Sex charges for female former high school teacher

[Graham2001]

I think this is going to cause some conniptions in SJW circles, the victims are not male, so they cannot use the 'teacher seduced by student' claim.

A female former high school teacher in Perth’s southern suburbs has faced court accused of repeatedly sexually abusing three teenage girls while working at the school where the alleged victims were students.


...


The 28-year-old woman, who cannot be named to protect the identity of her alleged victims, has been charged with 71 offences including rape, “persistent sexual conduct” and indecent assault.

https://thewest.com.au/news/court-j...ale-former-high-school-teacher-ng-b881074091z

 

[PhantomWolf]

I think this is going to cause some conniptions in SJW circles, the victims are not male, so they cannot use the 'teacher seduced by student' claim.

https://thewest.com.au/news/court-j...ale-former-high-school-teacher-ng-b881074091z

Why would it cause SWJs any issues? From what I have seen, and I'll admit I don't frequent fringe radial SJW sites hoping to find something to be offended by, most SWJs consider any relationship where there is an issue power being held over one partner to be abusive, regardless of who is involved in it.

In fact when it comes to female teachers having affairs with students, I have seen less people say that the student seduced the teacher (I see that far more with male teachers and girls) but rather comments from men going on about how lucky the boys were, or that they wished they had, had a teacher like that when they were at school.

 

[Seismosaurus]

I think this is going to cause some conniptions in SJW circles, the victims are not male, so they cannot use the 'teacher seduced by student' claim.

Huh? Can female students not seduce a teacher?

I mean in reality, nobody can seduce anybody unless the person wants to, or is at least willing to, be seduced. But that applies equally to males and females. I don't understand what 'SJWs' have to do with this.

 

[I Am The Scum]

I don't understand what 'SJWs' have to do with this.

For some people, blaming the SJWs is a thoughtless reaction, like saying "bless you" when someone sneezes.

 

[TragicMonkey]

For some people, blaming the SJWs is a thoughtless reaction, like saying "bless you" when someone sneezes.

How dare you privilege your theocracy upon my bodily health! This is supposed to be a safe space for sneezing. I've contacted the Anti-Mucus Defense League and we're starting a web campaign under the motto "It's Snot OK". Expect a flash mob shortly, we're just stopping for tissues on the way.

 

[Arcade22]

Huh? Can female students not seduce a teacher?

Female (or even male) students would never ever seduce a male (or even female) teacher or try to bribe them with sex in return for better grades. It has never happened anywhere ever.

 

[Porpoise of Life]

Female (or even male) students would never ever seduce a male (or even female) teacher or try to bribe them with sex in return for better grades. It has never happened anywhere ever.

I know defending sex with minors is kind of your thing, but come on...
A teacher that allows him/herself to be 'seduced' by a teenage pupil deserves what they get*. Even if the kid in question is some kind of super mature evil genius, it's very hard to cast the teacher as the victim in a case like that.

*Even disregarding the age angle, any teacher trading sex for grades deserves to get fired.

 

[autumn1971]

Well the use of “SJW” in the OP tells me that I can safely assume that the OP is going to either be sad that they aren’t allowed to act in a deviant manner without being called on it, or it is a wild claim about attitudes nobody has expressed.

Oh, two for two.

 

[Arcade22]

I know defending sex with minors is kind of your thing, but come on...
A teacher that allows him/herself to be 'seduced' by a teenage pupil deserves what they get*.

See the problem with this kind of reasoning is that you basically concede that the problem is being caught. If they don't get caught then surely they "deserve" to get away with it, right?

Even if the kid in question is some kind of super mature evil genius, it's very hard to cast the teacher as the victim in a case like that.

It's also very hard to cast said teacher as a "victimizer" just as is it's very hard to cast "the kid" as a victim, yet just parodying the dogmatic absolutists who refuse to accept these kind of subtleties manages to rile people up.

*Even disregarding the age angle, any teacher trading sex for grades deserves to get fired.

I'm not sure I've stated otherwise.

 

[I Am The Scum]

See the problem with this kind of reasoning is that you basically concede that the problem is being caught. If they don't get caught then surely they "deserve" to get away with it, right?

What on earth are you talking about?

 

[Arcade22]

What on earth are you talking about?

He said that "A teacher that allows him/herself to be 'seduced' by a teenage pupil deserves what they get". This statement is pure value signaling, presumably made because they felt a need to make sure people know where they stand.

However it also implies that, since it's very possible to "to be 'seduced' by a teenage pupil" without being publicly exposed, and since the potential negative consequences one might face (depending on where this occurred) mostly depend on it becoming public, that one literally "deserves" to get away with it scot free if one does get away with it.

 

[Checkmite]

Huh? Can female students not seduce a teacher?

I mean in reality, nobody can seduce anybody unless the person wants to, or is at least willing to, be seduced. But that applies equally to males and females. I don't understand what 'SJWs' have to do with this.

OP is trying to imply that in cases where female teachers have molested male students, "SJW"s would contend the male student was at fault and must have "seduced" the female teacher.

I have to admit, I've never once heard an "SJW" defend child sexual abuse by blaming the child for it, but I suppose that's anecdotal...

 

[ahhell]

As someone who is at least empathic towards conservative, the SJW in the op was pretty much a non sequitur. I suspect Graham2001 sees SJWs behind every corner.

He said that "A teacher that allows him/herself to be 'seduced' by a teenage pupil deserves what they get". This statement is pure value signaling, presumably made because they felt a need to make sure people know where they stand.

However it also implies that, since it's very possible to "to be 'seduced' by a teenage pupil" without being publicly exposed, and since the potential negative consequences one might face (depending on where this occurred) mostly depend on it becoming public, that one literally "deserves" to get away with it scot free if one does get away with it.

No that's like saying "murder's deserve to go to jail" implies I only think the problem is murder's who get caught because it is very possible to murder someone without being publicly exposed.

 

[Checkmite]

He said that "A teacher that allows him/herself to be 'seduced' by a teenage pupil deserves what they get". This statement is pure value signaling, presumably made because they felt a need to make sure people know where they stand.

By this definition, it is impossible to state one's position on any matter without "value signaling", making it a worthless term (although most already know that).

 

[arthwollipot]

I for one am wondering why it's so important to identify the person as a "female teacher" right up front in the headline (and the title of this thread). A teacher sexually assaulted students. Then later on you can say that the 28-year old woman cannot be named to protect the identity of the victims. That's a normal identification, common to many news reports. But it seems weird to focus on "OMG, it was a female teacher!"

 

[Checkmite]

I for one am wondering why it's so important to identify the person as a "female teacher" right up front in the headline (and the title of this thread). A teacher sexually assaulted students. Then later on you can say that the 28-year old woman cannot be named to protect the identity of the victims. That's a normal identification, common to many news reports. But it seems weird to focus on "OMG, it was a female teacher!"

I'm okay with this actually....for the same reason that you'd see a headline saying "3 murdered in Paris, Texas". Because "3 murdered in Paris", while correct on its own, could be misunderstood in predictable ways.

Most teachers who have been busted for abusing students, have been male. This could lead very understandably to an expectation by a reader when reading a headline that merely says "sex charges for former high school teacher" that the story is about a male teacher.

 

[arthwollipot]

I'm okay with this actually....for the same reason that you'd see a headline saying "3 murdered in Paris, Texas". Because "3 murdered in Paris", while correct on its own, could be misunderstood in predictable ways.

Most teachers who have been busted for abusing students, have been male. This could lead very understandably to an expectation by a reader when reading a headline that merely says "sex charges for former high school teacher" that the story is about a male teacher.

Unless they actually read the story, in which it is made clear in a standard and common way. It doesn't need to be called out in the headline.

 

[Checkmite]

Unless they actually read the story, in which it is made clear in a standard and common way. It doesn't need to be called out in the headline.

It doesn't need to be; but mentioning the fact that it's a female teacher has a certain man-bites-dog effect that will draw reads from people who might otherwise not bother.

 

[arthwollipot]

It doesn't need to be; but mentioning the fact that it's a female teacher has a certain man-bites-dog effect that will draw reads from people who might otherwise not bother.

Mmm. Maybe. I can't help but think there's an element of "See? See? Women can be sexual assaulters too!" Hashtag something.

 

[theprestige]

It's interesting how people still bristle at the idea that the media doesn't have our best interests in mind.