Teacher had sex with boy, 13, in classroom and even moved into his apartment complex

submitted by [deleted] from dailystar.co.uk

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (16 children)

This is an actual "OK, Groomer" moment.

Incredible.

Please stay away from children.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (13 children)

This is an actual "OK, Groomer" moment.

How do you figure? He said most boys would happily be groomed, not that HE wanted to fuck anyone underage, I can confirm I would have happily used my 30 year old teacher as a fleshlight when I was that age, and I would not have been a 'victim' of any sort. You are confusing being 'groomed' with being a 'groomer'.

[–]HanssenBob 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Why can't that apply to girls too then?

[–]asterias 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Because foids are supposed to always be innocent and it's always a man's fault. Even if the foid is in her forties or fifties.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (10 children)

Children can't consent.

Only a groomer would imply that they can.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

Children can't consent.

Only a groomer would imply that they can.

Its clearly not that simple. Are you telling me that at 17 years and 364 days old I am incapable of consenting to sex, but overnight I have a magical rapid brain development, and the next day I am capable of consenting? This is what the law says - sort of - the age of consent, or what constitutes an adult is different in a hell of a lot of states. There is clearly some ambiguity about when precisely an individual is emotionally capable of consenting to sex

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

OK, Groomer.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

So, you aren't actually able to refute or address anything I said, and are resorting to ad hominem attacks and name calling, got it, good talk.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

You moved the goalposts with whataboutism and now you want to cry about ad hominems? Fuck off.

A 32-year-old woman took advantage of a 13-year-old boy. Attempting to downplay that is some pedo-groomer bullshit.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You moved the goalposts with whataboutism and now you want to cry about ad hominems? Fuck off.

Whataboutism, a valid example proving something wrong, but dismissed as invalid based on the fact that they cannot refute it

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Adults should not have sex with 13-year-olds under any circumstances.

If you want to pat yourself on the back for having a more "ambiguous" opinion than that, well...

OK, Groomer.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Adults should not have sex with 13-year-olds under any circumstances.

I will grant the teachers behavior is predatory, 30 year olds shouldn't be trying to take advantage of 13 year olds. I will even grant that many 13 year olds are probably not ready to have sex, but I don't think I would consider myself victimized if I had been in this situation. I'd probably reminisce with my buddies about how awesome it was. Actually 13 is maybe a little young, but I know for sure this would have been the case by the time I was 15.

I more object to your reasoning. You accused me of 'moving the goalposts', but I never set them, you did when you said any minor having sex with any adult is unable to consent, and I don't think this is true. If I am 17 years old sleeping with my 17 year old girlfriend, we can both consent to sex. If I turn 18 before her, she suddenly loses all ability to consent, but regains it a few days later when she turns 18. This doesn't make any sense, yet it fits inside the goalpost that you set, and in many states would make you a sex offender if caught.

Whats worse, an 18 year old adult banging a 17 year old minor, or a 65 year old banging a legal 18 year adult. To me the second one feels more exploitative, but by your standards and the law, the first one is, and I don't see the justification for that.

[–]Cass 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Children are capable of consenting to sex with adults when they're capable of doing all the other things adults are doing.

... that's what I wanted to say. Then I remembered child labor is on its way to becoming legal again in the US so you'll soon see 13 yos paying taxes. And you know what? If you're 13, you have a job and you pay taxes, you can also bang a 30 yo why not

[–]Insider 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's a social concept. A thousand years ago, post-puberty kids were banging like no tomorrow. Life expectancy was 20-35 years.

Age consent laws are good for protecting kids from predators, but if an 18 year old and 16 year old want to bang each other, it shouldn't be a big deal.

Ideally, post-puberty young adults who are level-headed, mentally mature, are aware of predators and can make decisions for themselves should be allowed to make their own sexual decisions. However, there's just no way to judge and implement a rule for that. People who mature slower, even past the age of 18 can also be taken advantage of, manipulated and groomed. Just ask Drake, he's got lots of experience.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yep, here in Québec it's 14 years old. The second largest city in Canada, Montréal, is less than an hour's drive from Plattsburgh, New York. So a 15-year-old can't have sex with an adult in Plattsburgh, but they drive North 50 miles and it's no problem.

My point is, LEGAL consent isn't the same thing as biological consent. There is such a thing. Imagine you are 13 and your fat, ugly, stinking teacher comes to try to seduce you. You squirm in anguish. She rubs her huge, sagging and flabby chest on you and you can feel her hand cupping you through your pants. Her revolting breath in your face. Question: ARE YOU HARD? Answer: probably not. But if you are, chances are you want to do her. Biological consent through erection. Same thing with an "underage" (the concept varies hugely from place to place as demonstrated above) girl: If she starts ripping her clothes off and her pussy is dripping wet, it's biological consent.

It's still completely illegal (unless they drive to a place where it isn't) but is it wrong? I think the question is worth asking. I feel it's debatable. No LEGAL consent is being given, yet biological consent is there...

[–]HPFL 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

A racist AND a ped0? Wow, there is scum and then there is SCUM.