MrBounce 0 #1 March 22, 2006 OK, I came across this article about teacher Debra Lafave having sex with a 14 year old boy. Apparently prosecutors are dropping charges against her. So, I've got to ask the question, is it more allowable/less offensive for an adult woman to have sex with a 14 year old boy, than for an adult man to have sex with a 14 year old girl. Please understand that I'm not intending to cross the rules about posting here, so please keep your replies within the rules. Now I have to confess that when I was 14 year old boy, the concept of having sex with a gorgeous teacher like that would have been amazing. But now I'm an adult, intellectually I have to say its wrong, even though emotionally it doesn't feel as bad as if the sexes had been reversed. Why is that? Are we just brought up to believe that male children are better able to cope for themselves and protect themselves? Even though most studies point out that girls at 14 years old are more mature than boys of a similar age? (and no I don't have sources to prove that to hand). So I'm going to have to decide that she was wrong and the charges should not have been dropped, otherwise its going to send the wrong message to other potential offenders. But I still find myself having mixed feelings about it. Gavin Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. If you don't take it out and use it, its going to rust. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ROK 0 #2 March 22, 2006 In my opinion... Men that I know were more conditioned at an earlier age to believe that sex is a rite of passage to becoming a man. Our fathers were a bit more open with us, as opposed to their daughters. The thought of a 14 year old daughter having sex would send many for the gun, or ax. Whatever was closest at hand. The thought of a 14 year old son having sex was almost a source of pride. In today's world ( as opposed to the prairie days), I believe that adults who have sex with the underaged, should be shot. I don't care the argument, you have to be psychologically warped to take advantage of our youth. Sex is a powerful thing. I don't think anyone will argue with this. Your goals in life change drastically when the discovery is made. I forgot about school, sports, parents, and everything when I discovered sex, and my priorities in life became decidedly different (sort of like skydiving). Our kids will discover sex soon enough without some "expert" helping them along. Growing up in stages is necessary to becoming a sound minded adult. Both boys, and girls. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rasmack 0 #3 March 22, 2006 QuoteMen that I know were more conditioned at an earlier age to believe that sex is a right of passage to becoming a man... I hope you mean "rite of passage". Seriously. This is very much a cultural thing. Just about all our "mating rituals" are built around the concept of the man seducing/conquering/taking the woman, while the classical image of the woman is embodied in the madonna/whore complex. This is why our instinctive first thought is "thumbs up" to the boy, while we feel sorry for the girl, because we know she was "conquered" prematurely and we have no problem understanding what this violation does to her. The boy on the other hand was probably a very willing participant in something he was not qualified to correctly asses. The damage to him is pretty hard to quantify. Note. I am not condoning these views, and I think female sex offenders should be prosecuted just as harshly as males with the one ameliorating circumstance that bodily harm is probably most often not an element of the case.HF #682, Team Dirty Sanchez #227 “I simply hate, detest, loathe, despise, and abhor redundancy.” - Not quite Oscar Wilde... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindsey 0 #4 March 22, 2006 I think a lot of people have that same reaction as you. My problem with her not going to trial doesn't have to do so much with punishment for this crime, but rather concern about the ease with which she may offend again. I think that a lot of people see this as less criminal than if she were a man and the victim a girl. I think age of the child and willingness on their part is as much a factor as gender, though. Even though it's sick on her part to WANT to have sex with a 14 y/o boy, a 14 y/o (whether a boy or a girl) who sees himself as involved in a relationship with this adult is probably less scarred than a younger, pre-pubertal child who doesn't willingly participate. I think in this case, the boy is probably more harmed by the backlash than by the act itself....and the same if the genders were reversed. But society as a whole is harmed by allowing adults who prey on children to go free. I know she's under house arrest and then on probation, but I don't think she'll be followed seriously....and she'll likely reoffend I'd guess. linz-- A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ROK 0 #5 March 22, 2006 QuoteQuoteMen that I know were more conditioned at an earlier age to believe that sex is a right of passage to becoming a man... I hope you mean "rite of passage". ----------------------------------------------------------- Thanks! I changed it. I had to think about it for a few minutes though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites MrBounce 0 #6 March 22, 2006 QuoteI think that a lot of people see this as less criminal than if she were a man and the victim a girl. I think age of the child and willingness on their part is as much a factor as gender, though. Even though it's sick on her part to WANT to have sex with a 14 y/o boy, a 14 y/o (whether a boy or a girl) who sees himself as involved in a relationship with this adult is probably less scarred than a younger, pre-pubertal child who doesn't willingly participate. Forced sex with a child, irrespective of gender is clearly repulsive and sickening. If a child is 14 years old though, they are beginning to experiment with sex and sexual roles. At that age, I think that quite a few children could be very easily talked into a sexual relationship with an older adult. That fact that they want to be in a relationship does not make the crime any less. The adult clearly knows what is going on and is taking advantage of ignorance and curiosity for their own ends. I think that she should stand trial and receive punishment for her crime as a deterrent to others attempting the same. I understand that the boy in question is traumatised, but then so are those children who are attacked and/or abused unwillingly. The system already exists to protect children testifying at court. If she is allowed to go unpunished, then others will attempt the same believing that they too can get away with it. Possibly they may even go as far as to attack a child. Also punishing her will hopefully deter her from even considering such a relationship again. Gavin Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. If you don't take it out and use it, its going to rust. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites MrBounce 0 #7 March 22, 2006 Quote Seriously. This is very much a cultural thing. Just about all our "mating rituals" are built around the concept of the man seducing/conquering/taking the woman, while the classical image of the woman is embodied in the madonna/whore complex. I know, its strange isn't it, that on one hand we almost encourage boys to go out and have sex earlier. While on the other, we try to prevent girls doing the same. These two views are completely at odds with each other because if all girls were virgins until they got married, then no boys would be able to have sex. Still despite our enlightened beliefs and the concept of sexual equality, I know friends of mine who are fathers are still more restrictive on their daughters movements and actions than they are on their sons. Still I feel for the boy in question. He's at an age where he's beginning to realise what sex is. His peers are probably all giving him a "big thumbs up" for what is going on. And now he's had it all come crashing down on him. I really hope that he and his family receive very good counseling on this so that it doen't completely ruin the rest of his life. Gavin Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. If you don't take it out and use it, its going to rust. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites unformed 0 #8 March 22, 2006 QuoteI know, its strange isn't it, that on one hand we almost encourage boys to go out and have sex earlier. While on the other, we try to prevent girls doing the same. These two views are completely at odds with each other because if all girls were virgins until they got married, then no boys would be able to have sex Sure they could. They'd just have to bang older women. I don't think anyone will complain.This ad space for sale. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites MrBounce 0 #9 March 22, 2006 [reply Sure they could. They'd just have to bang older women. I don't think anyone will complain. That's what happened and is why I raised this thread Gavin Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. If you don't take it out and use it, its going to rust. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MrBounce 0 #6 March 22, 2006 QuoteI think that a lot of people see this as less criminal than if she were a man and the victim a girl. I think age of the child and willingness on their part is as much a factor as gender, though. Even though it's sick on her part to WANT to have sex with a 14 y/o boy, a 14 y/o (whether a boy or a girl) who sees himself as involved in a relationship with this adult is probably less scarred than a younger, pre-pubertal child who doesn't willingly participate. Forced sex with a child, irrespective of gender is clearly repulsive and sickening. If a child is 14 years old though, they are beginning to experiment with sex and sexual roles. At that age, I think that quite a few children could be very easily talked into a sexual relationship with an older adult. That fact that they want to be in a relationship does not make the crime any less. The adult clearly knows what is going on and is taking advantage of ignorance and curiosity for their own ends. I think that she should stand trial and receive punishment for her crime as a deterrent to others attempting the same. I understand that the boy in question is traumatised, but then so are those children who are attacked and/or abused unwillingly. The system already exists to protect children testifying at court. If she is allowed to go unpunished, then others will attempt the same believing that they too can get away with it. Possibly they may even go as far as to attack a child. Also punishing her will hopefully deter her from even considering such a relationship again. Gavin Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. If you don't take it out and use it, its going to rust. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MrBounce 0 #7 March 22, 2006 Quote Seriously. This is very much a cultural thing. Just about all our "mating rituals" are built around the concept of the man seducing/conquering/taking the woman, while the classical image of the woman is embodied in the madonna/whore complex. I know, its strange isn't it, that on one hand we almost encourage boys to go out and have sex earlier. While on the other, we try to prevent girls doing the same. These two views are completely at odds with each other because if all girls were virgins until they got married, then no boys would be able to have sex. Still despite our enlightened beliefs and the concept of sexual equality, I know friends of mine who are fathers are still more restrictive on their daughters movements and actions than they are on their sons. Still I feel for the boy in question. He's at an age where he's beginning to realise what sex is. His peers are probably all giving him a "big thumbs up" for what is going on. And now he's had it all come crashing down on him. I really hope that he and his family receive very good counseling on this so that it doen't completely ruin the rest of his life. Gavin Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. If you don't take it out and use it, its going to rust. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
unformed 0 #8 March 22, 2006 QuoteI know, its strange isn't it, that on one hand we almost encourage boys to go out and have sex earlier. While on the other, we try to prevent girls doing the same. These two views are completely at odds with each other because if all girls were virgins until they got married, then no boys would be able to have sex Sure they could. They'd just have to bang older women. I don't think anyone will complain.This ad space for sale. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MrBounce 0 #9 March 22, 2006 [reply Sure they could. They'd just have to bang older women. I don't think anyone will complain. That's what happened and is why I raised this thread Gavin Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. If you don't take it out and use it, its going to rust. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
altichick 1 #10 March 22, 2006 In the case of an adult, especially someone in a position of responsibilty, having a (consentual) relationship with a child...I think the crime should be regarded as equally wrong regardless of the sex of the offender/victim ... but the damage (to the victim) as a result of the crime *may* be less in this case. Do you punish the crime? Or the result of the crime? Is a woman less likely to reoffend? Is she less of a 'predator' than a male teacher in a similar situation? Quite possibly. Very difficult but I think treating it differently because the teacher was female sends the wrong message and further reinforces the inequality. But I could see how easily it could be argued that the crime (based on society's views of sex) is different. Yeah, I really can't come up with a better answer than that Don't sweat the petty things... and don't pet the sweaty things! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #11 March 22, 2006 I think this case is a prime example/reason why women should make less for working the same job. They also serve less time for doing the same crime. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NWFlyer 2 #12 March 22, 2006 QuoteI think this case is a prime example/reason why women should make less for working the same job. They also serve less time for doing the same crime. WTF over? That's a leap of logic that makes no sense whatsoever to me. As for the topic of the thread, when adults are having sex with children, it's not about sex, it's about power. Obviously, there are some grey areas ... the 17 year old who is dating the 15 year old ... when the 17 year old turns 18, has the relationship suddenly changed to rape? But in the case of a teacher and a student, it's a clear breach of a position of authority and trust, whether the teacher in question is male or female. It seems like, in this case, the boy's family had some influence over the prosecutors' decision, feeling it was better for his well-being to move on from this. They may well be right, though it sucks that this woman will not be adequately punished for her crime."There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
narcimund 0 #13 March 22, 2006 QuoteI think this case is a prime example/reason why women should make less for working the same job. They also serve less time for doing the same crime. I can see the job interview now: Interviewer: "You're both hired. Ms Jones, your starting salary is $40,000 per year and Mr. Smith, yours is $50,000/year." Ms Jones: "WHAT? Why is he getting more than me?" Interviewer: "Well, it's only fair. You might both be child molesters and as a woman you'd serve less time than Mr Smith. See?" Ms Jones: "Oh, well that makes sense. Ok." Mr Smith: "Wait a second. How many years in jail am I looking at? I think my freedom's worth more like $20,000 a year more than her." First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #14 March 22, 2006 QuoteQuoteI think this case is a prime example/reason why women should make less for working the same job. They also serve less time for doing the same crime. WTF over? That's a leap of logic that makes no sense whatsoever to me. I see the connection. Your next bit shows his point. Women are treated with a double standard and it reflects is how they are considered when discussing terms of responsibility for their actions. It's ok when it's too their benefit (this dismissal will NOT be treated the same if the genders were reversed), but it's not ok when it's not to their benefit....... If we want equality, then you take the good with the bad - and vice versa..... If we don't align society to that, then we are all hypocrites in terms of 'real' equal rights, not just the trendy political positioning by both sides of the argument. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NWFlyer 2 #15 March 22, 2006 QuoteYour next bit shows his point. Women are treated with a double standard and it reflects is how they are considered when discussing terms of responsibility for their actions. It's ok when it's too their benefit (this dismissal will NOT be treated the same if the genders were reversed), but it's not ok when it's not to their benefit....... If we want equality, then you take the good with the bad - and vice versa..... If we don't align society to that, then we are all hypocrites in terms of 'real' equal rights, not just the trendy political positioning by both sides of the argument. Um... you think you could you point out exactly where I said that a double standard in this case was ACCEPTABLE? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #16 March 22, 2006 QuoteUm... you think you could you point out exactly where I said that a double standard in this case was ACCEPTABLE? "um" I hate that. I didn't, (in fact you said that the double standard was NOT acceptable in you last paragraph) what are you inferring? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #17 March 22, 2006 QuoteI see the connection. Your next bit shows his point. Women are treated with a double standard and it reflects is how they are considered when discussing terms of responsibility for their actions. It's ok when it's too their benefit (this dismissal will NOT be treated the same if the genders were reversed), but it's not ok when it's not to their benefit....... If we want equality, then you take the good with the bad - and vice versa..... If we don't align society to that, then we are all hypocrites in terms of 'real' equal rights, not just the trendy political positioning by both sides of the argument. That is exactly it. Where is the women's rights movement now? Where are the feminists demanding equal treatment for men and women in this case? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #18 March 22, 2006 QuoteUm... you think you could you point out exactly where I said that a double standard in this case was ACCEPTABLE? I thought you said you didn't see the connection? Obviously I used an outrageous example to prove a point. But, if you have no objection to this lady not getting punished as severely as a man would have been. Then really, you should also have no objection to women earning lower wages. You can't demand equality on one side, but not take it on the other side. Well, you could, but it would make you a hypocrite. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #19 March 22, 2006 QuoteI think this case is a prime example/reason why women should make less for working the same job. They also serve less time for doing the same crime. Men get prison, women get counceling. In the same situation involving a male, any plea agreement would have included some jail time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #20 March 22, 2006 Quote....But, if you have no objection to this lady not getting punished as severely as a man would have been. Then really, you should also have no objection to women earning lower wages. To be fair, NWFlyer said it 'sucked that the woman would not be adequately punished'. She gets it, she's just inferring our intent incorrectly because you hit the unequal pay buzzer. It's very distracting...... Narci's response was the best. He's taking your example and taking it the other way to show how trying to highlight the wrong thing in expectation of people correcting their behavior towards fairness is almost always twisted to the opposite effect of MORE inequality (because people look for their personal gain before they look at parity). It was very funny and sadly, likely will happen with someone at some point. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NWFlyer 2 #21 March 22, 2006 QuoteBut, if you have no objection to this lady not getting punished as severely as a man would have been. I do have an objection. Read my replies again. Quote Then really, you should also have no objection to women earning lower wages. You can't demand equality on one side, but not take it on the other side. I didn't. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #22 March 22, 2006 QuoteMen get prison, women get counceling. In the same situation involving a male, any plea agreement would have included some jail time. And if "society" (including the women's right movement/feminists) are okay with that, then they also have to accept difference in other fields. Ie wages, different cost for similar products/services etc etc. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NWFlyer 2 #23 March 22, 2006 Quotewhat are you inferring? By choosing to reply to me, you also implied that my viewpoint on this was that a double standard was okay. Perhaps I read too much into that. However, I still find SkyDekker's logic to be a bit flawed: Women are not being punished equally for the same crimes, therefore they should also not be paid equally for the same work. It's the cause/effect part that I find flawed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #24 March 22, 2006 QuoteQuoteMen get prison, women get counceling. In the same situation involving a male, any plea agreement would have included some jail time. And if "society" (including the women's right movement/feminists) are okay with that, then they also have to accept difference in other fields. Ie wages, different cost for similar products/services etc etc. Agreed. Anything less indicates they are not really for equality, they are for special treatment. - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #25 March 22, 2006 QuoteWomen are not being punished equally for the same crimes, therefore they should also not be paid equally for the same work. It's the cause/effect part that I find flawed. He did say 'therefore' in mockery, however, you know he was really noting the disparity in positions by those that proclaim from the rooftops. Actually, the take away for those a bit less defensive on the subject is the opposite, as follows: "If women wish to be treated and paid equally, then they should also be zealous in ensuring they qre equally punished for the same crimes" Which was your point also, I believe. Your misread is exactly the mockery from Narci's post. I love when people who completely agree on a subject get bound up and misreads. What a little fix the "" icon would have made. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
