Statutory rape by hot teachers – please help me understand

[RusskyParticipant 13503]

I am guilty of statutory rape myself (never charged or convicted though), and I honestly think this is one of the most nonsense laws on the books.
If two people consent to sex and get pleasure from it, and they’re old enough to make their own decisions and judgements – this shouldn’t be punished with lengthy prison sentences and branding as a sexual predator for life.

You guys are writing about how nice that is that a hot 30yo teacher got 22 years in jail for having sex with high-schoolers.
I am lost – please explain it to me why she deserves it

proud carrier of the 'why?' chromosome

[bcrogerParticipant 113]

The reason why a women would go to jail for having sex with underage person, is the same as if a men has sex with an underage person. These laws can prevent rape, molestation, and things of that nature.

[RusskyParticipant 13503]

bcroger wrote:

The reason why a women would go to jail for having sex with underage person, is the same as if a men has sex with an underage person. It can prevent rape, molestation, and things of that nature.

reciprocity is not a good enough reason to break someone’s life for a minor infraction. I was under impression those boys like it too, so why put the government into equation?

I mean this: I agree that the laws should work both ways regardless of sex. What I disagree with – is why it is legal for 17 yo boy to f~~~ 15 yo girl, but it’s almost death sentence if that boy is over 21. What kind of bulls~~~ is this>?

proud carrier of the 'why?' chromosome

[WolfParticipant 890]

Russky wrote:

You guys are writing about how nice that is that a hot 30yo teacher got 22 years in jail for having sex with high-schoolers. I am lost – please explain it to me why she deserves it

I hear ya. I remember being in high school and I wanted to screw my vice principle immensely. She was super hot and always had sexy outfits on. If she did screw me, I wouldn’t have ran to the authorities; rather, I would have went back for more.

Russky wrote:

reciprocity is not a good enough reason to break someone’s life for a minor infraction.

That’s essentially why people are happy about it. If a male teachers screws one of his high school students, then he is a sex offender. If a woman does it, traditionally she was not. Now that they are getting the same treatment as men (sometimes), people are happy about it. It’s about equality before the law.

Does she deserve it? Perhaps not, but the same would have to be said about men in order for it to be fair.

 

[RusskyParticipant 13503]

I mean you celebrate her going to prison just because men had gone to prisons for the same offence many times over – so you claim that she deserves the same a man would get.
What I am saying is that the whole f~~~ing rule is baloney

 

It’s like: you would celebrate a woman getting a hefty ticket for speeding and saying she deserved it, if men were getting speeding tickets while women would get out of them.
I’m trying to point out that there is nothing worth celebrating here, because all speeding regulations are full of s~~~ and anti-freedom. The only reason they were enacted was because states wouldn’t get federal state funds if they didn’t go along with federal speed limit guidelines.
It’s wrong celebrating women getting speeding tickets because the whole thing is unjust. Yonowamasayin?

proud carrier of the 'why?' chromosome

[WolfParticipant 890]

Russky wrote:

What I am saying is that the whole f~~~ing rule is baloney

Well, law is mechanical in nature, so they have to establish an age for what constitutes statutory rape. Are you suggesting they lower the age or eliminate it all together?

[RusskyParticipant 13503]

Wolf wrote:

RusskyKGB wrote:

What I am saying is that the whole f~~~ing rule is baloney

Well, law is mechanical in nature, so they have to establish an age for what constitutes statutory rape. Are you suggesting they lower the age or eliminate it all together?

It should be deliberated on a case by case basis

I am a big believer that someone should be committed of a crime ONLY IF THERE WAS A REAL VICTIM
Most of the crimes these days are just a milking cow for the System – where nobody really got hurt – kinda like selling drugs

proud carrier of the 'why?' chromosome

[WolfParticipant 890]

Russky wrote:

I am a big believer that someone should be committed of a crime ONLY IF THERE WAS A REAL VICTIM

Some people think there is a real victim, and I’m inclined to agree.

Take my high school vice principle for example. As much as I did want to screw her, what if we did, she got pregnant and she decided to keep it? As a 15 year old, that would have turned my life upside down. And I don’t think that’s fair for a 15 year old.

[RusskyParticipant 13503]

Wolf wrote:

RusskyKGB wrote:

I am a big believer that someone should be committed of a crime ONLY IF THERE WAS A REAL VICTIM

Some people think there is a real victim, and I’m inclined to agree. Take my high school vice principle for example. As much as I did want to screw her, what if we did, she got pregnant and she decided to keep it? As a 15 year old, that would have turned my life upside down. And I don’t think that’s fair for a 15 year old.

Okay, if you knocked her up and suffered because of it – you should be able to sue her for damages. If not – there would be no case

proud carrier of the 'why?' chromosome

[bcrogerParticipant 113]

Also this lady tried to lure an 8th grader into sex. That makes her a registered sex offender. If a man tried to do that to an 8th grade girl,it it were a man then you would probably celebrate him going to prison.

[bcrogerParticipant 113]

Also the age of consent is set at 18. If it was set lower then people would say to set it at 16, the 14 then 12 etc. 18 may be too old but thats tha age and people need to learn to work with it.

[DOOGLERParticipant 17]

unpasteurized cow milk and camel milk is illegal lol

[BluesmokEParticipant 0]

I think you come off a bit pervey to tell you the truth,it is almost as if you’re suggesting a 30 yo should be able to f~~~ a 15 yo ..a 30 yo can f~~~ an 18 yo I’d say that’s fair enough, I’m in my early 20s and I still wouldn’t bang a 15 yo or 14 yo and I think it’s only fair that a woman be charged the same as a man would in that scenario even if she is hot. So what are you saying that if a 30 yo chick bangs a 15 yo she can get away with it just because she’s attractive? I would of banged my VP too and not rattled but if she got caught she shouldn’t get away with it just cuz she’s a woman..

[Lord VatsParticipant 379]

BluesmokE wrote:

I would of banged my VP too and not rattled but if she got caught she shouldn’t get away with it just cuz she’s a woman..

She not only would’ve gotten away, but she’d get YOU charged for rape. And guess what? They would prosecute the s~~~ out of you and send YOU to jail.
Plenty of women have had sex with minors and because of the fear of getting caught, have blamed the whole thing on the kid. People believe the women and blame the kid, thinking he must’ve had “raging teenage hormones”.

@RusskyKGB
As far as the law is concerned, I’m happy that a line has been drawn at age 18. Because a line needs to be drawn somewhere. That’s why speed limits are set in stone. It can be argued that a person going 61 mph isn’t endangering anyone but that’s what leads to anarchy. Case by case basis is just bulls~~~.
We celebrate not because two people had consenting sex and the older one went to jail. We celebrate because of the equality of law that prevents the older one from getting away with statutory rape just because the person is a female.

Summary

• Law says sex between a minor and an adult is statutory rape on part of the adult and I’m totally okay with it. A line has to be drawn somewhere, let’s draw it at 18 and f~~~ing enforce it.
• Anyone breaking the law should go to prison. Be it a man or a woman.
• As far as enjoyment is concerned, I know boys would enjoy having sex with a hot MILF, but same can be said about girls (they like hot DILFs). But if you end up f~~~ing a minor girl, you’re getting lynched, doesn’t matter who initiated it. Conversely, when it comes of women, when they end up f~~~ing a minor boy, it’s the boy that’ll get in trouble most of the time due to the propaganda of “rape culture”. And that’s why we celebrate when a woman goes to jail for breaking the law. Is that too much to ask?
• Finally, times change. There was a time when pedophilia was not only legal but encouraged. Maybe in the future it’d be legal again, or maybe slavery would become legal.

[uchibenkeiParticipant 7965]

age of consent in my country is 16, used to be 14.  the problem isn’t just age.  parents send their kids to school expecting them to be educated, not f~~~ed.  Teachers hold a position of trust, authority and power over the students and can use that to coerce the student into acting against their will.  The student may not even realize they are being coerced.  Teachers may also be a confidant to the student or the student’s peers and use confidential information to coerce students.  can a student really consent to sex with a teacher given these circumstances.

I bathe in the tears of single moms.

[RoyDalParticipant]

What is legal, what is right, what is fair, and what is necessary are all different things that often do not overlap. The legal system crushes innocent and guilty alike.

Society asks MGTOWs: Why are you not making more tax-slaves?

[Anonymous 12]

The law has to apply to both male and female teachers. The law says you can’t have sex with someone who is underage.

Whether the underage teen person consents or not is beside the point.

In the case of teachers they are also abusing their position of trust and authority and there have been studies that suggest that boys who have been raped by their female teachers go on to develop emotional problems due to it.

 

[VoidraitheParticipant 477]

Anonymous wrote:

The law says you can’t have sex with someone who is underage.

Anonymous wrote:

In the case of teachers they are also abusing their position of trust and authority

This, 100%. If it’s a law it must be applied equally even if the 17 y/o wanted it, even if the accused is male or female, black or white, etc.

[RennieParticipant]

BluesmokE wrote:

I think you come off a bit pervey to tell you the truth,it is almost as if you’re suggesting a 30 yo should be able to f~~~ a 15 yo ..a 30 yo can f~~~ an 18 yo I’d say that’s fair enough, I’m in my early 20s and I still wouldn’t bang a 15 yo or 14 yo and I think it’s only fair that a woman be charged the same as a man would in that scenario even if she is hot. So what are you saying that if a 30 yo chick bangs a 15 yo she can get away with it just because she’s attractive? I would of banged my VP too and not rattled but if she got caught she shouldn’t get away with it just cuz she’s a woman..

Is that so Chris Hansen? That’s the first post you make, attacking a respected member of the community? I’m just gonna have to get you take a seat over there in the litter box.

Also it seems that people here think that American’s laws are the final say, they aren’t.AOC is 18 in America. In many other civilized nations it’s not. It’s more often than not 16, it is in Canada for sure. It’s just fine that way and there’s no need to move it again.

I know that statement won’t sit well with some people here, but it needed to be said. Haters gonna hate.

[Cipher HighwindParticipant 1144]

I am of the mind that age of consent laws are in dire need of reform.  The present tranche of laws were brought about by proto-feminist, progressive nonsense in the late 19th century.  Ages of consent were raised from 9-12 to 16-18.  This was a matter of ugly spinsters outlawing the competition.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent#Reforms_in_the_19th_and_20th_century

Say what one will about the other matters concerning sex with those under 18, but the following is incontrovertible: it is absurd to put people in a cage for activities of mutual agreement.

[Author]

Posts