Maybe he should call a press conference and accuse the police of "pervert profiling."

The internet is no good. The perverts should hunt in school instead.

So.

There was a link on Drudge to a story about a fat ugly teacher that had sex with a 12 year old boy. I'm sure that boy was willing. Are the idiots here going to insist that it wasn't abuse and the kid should be commended for scoring or does the fat and ugly part matter more than the willing participant part?

The boy's father reported it so at least *he* understands that abuse occured.

Well the teacher is a 34 year-old woman and the boy is 13. The other boy, who's only 12 was only allowed to watch. And get this, the supposed rape occurred 28 times in a week.

Now I know the PC crowd wants to crucify this woman, but as a compassionate conservative I feel she only needs therapy. I recommend the court appoint a paid hunk to visit her daily for 6 months and then have her reevaluated. I figure that by that time she would lose interest in underage boys and could go back to work teaching.

To compensate the 13 year-old, the court should order the teacher to pay for and present him with a trophy appropriate to his achievements.

While this comment is tongue-in-cheek, a serious point is that young boys having sex adult women is different then young girls having sex with adult men. Boys are rarely damaged by such an encounter, nor are they unwilling actors. Any criminal penalties should be in proportion to the harm done. I don't feel it's right to destroy the life of this woman just to satisfy the PC crowd's thirst for gender equality at any cost.

If the teacher was a young "hot" lady, she would not receive a harsh punishment. This lady isn't (hot), so she's going to get the full punishment.

Mac, honey. If it weren't for the fact that we women have to deal with the boys who "aren't damaged" by this when they grow up, I might give you a pass.

Simply insisting over and over that boys are studs when they're used by perverted adults doesn't make it true.

According to the latest FBI research, there are exactly 12 children in the United States who are below the age of 17 who are online and interested in having sexual relations with men over the age of 30.

Don't be too sure......

Synova, sex is as old as humankind, and males are equipped by nature to instigate sex with females wherever and whenever they have opportunity. Social norms and laws were put into place to protect females from males, not the other way around. Only in our modern gender blind age have those norms and laws been warped to consider age and authority rather than gender. As such our laws are not even logical. If sex at a young age causes such great harm, then why is it ignored if both individuals are teens of similar age? Shouldn't all such teens be placed in therapy?

If some 13 year-old boy broke into some 34 year-old teacher's home in the middle of the night and raped her the teenager would likely be treated as a adult in court because the nature of the crime is that of an adult. Yet if the teacher willingly engages in the same act, somehow the teenager is now a child and the women is at great risk of spending many years in jail.

Gender blind rape laws are the result of too many people drinking the sexual equality psychobabble kool aid. They cause great harm to women where there's little if any harm done to the teenager. Justice dictates that the punishment be proportional to the harm done.

I'm probably a bigger believer in gender inequality than you'd ever believe but Mac. Read what you wrote.

"males are equipped by nature to instigate sex with females..."

This is what you are missing. Entirely missing. These boys are no more *raped* than are girls who are equipt by nature to chose the most powerful mate... probably someone much older than herself. Nature isn't at issue. But they are abused. The natural order, if you will, has been perverted. These boys are no more making a *conquest* than the girl in love with a 30 year old man has chosen the alpha wolf to mate with. He's *not* the alpha wolf but the gamma, slinking about at the edges and stealing what he can.

These boys aren't making conquests. They are not *instigating* sex with females. They are being used by older women *because* the roles can be reversed to something un-natural and un-healthy. It would be no different *at all* if the adult having consensual sex with them was a man. Because it isn't sex, it's power and control and manipulation.

If the boy was *instigating* something or making a *conquest* I wouldn't call it abuse even if the woman was as old as his mother.

Do you think that boy with the internet porn thing was uninjured? Heck he got to have sex with girls and made a crap load of money doing it. And maybe his friends even go, Whoo Hoo! wish it was me.

I don't know why you want so badly to insist that it doesn't hurt boys to be used as though they were girls. Geez, maybe that would get through to you. They are made into a girl with a penis, Mac. Just a girl with a penis.

Heh, I realize you did it again in your second paragraph... if the boy raped her, that would be bad. But if the woman was willing... then we treat her like a criminal. In both cases you show the *boy* as the active party. In the first case the woman resists and in the second she is "willing." In either case you've portrayed the boy as being the one in control of the situation.

Synova,

In most of these cases of adults having sex with a minor there's no lasting physical harm. If the adult has STDs then that should be taken into account by the court. In most such cases, however, there's little if any physical harm done, so the primary concern of the law is emotional harm. In a sexual relationship with an adult of the opposite sex, there's a huge difference in the emotional harm done to teenage girls as compared to teenage boys.

What we're really talking about here is human reproduction. Nature has endowed the two genders with emotional machinery customized for the different roles each gender plays in reproduction. For boys the sexual act is the total extent of their reproductive role. For girls, the sexual act is just the beginning of their reproductive role. Yes, effective contraception frees females from unwanted pregnancy, but the female emotional machinery didn't change just because the pill was invented. Attitudes change but the emotional machinery is the same.

Having been a young male and privy to the candid views of young males, I can testify that any teenage boy precocious enough to respond to the advances of an adult woman is not going to suffer lasting emotional harm from conventional sexual intercourse with her. Socially, promiscuous boys are part of the in-crowd and have high self-esteem. Promiscuous girls are social outcasts and often suffer from low self-esteem. The genders are just not the same in this regard.

I have never heard of a case where a women has been convicted of raping an adult man. There may be cases of sexual harassment, but not rape. That's because nature dictates that all conventional sex is consensual for males. The law doesn't recognize that natural fact for minors, but that's meaningless to a teenage male's emotional machinery. In such cases as the teacher and 13 year-old boy, he is always in control in his own eyes. The woman simply consents, even if she had to lie to get the boy away from his parents, drive him to her home, and get him drunk.

There's simply no equivalent for teenage girls responding to adult males. The girl's emotional machinery is different, the social consequences are different, and the harm is much greater.

I'm not advocating legalizing adult women having sex with teenage boys. My point is that there is real difference in the harm done to teenage boys compared to teenage girls and punishment should be proportional to the harm done.

ALL adolescent children, boys and girls, believe they are in charge. Both boys *and* girls believe that abuse was just sex. Girls feel grown up and special. If they are in a situation where someone else "tells" they get angry that the adult was betrayed. Admitting anything else is unacceptable. Even with non-conventional sex young people feel responsible for their own actions. If it's a boy and a man, the boy is more likely than not to consider it a homosexual encounter rather than admit that he was coerced or cajoled and abused by the man. If they feel shame, boys *or* girls, they feel shame for their own behavior. Just *try* to tell a girl with a "relationship" with an older man that she's being abused. It's next to impossible to do, even when a girl has been physically beaten, it's not going to work when it's just sex that she wanted to have.

If you think that boys and girls are different *in their own eyes* in this regard, you are wrong.

No, I was never a boy. And I'm not free to discuss the situations of men I know who were abused in their early teens.

These women, cute or ugly, who chose to have sex with boys rather than men, upset me because I have to figure that they have a reason for that choice. You say that boys natural promiscuity and lack of emotional involvement means they don't get hurt.

It seems that it's not uncommon for the boys, who you say are not emotionally involved, to end up in long term "relationships" with these women. The school teacher in Washington is apparently going to marry the kid. I'm almost thinking that I heard that the hottie in Florida was engaged as well. This is not "spread your sperm widely" behavior. It's "let's get me a little sex toy I can control" behavior. It's "I want to be the one who has power" behavior.

Punishment isn't proportional to the harm done in any case because we don't worry about proving harm in a statuatory rape case. If *this* girl or *that* boy haven't suffered emotionally, our society still has an interest in punishing the behavior. In the case of *teachers* they have been given a position of trust by parents and violating that trust should not be tolerated.

Heh... thought of another one... that teacher (New York?) who used sex to convince some of her male students to murder her husband. Sex is power. Can you claim that those boys were 1) Not harmed, and 2) The ones in control?

It is not empowering to be led about by your gonads. No amount of bragging to your buds is going to change that fact. And despite what you say, I think that some boys are smart enough to realize this.

You're trying to equate boys to girls, but it's quite obvious to anyone not drunk on psychobabble kool aid that the genders are very different emotionally. Males embrace risk while females avoid it. Males are far more aggressive than females. You only need to look at the number of males in prison compared to the number of females to see there's a real difference. These differences just don't appear when someone turns 18, they were their from birth and magnified during puberty.

Girl's emotions lead to double the rate of depression than for boys. Girls emotions lead to double the number of suicide attempts than boys, although boys are more likely to succeed. Boys aggressiveness and risk taking behavior gets them in trouble with the law at a rate of more than ten times that of girls. It's utter nonsense to claim they are the same when having a relationship with an adult.

Punishment isn't proportional to the harm done in any case because we don't worry about proving harm in a statuatory rape case.

Obvioulsy, that's the current state of the law, but these things run in cycles, and I expect that as more people understand that such insensitivity causes more harm than good, the law will be changed.