lawrocket 3 #1 August 3, 2005 Warning - sensitive topic. And I'm not joking. A few years ago it was Mary Kay Letourneau making headlines. Last year it was Debra LaFave. A couple of days ago it was Sandra Beth Geisel. These are the national news makers. Locally, there are more. Here in the Central Valley, Elizabeth Stow, a first year teacher at Tulare Western HS in Tulare, pleaded no contest to charges of sexual relationships with three of her students. Lost among this shuffle are the male teachers and coaches who do the same thing. Two of my male teachers from my high school, just that I know of, got in trouble for it. There is a lot going through my mind with regards to this issue. The first is just how prevalent sexual abuse of children is among teachers and coaches. Badjocks.com has reported 119 High School Coach sex scandals in the US - this year! Those are only the ones that the blog has managed to compile. This is separate from teacher sex scandals, which are likely extensive. There seem to be a great deal of societal images and issues associated with this. Catholic priests are the butts of jokes about child molestation. Yet, it seems that teachers and coaches are committing these acts with far greater frequency than priests. I wonder why it is that female teachers molesting students are viewed as either "crazy" or even viewed as doing good things for the victims. Yet, any male doing this is a "dirty old man," a reprobate or a pederast. Hey, Roman Polanski is STILL detested. I find these women to be reprehensible. Why is it that society's image of these women is any different than society's image of men? Why did Mary Kay Letourneau's wedding get national press coverage as if it was a royal wedding? "Oh, how sweet that they will be forever together and married." It's disgusting, and I can fnd no reason but to count it as such. Any adult, male or female, messes with my juvenile kid like that and they'll find me going to the ends of the earth. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
justinb138 0 #2 August 3, 2005 Quote Yet, it seems that teachers and coaches are committing these acts with far greater frequency than priests. I'd be interested to hear actual figures on it. Based on the number of teachers/coahes vs the number of priests, I'd guess that it is more common w/ priests, as the population of teachers/coaches is far greater. Quote I wonder why it is that female teachers molesting students are viewed as either "crazy" or even viewed as doing good things for the victims. Yet, any male doing this is a "dirty old man," a reprobate or a pederast. I don't know, but I personally find the double standard detestable. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #3 August 3, 2005 I can't remember if it was here or the Bonfire, but there was another thread about this. one of those female teachers screwed her male high school student (15 or 16 years old or something). and she was kinda hot. and people were comenting on how it is different depending on the genders, ie, some people might have thought how the kid was lucky to be able to nail his hot teacher (hey isnt there a Van Halen song about this?) whereas, if it had been a male teacher & a female student, they'd wanna castrate him. (although there's a Police song about that) Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,990 #4 August 3, 2005 >Why are men and women being treated differently in the press? Because there are physical differences between men and women that require men to be the aggressors in sex acts, and that penalize women more than men for promiscuity. That should not matter any more, since we've gotten civilized enough that we consider any non-consensual sex act a crime. But that underlying biological basis often 'leaks through' into our value judgements on sexual responsibility. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sen.Blutarsky 0 #5 August 3, 2005 QuoteBecause there are physical differences between men and women that require men to be the aggressors in sex acts You’re equating having an erection with being the sexual aggressor? I have a real problem with that. I lost my virginity at 15 to an 18 year old woman during a make-out session gone too far where she grabbed me, threatened to break me after I had firmly yelled ‘no’ a dozen times, straddled me and then ‘did’ me like a bullrider while I was trying to gently push her off of me. I was naïve and terrified of a pregnancy and didn’t want to have sexual intercourse with or without a rubber at the time. Although I gave in I was hardly the aggressor and probably should have shoved the bitch off except that I was raised not to ever hurt a woman and so I did the macho thing. No way. It’s a double standard, plain and simple. Blutarsky 2008. No Prisoners! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,990 #6 August 3, 2005 >You’re equating having an erection with being the sexual aggressor? I'm not, but many people do just that. We're wired that way. Men tend to associate sexual feelings with feelings of power and strength; consider what we associate with the words "virile" and "potent". Women tend to "go weak in the knees" when they feel aroused. There's an evolutionary reason behind our associations of those feelings. That doesn't mean that we have to express that, any more than an instinctive drive to eat means we have to be big fat slobs. But it is useful to understand the genesis of that drive. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Idunno 0 #7 August 3, 2005 Quoteshe grabbed me, straddled me and then ‘did’ me like a bullrider Would please send me her phone number? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sen.Blutarsky 0 #8 August 4, 2005 QuoteWould please send me her phone number? Funny! We haven’t kept in touch and I’m pushing 40, although on advice I once drafted a letter to her that has remained in my home file cabinet until now, goodbye mere scrawling! I am willing to name this woman and you can do with the information what you will, I don’t care to know, provided that you demonstrate to my satisfaction you are age 15 going on 16 and I am convinced that over your lifetime you will: (1) Develop a passive-aggressive approach towards all women who you, at your sole discretion, perceive as trying to advance themselves in business or society predominately on the basis of their female sexual aggressiveness. I must be convinced your mission is to literally destroy the lives of such women through surreptitious means. For example if the woman drinks too much after hours you are to hook her up with that coke dealer in the big city who you _know_ will rivet her soul to the habit. Then, after she’s been doing massive quantities of coke for a while you will unhesitatingly maneuver her to the key heroin guy at, say, the board of trade and prepare to celebrate her inevitable obituary. Fuck her in the interim, photos appreciated! You must show me that at least once you have chalked a victory by cocktail when one of these women dies. Ditto for family, financial and mental health vulnerabilities, the particular weakness doesn’t matter just find it, kill, crush, destroy – no prisoners, no survivors. Repeat at least once. (2) Fail several times per year to achieve orgasm with your longtime partner during lovemaking sessions and worry about the emergency room visit to inject your penis so the swelling goes down and you can sleep after this b.s. happens again. Your female partner must learn why it’s not her inability to satisfy you, it’s a historical thing, of course she may leave you on account of you’re all screwed up. But word travels fast and some female will pursue you because you can keep it up! Funny. Blutarsky 2008. No Prisoners! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
