than most people appear to be.

What do You mean, victims who can't give consent? So when I had sex with my girlfriend when I was 15, I was actually raping her? And she was raping me? Teenagers are perfectly capable of giving very enthusiastic consent, and everybody knows it.

The problem is not with the ability to give consent, it's with the lack of effective ability to avoid coercion, seeing as You can't just avoid a teacher's advances (or, in case of a breakup, scorn) since You are most likely legally forced to attend school.

However, You make a good point. Yes, it is similar to spousal rape or coercive rape, but here's the thing: Not all spousal sex is rape, and not all 'coercive' sex is rape. The first question to ask is always: Was there consent? If there was consent, even if it's misguided, even if it's unwise, then it cannot be rape. And I repeat, given the realities of teenage bodies and sexual power dynamics, it's not unlikely that there was consent. Not guaranteed, of course. Just not unlikely.

[–]Sour_Badger 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

All that is moot when you know that a 15 year old can not legally give consent to an adult. That's how statutory rape works.

[–]Sanguifer 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

And when You get raped by a woman and she gets pregnant, You get to pay child support for 18 to 25 years depending on where You live. That's how the law works. So all the outrage here about such cases is moot.

Good to know where You stand on that.

[–]kragshot 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I don't understand your tone with that last comment.

Are you saying that you are okay with that or what?

[–]Sanguifer 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No. I am saying that stupid, unfair, bad laws quite evidently exist, so dismissing something on the ground of "that's the law" is fallacious.

[–]ezetemp 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There are basically two issues here, the double standard and the abuse of trust and power.

For the double standard it basically comes down to the fact that we don't consider minors capable of giving meaningful consent. That they may actually want the interaction simply isn't relevant; it's considered more important that they may not be ready for the responsibility or consequences (stds, pregnancies, etc). In this, there's no difference between boys or girls; the 'lucky dude' may or may not be more common, but he's certainly not going to appreciate being the 'lucky herpes dude' just because he made a bad choice he wasn't ready to make. So there shouldn't be a double standard, either you're old and responsible enough or you're not. Whatever gender you are.

For the breach of trust and abuse of authority, it's a real issue. Even if we were to regard allowing such relationships a desired outcome, the authority issue has to be dealt with, as it both creates murky issues surrounding consent as well as producing problems with real and/or an appearance of bias. At the very least one of the parties would have to be reassigned.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It always seemed to me to be a return to high school thing. These teachers, themselves barely out of high school, throw themselves right back into the throng of judgy school boys, gossipy girls, and class drama, and they fall back into the loop. It's way to easy these days with social media and email giving people immediate, direct access to all details of their lives, to think you've "connected" with these kids on a personal level, and I think many of these young teachers can't disassociate themselves from the grade school child they were only 4 years ago. People don't change that much from 18 to 22 years old.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They're getting caught. That's all it is. Between technology that these women often use to contact their victims and some of the parents we have today, they're getting caught. Enough people have opened up to the idea, "No, it's not okay just because Tommy is a hormonal 16 year old boy and Ms. Davis is an attractive woman."

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

if these women get pregnant those boys are on the hook for child support.

If the government is going to put these kids on the hook for child support then the government should punish these women for putting those kids in a life ruining situation.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Assuming there are more female teachers seducing boys and not just more reporting of it. It may be something to do with: a boy is quite an easy target to seduce. My experience is that girls, particularly in their 20's and 30's really do want a boyfriend. If men outside of school are not showing that much interest in them it is quite easy for them to seduce a boy from the school.

[–]relentless_dick 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

At least the right word was used, seduced. These boys are not being raped at all.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I agree, but I think the best course is to argue for equality in terms because that, at the very least, will show up the double standard. When we acknowledge that a 24 year old woman sleeping with a 15 year old boy is equal to a 24 year old man sleeping with a 15 year old girl, then we can start to question why it's considered immoral, but getting to that equal playing field is more important, IMO.

[–]Giorria_Dubh 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'd say it's inevitable with any human population that a certain amount of pedophiles and ephebophiles (or however it's spelled) are inevitable. It's just that we're actually talking about women doing it now and paying attention when it happens. Just like the religious institutional abuse cases of the 50s and 60s, it's not that it wasn't happening before, it's just that people turned a blind eye.

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'd suspect female predators are just able to get themselves into positions involving young people more often with less suspicion since they're women.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I usually see this type of thing and just not comment, but I feel like I hold a sort of unpopular viewpoint...Am I the only one that thinks this shouldn't be a crime for anyone?

If you have appropriate sex education, you grant young adolescents the ability to have sexual agency at an earlier age. If they have sexual agency, they can say yes or no to who they please, and have the tools to do so without being coerced. A switch doesn't magically get flipped at 18 and you suddenly have the wisdom and ability to be an adult.

I mean obviously rape and molestation are huge issues, but I feel like we've really blown this way out of proportion. I had sex at 15 with my girlfriend, who was 16. I knew exactly what I was doing, and so did she. I think we (the adults of the world) make a tremendous judgement error in essentially saying, "well we're older now, so we know better than you."

[–]mechdemon 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Your example is different from the situation being discussed; while the fact that the victims are under the age of majority is the primary problem, the other major problem with these situations is that the teacher/student relationship is one of unequal power.

It's much like sexual harassment in the workplace, where a superior may try to entice/extort sexual favors. its a matter of balance of power, really - the teacher in the student teacher relationship has more power and thus more responsibility.

The fact these women are having sex with 12-15 year olds is something else entirely and deserves study.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I feel like to achieve equality like this is have the court be told the crimes of the accused, of the defendant, and the story. But keeping it all gender and race neutral. Would this be logical? Possible? What are your thoughts?

[–]McFeely_Smackup 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm sure it has nothing to do with spending the last 30 years telling women nothing they do is wrong, they're owed everything they want, and they're entitled to be treated like princesses while not being held responsible for their own decisions.

nah, I'm sure that would never result in a generation of narcissistic sociopaths.

[–]WordsNotToLiveBy 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This happens so much that I'm surprised there is no campaign against it. Oh wait, always the victim never the culprit. Nevermind.

[–]Salvloud 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Because the consequences are drastically lower, we know that.
Can we produce a statistic on the claim of this post though?

[–]xNOM 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I am pretty sure "sexual abuse" of children in the hhs child maltreatment stats leans heavily male for perps, actually.

[–]xNOM 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

LOL downvoted for stating a fact.

Exhibit 5-C "Selected Maltreatment Types of Perpetrators by Sex, 2013" Sexual abuse: male 87.8%, female 8.6%, unknown 3.6%.

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/cb/cm2013.pdf

[–]apullin -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This isn't about the viewing of the child abuse or the crime, this is about the viewing of the assailant. The implicit motivation behind this tradition of holding women to different standard than other folks is just another form of oppression.

Such treatment only further the construction of "The Other Gender", that there are people, who are subject to laws and trial, and then are women, who are a separate group.

[+][deleted] 11 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]enjoycarrots 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It's more about removing the double standards that say it's a special kind of evil when a male teacher does it, yet we come up with all kinds of mitigating factors to explain why a female teacher does it. Also, when it comes to teachers, you have the added student-teacher relationship making any sexual relationship more questionable.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter