Every single person is different. Doesn't mean standards shouldn't be applied. It's the action that should be judged as punishable anyway, not the actor.
Homicide by man or homicide by woman, should those be treated differently just because men are different than women? Or is the unprovoked killing of a person wrong regardless of who does the killing? Similarly, is statutory rape wrong regardless of who does the raping since the crux of the issue is the inability of minors to give consent? That doesn't change whether the offender's a man or woman.
But hell, maybe women should get longer sentences than men for the same crimes because they live 10% longer.
Society pretends women are equal to men so let's give them equality. Equal rights and equal lefts. When society accepts men and women are different then I'll treat men and women differently.
She's doing this for the power she has over the kids. It's fucked up and deserves to be called out. The whole position of power she has over someone makes this especially fucked up. Doesn't matter that the kid was 17, what you gonna do? Say no to your teacher? Who's to say? Now, imagine the reverse, 20something male teacher and a 17 year old pupil would be called rape instantly and rightfully so.
Doesn't matter that the kid was 17, what you gonna do? Say no to your teacher?
Pervasive gender bias not withstanding, unironically yes. It's trivially easy to ignore your teachers in highschool, I saw kids ignoring legitimate uses of authority constantly for no reason at all other than they could and the teachers now are even bigger pushovers than back then. The incredibly favorable process of reporting inappropriate conduct because of the hair trigger they have for avoiding scandals like this will outweigh even the pro-female biases in education.
Coercion isn't the big concern in that age range, it's manipulation.
If a teacher is willing to break the law to sleep with a kid, they probably aren't willing to follow procedure and other rules in terms of not punishing that kid in every way possible for rejecting them. Double that for women, because they aren't used to rejection period.
Something regular teachers who get bullied by students wouldn't be willing to do. Like planting things in your desk or knocking your grades on a test down.
Even if they aren't going to do that, a teenager is the exact type of inexperienced and naive type to believe such a thing would happen and factor it into their answer. The same way that even a normal dude asking out his secretary might not have any ill intents but because he could punish her for it, the law often considers it abuse of power because she had reason to think he might if she said no.
"Power imbalances," as gay as feminists have made them sound, aren't usually about the explicit words and actions. But about the theoretical possibilities and if the "victim" has good reason to believe them possible.
Just remember, no double standards, female pedos get the chipper like male pedos.
Because unfortunately even us men REALLY underplay the damage female on male rape can do, especially to a mind going through puberty.
This would imply that men and women aren’t different. They are.
Every single person is different. Doesn't mean standards shouldn't be applied. It's the action that should be judged as punishable anyway, not the actor.
Homicide by man or homicide by woman, should those be treated differently just because men are different than women? Or is the unprovoked killing of a person wrong regardless of who does the killing? Similarly, is statutory rape wrong regardless of who does the raping since the crux of the issue is the inability of minors to give consent? That doesn't change whether the offender's a man or woman.
But hell, maybe women should get longer sentences than men for the same crimes because they live 10% longer.
Society pretends women are equal to men so let's give them equality. Equal rights and equal lefts. When society accepts men and women are different then I'll treat men and women differently.
You literally just posted youd pounce on two "cute" little 5 y/o's "when they hit puberty" because they were dancing, you sick twisted gross retard.
Honestly do you fucktard feds really think you can find a MAGA diddler you seriously are smoking your own shit.
She's doing this for the power she has over the kids. It's fucked up and deserves to be called out. The whole position of power she has over someone makes this especially fucked up. Doesn't matter that the kid was 17, what you gonna do? Say no to your teacher? Who's to say? Now, imagine the reverse, 20something male teacher and a 17 year old pupil would be called rape instantly and rightfully so.
Pervasive gender bias not withstanding, unironically yes. It's trivially easy to ignore your teachers in highschool, I saw kids ignoring legitimate uses of authority constantly for no reason at all other than they could and the teachers now are even bigger pushovers than back then. The incredibly favorable process of reporting inappropriate conduct because of the hair trigger they have for avoiding scandals like this will outweigh even the pro-female biases in education.
Coercion isn't the big concern in that age range, it's manipulation.
If a teacher is willing to break the law to sleep with a kid, they probably aren't willing to follow procedure and other rules in terms of not punishing that kid in every way possible for rejecting them. Double that for women, because they aren't used to rejection period.
Something regular teachers who get bullied by students wouldn't be willing to do. Like planting things in your desk or knocking your grades on a test down.
Even if they aren't going to do that, a teenager is the exact type of inexperienced and naive type to believe such a thing would happen and factor it into their answer. The same way that even a normal dude asking out his secretary might not have any ill intents but because he could punish her for it, the law often considers it abuse of power because she had reason to think he might if she said no.
"Power imbalances," as gay as feminists have made them sound, aren't usually about the explicit words and actions. But about the theoretical possibilities and if the "victim" has good reason to believe them possible.
That is the downest case of bad and she just wouldn't quit.