Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Hot for teacher?

Hot for teacher? (Page 2)
Thread Tools
Shaddim  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 20, 2014, 08:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton View Post
I find it super interesting that you continue down this road of baseless accusations whilst simultaneously accusing others of jumping to conclusions. I clearly said nothing about behaving unethically; I said you were somehow his client.
Huh? You said it right here:

How surprising, given that you apparently paying him to represent her interest, seeing that he is willing to discuss these extremely client-confidential details with you.
I've never said the lawyer gave me info about her, because he hasn't, and I'm not paying him (that's now the 3rd time I've said that). WTF is wrong with you? I'm not the one jumping to such massive conclusions, you've barged in here and slung shit all over; the girl, the guy, my attorney, and me. Get yourself sorted out.

So basically, this thread is partially about your broader argument that the issue of statutory age of consent is either incorrect, or should be assessed on a case-by-case basis.

And the other part is something to do with your rejection of contractual terms and/or the fiduciary duties of school teachers and/or authority figures over school students.

Perhaps we might be able to give better responses if you actually clarified these things up front, rather than introducing them after the fact in an oblique and reactionary fashion?
Again... WTF is wrong with you? You've been a prat this entire thread. No, this thread isn't directly about the law, it's about passing judgement without weighing the price, and you've shown a good example of that for everyone, haven't you?
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 20, 2014, 08:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
Huh? You said it right here:



I've never said the lawyer gave me info about her, because he hasn't, and I'm not paying him (that's now the 3rd time I've said that).
A comment I made after you mentioned that the girl was using your lawyer and that your lawyer wasn't "anal" about the letter of the law in this case. All of which implied that you had discussed this matter with your lawyer, ergo given your involvement in this thread and clear personal connection to the matter, that you were somehow the client or otherwise involved with the client, e.g. a relative, proxy, or close friend who was footing the bill because of your wealth and thus able to discuss confidential matters with the lawyer.

This assumption was perfectly reasonable but as it turns out, you indeed discussed with the lawyer but before they took on the client, ostensibly because of your discussion. So you were indirectly involved, but not a client.

So basically, you leave out half the facts, then jump down the throat of anyone who dares to make a conclusion based on the facts you provided, and not the facts you left out. Sound familiar?


WTF is wrong with you? I'm not the one jumping to such massive conclusions, you've barged in here and slung shit all over; the girl, the guy, my attorney, and me. Get yourself sorted out.
Oh hai, now we get to the part where you start name-calling and making completely baseless accusations that are completely untrue - your favourite vice to accuse others of being guilty of. Wow. Interesting.

Again... WTF is wrong with you? You've been a prat this entire thread. No, this thread isn't directly about the law, it's about passing judgement without weighing the price, and you've shown a good example of that for everyone, haven't you?
Wow. Just...wow. You, sir, need a time-out and some sober second thought on how you have responded to completely rational commentary. Maybe you're a little too emotionally invested in this matter?

And also, maybe you should learn to stop your terrible habit of providing half the available facts, asking for analysis, and then criticizing others for not knowing the facts that you didn't divulge.
( Last edited by ShortcutToMoncton; May 20, 2014 at 08:57 PM. )
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
Shaddim  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 20, 2014, 09:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton View Post
A comment I made after you mentioned that the girl was using your lawyer and that your lawyer wasn't "anal" about the letter of the law in this case.
Halt. No I didn't. I was talking about him not being so anal about the law, in general, not in this case. Another assumption, for you.

All of which implied that you had discussed this matter with your lawyer, ergo given your involvement in this thread and clear personal connection to the matter, that you were somehow the client or otherwise involved with the client, e.g. a relative, proxy, or close friend who was footing the bill because of your wealth and thus able to discuss confidential matters with the lawyer.
No, I mentioned it to him and he offered his help, I've already said that.

This assumption was perfectly reasonable but as it turns out, you indeed discussed with the lawyer but before they took on the client, ostensibly because of your discussion. So you were indirectly involved, but not a client.
Only in that I mentioned that she may not have anyone to represent her, if she needs it.

So basically, you leave out half the facts, then jump down the throat of anyone who dares to make a conclusion based on the facts you provided, and not the facts you left out. Sound familiar?
Don't blame me for your crappy behavior and conclusion jumping.

Oh hai, now we get to the part where you start name-calling and making completely baseless accusations that are completely untrue - your favourite vice to accuse others of being guilty of. Wow. Interesting.
"Baseless"? That word doesn't mean what you think it means, obviously.

Wow. Just...wow. You, sir, need a time-out and some sober second thought on how you have responded to completely rational commentary. Maybe you're a little too emotionally invested in this matter?
and you need to just GTFO of my thread, it was fine before you came in here and started this BS. I'm not the only person to mention your drama in here.

And also, maybe you should learn to stop your terrible habit of providing half the available facts, asking for analysis, and then criticizing others for not knowing the facts that you didn't divulge.
I gave what info I had, and posted it here, you chose to read into it beyond that point, and then tried to be hostile with me when I called you on it. Poor form all around, and I can only say I'm glad you aren't my attorney.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 20, 2014, 09:31 PM
 
Hah hah...your thread.

Grow up.
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 20, 2014, 09:44 PM
 
Furthermore, your entire line of argument in this thread, after setting out the "facts" you chose to divulge, has been:

A) they didn't know the law and thus it should not apply to them; and
B) well in my opinion the law is not correct anyway.

I mean....I don't even know what to tell you.
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
Shaddim  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 20, 2014, 10:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton View Post
Furthermore, your entire line of argument in this thread, after setting out the "facts" you chose to divulge, has been:

A) they didn't know the law and thus it should not apply to them; and
B) well in my opinion the law is not correct anyway.

I mean....I don't even know what to tell you.
If you think that, then you're mentally impaired. I didn't even mention the law except to say she could be charged with a crime, but the breadth of this is about the school board and social perceptions regarding age. You brought in what you wanted to bring in, despite me even saying that the DA isn't going to pursue a case. However, as subego predicted, you've now started the "crankypants torrent", blaming people for what you started (by insinuating my lawyer is involved in gross ethical misconduct), and generally showing your ass like you do in any thread I start. The easy fix for this is, just go away. I get it, you don't like me, I know that, everyone knows that. (Duh?) Move on.

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton View Post
Hah hah...your thread.
Yep.

Grow up.
Ironic.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 20, 2014, 10:54 PM
 
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 20, 2014, 11:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton View Post
I guess to sum up my original cranky pants response(s), what I am trying to illustrate is:

19 male with 25 female.
18 male with 25 female.
17 male with 25 female.
16 male with 25 female.
15 male with 25 female.
14 male with 25 female.

Which is "bad" and which is "okay"? Well, apparently that has been enough of a problem to evaluate that statutory rape laws were invented.
Which is the disconnect. I'm asking for your opinion, and you're defending the legal system.

My answer to the above is 16 starts to get shady. With 14 there's definitely something bad going on.
     
BLAZE_MkIV
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Nashua NH, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 20, 2014, 11:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
You're not this obtuse. As I said before, he hasn't discussed anything with me about her since he's taken her on. It's pretty crappy to assume that he's been behaving unethically.
A lawyers client isn't necessarily the person who's paying them. That his lawyer was representing her was obvious to me in when he first posted it. There wasn't anything about who was paying the lawyer.
     
zro
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: The back of the room
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 20, 2014, 11:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
OMG she's hideous!
     
Shaddim  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 20, 2014, 11:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
I apologize to other members for arguing in here, it was childish, but I won't apologize to StM, because he was just being a doo-doo head.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 12:06 AM
 
Could any part of the relationship have happened in a neighboring state? A date to an out-of-state restaurant perhaps. Tennessee shares borders with 8 other states. According to Wikipedia, 6 of those states have age-of-consent of 16, one is 17, and only one (Virginia) also has 18. If age-of-consent is an inflexible ethical matter, then at least some state laws must be fallible, because they can't all be right.

Hmm ... if the relationship did cross state boundaries, wouldn't that make it federal jurisdiction?

While reading this, I keep thinking of those nosy ass school stories, where they punish students for things done or said outside school. Even to extorting Facebook passwords, so they can snoop through student accounts.

The teacher was almost certainly off duty - it is much harder for teachers to play hooky than for students. So without a criminal case, if they fire her, they are punishing something done on her own time. Time they weren't paying for. I'm leaning towards Shaddim's viewpoint here. If they want to control her off-campus hours, they should pay for them. All 24 hours, at minimum wage or higher.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 12:50 AM
 
This thread is worthless without pricks.

Oh, wait. Nevermind

But in all seriousness: what are we discussing here ?

The law is the law. And we all know how the law interpreted literally can be more wrong than right.
That kid just has to grow a pair, and tell his parents and the school to f*ck lay off.

-t
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 05:13 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Which is the disconnect. I'm asking for your opinion, and you're defending the legal system.

My answer to the above is 16 starts to get shady. With 14 there's definitely something bad going on.
No, I am not defending the legal system - that is the disconnect. I am saying this is what the rules probably are.

That you feel there is a certain age at which this becomes immoral/illegal likely means society feels the same way - and lo and behold, in the state of TN that age has been pegged as 17.

In this instance there are likely two "sets" of governing rules: one regarding statutory age of consent (broken), and one regarding the contractual, fiduciary and ethical duties of a teacher and a student - likely, also broken.

What no one has bothered to show or explain, despite my repeated requests, is how those two frameworks are treated in the USA and TN in particular. Shaddim has chosen to provide absolutely zero research and instead decided the outcome based on his gut feeling that this is a very romantic situation, there was no harm no foul, and thus no penalty should apply to anyone.

I see clear breaches of legal and ethical codes of conduct and as a result feel that some penalty should obviously apply. The question is, what? Is consensual statutory rape a non- issue in TN? Is Shaddim's opinion that teacher/authority figures have no fiduciary duties as long as they are not directly in a professional relationship the correct conclusion based on TN law?

My first posts can be summed up as, "In my opinion this is an offence worthy of dismissal from her job. But is this conduct allowed in TN?"

I have gotten zero response to that question, other than people's opinions on the situation. But these opinion are valueless if they are not shared by the TN legal/school system.

I'm impatient towards your "probing" because it doesn't matter what I think of 17 3/4 or 18. The relevant question is, what does TN think?
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 05:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
The teacher was almost certainly off duty - it is much harder for teachers to play hooky than for students. So without a criminal case, if they fire her, they are punishing something done on her own time. Time they weren't paying for. I'm leaning towards Shaddim's viewpoint here. If they want to control her off-campus hours, they should pay for them. All 24 hours, at minimum wage or higher.
I respectfully suggest that is entirely irrelevant. Professionals have obligations and codes of conduct that must be met whether at work or no. Schoolteachers are not allowed to have sexual relationships with their students only during off-duty hours.. Come on.
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
Ω
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 06:34 AM
 
18 for age of consent? If by the age of 16 you don't know your wrongs from rights then another two years is going to do f all.

The teacher aspect only muddies the water, but if some 16 - sub 18 year old is getting his/her end away then good on them.
"angels bleed from the tainted touch of my caress"
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 06:52 AM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
If you think that, then you're mentally impaired.
Ahhh yes. Good old Shaddim, the noble and righteous guardian of courteous discussion and good manners on the internet...except when someone disagrees with him or offers an alternatve take, in which case the petty name-calling is an immediate resort.

What a hypocrite. My responses in each of my posts has been courteous and polite, even in the face of your repeated suggestions (starting here and continuing throughout the thread) that anyone who disagrees with your opinion is worthy of name-calling.

I didn't even mention the law except to say she could be charged with a crime, but the breadth of this is about the school board and social perceptions regarding age.
And what I`m saying is that this is about two things:
1) The law; and
2) Legal/fiduciary duties and ethical obligations of a teacher to a student.

Those things, exist. They encompass "social perceptions regarding age" but also strong social and professional perceptions regarding what certain authority figures - whether it be teachers, doctors, lawyers, you name it - should or should not be allowed to do.

You have repeatedly ignored or brushed off these issues as thought they are not worth discussing. Given that this is what this matter is about, I find that shockingly dismissive and obviously indicative of your willingness to find the result you personally want, damn what rules or standards may have been put in place by people who have examined this particular issue.
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
Ω
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 07:04 AM
 
It's Shaddims Law. He who disagrees with Shaddim is a fool.

Problem I have is that we look at the black and white when this very much a grey area. I think cases should be looked at the merits involved. The age of 18 was probably chosen to protect the minority who are not ready by the age of 18.
"angels bleed from the tainted touch of my caress"
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 07:17 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Which is the disconnect. I'm asking for your opinion, and you're defending the legal system.

My answer to the above is 16 starts to get shady. With 14 there's definitely something bad going on.
And I guess to post-pad like a total mofo:

I personally don't think there is any magical age; that it should really be determined in the specific circumstances of each case. Of course, that is practically impossible because every single case would then be the older participant claiming that the younger was within the magical age of consent; and that is why at some point in the past societies decided to set a specific age and/or set of circumstances that everyone could be aware of, and stick to them. Some 16-year-olds are likely fine to have sex with whomever they want; I am also certain we have all met those 18, 19 or 20-year-olds in university who were clearly not ready for consensual sex and went through years of messed-up relationships because of their personal struggles. So again, absent any way to tell in advance, I am totally fine with the lawmakers of Tennessee picking the age of 17 or younger, and the people of Tennessee obviously not feeling that it was a law that needed overturning before this time.

Also personally, I feel that a 25-year-old schoolteacher who willingly decides to sleep with a 17-year-old high school student should be fired just on the grounds of being so, so stupid. Presumably she went to college and, you know, learned Stuff? I'm going to conclude that this situation was a large and highly stressed part of the Stuff. The fact that she couldn't wait the extra 6 months to have sex with him until a) he had turned 18; and b) graduated his final year, makes me shake my head. You can cure many things, but stupidity isn't one of them.
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 07:19 AM
 
Originally Posted by Ω View Post
Problem I have is that we look at the black and white when this very much a grey area. I think cases should be looked at the merits involved. The age of 18 was probably chosen to protect the minority who are not ready by the age of 18.
I agree. As I have been saying, the starting point is that there is a law; it was broken; now we have to determine if there is leeway allowed for specific circumstances like these.

I should stress I am talking just about the statutory age of consent here. I still feel that the duties of a teacher and student are really the paramount issue in terms of her job.
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 10:13 AM
 
Originally Posted by Ω View Post
18 for age of consent? If by the age of 16 you don't know your wrongs from rights then another two years is going to do f all.
Maturity is a process, an no one's done with it by 16 or 18. Or 30, many times.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 10:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Maturity is a process, an no one's done with it by 16 or 18. Or 30, many times.
If you're 15-17 and you try to have sex with an adult, you're a kid. If you're 15-17 and you try to murder an adult, you're an adult.
     
BLAZE_MkIV
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Nashua NH, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 10:35 AM
 
Originally Posted by Ω View Post
It's {insert any name} Law. He who disagrees with {insert any name} is a fool.
Fixed

Didn't he state that they met while he was 17. Meaning he's not 17 now. You'd have to prove that the acts in question took place when he was 17. How does parental consent affect statutory rape?

The teacher student thing can't possibly apply to anyone you can label student. Is my math wrong? I doesn't look like even if he went to that middle school she wouldn't have been teaching when he did.
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 11:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by BLAZE_MkIV View Post
Didn't he state that they met while he was 17. Meaning he's not 17 now. You'd have to prove that the acts in question took place when he was 17. How does parental consent affect statutory rape?
It seems clearly admitted that the acts took place when he was 17.

I have asked about parental consent and stat rape, but no one seems to know. It seems logical to me that parental consent might be allowed below the age of consent, but above a certain age (e.g. say, someone who is 16 or 17, but not 13). In this instance, I would assume that provided parental consent would be fine vis-à-vis a stat rape charge. However, I actually do not know if that is the case.

The teacher student thing can't possibly apply to anyone you can label student. Is my math wrong? I doesn't look like even if he went to that middle school she wouldn't have been teaching when he did.
No one seems to know this either, but my answer is - why not? Whether you're a student in grade 1 or grade 12, a school teacher of any grade is an authority figure and one that you will almost certainly obey. There is a clear nexus in the situation of a school teacher sleeping with one of their students, and I think it is likely we will all agree that is obviously wrong and/or a breach of legal/fiduciary duties and teacher codes of conduct; what about a student in their school, from another class that they do not teach? What about a student in their school district, but from another school? What about a student from another school board entirely?

To me, the logical answer is that this presents too much choice and grey areas that could be exploited. To use Shaddim's stated definition, a teacher could have all the sex with students they want by sleeping with the ones from another school; that seems inherently wrong and unlikely to be the exception to the rule (although it might be). It would seem more likely to me that the general rule is no sex with school students, ever. I don`t know the answer, but I think you are correct in saying it seems like a key point in this fact situation.

I do not know the answers, but I am sure courts have examined the issue and likely there are answers to be found, if someone has the time or inclination to look for them.
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
BLAZE_MkIV
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Nashua NH, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 01:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton View Post
To me, the logical answer is that this presents too much choice and grey areas that could be exploited. To use Shaddim's stated definition, a teacher could have all the sex with students they want by sleeping with the ones from another school; that seems inherently wrong and unlikely to be the exception to the rule (although it might be).
Even if for example the teacher is 24 and the student 18 and one is from a private school and the other public?

It would seem more likely to me that the general rule is no sex with school students, ever. I don`t know the answer, but I think you are correct in saying it seems like a key point in this fact situation.
There has to be some restriction because a 40yr old taking pottery classes at a community college would be a student. Were is the cut off? Any school in the school district, or do they mean just grade school students in any school? What if the 17yr old got their GED? (for arguments sake ignore the age of consent) I though the teacher can't have a relationship with a student was the position of authority issue. If its actually that, then what if there was never any teacher student relationship.
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 01:47 PM
 
I do not know; all good questions. I would just assume that grade school would be the core defining metric, though; there is no way post-secondary could be included.

I suspect a lot of this might be governed by the terms of employment and/or ethical code of conduct for teachers in TN.
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 01:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton View Post
I'm impatient towards your "probing" because it doesn't matter what I think of 17 3/4 or 18. The relevant question is, what does TN think?
I can't answer your question, I'm not an attorney. Do you know one? Maybe you should get all pissy with them.

The relevant question to me is the one I asked you. I guess I appreciate the honesty in saying you don't give a shit about having a discussion, but seeing as how I didn't do anything to deserve this behavior, it's mostly coming off as nasty and unpleasant.

Despite this however, like a salmon swimming up the crankypants rapids, I shall rephrase the question.

Don't you think 18 as an age of consent is kinda high?
     
BLAZE_MkIV
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Nashua NH, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 01:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I can't answer your question, I'm not an attorney. Do you know one? Maybe you should get all pissy with them.

The relevant question to me is the one I asked you. I guess I appreciate the honesty in saying you don't give a shit about having a discussion, but seeing as how I didn't do anything to deserve this behavior, it's mostly coming off as nasty and unpleasant.

Despite this however, like a salmon swimming up the crankypants rapids, I shall rephrase the question.

Don't you think 18 as an age of consent is kinda high?
I don't think you can literally apply age 18 as some concrete cutoff. To me it would be completely appropriate for a relationship between two 17 yr olds to continue unchanged until their both 18. This is why there are people involved in applying laws. You can't strictly interpret them.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 02:02 PM
 
I'm talking about age of "full" consent. The point where there is no longer any "you must be this many years to go on this ride".
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 02:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Don't you think 18 as an age of consent is kinda high?
Are advocating for the elimination of consent laws altogether?
45/47
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 02:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I'm talking about age of "full" consent. The point where there is no longer any "you must be this many years to go on this ride".
No one's really interested in answering your questions, they all assume there's some nefarious subtext to it all...I call this the "Besson Effect."
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 02:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I can't answer your question, I'm not an attorney. Do you know one? Maybe you should get all pissy with them.

The relevant question to me is the one I asked you. I guess I appreciate the honesty in saying you don't give a shit about having a discussion, but seeing as how I didn't do anything to deserve this behavior, it's mostly coming off as nasty and unpleasant.

Despite this however, like a salmon swimming up the crankypants rapids, I shall rephrase the question.

Don't you think 18 as an age of consent is kinda high?
I'm not pissy; I don't have time to discuss your veiled comments that were clearly leading to a conclusion you were trying to reach. (Edit: "The Besson Effect" in full force. Hahaha. How much does that pain you? ) If you wanted to ask me if 18 is high, then you could have come out and asked that question, instead of asking me to "compare and contrast" as though I have unlimited time to type. Understood? Just get to your real point and stop being reverse-pissy because I have honestly asked you to do so.

Secondly, as I have pointed out, the issue that Shaddim has raised is the conduct that is already past. Where are you going with your discussion - that the age of consent should be lowered so that this teacher would not have committed stat rape? I would be more than surprised to find out that stat rape perps have already tried this, no? And that underaged drinkers have argued 21 is too high? And underaged drivers have argued that 15/16/17 is too high?

As I said to Shaddim, if you feel that this teacher should ultimately argue for a change in the relevant laws...then you could come out and say that, rather than dancing around the point.

You're not helping my mood by repeatedly ignoring the comments that I do make. I specifically responded and said that in my view, each instance should depend entirely on the person and the situation. Failing the practicality of that, I am completely fine with TN's decision to limit the age of consent to under 18 for partners within 4 years of age.

FWIW in Canada I believe the age of consent is 16, also with a close-in-age exemption. I'm fine with that, too. But to be honest, I am somewhat more comfortable with a 25 or 30-year-old sleeping with an 18-year-old rather than a 16-year-old. Perhaps to that point, I have started to feel that in my world, kids seem to have more knowledge but simultaneously seem to grow up slower. Parents in general are sheltering for a longer period of time. Being prepared to "leave the nest" at 17 or 18 is no longer as expected as it was only a couple decades ago. Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing is another discussion, but I think it does sway me to think that 17 or younger is not an inappropriate cutoff for sexual partners over the age of 21, who will very likely have an inordinate amount of power in the relationship by virtue of advanced age.
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 02:24 PM
 
I think it's strange that it differs from state to state. This kind of thing seems like it should be across the board.

How old do you need to be to serve in the military, 18? No, 17 apparently. So 17 is old enough to enter into a contract and risk your life, a pretty serious decision. Yet you can't vote, and in TN can't have a relationship with a hot teacher.

(Oh wait again, at 17 you need parental consent to join. Way to hide the details, Army!)
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 02:44 PM
 
If age-of-consent is to protect the minor from consequences (pregnancy, child support) might I point out that any baby will arrive after both parties are legal adults. So having a relationship at 17.75 in a state with cutoff of 18 isn't bothering me.

The intent of the law is fulfilled even if the letter is not. And if we want to honor laws in an abstract form, there is always the Indiana pi bill that tried to define pi as 3.2 - fortunately never passed into law.
     
Shaddim  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 02:52 PM
 
Good news! She isn't going to be fired, she'll remain on leave for the rest of this year, then they are moving her to an elementary school (where one of the board members is on the faculty). They didn't have the votes to terminate her contract and the superintendent seems to have had a bit of a change of heart. His threats regarding her termination were rather hollow all along, as he doesn't have that kind of authority, only the full board can do that, suspensions are at the limit of his power. It seems the teacher's union finally stepped up too, and cited the issues we've been discussing (the guy not being her student, or even a student at her school, and the fact that by they found out about all of this he'd turned 18). Ultimately, by an almost split decision, they determined that she isn't a threat to children (but she will be on probation and likely scrutinized for some time), possibly one factor is that the majority of the board members are women, who in general are a more level-headed lot. I'm proud of her (my) attorney, I don't believe he's slept since he took her on as a client, this all rankled him as much as it did me.

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton View Post
Ahhh yes. Good old Shaddim, the noble and righteous guardian of courteous discussion and good manners on the internet...except when someone disagrees with him or offers an alternatve take, in which case the petty name-calling is an immediate resort.

What a hypocrite. My responses in each of my posts has been courteous and polite, even in the face of your repeated suggestions (starting here and continuing throughout the thread) that anyone who disagrees with your opinion is worthy of name-calling.
Sad. Throw stones at a woman like you're an old testament pharisee, accuse my attorney (and me) of acting unethically, jump to conclusions about statements that I never made, and then blame me for all of it. You're not only a poor excuse for an attorney, displaying your own ethical lapses, you're actually a rather rotten human being. Here's a name for you, "dirtbag". (edit: Geez, did that hurt your feelings, Shorty? Aww.)

And what I`m saying is that this is about two things:
1) The law; and
2) Legal/fiduciary duties and ethical obligations of a teacher to a student.
No, it isn't, it's about you deciding to jump in here and be a tool, a function you excel at, given your poor deductive and social skills.

As most other have already figured out, he isn't her student, or even attending her school, she teaches a level of kids well below his grade. This was never about "the law", which at worst can be a blind and wounded animal, devoid of any compassion, I suspect it's more about how people enjoy tearing someone else down (like the way you often behave). Her duty is to her students and school, which has never been scrutinized, she's a caring, decent person in this community (something that I imagine is lost on you, running around yelling "The Law", "The Law", like some half-baked Judge Dredd clone).

Those things, exist. They encompass "social perceptions regarding age" but also strong social and professional perceptions regarding what certain authority figures - whether it be teachers, doctors, lawyers, you name it - should or should not be allowed to do.

You have repeatedly ignored or brushed off these issues as thought they are not worth discussing. Given that this is what this matter is about, I find that shockingly dismissive and obviously indicative of your willingness to find the result you personally want, damn what rules or standards may have been put in place by people who have examined this particular issue.
Yes, if he were her student, client, etc.. He isn't, and she isn't even in a position of authority over him, in any way. Do you understand that? No?

Originally Posted by Ω View Post
It's Shaddims Law. He who disagrees with Shaddim is a fool.
Who are you, his sidekick? Wake up and decide to play "pile-on" today, did you?
( Last edited by Shaddim; May 21, 2014 at 03:06 PM. )
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 03:00 PM
 
@Shortcut

You're declaring 18 is low by having an issue with 17¾. This is a bizarre position for someone coming from a country where the age of consent is 16.

This (frankly, kinda weird) position of yours has apparently led to a questioning process for which your only response is to have a meltdown. There's nothing I can do about that.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 03:01 PM
 
Mmm hmmm
45/47
     
Shaddim  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 03:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
I think it's strange that it differs from state to state. This kind of thing seems like it should be across the board.

How old do you need to be to serve in the military, 18? No, 17 apparently. So 17 is old enough to enter into a contract and risk your life, a pretty serious decision. Yet you can't vote, and in TN can't have a relationship with a hot teacher.

(Oh wait again, at 17 you need parental consent to join. Way to hide the details, Army!)
That, right there. 17 is old enough to join the service, one of the biggest, and potentially most dangerous decisions in a person's life, but it isn't old enough to get it on with someone a few years older than you? Geez, that's rather obtuse, isn't it? I think it's a fair age of consent, all around, even for driving a vehicle on your own. It's when most seem to start getting their heads on straight, though that does vary a great deal. My nephew was much more together at 16 than I was, "buck wild" is probably a fair assessment of me at that age. I had already moved out of my parents' home (out of spite, but I did move back), joined a band, and gotten an unfortunate tattoo, all before 17. Umm, yeah, I wasn't ready for the real world yet.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 03:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
Sad. Throw stones at a woman like you're an old testament pharisee,
Completely false. I pointed out what the law seemed to say about these situations.
accuse my attorney (and me) of acting unethically,
Completely false.
jump to conclusions about statements that I never made,
...or rather, made conclusions about statements that you did make. You do realize there's a difference, right?

and then blame me for all of it.
You mean, blame you for acting like a spoiled child throwing a tantrum?

You're not only a poor excuse for an attorney, displaying your own ethical lapses, you're actually a rather rotten human being. Here's a name for you, "scumbag".


Get a grip on yourself. You're acting like a 6-year-old.

No, it isn't, it's about you deciding to jump in here and be a tool, a function you excel at, given your poor deductive and social skills.

As most other have already figured out, he isn't her student, or even attending her school, she teaches a level of kids well below his grade. This was never about "the law", which at worst can be a blind and wounded animal, devoid of any compassion, I suspect it's more about how people enjoy tearing someone else down (like the way you often behave).
Have you even read any of this thread? Did you not see the multiple posts on the appropriate nexus of teacher-student relationships or authority-figure relationships in general?

Or are you just ignoring everything outside of what you think?

Yes, if he were her student, client, etc.. He isn't, and she isn't even in a position of authority over him, in any way. Do you understand that? No?
Apparently not. What a surprise.
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
Shaddim  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 03:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
@Shortcut

You're declaring 18 is low by having an issue with 17¾. This is a bizarre position for someone coming from a country where the age of consent is 16.

This (frankly, kinda weird) position of yours has apparently led to a questioning process for which your only response is to have a meltdown. There's nothing I can do about that.
I doubt this would be the case if he were thinking objectively, but he isn't, it's personal and he's compromised.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Shaddim  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 03:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton View Post
*Lots of tripe*
Don't run around half-cocked, you're liable to go off and hurt yourself (and what's left of your reputation). This stopped being about the teacher as soon as you started posting, as evidenced by you not even addressing any updates to the matter. That's a personal issue, and nothing anyone else can work out for you.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 03:24 PM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
I doubt this would be the case if he were thinking objectively, but he isn't, it's personal and he's compromised.
The idea here is supposedly I'm setting him up for a "gotcha" moment. The thing is, he's already had that by having a problem with a 17-year-old consenting... regardless of what the law says.

All I want is explanation of that thought process, or elucidation if that isn't the thought process. I have zero interest in changing the opinion, I merely want to know where it comes from.
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2014, 03:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
@Shortcut

You're declaring 18 is low by having an issue with 17¾. This is a bizarre position for someone coming from a country where the age of consent is 16.
I don't understand what you are talking about. Where did I declare that 18 is low? I clearly said that 18 is fine, which is TN's legal age. I also clearly said that I am fine with 16, which is Canada's age. I also clearly said that I am personally more comfortable with 18 than 16.

What are you not understanding?
This (frankly, kinda weird) position of yours has apparently led to a questioning process for which your only response is to have a meltdown. There's nothing I can do about that.
What meltdown? Honestly, do you see me calling other people names? Am I not engaging in rational discussion? Is it because I'm typing a lot?
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 23, 2014, 03:06 PM
 
If I missed anything you said it was because I tend to glaze over once people start impugning my motives and accusing me of "veiled comments".

Now that I have an answer to the first question, I'm curious as to your rationale. What I mean by that is "what do you think is a good rationale for choosing the age of consent?"

IOW, is 18 a good choice because it's late, and we can be sure a majority of people are going to be as ready for that as possible, or is 18 more of a "middle ground", where there would be significant improvement by enacting the (unpopular) option of raising it even higher?

Since you're "okay" with 16, I'm guessing the former, but I'd rather hear what you have to say.



P.S. If you feel you've answered this previously, I'm fine with you just pointing me towards where.

P.P.S. I feel I should repeat I have zero interest in changing your opinion, or making a point. You have a different view than me, so I'm curious about it.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 24, 2014, 08:06 AM
 
Zero tolerance rules are often put into place because of repeated or egregious (or both) violations of a less stringent rule. There is often a reason for zero tolerance, even if it seems to be excessive, and the reason doesn't have to have been a case of abuse in the organization that sets the rule.

Now, let's think about a different angle. In the US, insurance companies charge young people, primarily males, a LOT more for auto insurance until they are 26 years old, based on statistical data that shows a much higher incidence of risk-taking (or low incidence of risk avoidance) in the 16-26 year old age group. It turns out that the stats illustrate a neurological phenomenon: the prefrontal lobes of the brain don't mature until around 26 years of age or so. And that is not just in males... So we have a physically adult male with an immature decision-making system, and a physically adult female with a nearly mature decision-making system. What could possibly go wrong?!?!?! ()

It's interesting to see how differently "statutory rape" is prosecuted, and how different the outcomes are, when the juvenile is male versus female. In cases of statutory rape, our society seems to see a minor female as always the victim (and creepy, predatory adult males make that an easy assumption), but minor males as having somehow achieved a victory. Both assumptions are inappropriate, of course, since there are plenty of cases where the facts are contrary to both assumptions.

What it comes down to is that an adult in a position of authority, who had almost certainly been fully informed of the "zero tolerance" policy, stepped over the line with someone whom she should have known was a minor. Why should she have? It's part of fulfilling that "position of authority" thing; if you know you're restricted from a certain thing, it's your responsibility to identify that certain thing. Being a teacher in public school is a very, very special position of authority, and abusing that authority, even a little, is a problem no matter what that abuse is.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 26, 2014, 08:14 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
If I missed anything you said it was because I tend to glaze over once people start impugning my motives and accusing me of "veiled comments".
Well then I would suggest that you look at changing your phrasing of certain questions...particularly those in which you present a short fact scenario and request that others "compare and contrast". It does not really work on many levels in this particular format.

Now that I have an answer to the first question, I'm curious as to your rationale. What I mean by that is "what do you think is a good rationale for choosing the age of consent?"

IOW, is 18 a good choice because it's late, and we can be sure a majority of people are going to be as ready for that as possible, or is 18 more of a "middle ground", where there would be significant improvement by enacting the (unpopular) option of raising it even higher?

Since you're "okay" with 16, I'm guessing the former, but I'd rather hear what you have to say.
As I previously mentioned, I feel that the correct age varies depending on the facts - i.e. the particular persons, circumstances, and the society involved. I would also say the same thing about many other age-based arbitrary limitations - the ability to drink, enter the military, or drive have all been mentioned in this thread. But the point is, the people of a certain region decided on a certain age, and that's the age that applies in that region - it seems to be one of those "State's rights" people like to complain about.

The people in charge of legislating these rules in Tennessee came up with 18, whereas those same rule-makers in Canada decided on 16. I think your comments are likely reasonable - 18 is the legal definition of an adult and probably the oldest and safest age to choose. But choosing 16 acknowledges that a non-insignificant percentage of young people are ready to make that choice before the age of 18.

Either way, my analysis was confined solely to the fact situation as presented by Shaddim: that this was a factual instance of sex with a minor or whatever definition is used by TN legislation; the older party has a job and an college education as a teacher, working with children; and her defence seemed to be "whoops I didn't know this was illegal." As I pointed out, whether TN law uses an objective or subjective interpretation of circumstances when assessing whether punishment is appropriate is really an important point.

Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
What it comes down to is that an adult in a position of authority, who had almost certainly been fully informed of the "zero tolerance" policy, stepped over the line with someone whom she should have known was a minor. Why should she have? It's part of fulfilling that "position of authority" thing; if you know you're restricted from a certain thing, it's your responsibility to identify that certain thing. Being a teacher in public school is a very, very special position of authority, and abusing that authority, even a little, is a problem no matter what that abuse is.
I have some good friends and family who are teachers throughout 5 different provinces in Canada (ranging from grades 1 to high school). So I used this thread as a good excuse to catch up with them over the weekend, and worked in the fact scenario as a "well what do you think" situation. All five were unanimous that the relationship would be completely inappropriate and in their understanding of school board operations, possible grounds for dismissal - keeping in mind this is only as regards the teacher-student relationship, as the relationship would not have violated Canada's underage law.

I'm starting to suspect from this thread that it is mostly professionals who seem to have a problem with what happened. I suspect that is likely because professionals are trained and educated on the importance of this matter and what a huge no-no it is.
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 26, 2014, 03:24 PM
 
Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton View Post
Well then I would suggest that you look at changing your phrasing of certain questions...particularly those in which you present a short fact scenario and request that others "compare and contrast". It does not really work on many levels in this particular format.
As I stated, I'm not interested in arguing about your feelings on the age of consent, and I appreciate you explaining your position.

However, if you want to get into an argument about whether the phrase "compare and contrast" makes someone deserving of confrontation mode... I'm sorry, I have to go to the mat with you on that.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 26, 2014, 06:20 PM
 
Like said, it sound like people are arguing for the elemination of consent laws altogether.
45/47
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 27, 2014, 08:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
As I stated, I'm not interested in arguing about your feelings on the age of consent, and I appreciate you explaining your position.

However, if you want to get into an argument about whether the phrase "compare and contrast" makes someone deserving of confrontation mode... I'm sorry, I have to go to the mat with you on that.
Perhaps I missed it somewhere, but if you go back to my initial comments and our initial exchanges, my recollection is that you made multiple questioning posts and I gave multiple responses as to my opinions on the subject...but I don't think you were divulging your opinion.

Again, I could be wrong and I don't have time to read through again, but I feel the "Besson Effect" is an accurate descriptor: if you're not showing your own cards but repeatedly questioning the results or logic of others, then it feels like a set-up waiting to happen. I initially wrote what I considered to be satisfyingly comprehensive responses, and you gave a short "compare and contrast" response that seemed to indicate you likely had a pre-formed opinion on the issue of age of consent - but I don't think I saw it until later.

Whether you feel that's entirely okay is another thing, but I'm just saying that I personally will not play like that.
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 27, 2014, 09:20 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Like said, it sound like people are arguing for the elemination of consent laws altogether.
I do not think anyone has made or suggested this argument.
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:20 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,