18 Comments »

1. 

   “pussy pass”

   Comment by Dominic Dilligaf — Fri 28th February 2014 @ 9:38 am

2. 

   thas cos she waqs the “victim”..

   Comment by kiranjiharr — Fri 28th February 2014 @ 3:12 pm

3. 

   You are as old as the woman that you squeeze, or am I getting really mixed up?

   Please excuse my naivety (harder to spell than nativity), but if she only slept in the bed with him, is it all that heinous? Did she squeeze him or was he squeezing her, or both!!… Aren’t we all making negative assumptions and just showing our own negative approach to life?

   Ten minutes of reading this story and my voyeurism was getting way out of control and my problem was pretty real. Much worse than just reading the SUN.

   I do agree that teachers shouldn’t be sampling the merchandise, bruising it maybe, whether woman or man teacher. Honesty, integrity, avoidance of conflict of interest. How many exam papers need to be remarked and the whole class of scaling of results to be rechecked. Also, we need to watch social workers even more carefully.

   Man bites dog – human interest?

   Wasted column inches that would have been more socially useful if they were considering men’s rational suicide issues. But that wouldn’t raise our blood pressure, put a glint into our eye and entertain the average man… The profit media would never make that mistake. (We would rather bury our children and drown our sorrows afterwards.)

   Comment by MurrayBacon — Fri 28th February 2014 @ 7:03 pm

4. 

   Most likely she didn’t get jail time because, as the article noted, at 16 you are considered an adult and his father knew the teacher was in the room with him. I don’t agree with either, but no intimate activity happened. The teacher ought to be grateful she didn’t get a worse charge, otherwise she may of needed to get a bail bondsman to get her out of jail.

   Here in America, the woman probably would have gone to jail, as we have been seeing this type of thing happen a lot with female teachers seducing male students. Although, in most of those cases, the father did not allow the teacher to come into his home and lay in bed with his son.

   Comment by Lewis Snow — Sat 1st March 2014 @ 1:25 pm

5. 

   This is going to be a problem until the men’s movement changes the hearts and minds of boys, young males and older males, IMO.

   My own sons say, “If she’s a good looking teacher, …..”. (use your imagination).

   At least NZ judges are being fair on this. If the boy is harmed, it’s rape. If he loves it, it’s not. In between is a lot of extras judges have to take into account like the families involved, IMO.

   Comment by Julie — Sun 2nd March 2014 @ 10:50 am

6. 

   Julie – your comment “If the boy is harmed, it’s rape. If he loves it, it’s not.” sounds both uncorroborated and disgusting.

   Comment by Stephen Gee — Mon 3rd March 2014 @ 4:15 am

7. 

   I agree Stephen. I should have used better words. I apologise.

   Sometimes I read a news article about a case and the judge mentions the harm factor. I must learn the appropriate wording.

   Comment by Julie — Mon 3rd March 2014 @ 12:46 pm

8. 

   A boy can’t be raped. Fact. The law does not recognise rape as against a man.

   Comment by shafted — Tue 4th March 2014 @ 9:37 am

9. 

   Dear Julie, your son’s comment reflects the viewpoint held by people who see sexual pleasure as only positive. In my opinion, this reflects an incomplete view of adult relationships, by ignoring the impacts onto the wider social relationships, that play a huge role in what we receive and give in society. (Although many men don’t have much problem with pressure to have sex, I suspect that it is much more common than people care to admit. On the odd occasion when a man is willing to talk, the outcomes can be surprisingly harsh.)

   My own sons say, ‘If she’s a good looking teacher, “¦..’. (use your imagination).

   By way of an example, young girl maybe 15 or 16 years old, is seduced by 18 year old woman staying in her parent’s household. After a time, the parents pickup that the visitors relationship with their daughter isn’t just what can be seen on the surface. They question their daughter, who denies anything is happening. She thought it sophisticated to be able to hide something from her parents. What harm could come from it, she thought?

   Well, the incomplete honesty, in reality a form of dishonesty, created a relationship rift with her parents and siblings, that was never to heal. Although the underlying secret did remain secret, the distrust and caution injected into the parental relationship, followed on into some anti-social behaviours by the daughter. This led to an increasing rift, that neither was able to heal.

   The situation didn’t become completely toxic, but it did spiral far beyond what the initial situation would suggest was reasonable. The effects on the daughter’s attitudes also had a subtle effect on her later adult relationships with men, where she tolerated secrecy that most women would not. This rebounded on her, much to her disadvantage. By the time she had put it back together, the best years of her life were passed.

   Harm for young boys in similar situations, is usually attitudinal harm. Difficult to measure at the time, difficult to see at all in the short term. Typically even for relatively consensual relationships, it may lead to imbalances between sexual expectations and social expectations, that can end up being a barrier to relating well to most women, through their lives. Similarly, overprotecting our children may be damaging too…..

   People weren’t meant to have life easy. Life has to be abusive, brutish and short. To survive, evolution throws many curved balls, to maximise humsn survival and the paramount financial interests of legal workers.

   Nonetheless, providing a reasonable degree of protection for our children, from predatory legal workers, will greatly help them to make the best from their lives.

   Comment by MurrayBacon — Tue 4th March 2014 @ 9:44 am

10. 

    My comment above was only for relatively consensual relationships.

    When an adult perpetrator uses power and fear, to try to protect themselves from exposure, they may put huge pressure and fear onto their victim. This pressure reflects the harsh penalties that they face. Put differently, if the penalties were not so severe, then maybe less pressure and fear would be applied? This extreme pressure and fear ends up being a large part of the problem for the victim.

    So, if we use punishments that are beyond proportionality to the offence, we create hugely increased pressure problems for the victim. This is why it is so dangerous to decide on punishment levels by philosophical or religious grounds, rather than looking very carefully at what the real world consequences are and all of the options that we have available for managing these types of situation.

    People who say “that kid is lucky to have sex with an attractive teacher”, are talking when they should be stopping to listen to what the boy wants to say.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Tue 4th March 2014 @ 10:33 am

11. 

    When an adult perpetrator uses power and fear, to try to protect themselves from exposure, they may put huge pressure and fear onto their victim. This pressure reflects the harsh penalties that they face.

    Until about half a dozen years ago in New Zealand no woman faced harsh penalties for these crimes(and still don’t in reality). What need to put “pressure and fear onto their victim”? These are perpetrators who can rely on cultural pressures that tell boys they are flawed if they don’t want it.

    Comment by gwallan — Wed 5th March 2014 @ 10:07 pm

12. 

    The first female charged was Briar Dravitski This seas late 2005. She was 23, the victim was 13. Unforyunately it’s still in the Database in my old computer.

    Comment by Alastair — Thu 6th March 2014 @ 12:29 am

13. 

    Murry, I agree with an action having a consequence and sex is up there IMO.

    A positive for everyone who cares about ‘rape’ is that NZ is hard on this. Every nook and cranny is being searched, every stone unturned…. fact is, if a person has done something that can be seen as a sexual offence even all the way back to when they were young, they’re being hunted.

    I don’t know who harms the victims more – the person who did the sexual act (definition too wide to explain) or the hunters and I include death on both accounts.

    Yep, for sure, actions have consequences.

    Please don’t take offence of my words at the moment, I’m stuck between story after story of our sick system at work and groups with actual child abusers telling me, “We’ve got this, we’ve got that, do you want this, do you want that”. For once I have some empathy for MP Paula Bennett (shivers)

    Comment by Julie — Thu 6th March 2014 @ 9:35 am

14. 

    ..another british female teacher gets the soft treatment. I suppose we can be somewhat surprised that they even bothered to jail her. Women pedophile just doesn’t seem to have that heinous ring to judges ears…a bit like woman murders man; just a token error of judgement by the girl.

    “Female paedophile, 21, is jailed for two years after she had sex with an eight-year-old boy 50 times, starting when she was 16”

    Fairy tale here in case you aren’t already bored with the same story:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2583647/Female-paedophile-21-jailed-two-years-sex-eight-year-old-boy-50-times-starting-16.html

    Comment by Bruce S — Wed 19th March 2014 @ 10:17 am

15. 

    14 I think they meant she raped an eight year old 50 times, oh no that’s right… only men can rape.

    Comment by Scott B — Wed 19th March 2014 @ 11:14 am

16. 

    I really do think the time has come where we need a DIGITAL judiciary; not the one fingered salute we’ve been receiving from the frail, feeble fraternity of fraudsters claiming to be justice prudent.

    Simply all that will be required is a computerized system; facts entered, measured against the legislation and verdict delivered. No need to enter sex of perpetrator; just details of the crime. Mitigating circumstances will only be judged according to the legislation.

    No court rooms required; no need to wait for judges to come back from holiday; no need for lawyers. Justice without prejudice. Perfect!

    Comment by Bruce S — Wed 19th March 2014 @ 2:42 pm

17. 

    Interesting thought Bruce S

    Comment by Scott B — Wed 19th March 2014 @ 5:57 pm

18. 

    NZ minor sexual contact case:
    Teacher seen kissing girl in classroom
    Teacher struck off
    I am not absolutely sure that these two headlines refer to the same teacher?

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Wed 28th May 2014 @ 8:07 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

Δ