Happy teenagers
2009-09-22 13:54:26.023318+00 by
Dan Lyke
13 comments
Meanwhile, in London, a music teacher has been jailed for lesbian affair with 15 year old pupil. The Times quotes the student's mother:
In a statement, the mother said that it was first thought that Goddard’s influence was good. “She appeared to be thriving and happy for the first time in a very long time,” she said. “I felt that the allegations were a vicious rumour and I couldn’t believe any teacher at the school could do such a thing.”
[ related topics:
Children and growing up Sexual Culture Current Events
]
comments in ascending chronological order (reverse):
#Comment Re: made: 2009-09-22 21:31:39.610784+00 by:
meuon
"It is, of course, against the law to engage in sexual activity with a person under 16, even with her consent." - Pretty hard line, clear as day. I'd say 16 is more reasonable than 18 or 21.. but when you cross the line, bad things are expected to happen.
#Comment Re: made: 2009-09-22 22:10:17.714478+00 by:
Dan Lyke
Yeah, I'm not going to defend the teacher, there are ways to address adolescent confusion that don't involve statutory rape, but it sure seems like the parents are doing as much or more long-term damage with the "sex is dirty, save it for someone you love" routine.
#Comment Re: made: 2009-09-22 22:19:46.932657+00 by:
meuon
[edit history]
Sex is only dirty if you are doing it right.
#Comment Re: made: 2009-09-23 00:26:05.473424+00 by:
andylyke
He said the "particularly aggravating feature" of the case was that Goddard
continued to teach the girl music throughout their affair.
I'm a little confused. Is teaching music a more heinous act than sex with a
minor?
#Comment Re: made: 2009-09-23 00:43:29.452498+00 by:
meuon
It's aggravating because it was a sign of a relationship beyond the plain simple easy to judge "crime". The real world is never black and white.
#Comment Re: made: 2009-09-23 01:33:13.565396+00 by:
topspin
Yeah, it's not just the parents who are screwy here. The "particularly aggravating feature" comment from the judge can only mean.... if you're going to commit statutory rape, it's particularly bad if you actually care about the victim as more than an object.
The end lesson for the child is: Jeez.... you're not only queer, you're deviant, you make lousy choices AND someone who wants sex with you should only view you as an object or else it's "extra bad." Poor kid.
#Comment Re: made: 2009-09-23 07:07:17.804835+00 by:
Dan Lyke
Dad, it depends. This is Britain, and I could certainly see factions there making Elgar a prosecutable offense.
Topspin, yeah, in the confusion of adolescence someone treats that poor kid both like an adult and gives her value.... and is prosecuted for that. I'm betting a good number of her peers have experience with each other, including all the teenage psychodrama, and nobody's screaming that they're permanently damaged and scarred for lilfe.
#Comment Re: made: 2009-09-23 15:05:12.278851+00 by:
Larry Burton
I guess I'm looking at this a little different. I'm not so sure that the minor was injured in this relationship at the point it was stopped but had it not been stopped where would it have ended or where could it have ended? I guess before claiming that there were aggravating circumstances because of the prior relationship I'd like to know if the relationship was nourished in order to seduce the young lady or did the sexual relationship develop naturally out of the teacher/student relationship? Neither case is acceptable but one means there is a sexual predator on trial and the other is that the teacher was too immature for the position.
#Comment Re: made: 2009-09-23 15:37:29.591806+00 by:
Dan Lyke
Larry, I'm not totally sure, but from the three articles I've read:
- The younger party was of the age of consent when this relationship was ended, and only shortly before the age of consent when it started.
- The teacher had other students, and there are no allegations of inappropriate relationships with those other students.
- The judge noted "She [the student] has made it clear that the sexual contact between you [the teacher] was consensual and she says in her statement that in fact it was instigated by her."
- Goddard, the teacher, was a child prodigy, so her socialization and notions of adulthood are probably skewed relative to the cultural norm.
So I think we're way solidly in the "too immature for the position" camp.
#Comment Re: made: 2009-09-23 15:39:35.420344+00 by:
Dan Lyke
(Whoops, correction re age of consent: If it hadn't been a student teacher relationship, the age of consent would have been 16, but since it was, the age of consent in this case is 18.)
#Comment Re: made: 2009-09-23 17:24:01.675999+00 by:
JT
"Aggravating" in this case refers to the teacher's relationship with a student. If you are just average joe dating a 15 year old girl, it's considered statutory rape. What makes it aggravated is if you have any authority over the child. Teachers, policemen, clergy, anyone who would be considered in having a "guiding force" over the child is what determines the aggravated charge. It's basically a worse charge because the child is expected to follow your guidance, and even if the child were able to tell a stranger "no" then the ability to tell the person with authority "no" would be hindered.
#Comment Re: made: 2009-09-23 18:04:15.793993+00 by:
meuon
JT: a different (good) viewpoint I had not considered.
#Comment Re: made: 2009-09-23 20:23:37.429413+00 by:
JT
Well, I'm just going off of what makes American laws "Aggravated" i.e., "Rape" implies no weapon, "Aggravated Rape" means there was a weapon used... "Aggravated Statutory Rape" actually sort of considers your authority as the weapon. Mind you, I haven't read the article in a few days and didn't pay 100% attention to it at the time, but I'm just here to throw a confusion wrench into things here and there, so take it for what it's worth.