« Bonfire of the Vanities - Week 84 | Main | Judith Regan Is A Genius »

News Quiz

Who is this woman, and why is she facing 100 years in prison?

newsquiz01.jpg


The first correct answer wins a fabulous prize ($25)...

Update: Apparently it was easier than I thought. The winner (leelu in the very first comment) requested that I donate the $25 to Spirit of America's Library Books for Iraqi Children program, which as he can attest I happily did.

From WKRN (Video):

A Warren County elementary teacher faces a maximum 100 years in prison if she's convicted of having a sexual relationship with a 14-year-old boy.

Only news two was in Fentress County as 27-year-old Pamela Rogers Turner was arrested and charged with 15 counts of sexual battery by an authority figure and 13 counts of statutory rape. District Attorney General Dale Potter said that Turner, a physical education teacher and coach at Centertown Elementary, had an ongoing sexual relationship with a male student. Potter said that some of the incidents even took place at school and at the boy's home, where the teacher reportedly lived a short while.

Pamela Rogers' father, Lamar Rogers, has been the girls basketball coach at Clarkrange High School for 29 years and coached Pamela's team the a state tittle. [Story]

Pamela Rogers and Christopher Turner engagement announcement.

Update 2:: The Smoking Gun has the indictment.

Update 3:: Bad Jocks goes to the wayback machine and finds 1997 pictures of Pamela in a bikini as Ms. Monday Nitro on WCW.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference News Quiz:

» Angry in the Great White North linked with If she had waited a bit, it might have been legal

» Six Meat Buffet linked with White Trash Wednesday: Debra Lafave redux

» Say Anything linked with This Makes Seven

Comments (99)

Pamela Rogers, for 15 count... (Below threshold)
leelu:

Pamela Rogers, for 15 counts of sexual battery and 13 of stautory rape.

She's a teacher.

Pamela Rogers Turner, actua... (Below threshold)
Johnny Catbird:

Pamela Rogers Turner, actually. She was a PE teacher and coach. She lived with the victim's family for a while.

Britany Spears? Charged wi... (Below threshold)
Drew:

Britany Spears? Charged with poor taste in music and being a slut?

That's either Ida Know or I... (Below threshold)

That's either Ida Know or Ida Care.

Every teenage boy's fantasy... (Below threshold)
jmaster:

Every teenage boy's fantasy.

(Well, all except for the 5% who are gay).

For giving herself a Wet Wi... (Below threshold)
Jack Tanner:

For giving herself a Wet Willie in a white pickup truck?

Honestly, I don't get these... (Below threshold)
Just Me:

Honestly, I don't get these women, are they really that hard up. I mean when I look at 14 year old boys, I do not think "potential sex partner"

I don't care what her name ... (Below threshold)
Rick13:

I don't care what her name is or what she is facing! I just hope they make a movie!

Paris Hilton for falsely, a... (Below threshold)
AnonymousDrivel:

Paris Hilton for falsely, and repeatedly, reporting a lost poodle which subsequently tied up valuable anti-terrier resources.

Look at her. Dressed like a... (Below threshold)
Rob Hackney:

Look at her. Dressed like a complete slutty whore. And look at what she did, corrupting young boys. Society truly has no VALUES anymore. It's disgusting.

Maybe some kind of female circumcision is in order to curb her raging hormonal behaviour! Would be similar to castration for male rapists.

And people joking about the... (Below threshold)
Rob Hackney:

And people joking about the crime should be disgusted with themselves. Unless of course, you think underage CHILDREN having sex is a joke.

A female rapist is the same as a male one. a Rapist.

My wife and I were discussi... (Below threshold)
Mike:

My wife and I were discussing this recently when we heard about a teacher in the DC area having a relationship with an underage student.
Maybe my memory is bad but is this just a recent phenomenon or is it something that had been happening for a long time and just recently taken seriously?
Back in my day (80's), with the exception for the random scuzzy male gym teacher, I never heard of female teachers using the male student population as boy toys until recently.

Are the schools are loosening the standards and are allowing people to teach that would have been weeded out in some sort of psych profiling battery?

In case anybody was wonderi... (Below threshold)
jmaster:

In case anybody was wondering, I’m not yet disgusted with myself.

'Dressed like a complete sl... (Below threshold)
Jack Tanner:

'Dressed like a complete slutty whore. '

Still working on those issues, huh?

Miss Pamela Rogers and Mr. ... (Below threshold)
Amber:

Miss Pamela Rogers and Mr. Christopher Turner exchanged their wedding vows July 26, 2003.

I have a feeling they are not going to see their second anniversary...

jmaster,Sorry, my mi... (Below threshold)
Meezer:

jmaster,
Sorry, my mind was wandering.
Here ya go:
Jmaster! You ought to be disgusted with yourself!!

I don't know that this stuf... (Below threshold)
Just Me:

I don't know that this stuff didn't happen, I just wonder if it doesn't get reported more.

Hard to say.

Either way, I still don't understand what the appeal is, in a 14 year old to an adult-I just can't see 14 year olds as somebody to have sex with, shoot, they are barely older than my daughter.

Mr. Hackeny:Not al... (Below threshold)
Ray Midge:

Mr. Hackeny:

Not all things we use the word "rape" for are moral equivalents. Unfortunately, the word rape is used for both non consensual sex, (rape-rape) and consensual sex where one or both of the actors is the local age limit for sex (statutory rape).

While a female rape-rapist is the moral equivalent of a male rape-rapist, a female heterosexual statutory rapist isn't the moral equivalent of a male heterosexual statutory rapist.

Our moral sexual intuitions are not the same because we don't feel the same way about an underage girl having sex as we do about an underage boy having sex (although our political intuitions tells us they should be the same, or at least get us to outwardly pretend they are the same).

Regardless what we think should think politically, that teacher is HOT! and the 14 year old boy got lucky. (while of course we would have felt a 14 year old girl would have had her some special aspect of her ("innocence" perhaps) stolen away from her.)

Speaking as an ex-14 year o... (Below threshold)
Scott Free:

Speaking as an ex-14 year old boy, I would have crawled across broken glass to be 'abused' by a P.E. teacher who looked like that.

Politically incorrect, I know, but guys are like that.

Lemme guess... Daddy coache... (Below threshold)
OneDrummer:

Lemme guess... Daddy coaches girls' basketball for 29 years... think he has any skeletons in his closet when his daughter grows up to do this?

Anyone read that recent SI article on that Denver area girls' hoops coach? Creep-city.

Why are these women teachers all hot blondes in their 20's anyways? Damn that LeTourneau.....

Man is she incredibly stupi... (Below threshold)
JP:

Man is she incredibly stupid for having sex with a minor. Man is he incredibly lucky for having a blazing hot gym teacher who is stupid! If there is one (straight) male who says he wouldn't have been all over that when he was 14, I wouldn't believe him.

"While a female rape-rapist... (Below threshold)
Just Me:

"While a female rape-rapist is the moral equivalent of a male rape-rapist, a female heterosexual statutory rapist isn't the moral equivalent of a male heterosexual statutory rapist. "

I totally disagree.

Statutory rape isn't about the consent of the child, but the responsibilty of the adult involved.

An adult female that has sex with a 14 year old student is just as guilty as an adult male that has sex with a 14 year old student. Teachers are in the position of responsibility, they are the ADULTS in the relationship, and should understand that even if the 14 year old has the hots for them, that it is not appropriate or legal to act on them.

She is a rapist by statute, and should go to prison for it.

I kind of agree with Scott ... (Below threshold)
jmaster:

I kind of agree with Scott on this one. Yes, what the woman did was wrong, both morally and legally. And the fact that she was a teacher makes it even worse. But I know if I was the boy, I would have wanted it to happen. That’s all I’m saying.

I am not now, nor have I ever been a female. And I have done a lousy job over the years trying to figure out how the female mind works. So I can’t speculate on how things might be different if it were a male teacher and a female student in this case.

Now, as a mental exercise, lets assume this same 14 year old boy jumped this teacher as she was leaving school one day, and stabs her to death. Maybe he just rapes her. Should he be treated as an adult in these situations?

"She is a rapist by statute... (Below threshold)
JP:

"She is a rapist by statute, and should go to prison for it."

No doubt about that. But it still doesn't change the fact that while she is sitting in prison, he will be telling stories to his friends, getting high-fived and hearing "Way to go" a lot. I am speaking from experience as an ex 14 year old boy. Like it or not, that is the difference between boys and girls.

I won't deny that a 14 year... (Below threshold)
Just Me:

I won't deny that a 14 year old boy wouldn't jump at the chance to go to bed with his very hot teacher, but don't assume that 14 year old girls aren't willing to jump into bed with their very hot male teachers. Satutory rape is about whether or not the 14 year old of either gender is pressumed capable of consent, and according to the laws of the state she lives in, a 14 year old is deemed incapable of that consent. I knew a girl in middle school, who at 12 looked like an adult. She would have sex with almost any male willing to do it with her, and she happily bragged about her conquests. Now, because she was bragging, does that mean the adult men she had sex with, aren't guilty of anything?

The gender of the minor shouldn't and doesn't make a difference, the law says teachers shouldn't be doing it, and they should be held equally accountable.

I agree with many of the p... (Below threshold)
Frank H:

I agree with many of the posters here who think this kid is going to have serious bragging material. But that's just the outward sign. You think there was never a young nymphette who bragged about seducing her (male) history or english teacher? Think again.

The internalized problems are bigger, however. Feminists have been making the case for years about all the internalized psychological damage done to women who are so treated, yet no one has ever credibly asked about the internalized psychological damage done to boys (and sometimes men). How many privately found the experience terrifying? How many have trouble developing healthy romantic relationships with women three, four, ten years down the road?

Society has demanded that these questions be asked on behalf of girls. It's time to demand that the same questions be asked on behalf of boys, regardless of male braggadocio.

He might start feeling more... (Below threshold)
julie:

He might start feeling more than a bit guilty that his hot teacher is now going to spend most of her adult life in the slammer.

I've been wondering about t... (Below threshold)
Mike:

I've been wondering about this lately ...

Starting with the Kinsey Report and advancing through the 1960's and 1970's, "progressives" have steadily chipped the veneer off virtually every sexual taboo - except* adult sex with pre-teen and teenage children; that is, children old enough to have either reached puberty or to be aware of their sexuality and know that they are engaging in a sexual act.

I read an article a few weeks ago on Drudge about the shocking content of films at this year's Sundance Film Festival. You can read the story here: http://www.variety.com/VR1117917076.html

Each of the films mentioned in the article included characters of children 7 - 14 involved in activity, some of it brutal, that centered around sexuality.

And now we have this story, and the one a few months ago, also referenced here on WizBang as "Hot for Teacher."

Which makes me wonder ... will the combination of the shock content of films (which raised nary an eyebrow) and the notariety given to these school cases, particularly since they are female-male, lead to a head-on push by the leftist custodians of popular culture to desensitize us to the notion of consensual teen and pre-teen sex relationships with adult men and women?

Again, just a thought.

* I remembered Nabokov's "Lolita"; I'm not familiar enough with the novel to make points about it, but I seem to recall that it dealt with Humbert Humbert being driven nuts by an attractive teenager, and not with sexual expolits of Lolita. Anyone can correct this if I'm wrong.

This is what society has do... (Below threshold)

This is what society has done to women, turned us into the men we hated. I knew a male coach in 7th grade who slept with one the cheerleaders. I thought it was completely sick. The thought of a female teacher doing that never entered my mind.

The signs of our times.

Rape is nearly always about... (Below threshold)
mojo:

Rape is nearly always about power, not sex.

And how come she missed two? 13 sexual battery and 15 stat rape?

Just Me:I hear wha... (Below threshold)
Ray Midge:

Just Me:

I hear what you're saying, but the criminal law reflects usually differences based on the amount of harm actually inflicted on the victim. Attempted Homicide is not the same crime, nor receives the same punishement as Homicide.

Our moral sexual intuitions reflect that the actual harm inflicted on the 14 year old boy by consensual sex with an adult female is minimal (further differentiated by employing a sliding scale based on "hotness" of the chick), but the actual harm feels to us greater when the 14 year old is a girl. It just does.

Politically, we can't tolerate having criminal laws that reflect that difference in moral intuition though - that it's okay (or punished less) to have heretosexual sex with a 14 year old if you're a woman than it is for a man to do it.

As a consequence, the teacher here may have to spend up to 100 years in prison because we feel politcally bound by the "no double standard" sentiment to treat her the same as a man, but all our intuitions say 'I wish I was that "victim"'.

Sometimes the lack of a double standard can be screwed up too.

It is the latest thing for ... (Below threshold)
Rod Stanton:

It is the latest thing for "progressive" teachers. remember the first big one in Wash. about 10 years ago. She was a junior exec in the campaing of the newly elected (stolen election) Gov.

I don't know, Ray. There ar... (Below threshold)
julie:

I don't know, Ray. There are studies out there that boys are adversely affected enough that they have been treating the crimes equally. Also, how would you feel if a 14 y/o boy was having sex with his hot male gym teacher?

I will not speak to the mor... (Below threshold)
James:

I will not speak to the morality of it, or whether the laws are just in this case. I'd just like to point out that this is what you get from years and years and years of radical feminism shoving down our throats (I was going to type "at gunpoint" but that would have been a little too wryly ironic) that girls are in all ways exactly identical to boys. Girls are sensitive and vulnerable about sexuality, and so must be little boys, so innocent are they.

Bullshit.

Most straight men in this forum would have slaughtered a bus full of nuns to get some of that when they were 14 years old. I'm not proud of that, but it's called *biology* -- it's how we're wired. Until a few centuries ago (in the West, and still today in a number of other cultures), most 14-year-olds would already be looking at marriage. I'm not trying to defend the teacher's behavior -- regardless of moral issues, the legal consequences are huge -- but I think the way people are trying to treat this exactly as if the sexes had been reversed is just ignorant. BOYS =/= GIRLS, plain and simple.

BTW the one in Wash had fou... (Below threshold)
Rod Stanton:

BTW the one in Wash had four kids by her husband ( or so they say) and two by the Jr. High kid, who is now an adult. IT is not because they are "hard up" it is because it is "progressive" and intelectually stimulating.

Forget broken glass, when I... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Forget broken glass, when I was 14 I would have crawled on my hands and knees through half a mile of freshly congealed lava atop mount Kilauea.

I don't know if the single picture does her justice, or if it makes her look better than she normally does, but if that's what the girl looks like all the time, then I do believe she's a walking resolution for those young men who are feeling uncertain about their sexuality.

Politically incorrect? You betcha, but then the truth has a funny way of being like that.

Where were the teachers like this when I was a freshman in high school? I had to wait till I was a senior for a teacher to show an interest in me, and I was still too young and clueless to figure it out at the time. Now I'm not-so-young but still almost as clueless.

So child molestation should... (Below threshold)
julie:

So child molestation should only be prosecuted if it is a girl/man or a boy/man? If it is a boy/woman it's a pass?

Julie:Many (most) ... (Below threshold)
Ray Midge:

Julie:

Many (most) generally feel a worse crime has been committed when a 14 year old of sex X has had sex with an adult of sex X, than if it was X with Y, but that just reflects our underlying antipathy to homosexuality - i.e. if the teacher was "Paul Rodgers" instead of "Pamela Rodgers" not quite the no harm/no foul sentiment go on. Our moral sentiments are our moral sentiments whether or not they are logically consistent. Our law usually reflects those moral sentiments excapt where they conflict with another perhaps politically based sentiment as is the case here.

Also, perhaps a 14 year old male is actually just as likely to get as equally psychologically messed up as a 14 year old female by sex with an adult (I wonder though). Our moral intuitions don't accord with that though. We usually view the girl as somehow more harmed; that something has been stolen from her that hasn't from the boy, even if we don't admit it outloud.


"Our moral sexual intuition... (Below threshold)
Just Me:

"Our moral sexual intuitions reflect that the actual harm inflicted on the 14 year old boy by consensual sex with an adult female is minimal (further differentiated by employing a sliding scale based on "hotness" of the chick), but the actual harm feels to us greater when the 14 year old is a girl. It just does."

BS

My moral intuition tells me that it is wrong, no matter what gender you are dealing with.

Maybe this is a gender thing-I don't see too many of the women arguing that a female teacher having sex with a 14 year old boy isn't morally repugnant.

When I did juvenile probation before kids, I didn't have a 14 year old boy sexually abused by an adult woman, but I did have one sexually abused by his boy scout leader. He was absolutely screwed up after that experience, but he had a relationship with the man for over half a year, and "consented" to the sex. But I can't say this kid would have crawled across glass to have sex with his cubscout leader.

Honestly, teenage boys will have fantasies and they may involved their teachers, believe it or not, teenage girls have fantasies too, and sometimes they involve male teachers. If both the male and female have sex with the teacher, please show me how the female actually experiences more harm than the male?

So, Ray, you are saying it'... (Below threshold)
julie:

So, Ray, you are saying it's only prejudice that treats sex between a boy and a man as distasteful?

Nevertheless, you shouldn't say "our moral sentiments" and that "our laws" reflect that sentiment. Many people disagree and I can state as a fact that in the state where I live, woman have been charged, convicted, and sentenced to prison for these types of crimes for about twenty years.

Just Me: "Please show me h... (Below threshold)
Ray Midge:

Just Me: "Please show me how the female actually experiences more harm than the male."

I doubt they do if it was truly consensual, but that doesn't stop the parents and community from feeling as if a greater crime has occurred. A father may feel then need to console his daughter after such consensual sex (or otherwise act as if she is harmed) but is more likely to high five his son (esp. where the teacher is as HOT as here). Our moral sentiments don't reflect the actual harm done (where's the harm if it's consensual in the first place?) they reflect how, ultimately, we feel girls are different than boys.

Our moral sentiments are not logical constructions, more likely they are odd jumbled things dropped in place by evolution which has never had much overall concern for the equality of the sexes in a given species.

Julie:I don't doub... (Below threshold)
Ray Midge:

Julie:

I don't doubt women are treated in many places as harshly as men for sex with minors. We have a more pronounced moral(political) intuition that people should be treated the same by our government for characteristics beyond their control like sex or sexual orientation. This sentiment butts heads thought our (many people's) moral intuitions to treat differently. Which one wins out is a political question.

In the past, boy/woman sex probably was more likely to be more lightly punsihed than was girl/man. Would the sheriff have investigated it as thoroghly? Would the prosecutor have offered the same plea? They will today because if they don't they are offending our sentiment of equal treatment (even if we somehow, somewhere know it's not the same).

I would note that the law still allows a release valve for those disparate harm sentiments in the form of the sentencing ranges open to a judge. While the book may say 5-10 years for anyone committing statutory rape, I wonder if the sex ratio of those getting five years and those getting 10 is 50/50?

Every time one of these cas... (Below threshold)
OBH:

Every time one of these cases comes up, it's always the same story. Some people blame the woman and some guys give the bragging rights argument. To me, there's a common sense arguement aimed at the school board and they should share some of the blame. Anybody who was ever a 14 year old boy or even know a 14 year old boy knows that this is the time when their hormones are starting to kick into overdrive. To hire these very young and attractive teachers, who are barely out of their teens, is asking for trouble. Why not let these young teachers teach in elementary schools for a while so that they can get some experience in the classroom. This would also give the school board a chance to monitor the teacher's performance and temperament before sending them into the hormone pool. These young women obviously have some emotional or self esteem problems that make them do this. The real harm that will be done to these boys is the guilt they will carry around with them for what happens to the teacher and it probably won't happen until they get older. If convicted, this young woman will likely spend her whole life in prison and God knows what that fact will do to the boy. How many cases like this will it take for common sense to prevail?

Just because a person has t... (Below threshold)
Just Me:

Just because a person has the right equipment, and that equipment is functioning (and if the equipment is the determinate for when sex is acceptable, then girls should be less morally wrong than boys since girls tend to hit puberty before boys), doesn't mean that they should act on those things, or be encouraged to act by the ADULTS in the situation.

Sex is more than mechanics, sex also involved emotion and the psyche, and to pretend like sex at 14 with an adult doesn't have any effect on a boy is to be in denial.

Julie:Any male old... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Julie:

Any male old enough to grow hair on his scrotum is not a child.

He's an adolescent and a minor, but neither of those term are interchangable with the word child. The term "child" is such a loaded word that its use in this context can only be for the purpose of manipulating the discussion. By labeling someone a child, you infantilize them, making sex with them seem more perverse than it would otherwise be perceived.

Now I'm not saying that what this woman did was right, but child molestation? Had he been 11 or even 12 I might agree with that description, but at 14 he's old enough to father children himself. Anyone that age, regardless of their legal status, is no longer a child.

If this had been a case of two 14 year olds getting it on we wouldn't be having this discussion because it wouldn't be news.

I think that what this woman did was wrong because it was inappropriate and a breach of the trust the school and community placed in her. But I don't think it was a crime on par with genuine rape and I certainly don't think that she needs 100 years in prison to learn her lesson. I'd send her up the river for a year, possibly two, but no more unless there was cause to believe that their relationship was exploitive or abusive. And no, the fact that he's 14 doesn't necessarily mean it was either.

I would agree that this isn... (Below threshold)
Just Me:

I would agree that this isn't the same as forcible rape, but I wouldn't say that about a male teacher having sex with a 14 year old female either.

Also, the 100 years is if she is sentenced to consecutive years on each charge-the media loves to do this, in reality most people convicted of any crime-statutory rape or forcible rape or burglary end up having the majority of their sentences run concurrently, so they serve the sentence for each charge all at the same time. How this is done has a lot to do with sentencing laws and the descretion of the judge.

"Now I'm not saying that what this woman did was right, but child molestation? Had he been 11 or even 12 I might agree with that description, but at 14 he's old enough to father children himself. Anyone that age, regardless of their legal status, is no longer a child. "

Legally, they are considered to be minors incapable of consent. Also, if pubic hair is a determinate of how serious the charge is, then it should be perfectly acceptable for male teachers to have sex with 11 and 12 year old girls, since a good many of them have their periods and pubic hair by that point as well.

I agree that a 14 year old isn't quite a child, but they aren't adults yet either, and dealing with the ramifications of a sexual relationship with an adult teacher is something no 14 year old needs on their plate.

"If this had been a case of two 14 year olds getting it on we wouldn't be having this discussion because it wouldn't be news."

You are right, but then in most states, two 14 year olds can get it on legally without any charges being filed. An adult teacher, is not the same thing as a 14 year old girlfriend or boyfriend. Also, and adult teacher should know better. Just because a 14 year old is mechanically capable of having sex, and may fantasize about sex with the really hot teacher, that doesn't mean that the teacher should fulfill those fantasies, or that fulfilling those fantasies doesn't cause any harm to the 14 year old simply because the 14 year old is a boy.

If the boy had hoarded his ... (Below threshold)
Lilly:

If the boy had hoarded his allowance and paid a hooker would we be having this conversation? The fact that she is a teacher and trusted by the community plays into the collective outrage.

If the boy had climbed on his paid hooker and porked gleefully away would you want that hooker jailed for 100 years for molestation? It's all about the position... err.. the teachers one that is.

Ray, no doubt this was trea... (Below threshold)
julie:

Ray, no doubt this was treated differently at one time. But, the legislature changed the laws. And for quite a long time now people are arrested and charged, juries convict, and judges give some serious time.

There are all these rules that a judge must follow in order to give what is called a "high term" sentence. The basis for the increase must be stated on the record. Plus, it is unclear at the moment whether sentencing ranges are still legal. Everyone was waiting for the USSC case to decide. Two weeks ago they did. Now, lower courts are even more bewildered as to the legality.

If the boy purchase the ser... (Below threshold)
Just Me:

If the boy purchase the services of a hooker, there would likely only be the one molestation charge, and probably a charge for the prostition, so it is doubtful she would be looking at 100 years.

The teacher is looking at 100 years, because there are multiple charges for multiple sexual contacts. The 100 years is the maximum she could receive if she is convicted on all the charges and those sentences are run consecutively. It is doubtful that all the sentences will be run consecutively, and that she will be senteced to 100 years. More than likely, as in most cases, the sentences will be concurrent, so she will probably get something much less than that. My guess is something like 10 years.

And to answer your question the hooker should be charged, the law is pretty clear, that a minor is incapable of concent. YOu may find it morally less reprehensible, and in this case I would agree, since a teacher is in a position of trust and authority, while a hooker isn't, but that is still no excuse for the hooker.

Julie:I don't thin... (Below threshold)
Ray Midge:

Julie:

I don't think I disagree with much of what you say. I would question the point about the legislature changing the laws though. In many states, the law has never made a distinction on the sex (m/f) of the offender. The discretion was built in, and exercised by the various players such that and the incident never worked into a felony case when it was boy/woman, or it was, got treated less harshly. I think it's often just that the equality sentiment has intensified, making it politically to treat differently rather than statutory changes.

Additionally, while the judge may have to state the factors meriting the sentence on the record, this is, in part, an illusory constraint. Identical factual scenario can result in different sentences with the judge merely emphasing different or more factors on the record in the two cases.

Even if you don't think Judges explcity consider the sex of the victim, they certainly consider the parents views, their views regarding the harm to their own child. And, in turn, the parents view of the harm reflects the stronger "protect girls" sentiment, as often probations sentencing recommendation does (perhaps not explicitly).

In short, I'm just saying you still end up with differences in how society treats the statutory rapist based on the sex of the offender, but because of legal constraints, they're justified less explicity than in the past.

JustMe:I think the... (Below threshold)
Lee:

JustMe:

I think the main area where you and I disagree is not that what she did was wrong, but on just how wrong it was.

Your position seems to be that at 14 he was wholly incapable of making any kind of a decision when it comes to sex, simply due to the fact that the law does not recognize him as being capable.

Well I will agree that at 14 he's in no position to make sexual decisions, or at least not rational ones. At that age the automatic response to an offer of sex from an attractive partner is "Yes please!!!" regardless of the consequences. We're all lucky that most girls that age are more level-headed, otherwise we'd all be grandparents by age 30.

I just can't for the life of me look at this situation and see a victim here. Certainly there have been misdeeds that have taken place, but if anyone is the victim it is the community at large. Like I said before, this was a betrayal of the trust that was placed in her by the community. If I were teaching a college class, it would be a nearly equal betrayal of trust if I started sleeping with my students. I might not be facing a jail-term because of it, but I would, and should, be fired for it.

When I look back on the way I was at 14 and the things I was doing with girls at that age, I have a hard time eliciting the politically correct outrage that cases like this seem to demand. I think that what she did was wrong, but not so much because of the age difference between them or because of how young he was, or even the sexual acts that took place. Rather I see her actions as an assault on society itself by damaging the reputation of her profession and undermining the trust that parents place in teachers everywhere.

Had she not been his teacher but instead been someone living down the street, I doubt I'd feel anything but sorrow that the two of them got busted and annoyance that the taxpayer's money was being wasted.

The problem with cases like this one is that our laws are at odds with our biology. In most cases this is a good thing. There are men out there who would be cruising the high schools tomorrow morning if the age of consent were lowered. Not all sexual predators target actual children. The age of consent exists primarily to protect teenaged girls from being left high and dry by older guys who only want to use them for sex and then move on to the next girl. Don't believe me? Until 10 or 15 years ago, the laws defining statutory rape only specified sex between older males and younger females. Situations where the roles were reversed weren't considered a crime. The reason for the gender bias was simple, boys don't get pregnant, girls do. When a 24 year old guy seduces a 17 year old girl and leaves her pregnant, it is a life changing, if not shattering, event in her life. When a 24 year old woman gets pregnant on the other hand things aren't so dire. The statutory rape laws attempted to ensure that males faced consequences for sex that were similar to what biology exacted of females naturally. In some states, Georgia in particular, the statutory rape charge would be dropped if the couple married. In other words, if the male stepped up to the place and took responsibility for his actions, he would not be further penalized for them by the state. Now I'm not trying to harken back to the "good ole days," especially since I don't think a shotgun wedding is a solution for sexual predation of teenaged girls. But I do think that these laws represented a more resonable attempt at dealing with the real problem of young women being exploited by older men, without carrying with them the baggage of attempting to deal with an imaginary problem of young men being exploited by older women.

Situations like this one highlight a disturbing trend in modern America that I began noticing back when I was a teenager myself in the 80's and early 90's. When my grandparents were young it was not uncommon for a girl of 15 or 16 to be married and even pregnant. This was considered normal and these girls, while young, were treated essentially as adults and were expected to conduct themselves as adults and not as children. Nowadays if you're under 18, you're considered an infant. Ga-ga goo-goo. Not only are you not held to any kind of a standard when it comes to judgement or conduct, but any attempt on your part to make decisions is undermined, denigrated, and belittled. Some of us at that age are apt to take exception to this treatment and demand recognition as responsible young adults by taking responsibility for ourselves, but most are not. Most people aren't nearly stubborn or ornery enough. This is why you have 27 year olds living with their parents and functioning on virtually the same level as 17 year olds were a generation ago. Parents in this country are, quite literally, raising children.

So when I see people lamenting the sexual experiences of a 14 year old because he's "a child" I really get annoyed. If a person of 14 years is indeed a child, it is only because their family and the culture they live in has demanded nothing more of them.

A person that age is at the point where society should be demanding that they begin assuming the role of an adult. Now I'm not talking about sex here, I'm talking about maturity and personal responsibility. Coddling and infantilizing someone that age doesn't do anything but guarantee that if they ever do grow up, it will only be in time to star on the new version of 30-something.

Robert A. Heinlein put it best when he said: "Don't cripple your children by making their lives easy for them."

So maybe at 14 this guy was a child, but if so that is far more incriminating for our society at large than it is for this woman who slept with him.

The males here generalizing... (Below threshold)
-S-:

The males here generalizing about their own biological compulsions while early teen years -- saying they'd crawl through lava or otherwise inorder to 'get some of (that)' as to sexual intercours with an older woman (or, any woman, I am thinking) -- miss the damaging issues associated with this case, as with others like it, and that is:

the female of issue is/was a person of authority in the lives of those she had sexual relationships with who were younger.

The males commenting on this board relate as to compulsions for sexual engagement, but avoid discussing the idea of having those sexual relationships with someone in a position of authority in their lives at those times, which is the issue.

ANY adult knows what it was like to be a teenager, of any age. I agree that sexual engagement is more a compulsory issue for males during those times (as with others) than with females, but BOTH are very motivated by hormones during, especially, teen years -- our very brains along with our personalities take longer to mature than do our physical imperitive to reproduce and that's then the issue of society to regulate to a greater degree (and thus, d'oh, social relationships that are forbidden and discouraged, for both genders, and that's because the greater society is negatively affected by the problematic behaviors by some that results in issues that society is later responsible for, so it's reasonable for society to require certain restrictions based upon what can and does result, among other reasons why).

Anyway, the DAMAGING issue of this woman's behavior is that the males affected (as would be, also, to any gender in any mix) is due mostly to the fact that she was assumed to be an authority figure, an adult who would provide a degree of protections from certain risks, even if desired by whomever, but violated that relationship by violating the risks inherent in the child-adult relationship that was defined beyond any "consenting" capacity to change that relationship.

It's the violation of that relationship that poses grave problems to those affected and why this woman deserves jail (if determined to be guilty for her crimes) and why the males involved deserve counselling, even if they think they don't. Because, what's been taught to those affected (in this case, males) is that the boundary is non existent that should otherwise never be transgressed...and that's the real damage right there.

Males can go to any length, and do, to engage in unmoderated, unregulated, unrestricted sexual intercourse, yes -- some do -- but it's an aspect of maturing of the mind and personality to be able to recognize compulsion from rightful action.

The inability to recognize that line is also the failure that allows people to steal, to cheat, to murder and maim. It's an important lesson to learn, most do, some don't but it's worse when adults who apparently also never learned that lesson then grow older and pose as treats for those still learning or who haven't yet learned that line and how important it is. Which is what authority figures are all about, teaching where the line is, when to recognize it, how to chose and how to control impulse and defy compulsion.

To discuss the woman's behavior and the students/males involved (or any other combination of genders and ages) is to avoid discussing the real problem here. But, I do agree with those who mention Kinsey and "progressive" ideology, which did work toward and still do work toward erasing that boundary. Kinsey had sexual intercourse with children and continued on to discuss that his actions were "natural" and an example to be followed due to enlightenment and other preposterous mentally ill perspectives.

The whole argument turns on... (Below threshold)

The whole argument turns on the idea that a 14 year old man is a child when both history and biology argue otherwise.

I think it was all Van Hale... (Below threshold)
Drew:

I think it was all Van Halen's fault.

I think the "authority figu... (Below threshold)
Ray Midge:

I think the "authority figure" aspect is overblown, more of a verbal front to hang our disapproval of the age difference on, than a causal determinate of the 14 year old's fuure character.

If the 14 year old was working a few summer hours in a Dairy Queen, having sex with his 16 year old manager, do we really think his character has altered?

The second that teacher walked in the classroom she was a lust object to every 14 year old male in the place, authority figure or no (perhaps more so because of that fact). I don't think the mere fact of the fantasy coming true for one of them can be said to be such an altering occurence that it moves the line w/r/t how he will view steal, cheating, murdering as S. posits above. Goodness, if we are all so infinitely malleable as a result of getting what we desire then the human race of such an eggshell nature I wonder how we made it out of the trees. Fortunately/unfortunately science steadily discovers we are less and less the product of our post-natal environments than we ever thought.

More likely, the 14 year old is going to be the same person he was going to be when he is 25 regardless. If his character suffers from the environmental impact that follow his choice, it's far more likely the result of the attention and media circus that will ineveitably arise repeatedly, incessently drumming hims "victim" status into him, finally convincing him it's so.

It seems to me that Ray is ... (Below threshold)

It seems to me that Ray is right. At 14 I was leading other young men in small groups, at 15 I was in charge of 30 fellow cadets' daily lives. I went to college at 16.

The problem in this is that some folks (even on this board) want to infantilize the young man, and if they succeed, his life may actually become negatively altered. For now, though, if left alone to live his life on a more normal track, sans media attention, he'll probably be fine. And he'll have one hell of a story to tell. ;-)

Ray: I looked this... (Below threshold)
julie:

Ray:

I looked this up about a month ago a 1981 USSC case stated: “There are now at least 37 States that have enacted gender-neutral statutory rape laws.” I'm not interested enough to find out when the trend went to gender neutral. I can only say again I know for a fact women who were sentenced to prison for this as far back as the mid 1980s. I also know of cases where they weren't, but those were in the early 1970s.

And while a judge can emphases different factors, it still has to be supported by the record and is subject to appellate review. You are also assuming that all these cases are charged with statutory rape. This depends on the states laws. If the victim is young, if there is a 10 year age difference, if the defendant held a position of authority, it is generally treated as an enhancement of the statutory rape or it is charged as a straight child sex. abuse. You are also looking at laws where prison may is often mandatory.

The only point I'm trying to make here is that this is not something people should dismiss as not being a serious violation of the law, because it may just come back and bite you in the ass big time.

I'm wondering how it is goi... (Below threshold)

I'm wondering how it is going to bite Ray in the ass bigtime as he is presumably neither a 14 year old boy or a 20 something female high school teacher.

Nah, the authority figure r... (Below threshold)
-S-:

Nah, the authority figure responsibilities lie in what one choses to do as a profession. If you're a policeman/woman, a TEACHER, things of that nature, where you're responsible for supervising the BEHAVIORS of CHILDREN, of any age (under 18, still a child to most adults and that's what society long ago decided, even though 14 year olds could think about and even engage in sexual activities, society long ago determined that sexual capacity did and does not an adult make, and society was and is right about that), then you're an authority figure by pledge and expectation and society has every right to anticipate that you aren't going to engage in activities with children that violates trust.

The trust part is defined as an authority figure who has offered themselves to society (they get a license, based upon a set of conditions, among which is a well defined set of behaviors that society spells out as to what is expected of those licensed, or not) as those who society can rely on to care for children. That means, not teaching children things that society agrees are wrongful actions.

Among which, most especially, are sexual behaviors. AS with crime and such. But sexual interaction with children is among the most vile by most societies the world over and the reason why is longer than this board can accommodate.

IF a child of fourteen is on a summer break and has a relationship with an adult who is also a teacher, that teacher IS STILL EXPECTED to abide by social expectations (to avoid sexual contact with a child, and to avoid exposing a child to sexual content) whether in a classroom or not. As are also others in other professions, but mostly ADULTS ARE expected to avoid those behaviors with children, summer or not.

It's a case of someone who never learned a lesson of impulse control being able to grow older and seek out an environment where they have exposure to those they can victimize, as in A CLASSROOM, when an adult engages in sexual contact with a child in a classroom, such that the person (the adult) violates a number of social contracts, and not just professionally as a teacher but worse as an adult within society.

Just because a human being is capable of sexual activity does not make it alright or even understandable to encourage or worse, engage in sexual activity. Fourteen is still not an adult, neither is fifteen, sixteen, seventeen and in my experience, neither is eighteen but society says otherwise.

Even Charles Manson probably can still have sex. It doesn't make it socially acceptable to most that he be able to perpetuate his genes, thus, isolation for him.

That's an extreme, yes, but persons who grow older without learning certain impulse controls go throughout society without exercising the anticipated controls over impulse that society requires for independent living, for someone to live without supervision. Those people who do do that -- live within society without the ability to moderate their impulses and compulsions while also growing older beyond a childhood learning point -- require supervision by society because of that and thus, we get people who are institutionalized. Prison, state hospitals, predator records and parole with community awareness of locations, etc., but still social supervision. Some persons cannot be allowed to mingle in society without supervision and people who use children to act out their own impulses and compulsions should be closely monitored, if not institutionalized.

Even when there is a 'willing victim," the honus, the responsibility for whatever occurs afterward, rests with he/she who acts, and sometimes who participate, also, but usually, when one participant is a child and the other is the adult, society judges the adult differently, harsher, and should.

-sigh-To those of ... (Below threshold)

-sigh-

To those of you who think boys and girls treat it differently, that's bullshit. That has nothing to do with how society views it. The responsible party IS the adult. The adult was the one who is in the wrong, so therefore the adult should be treated the same way, whether its a male or a female, consensual or nonconsensual (it doesn't even matter. At that age, it generally becomes "consensual" anyway because its an authority figure. Authority figures tend to have influence over your decision-making and such, even at the ripe age of 14.).

Sure, if you were 14 you might have "slaughtered a bus full of nuns" (to quote one of the more obsene commenters here) to "hit that", but think for a minute. Its the likely case that she had FULL control of the situation. "do this", "do that". I bet it was all her fault, the 14 year old boy was just that...A BOY. It would be the same even if it was a hot male teacher.

I bet you half the women here had some young, hot, stud teacher that every girl in their high school lusted after. In my high school, it was a history teacher who also taught the freshman football. If you were a girl and that teacher said all the right things, approached you at just the right moment (emotionally vulnerable), and did everything right, I bet you that girl would have definitely had "consensual" sex.

All I'm saying is that in both cases, Male Teacher/Female Student and vice versa, the authority figure (the teacher) is COMPLETELY at fault, and therefore the sentence, punishment should be the same.

After thinking about this f... (Below threshold)
Lee:

After thinking about this for a while, the thing that bothers me most is that she cheated on her husband, a man she married not 2 years ago. Maybe I'm just a naive romantic, but I like to think that when you marry someone, when you make the promises that define a marriage, you at least TRY to keep them.

I have to wonder what she was thinking when she got married. Did she take her vows seriously, or what? I can't imagine marrying someone and NOT being serious about it.

I try to imagine myself in her shoes (obviously with the genders reversed), married to someone I love. I imagine what it would be like to cheat on them and I can't help but feel disturbed by the idea. I also can't help but wonder why she did it. Sexual indiscretions when you're single are one thing, but to sleep around after you're married is beyond irresponsible, it is nothing short of malicious.

For a teacher to sleep with one of her students is a betrayal of the trust placed in her by the community, but what about the trust her husband placed in her? Is that any less important?

Of course it is possible that all of this happened before she got married, but everything I've heard makes it sound like it was recent and on-going.

Ironically, this story takes place in McMinville TN, maybe 60 miles from where I grew up, and less than 30 from where my grandparents live. My mom used to work in McMinville back in the 70's. It truly is a small world.

"So child molestation shoul... (Below threshold)
David Blue:

"So child molestation should only be prosecuted if it is a girl/man or a boy/man? If it is a boy/woman it's a pass?"

I think so.

The really terrible thing here is what this boy has done to his teacher and presumably his first lover. The damage to her is huge and obvious. And however foolish she was, from his point of view it was his actions that have wrecked her life. Unless he's bereft of all conscience that's going to stay with him. It might affect him a lot in the long run.

It's one of those situations where the intrinsic harm of the situation seems trivial compared to the harm the law is doing to these people.

I have to admit something h... (Below threshold)
-S-:

I have to admit something here and that is I am wondering if many of the comments written here earlier are in sick jest or else that many of those writing are child molestors. Or, both.

Because, the child involved, a male, was fourteen years old. That means at fourteen that the male child was a child. A child. Who an adult had sexual contact with. Which makes that adult a child molestor, guilty of child molestation.

The fourteen year old child, while "consenting" to whatever degree a fourteen year old child can "consent," could reason through, and only through, a fourteen year old set of emotions, personality and life experience. Which means and means only that if there was any "consent" that it was not adequate to compensate for the actions that that fourteen year old was involved in. As in, he was not qualified at the age of fourteen (or fifteen, or twelve or ten, or eleven or sixteen or seventeen) to make a self responsible decision on his own behalf where such activity was/is concerned.

Since he was engaged in sexual activity with an adult who WAS capable of making a decision on their own behalf, at least assumed to do so by legal definition of age alone, that adult can't be held responsible for having sexual intercourse but she (or, he if it was a male) can be held responsible for having sexual activity of any sort with a partner who was under the age of consent, who was/is a child.

It doesn't matter, again, if a partner is under the age of consent, is a child "consenting," or is desirous of sexual contact, it's not a case of that child's desires or abilities, but of the fact that an adult involved WAS/IS held responsible for consent as an adult where the behavior that was engaged was of a sexual nature with a child.

People here are trying to justify the acts because the child was a male, "wanted" sexual contact with someone -- it doesn't matter what the child wanted or fantasized about or what he/any child could or can be coerced or encouraged into as to behavior (which emphasizes here that a child cannot reason responsibly about actions they may be capable of and that they can be led into behavior by adults, into behaviors that that child cannot realize at that time from their limited perspective as to being dangerous to themselves or others, which again emphasizes also just to what degree an adult is responsible for NOT encouraging a child into certain behaviors, particularly of the sexual sort).

About those teenage fantasies, as a female, no, I would not have engaged in sexual contact with any adult male, nor any male of any age, while at fourteen or even later. Even if encouraged, I'd have literally run away. It's a case of what other adults have taught and influenced in any individual's life, as to behaviors that children take, and when there isn't any clear influence by other adults, children can and are more easily led into behaviors that are not good for them, or good for others in the social sense.

So, again, that only emphasizes just how important it is for adults to maintain a set of behaviors with children that does not encourage sexual permissiveness -- you never know what child you may help to avoid sexual abuse, just by maintaining a good example to any and all children, especially those without other adult figures in their lives, without the ability to say no to harmful actions, to protect themselves against sexual predators.

The adult woman in this situation is a sexual predator. She lacked the ability to manage her own impulses and compulsions and was almost certainly instructed in that mismanagement in her own earlier years by an equally irresponsible 'adult'. Sexual abuse is a viscious circle and will repeat itself if the experiences are not treated but especially prevented from recurring.

"I bet you half the women h... (Below threshold)
Just Me:

"I bet you half the women here had some young, hot, stud teacher that every girl in their high school lusted after."

Yes, we had a very good looking PE teacher that was the object of many a school girl crush, and we had a student teacher in biology that we all had a crush on. As far as I know, neither teacher decided to make our teenage fantasies come true.

Also, what is bothering me here, is that many of you are arguing that a 14 year old boy can't be a victim, but in turn argue that a 14 year old girl can, my argument is that both are either victims or they aren't, biologically girls sexually mature before boys do.

Also, as for statutory rape, I know many states, and at least the one I grew up in had Romeo and Juliet type laws. In my state it was only statutory rape if the age difference was 4 or more years. So the 14 year old having sex with the 16 year old wouldn't have been statutory rape, but the 14 year old with the 25 year old would have been.

But having the physical mechanics to have sex doesn't mean that having sex with adults is a healthy idea for young teens.

Look at the trail of victim... (Below threshold)
julie:

Look at the trail of victims Mary Kay Letorneau left in her path. It bothers me that there is little empathy for her family. Imagine if your husband or wife did this to you. She cheated on her husband, pubically humuliated him, left him to raise 4 kids on his own. She abandoned her own kids for a 12 year old. How does it feel to have your mother choose a 12 year old over you? The 12 year old had two kids by the time he was 14 that he couldn't properly care for. He dropped out of school and has no marketable skills. Eveybody is on welfare. She can never teach so who knows how she is going to support herself. Etc. etc.

I once had a boyfriend who ... (Below threshold)
lunacy:

I once had a boyfriend who had a similar experience with a high school english teacher.

He thought he was lucky too.

That is until he decided to kill himself before he was to be convicted on abusing children. Of course, he didn't just turn around and have sex with children right off the bat. First he had a serios of failed relationgships and then a very hostile relationship with me where in he became increasingly sexualized about men, young men, girls, young girls, rationalized that there's nothing wrong with any sexual relationship all the while feeling horribly guilty and conflicted about his urges. When it became clear he was only getting worse and he refused repeated attempts to get him counselling, I dumped him like a bad habit. I was not surprised in the least when 4 years later I learned of his suicide. Tragically, it didn't surprise his mother, sister, brothers, aunt or anyone else who knew him.

Point is, a large number of adults who have sex with children were once children who adults had sex with. And so the cycle continues. When I worked with abused kids, all of them, boy girl young old, had no problem perping their peers. I mean, hey, they didn't always mind it so why should their victims.

No, dude isn't lucky. Even if he never has sex with children, what do you suppose his attitude will be when his 13 year old daughter is busted having sex with a 19 year old?

Lunacy

I often wonder about the ot... (Below threshold)
julie:

I often wonder about the other victims of sex abuse, ie, the wives, girlfriends, husbands, children. The conflicts and sense of betrayal must be overwhelming.

I'll admit when I hear all this rationalization for this type of behavior it reminds me of the rationalization sex offenders always try to spin. Personally, I think the fact that you could get arrested and do serious time should be enoughof a deterrance. If it isn't, you have a serious problem.

Feh, that is tame. Just lo... (Below threshold)
Chris Van Dis:

Feh, that is tame. Just look at what is going on south of where I live:
http://www.detnews.com/2004/metro/0412/04/metro-23804.htm

That is an interesting stor... (Below threshold)
Just Me:

That is an interesting story. Makes you wonder why some of these stories get so much national media attention while othres don't.

Sounds like there are a lot of teachers out there who don't have enough common sense to know what is right and wrong when it comes to sex and their students.

Interesting? Pretty sick, t... (Below threshold)
julie:

Interesting? Pretty sick, too. Yes, this goes on a lot. The female offender gets more publicity b/c it is less common. And as you can already tell, the disparity in the looks department adds to the publicity in the Tenn. case. It appears the kid in Tenn. turned 13 y/o last July. The sex started in Nov and continued through January.

Julie I think you are right... (Below threshold)
Just Me:

Julie I think you are right that the female offender gets more attention, because it is more rare, and more sensationalistic.

That, and the fact that tea... (Below threshold)

That, and the fact that teacher in this case was a fairly attractive (by some people's standards) female, and in the other one, a not very attractive one.

People seem to be trying aw... (Below threshold)
Ray Midge:

People seem to be trying awfully hard here to justify their strong feelings as to why the woman's actions are so bad on the basis of "harm" to the 14 year old male. There are three things in particular about it, intertwined, that keep getting raised as causing this harm: The teacher angle, the age difference angle and, less explicitly, the age of the 'victim'. Addressed independently:

1. Teacher/Authority figure/"Violation of trust": Is the kid going to suffer psychological ramifications because she was his teacher, independent of the other factors? I don't see it. People aren't that fragile. This isn't to say that the social postion of the sexual counterpart can't cause harm in and of itself.

Certainly if one person is a parent, people get messed up. The fact we are hardwired against incest speaks to this truth. Genetic mutations are a biological concern of course, but it seems not improbable that nature made it "wrong" because it has other harmful effects on the offspring manifested in psych troubles. Those psych troubles can even happen with people who just play the role of biological parent. People get messed up b/c of sex with stepparents it seems to me too.

But a teacher? C'mon. If that was a harm in and of itself we'd outlaw sex between college professors and students. I would even argue professors are much more highly esteemed than high school teachers by their students. The "violation of trust" that keeps getting tossed around isn't a "trust" built in between the teacher and the 14 year old, it's that between the teacher and the 14 year old's parents "not to have sex with my kids." But does that violation of trust "harm" the 14 year old. I don't see it.

2. Age difference in an of itself. Here it's 13 years. Does the 14 year old suffer more "psych harm" if the person they have sex with is 27, 22, 17, or 15 all other factors the same? Nonsense. Most probably the age difference is a proxy for how much we think the sex was "consented to" or the product of the 14 year old's mind/initiative. Increase the gap, the more we think the older person "tricked" the younger person or otherwise over came their resistence (more "seduction").

Assuming two 14 year old are equally desirous of having sex with another person, I don't see how the age of the other person they have sex with, in and of itself, can alter the amount of "psych" harm suffered between the two.

3. Sex at 14 is, in and of itself, bad for the person, regardless of the age of their partner or their relative "authority." This is the biggie and, it seems to me, the most generative of harm. Vary this one and the harm changes big time. But I think the reason for this is because of the certainty of the sex act's non-consensual nature, we know must be occuring, a factor which correlates with age. 10 year old? That's obviously non consensual and thus harm inducing.

What do I mean here? A 20 year old who is raped may suffer post incident psych. trauma that they will associate with sex, perhaps forever, and will cause changes in behavior in other aspects of their life. A 10 year old will similarly suffer, but based largely on the fact it wasn't consensual. We react so strongly to sex with 10 year olds because we know it's impossible for it to be consensual sex on their part.

Also, the extent of that psych trauma is different for a 10 year old than a 20 year old, because that age is so crucial. An analogy: Starve a 10 year old for 6 months and the person they will be at 30 has been altered MUCH more than starving a 20 year old for 6 months as when they are 30. The same underlying event that is going on (starvation, non-consensual rape) can produce different degrees of harm depending on the age of the person they are inflicted on.

But notice that harm ultimately depends on whether or not it was non consensual. And this is what a lot of people can't admit: 14 year old males engaging in consensual sex don't suffer harm simply because they are having that sex. Moreover the characteristics (outside of parental figures) of the person they are having sex with doesn't matter either.

Most people here that aren't that outraged feel so because they remember how consensually they would have engaged in sex with ANYBODY as a 14 year old male. (let alone a chick as hot as the photo makes her out to be)

Speaking personally, my STRONGEST desire as a 14 year old male was to get a sex partner. It was #1 on my top list. It was also 2-9. (#10 was a dirtbike) A lot of men here seem to remember that age similarly.

The simple fact is that having consensual sex at 14 isn't harmful to males. For most or our 100,000+ years as a species we were doing so. Only in this last 1% of our existence have we changed our views on it. And only in certain culture sub populations. Yes, Romeo was 14. Juliet was 13. For most of our existence 18 was looked on as something almost post-menopausal.

Any harm this 14 year old suffers will be a result of our current society telling him his actions are bad, that because he has harmed our norms he must have somehow suffered too. We'll make him believe it.

None of it depends on the job of the person he had sex with or their age relative to his. What matters is whether or not it was consensual.

1. Teacher/Authority fig... (Below threshold)
julie:

1. Teacher/Authority figure/"Violation of trust"
Goes to coercion. It certainly isn't the only crime where it is considered a factor.

But a teacher? C'mon. If that was a harm in and of itself we'd outlaw sex between college professors and students.

Since, college students are older, there is less chance of coercion. But, because they are college students and it can still be coercive, most universities will can the professor.

2. Age difference in an of itself. Here it's 13 years. Does the 14 year old suffer more "psych harm" if the person they have sex with is 27, 22, 17, or 15 all other factors the same? Nonsense.

This kid is 13. He'll be 14 in July. Under Tenn. law it is sex with a 13-17 year old and a 4 year difference between the offender and the kid.

3. But notice that harm ultimately depends on whether or not it was non consensual.

No it doesn't. Look at it as informed consent. A kid does not know of all the risks involved. I looked at one tenn. statutory rape case where the offender was also hiv positive. Then there is LeTorneau's boytoy who ended up the father of two by age fourteen. If I'm a parent, I don't want to be morally and financially responsible for my 13 y/o daughters twins.

You seem to be arguing that potential harm is not enough to outlaw an activity, that acutal harm must occur. Well, most people who drive drunk don't crash and take out an entire family, but because the potential is there, drunk driving is a crime.

Most people here that aren't that outraged feel so because they remember how consensually they would have engaged in sex with ANYBODY as a 14 year old male. (let alone a chick as hot as the photo makes her out to be)

I think of it more of an attitude that they have the right to fuck anything they want and blame it on biology. Sorry, I don't buy into that.

Look, whether you agree with it or not, this woman is going away for a long, long time. If that does not deter someone from having sex with a minor, they have a serious problem.

Julie:By the natur... (Below threshold)
Ray Midge:

Julie:

By the nature of your responses you seem to have misunderstood the point behind my post above. I am not arguing that she shouldn't be punished or that such actions shouldn't be criminalized.

In fact, I think they should, but for reasons that would be laid out in a separate post (although I wouldn't have that much trouble with her being penalized less than if the sexes were reversed (also long reasons needing a separate post)).

My point above was that people seem to be conflating issues and overblowing the extent to which a person suffers psychological harm dependent on the variable addressed on my previous post. So in response to your points:

1. 'Inherhent coerciveness of teacher position' point.

I don't diasagree, as long as coerciveness is just a proxy for "consensuality" which, as I posted, I strongly contributes to psychological harm from the act.

To the extent that you are using coerciveness of the position as a proxy for "wrongness" inherent in him finidng her more attractive becaue of that postion, that isn't really psychological harm is it?

The distinction is, did her postion make him do something he didn't want to do, or did her postion make him want to do something he shouldn't even more?

2. 'Age difference' point. You seem to be responding to my point about the age difference between them with the separate point of his actual age. I too find 13 to be more troubling than 14, but because of the fact that a 13 year old engagin in sex is more likely said to be doing so non-consensually. Of the 13 year olds having sex, I am more likely to believe a greater % are doing so non-consensually. Especially ages 10 vs. 14.

3. 'He's not consenting because he doesn't know what he's consenting too point'

Again, I don't disagree with the notin that the greater the likelihood that you don't fully understand the ramifications of your choice, the greater the likelihood you will suffer "harm" resulting from your choice. And that such varies with age.

But whether or not the choice is a good informed choice, is a separate question from whether or not it was a consensual choice.

Usually we say another person (Y) influenicng you (x) into making an uninformed decision that ultimately leads to bad results for X isn't a crime by Y. (unless there was fraud on the influenicng persons part). Did the teacher commit fraud here? No.

However, your point is a good one in that society be wary of the choices made by minors and try to get them to make good choices is a good point but again, separate from "psychological harm" due to the coercion in the sex here which was my point.

Again, I think there are lots of wonderful logically consistent reasons why society should criminalize the teachers actions in this case. Your last point probably the most relevant. My post was on how they can't all be shoehorned into the psychological harm inherently suffered by a 14 year old as a result of the act of a 27 year old teacher and that 14 year old student (consensuality held at a constant).

If there was confusion on this point, I apologize. In all likelihood, the mistake was in sloppy language on my part.

Some of you will be glad to... (Below threshold)

Some of you will be glad to know that there's a bill in Oklahoma to criminalize sex between professors and their adult students.

http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2005_02_07.shtml#1107990764

It's all part and parcel of this pushing back the frontiers of personal responsibility to higher and higher ages in opposition to history, bioloogy and common sense.

"1. Teacher/Authority figur... (Below threshold)
Just Me:

"1. Teacher/Authority figure/"Violation of trust": Is the kid going to suffer psychological ramifications because she was his teacher, independent of the other factors? I don't see it. People aren't that fragile. This isn't to say that the social postion of the sexual counterpart can't cause harm in and of itself.

Please put down the crack pipe.

Kids really are that fragile, and kids perceptions of the world are very different from adults. My preteen daughter thinks the world has ended if a somebody at school teases her or hurts her feelings. Kids of this age may have the ability to have sex, but sex involves far more than the physical, and having sex with a teacher can very well cause harm. What happens if the teacher decides to move on to another 13 or 14 year old in class? I remember how devesatated I was, when my first boyfriend broke up with me, can you imagine your first girlfriend being your teacher, and having to go to school? Also, sex often comes with emotional attachements-you can't totally separate that, especially given that this teacher had an ongoing relationship with the student-it wasn't a one time deal, but it happened multiple times.

When I supervised kids on probation, I had a child whose world fell apart, after his boy scout leader molested him (he was 13 and the relationship lasted about 6 months before it was discovered). He experienced a lot of anger issues, depression and all sorts of stuff. All of this stuff came out, after the abuse occured.

Sure some kids may be fine, but don't pretend like every kid is going to be, and often the problems that kids have may be from internalizing the feelings about what happened.

Anyone else remember this t... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Anyone else remember this teacher?

http://debra-lafave.tjp.hu/

You really have to wonder how many of these cases go undiscovered.

Just Me:You comple... (Below threshold)
Ray Midge:

Just Me:

You completely miss my point. I am not arguing that adults in "postions of trust" are not more able to get children/teens to engage in activities those children teens don't want to engage in. Of course they are.

My point is that it is not the "position of trust" in and of itself that intensifies "psychological harm" as a result of the sex.

The thirteen year old suffers harm at the hands of the boy scout leader not because there is something more harmful about consensual sex with boy scout leaders or those in "p.o.t.", but becasue the boy scout leader is more able to overcome the 13 year olds will and force him to engage in sexual activities that aren't consensual.

The reason that society should be extra sensitive (and perhaps make a harsher example of) of those in "p.o.t." is because those people are more able to force non-consensual activites on others (additionally, people who want to force non consensual sexual activity seem to cluster to such 'p.o.t.' for just this reason). This seems to be the reasoning behind the ridiculous proposed legislation in Tom Hanna's post directly above yours.

I've no doubt your friend was deeply affected by what the boy scout leader did to him, but the effect was due to the non-consensual nature of the activity, not the molestors job or other such factor. I suspect your firend would have had the same effect had it been the next door neighbor who did it to him.

In this case, the 'p.o.t.' question is: did the fact she was a teacher force him into sexual activity (Gosh I better say yes to her advances or else something bad will happen to me!) or was he more than willing and wasn't forced in any sense, rather running as fast as he could to get a piece of that 27 year old hotness. I don't really know the facts of the case, but I saw her picture and I know what I was like at that age.

Sorry, I thought you were a... (Below threshold)
Just Me:

Sorry, I thought you were arguing that kids who are 14 don't experience any harm.

I think the issue with a POT is more that the person has easy access to the child, and more opportunity. One reason priests had such an easy time molesting kids, was because the priest had access, and parents trusted the priests. A parent may not so readily trust the neighbor down the road, but they generally don't expect a teacher, priest or boy scout leader to harm their kids either.

My position is that it doesn't matter what the position the adult was in, they are adults, and they should know better. It doesn't matter of a 14 year old comes on to them, it is their responsibilty to say "nope"

Just Me: (tried sending th... (Below threshold)
Ray Midge:

Just Me: (tried sending this email, but couldn't get through)

Sorry if my post there had any sort of short tempered tone. If you perceived any snottiness, I sincerely apologize. I see you used to be a probation officer. I used to be a sex crimes prosecutor and I'm sure we've both seen the absolute, absolute evil adults are capable of visiting on children. I think ultimately were on the same side on this issue at it's base. Anyway, I enjoy your comments. Take care.

There is no use in arguing ... (Below threshold)
Lee:

There is no use in arguing with women about the libidoes of teenaged boys or their ability to experience sex in an adult capacity. Neither is there any point in arguing maturity with someone determined to see anyone under 18 (or whatever age they are when the magic birthday comes) as a child.

Maybe this was a case of abuse, and maybe it wasn't. Either way arguing with a grown woman about what it is like to be a teenaged boy is like arguing with liberal over what it means to be a conservative.

That being said I must admit that the more I think about this case the more it bothers me. Not because of the age of boy involved, but because of what this situation says about this girl's mental state. I'm having a hard time understanding how any rational person could do what she did. Regardless of whether or not it is sick/wrong/etc for a 27 year old to sleep with a 14 year old, the consequences for doing so severe enough that no sane person would even think of trying it.

Here small subset of what she has thrown away:

1) Her career. She'll never work as a teacher again.

2) Her marriage. If her husband stands by her then he should be cannonized as a saint. Odds are he'll dump her.

3) Her freedom. She's looking at a long prison sentence no matter how you cut it.

4) Her civil rights. Convicted felons can't vote, can't own firearms, cannot be bonded, and are banned from public office.

5) The good will of society. After this is all said and done she'll likely be required to register as a sex offender, which means that this will haunt her for the rest of her life. She won't be able to live anywhere without her neighbors throwing bricks through her windows, setting fire to her car, or otherwise terrorizing her. She won't be able to find a job for decent money that doesn't involve her giving table dances to drunk fat rednecks.

She has basically flushed any chance at a happy and peaceful life right down the crapper. Which begs the question, why?

I can only assume that she really is disturbed. If so then it is likely that the kid she had sex with really has been adversely affected by it. Not because of how old he is, or how old she is, but because having sex with a crazy person is inherently disturbing. Sex isn't just a physical thing, it is emotional and spiritual. When you sleep with someone who is in spiritual pain or turmoil, it tends to rub off on you. He may need some therapy just to be sure that he doesn't internalize this pain and turmoil and have it become part of his sexual make-up. It wouldn't be so bad if he were a little more experienced, but if he was a virgin (or nearly so) then he might need a little help sorting all this out.

Hopefully he'll meet a nice girl his own age and everything will work out for the best in the end.

As for this girl, I hope that she gets the help she needs, even if it is a little late.

Things were probably fine u... (Below threshold)
abductee:

Things were probably fine until he started bragging to his friends. I was 14 and got involved with and 18 year-old. I didn't brag but it was my idea to get it on... and she didn't look that hot. I guess I could have threatened to put her in prison if things did'nt go how I wanted.

Actually abductee depends o... (Below threshold)
Just Me:

Actually abductee depends on what state you lived in at the time. I think most states have romeo and juliet laws, and I know the state I formerly lived would only consider it a crime if the difference in age was greater than 4 years.

Lee I don't disagree at all that there is probably something not right with this woman-I honestly can say I don't know what anyone over the age of 20 sees in a 14 year old boy that would make them think sex partner. When I see 14 year old boys, I see a 14 year old boy, and not somebody I want to get it on with. And you have to wonder why she was doing it, considering she is married.


Ray-don't worry-no snarkiness noticed-I just think we do boys a disservice when we argue that there isn't any harm to them in situations like this-I think boys just deal differently with these situations, and it isn't a good idea to assume they aren't harmed.

Adults shouldn't be having sex with minors period.

Hey, everyone, Im from Cook... (Below threshold)
Lindsey:

Hey, everyone, Im from Cookeville, TN. Pams dad coaches in Clarkrange. She helped coach my cousin Ashley (no last names) in 2004 her b-ball team went to Florida. Well Ashley asked me if i wanted to tag along so i said sure. Well we rode down with Pam and her soon to be ex-husband. Everyone on here is judging BAD, I guarantee you NONE of you have ever met Pam or her husband.If you were around him for 10 minutes you would wanna punch his lights out. He's a jerk and no im not judgin i know he is i rode w/him for THIRTEEN HOURS. Now i feel like what im about to say is true cause im not judgin i know them both very well. Pam wouldnt do that, she wanted a divorce during 2004 before she ever met this "THIRTEEN YEAR OLD" (yes i know his name NO im not telling) now what i think happend is Chris got mad cause she wanted a divorce and started setting her up. He kicked her out, and said you can stay here for now cause i dont want you anymore. I know Pam didnt have sex w/him you know how many guys from Tech would come down like every weekend to hang out w/her when she was goin through the divorce shes not fuckin stupid...(obviously yall are) anyways no Pam didnt do it Chris framed her. but believe whatever you want yall are havin a hayday w/it so. oh yea and Rob Hackney (w/e the fuck kinda name that is) and Jack Tanner (fucked up name to) yall dont know pam you call her a slut cause she's wearin a hat,and cause she has blonde hair possibly. MAYBE you dont know what a slut looks like. If you wanna know im sure you can look at your wife or fuckbuddy or whoever and tell...:D thank you and g'nite!

If your husband sucks, you ... (Below threshold)
Just Me:

If your husband sucks, you leave him, you do not then pick up a 13 year old student to have sex with.

Just Me:Well I can... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Just Me:

Well I can certainly agree that adults should not be having sex with minors. Like you, when I see a 14 year old girl, I don't see someone I'm interested in sleeping with. I think a lot of this has to do with how old I am. At 32, a girl that age just doesn't do anything for me. Even if she's mature for her age and looks older, it still doesn't do much. That is not to say that my primal instincts don't flare up sometimes, they do. These autonomic responses are quickly extinguished with the recognition by my conscious mind that the girl is too young. Back when I was in high school the story was very different. When I was 16 or 17 I was a big fan of 14 year old girls, as was every other guy who wasn't light in the loafers. Back then I was a fan of any good looking woman between puberty and middle age. As we move through life our tastes in members of the opposite sex change though. Today my ideal woman is in her late 20's or early 30's. I wouldn't want a teenager even if she was over 18. I might enjoy looking at her (Britney didn't make her money off her voice after all), but as far as a relationship goes I just don't see any potential there, and I'm not one for casual sex.

So while I can certainly understand why a 14 year old guy would be interested in this woman, I can't fathom why she was interested in him. I think that most of the guys here have let their libidos get the better of them and have been thinking with the wrong head about this situation, myself included. When I put aside the fantasy of what it would be like to be 14 and sleeping with a drop-dead gorgeous 27 year old, it becomes clear just how bizarre and potentially disruptive this situation is. She may not have been trying to abuse him, but the fact that she would choose to be with someone so much younger than her says a lot about her frame of mind, and what it says is very worrysome.

The only exception I can see to the no minors with adults rule is when there is a small age difference between those involved. I think the Romeo and Juliet laws you mentioned should include situations where the age difference between those involved is small, even though one partner is under 18 (or whatever the age of consent is in your particular state) and one partner is slightly over that age. Persecuting a 19 year old for dating a 17 year old is insane, yet I've heard cases of just that sort of thing happening.

Obviously a 27 year old with a 14 year old is WAY outside the bounds. It may or may not be abusive, but it has a great enough potential of being psychologically painful or confusing that no rational society should permit it. If two 14 year olds want to get it on then fine, but older people should find someone their own age to have fun with.

I'm not going to comment on this thread anymore because the more I think and talk about it, the more the whole situation bothers me.

Ok, I'm going to have to go... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Ok, I'm going to have to go back on what I just said about not commenting on this anymore because Lindsey makes a VERY good point, we don't know this woman and we don't know the details of the case. An indictment is not the same thing as a conviction. All during this whole thread everyone has been making posts assuming that she had sex with this kid, me included, when the facts of the case have yet to be determined.

As for her husband, I suspected that the two of them were having problems, why else would she be living somewhere else?

If she has been framed by her husband, then I hope that the DA turns his guns on the asshole and nails him for false reporting.

I'd certainly like to know how it was that her husband managed to frame her, assuming that is indeed what took place. Did he convince this kid to lie about it? What evidence or testimony is this case based upon? An accusation of sexual assault, uncorroborated by other evidence or testimony, is not sufficient grounds for a criminal conviction, at least not in Arizona. I'd imagine that the laws in TN are much the same, but I'm not a lawyer and therefore not qualified to say. How is she pleading in this case?

It will be interesting to see how this case unfolds.

Even if she is innocent, it will be difficult for her to go back to her old life since even the accusation of a sex related offence where minors are involved is itself treated as a crime. In other words the mere accusation in cases like this carries with it a stigma far in excess of what actual conviction of other crimes would carry. Even if she is innocent, she will always be treated by some as if she were guilty.

Lee:"The only exce... (Below threshold)
Just Meq:

Lee:

"The only exception I can see to the no minors with adults rule is when there is a small age difference between those involved. I think the Romeo and Juliet laws you mentioned should include situations where the age difference between those involved is small,"

I can't vouch for the laws in every state, but this is the case with the state I lived in. Basically if there was 4 or fewer years seperating the couple, then it would not be statory rape, so a 15 year old with an 18 or 19 year old would be legal, but a 15 year old with a 20 year old would not.

I like these laws and they make sense. But in this case at least, the laws are moot since this wasn't a case of two teens having sex, but an adult woman and a 14 year old.

He was in 8th grade...quit ... (Below threshold)
this is old:

He was in 8th grade...quit wishing it were you and be glad it is not your child messed up FOREVER! If the 13 year old was walking down hall with "it" hanging out of pants - she has no right to touch. Tired of hearing "poor Pam" "young teacher" "mean husband". She is small tick stupid hick who took advantage of a CHILD - was a virgin child.

Why would she even need to ... (Below threshold)
Trevor:

Why would she even need to go to court...? The judge and jury is here on this message board today. I would hate for you guys to be in charge of the rest of MY life. You have already decied that she is guilty and you don't all the facts. Where were you on the night of.......? When all these alleged "attacks" took place? Were you there? Did you see it? I don't think so. Maybe she is the victim of some terrible lies. You can't believe everything you hear. Personally, I don't think she did it and I will keep that opinion until I hear her say otherwise.

Ms. Turner's looks are irre... (Below threshold)
CJ:

Ms. Turner's looks are irrelevant. The fact that the boy may have been sexually active prior to this event is irrelevant. The FACT of the matter is that he is a child and she is an adult. Societally and morally, it is WRONG for her to have sexual relations with him.
Furthermore, this woman is married. She has not only committed a sexual offense on a minor (no matter his willingness), but also committed adultery.
What NO ONE here has mentioned is the fact that God created sex FOR MARRAIGE ONLY -- not whenever you see someone you think is hot or just want to drop your pants. There will NEVER be true fulfillment in sex without the covenant of a marriage committment. The Word says it. Research shows and life in general proves it.
The problem isn't Ms. Turner's alone. It's the attitudes of the majority of posters we all see here. Sex is a casual thing -- with no consequences or morals involved (or so people think).
THAT is the ROOT PROBLEM with this situation and thousands more like it. It's wrong and it can't be justified by her looks, his activity or either of their hormonal ragings.

Lee Wrote:"She has... (Below threshold)
Mir:

Lee Wrote:

"She has basically flushed any chance at a happy and peaceful life right down the crapper. Which begs the question, why?

I can only assume that she really is disturbed."

I don't think shes disturbed in that sense.. If she really did do it, it was more of a human nature deal of taking chances and getting away with it.

People know when they are doing wrong. It is just a rush going over authority.

I this case is considered p... (Below threshold)
Bob:

I this case is considered purely on the basis of the law, gender should not be an issue. She should be treated exactly the same as if she were a male teacher doing the same thing to a 13 year old girl. Purely and rationally there needs to be legal equivalence. The same must be said as if she were ugly or alternativly and ugly man molesting a cute 13 year old girl.

I'm a man and I unconsciously want to protect women and have special considerations for them in comparison with men. This is especially so if the woman is young and beautiful. I *really* want to find a way to rationalize and set her free... but the law must be dispassionate about this especially given the setting of the school.

To those that think that this doesn't hurt a 13 year old boy, this is wrong. Recently there was a young man in his 20's who commited suicide due to his having been in a religious cult where since his early teens (I believe) his church duty was to service the women. He really loved this at the time! Just a few years later is was very troubled and killed himself.

Pamela is a nice girl and s... (Below threshold)
lou:

Pamela is a nice girl and she DID NOT do this! She comes from an upstanding family in our community and she is just a victim of false accusations and rumors. Everyone needs to mind their own business and LEAVE HER AND HER FAMILY ALONE!!! Also, the stupid news crews need to stay out of our town!

UPDATE: A "trembling and "s... (Below threshold)
gg:

UPDATE: A "trembling and "speechless" Pamela Rogers pleaded guilty in a deal that got her 9 months in jail...which might be the EASIEST part of her sentence other than her husband divorcing her....12 years probation, (tight supervision and only near children or sports events with her PARENTS)..and a gag-order forbidding her to discuss the case with ANYONE..nor to make once cent profit from the story.
Being in media ad music, we've been trying to determine if what is seen and heard today is PART of what could make an "adult" married female..(Lafave for one, and about 25 more since then) risk a marriage..an education, and possibly, loss of her children to DHS or foster-care..PLUS JAIL..... J A I L or worse PRISON just to have a relationship with a young boy. Some sentences are harsher, like the one that will be handed to California teach Srah Bench-Salorio, who, instead of being allowed bail, has been held since her arrest for molesting 3 young boys (January 2005) and has just accepted a plea deal versus 62 years. Another married, well-loved by her students teacher whose husband had even ran for the School Board and was embarassed beyond belief to get the call hat his wife was in jail and had been seducing these young boys with dinners, e.mails, and trips for over 3 years. Lafave wants a jury trial because her lawyer advised her not to take a plea deal that would give her a long prison sentence for her affair with a 14 year old..she lost her husband..her job, and her life...recent headlines or her case involved what her lawyer called "pornographic" nude pictures taken of her shortly after her arrest at the door of her victims home trapped by cell-calls that were recorded and placed her on the way to have relations with him again. From eports. most sex-offenders have identifiable body-parts photographed for evidence so the victim, (who in her case gave explicit details about her body) could later identify them in court. A judge DID agree that hers went beyond the norm, as she was forced to have her feet in stirrups on a med able for the some of the pictures. ANOTHER good reason for no "sensible" adult female teacher to risk this crime, as a strip-search is standard on arrest, and lot's of humiliation will follow.
NOT READY FOR THAT????? Then hands off our kids!!!

The last posting wa... (Below threshold)
Brian:


The last posting was in October?….geeze….you guys are a fickle buch aren’t ya’?
For one thing I have been writing Pam while she does her jail time. And my motives were typical guy sexual attraction motives. I live in East Tennessee so I offered to take her out on a date when she gets out if she was interested. I am very attractive guy and I gravitate toward hot slutty type women basicaly who like to party naked. Because basicaly I’m just out for a good time.
After several letters I’m backing off Pamela because she is to nice for me. She is not the sultry seductive, sex kitten ditzy blond abnormal pedaphile child molester that the media has made her out to be. Hey I’m not going to pretend what really happened between her and little Jack horney ok?……maybe something happened maybe not….but I’m here to tell ya’…..this woman is a quality woman……she’s kind, creative, sincere, highly intelligent and sensitive….not the menace to society that everyone is blathering about.
She’s so kind and classy hell I don’t even know how to deal with her I’ve not recipricated with a woman of this quality in years. If I’m going to be her friend I’m going to have to raise my standards. Or she'll give me the boot. ( Understandably )
Now why would I raise my standards for a rapist? Or a pediphile, or a terror to society? OK? Hello?
I mean seriously people…..think about it….if a good time Charlie like me can see there’s something wrong here where her case and situation is concerned….theres no excuse for you addicted to your own opinions assholes either. So wake up. Don’t give this woman jailtime, give her a better investigation of her case, and give her her life back.

You know, why doe... (Below threshold)
Brian:


You know, why does everyone dance around the real issues with all our jaw-jacking imposing our opinions on others ( can we say " Hail Hitler" everyone?, criminey you all amaze me with your gestapo bullshit views ) , everyone but a few has so much to say and the point that most make is either off target or superficial at best. Are we afraid to probe below the surface? Well I'm not. So here goes.
Has anyone wondered why these attractive women are going after these young men like this? Risking it all for sex? Listen up fella's this is sexual interest and desire that we are not accustomed to women exhibiting. And its messing with the status quo. Men are always the ones with all the sexual impulses, and the ones who act on them. Right? The nasty finger always gets pointed at men when the subject of sexuality comes up. Well....not any more. Finaly, the sunrise of sexual equality is rising on the horizon. Its about time.
Ok so in case your wondering about all these hot teachers going after men not even old enough to drive yet. Its a simple matter of physics people. These women crave the passion, excitement and pleasure of having sexual contact with men in peak condition. Its really that basic that simple. Is it because these women are sick?, wacko?, padaphile? Possibly, but not likely.
Our society has trained women to have sex for all the wrong reasons....you know....for money, for security, for companionship, for drugs, because his name is Johnny Football, or Joe Rockstar, or Donald Trump. Rarely do women have sex on the basis of pure sexual and physical desire. Rarely do they have sex because their entire physiology and nerology is lit up and they crave that physical gratification and satisfaction and contact like men do.
Well guess what...These women are going for it. And its for those reasons. Its not like these lucky teenagers they have targeted have wealth, savvy, success, sportscars, cocain, celebrity status to "offer" or to spark these women's interest so incredibly. I love the sexual initiative these attractive women are exhibiting its debunking all the old myths about women being less sexual than men. I freakin’ love it.
I should know.... the hot sexy women that date me could care less about the shitty car I drive, or the flashy friends and fancy lifestyle I don’t have. So what….I’m wealthy where it really counts. Women date me for my looks, my body, my personality, my brains, my charm and to have a great time and for great sex.
Casts a little different light on what we thought women really valued eh guys? And this runaway train rash of older women younger men thing is going to force our male dominated society to change its perspective of female sexuality. I just hope that not to many casualties of otherwise good women being thrown in jail for their spirits to rot results from it. But so far it has. Not good.
Women are finaly coming out of their shells and opening up sexualy and we destroy thier lives for it. I don’t like the message that is sending to women in general of our society. When a woman over 18 has sex with a teenager she’s not having sex with a child but with a young man….so that doesn’t make her a pedophile, nor does the fact that she craves great sex and acts on the impulse in a non-invasive way make her a rapist. But we are labeling them that arent we? Why does everyone feel so threatened? Trust me…..teenage boys eat this sort of thing like candy….and feeling threatened or violated is the furthest thing from their highly sexualy charged minds.
I’m all for protecting children not yet in puberty, Teenage boys are not children, so lets not cut our foot off to get rid of our ingrown toenail.
When I was 13 I was 6 feet tall, had a ripped athletic body, a voice like Randy Travis, and housewives in their 20's,30's and 40's chasing me like I was some sexual god. If anyone would have approached me and told me that it was illegal for me to have sex with anyone other than snot-nosed girls my own age, I would have either laughed in your face, or buiried my size 11 shoe right up your ass. My sex drive and interest in women was so intense you could split atoms with it. I was never more ready for sex my entire life!!! But I had to confine that to little virginal girls my own age? What an unmitigating crock of legal horse-shit. I prefered women who could handle me. Make sense?
So the women in question are causing no harm with their sexual explorations, ( ever wonder why they are receiving such light sentances?). If they were causing such “wreckage” and disruption, trust me, our ever ready to prosecute when it comes to sex legal system would dish out much tougher penalties. When it comes to destroying the true beauty of sexuality, men are always the culprits, with their aggressive, destructive nature and drive. Who do you think dominates the porn industry? And poures billions of dollars into it each year? Women? Yeah right, women would have no part in it practicaly if they weren't paid to. And I can't blame them. But women are not men, and are not to be feared in the same capacity by any stretch. We can't make women pay for what men are guilty of, a woman can't be poured into the same sexual mold as men. So lets aknowledge that and stop approaching this from such an anal retentive colloaquial standpoint of warped narrow sexual sensibilities based on fear and ignorance ok?
Tossing these women in jail and destroying their lives for being human is not a viable solution to the situation.
Sureley we can engineer a better way of dealing with this aspect of human nature and female sexuality. We sent men to the moon for crying out loud. Lets stop sending women to jail.

Pamela Rogers is finally in... (Below threshold)
Bill:

Pamela Rogers is finally in jail. Sadly it really isn't for the statutory rape of a 14 year old boy. It's for being a total dumb ass. She got probation and then turned around a sent those stupid emails. Dumb. dumb, dumb! Why do so many support the horific double standard I see in these comments? When one is that young consent can't be given by the victim boy or girl. If she was 16 and he 14 we wouldn't be here. She's 27 and a teacher! I don't care how lucky you think he got she broke the law. A law which has a purpose. Thank goodness there's no law against circle jerking or you guys would be practicing your craft under the jail. Young girls today are not the innocent little sweethearts you might imagine. Thanks to Hollywwod and the skank of the week club paraded in front of the tv cameras (think Paris Hilton), these kids think money and sex are all that's important. That may be true after age 22 but teenagers are supposed to be able to live in some sort of altered state until they become regular scum sucking adults. You know, like poor Pam Rogers. The Pam Rogers who can't marry and keep an adult male and has to get her envelope licked by a 14 year old boy-repeatedly! Say after me; children cannot consent, children cannot consent.... This double standart isn't funny, it's part of the problem.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy