UK authors - Beware. 16 may be legal for sex, but not nudity!

[oggbashan]

A recent prosecution of a school teacher who groomed a 15-year-old girl, but waited until she was 16 before having consensual sex, has resulted in a conviction for sexual crimes.

Part of his offence was to solicit and keep naked images of her. Apparently, and this isn't generally known in the UK, it is illegal to have naked pictures of people under 18, despite the UK age of consensual sex being 16.

Stay with Lit's 'nothing happens before the 18th birthday' rule...

 

[R. Richard]

In some jurisdictions in the USA, even if the state age of consent is 16, a teacher is not allowed to have sex with a student who's under the age of 18.

 

[Mister_Chris]

I would not have thought that a teacher could have sex with a student of any age.

 

[Hypoxia]

I would not have thought that a teacher could have sex with a student of any age.

Should I admit to having sex with a student in a first-aid class I taught as a Red Cross volunteer? CPR practice with a bit of tongue turned into a lengthy relationship with an offer of marriage into a prominent family. So tempting... but my heart went elsewhere. Anyway, not all teacher-student hookups feature power asymmetry. And the Red Cross didn't have a don't-boff-the-attendees policy AFAIK. So we were innocent, yes?

 

[Zeb_Carter]

I would not have thought that a teacher could have sex with a student of any age.

What rock have you been hiding under? A week doesn't go by that another teacher/student relationship isn't on the news. Film at...well never.

 

[sr71plt]

There's a difference between what is illegal and what could get you fired. There are students who are of legal age. We have places called universities and colleges.

 

[Trip_Dalton]

There's a difference between what is illegal and what could get you fired. There are students who are of legal age. We have places called universities and colleges.

What's a university? Dumbass . . . .

 

[sr71plt]

I'm not the least bit surprised you don't know what a university is, and I have no idea what your idiotic posting is supposed to mean beyond nasty backbiting.

 

[Trip_Dalton]

I'm not the least bit surprised you don't know what a university is, and I have no idea what your idiotic posting is supposed to mean beyond nasty backbiting.

Get a new word old fart, that one is getting tiresome.

You show up, insult everybody, and act like the poor injured victim

I wouldn't bite you in the back even if you were made of ice cream you scumbag.

 

[slyc_willie]

There's a difference between what is illegal and what could get you fired. There are students who are of legal age. We have places called universities and colleges.

I think the ethical consensus is that sex between a teacher (professor, instructor, whatever) and a student is grounds for termination for the teacher, even if the student is eighteen or older. That has more to do with academic integrity than morality or legality. A teacher boffing his or her student is easily perceived as being professionally compromised (and they often are, from what I've seen).

On the other hand, I knew a girl, many many years ago when I was going to college in the mid-90s, who was involved with a philosophy instructor after she had taken one of his classes. The jury was still out as to whether or not they actually hooked up while she was in his class; her story was that she came onto him during the final weeks of the course, but they did not begin dating until after the class was over.

She often showed, once it came out that they were a couple, a transcript from the college showing that she had received a B in his class, with her argument being if she had slept with him for a better grade, surely she would have gotten an A.

The instructor eventually moved to a different campus (but within the same college) and he and his former student continued seeing one another.

It obviously wasn't illegal for the instructor and the student to be romantically involved, since she was over eighteen (and he was nearly twice her age), but once their relationship came out, it did lead to some small level of scandal.

 

[sr71plt]

I think the ethical consensus is that sex between a teacher (professor, instructor, whatever) and a student is grounds for termination for the teacher, even if the student is eighteen or older. That has more to do with academic integrity than morality or legality. A teacher boffing his or her student is easily perceived as being professionally compromised (and they often are, from what I've seen).

I agree. It's not ipso facto illegal when the student is over 18 (which was one point I was making), but it very well could lead to termination of the teacher (which is another point I was making). It's likely in their contract.

Beyond that, I don't know why Trip is being his usual asshole self toward me.

 

[sr71plt]

Get a new word old fart, that one is getting tiresome.

You show up, insult everybody, and act like the poor injured victim

I wouldn't bite you in the back even if you were made of ice cream you scumbag.

One thing is quite certainly. I've never been a fourth as nasty and tiresome, on this thread or elsewhere, as you have been on this thread and elsewhere. As a contributor to this forum, you're running at less than zero in usefulness.

So, I'll tell you what. I'll lift my middle finger for you and you can sit on it and spin.

Later: I just checked your recent posting history. Over half of your posts for this year constitute attacks on me. You have no other purpose to be on the forum than to attack me. Think you need to get a life.

 

[CyranoJ]

The legal age for consent is 16 in Canada too, excepting where potential exploitation is involved (via pornographic images, for example) so hereabouts, nobody should be surprised to find that the legal age for images is eighteen. I'd expect our rules are basically similar to the UK's in this.

 

[Trip_Dalton]

One thing is quite certainly. I've never been a fourth as nasty and tiresome, on this thread or elsewhere, as you have been on this thread and elsewhere. As a contributor to this forum, you're running at less than zero in usefulness.

So, I'll tell you what. I'll lift my middle finger for you and you can sit on it and spin.

Later: I just checked your recent posting history. Over half of your posts for this year constitute attacks on me. You have no other purpose to be on the forum than to attack me. Think you need to get a life.

Maybe if shut your fucking pie hole and quit being such a smartass, I'd leave you alone, but after six years of listening to your bullshit, I'm done taking it you lying drunk. Now, I'll post what I want, when I want, and I'll shit on every snide little shitty comment you make.

And hey, if you're this big time professional writer, why do you spend eighteen hours a day insulting us lowly amateurs? If you were half as good at story telling as you are at lying, you'd be a millionaire.

 

[Trip_Dalton]

We have places called universities and colleges.

I'll tell you what, explain how this wasn't a smartass remark, and I'll go away you whiny little prick. The topic is high school girls, and we all know what a fucking university or college is Captain Obvious.

 

[Mister_Chris]

I suppose I should have been more clear

I would not have thought that a teacher could have sex with a student of any age.

Sigh.

Yes, I suppose it is physically possible for two people to have sex. At shockingly young ages. In an asymmetric power relationship.

It is physically possible.

And the dry and ponderous legalities of the issue will vary from region to region.

I suppose what I was referring to, was the morality of the issue. I would suggest that whenever a teacher/student relationship exists, there is an unequal power balance. For this reason, in real life, students and teachers should never have a social, and certainly not a romantic, and most certainly not a sexual, relationship.

It makes for a great fantasy on Literotica. And I would suggest it is best left there.

And on a completely different topic...

Perhaps we might petition Laurel and Manu to create a specific 'Flame Wars' category, where people could go and scream insults at each other as often as they wish. The creation of such a category would foster the growth of creative insultery, taking the art of verbal defecation to a whole new level. It would provide a source of sorely needed emotional release for some individuals, and probably leave a lasting mark on the Internet.

It would also make it much easier for those of us who wish to have a reasonable discussion, to do so.

Just a thought.

 

[CyranoJ]

I would suggest that whenever a teacher/student relationship exists, there is an unequal power balance. For this reason, in real life, students and teachers should never have a social, and certainly not a romantic, and most certainly not a sexual, relationship.

It makes for a great fantasy on Literotica. And I would suggest it is best left there.

Q. F. T.

 

[DeYaKen]

A recent prosecution of a school teacher who groomed a 15-year-old girl, but waited until she was 16 before having consensual sex, has resulted in a conviction for sexual crimes.

Part of his offence was to solicit and keep naked images of her. Apparently, and this isn't generally known in the UK, it is illegal to have naked pictures of people under 18, despite the UK age of consensual sex being 16.

Stay with Lit's 'nothing happens before the 18th birthday' rule...

If he was her teacher he has also broken another law. In the last ten years it became an offence for a teacher to have sex with any of their own students who are under the age of 18. Even after that age it is still a disciplinary offence which may result in their no longer being able to teach.

Interesting point: In the 1980's The Sun, a Rupert Murdoch "newspaper", published topless photos of a 15 year old school girl in it's regular page three slot. The photos were taken by her father. No one was ever prosecuted.

 

[Handley_Page]

Should I admit to having sex with a student in a first-aid class I taught as a Red Cross volunteer? CPR practice with a bit of tongue turned into a lengthy relationship with an offer of marriage into a prominent family. So tempting... but my heart went elsewhere. Anyway, not all teacher-student hookups feature power asymmetry. And the Red Cross didn't have a don't-boff-the-attendees policy AFAIK. So we were innocent, yes?

Looks like a bit of a plot bunny, there. . . .

I'll tell you what, explain how this wasn't a smartass remark, and I'll go away you whiny little prick. The topic is high school girls, and we all know what a fucking university or college is Captain Obvious.

Please; put your handbag away.
Will you please take your vituperation into PMs or something other than a thread.
Your writings do nothing to advance the subject and merely clutter up the screen.

 

[oggbashan]

If he was her teacher he has also broken another law. In the last ten years it became an offence for a teacher to have sex with any of their own students who are under the age of 18. Even after that age it is still a disciplinary offence which may result in their no longer being able to teach.

Interesting point: In the 1980's The Sun, a Rupert Murdoch "newspaper", published topless photos of a 15 year old school girl in it's regular page three slot. The photos were taken by her father. No one was ever prosecuted.

He wasn't HER teacher. He taught at a school over 100 miles away and they originally met on the internet. He knew she was 15 when the on-line relationship started and delayed physical contact until she was 16. But she regarded him as 'a teacher' and that was part of her attraction to him. He used his position of authority as a seduction tool.

During the court case he claimed that he didn't know it was illegal to possess pictures of naked children under 18. He thought after 16 was OK. In the UK, I think that presumption was valid. People don't know, or didn't until this court case. Most people assume that because the age of consent is 16, anything goes (unless you are a teacher or in a position of authority), but that is not the law.

But ignorance of the law is not acceptable as a defence anyway.

 

[lloyd_5]

A recent prosecution of a school teacher who groomed a 15-year-old girl, but waited until she was 16 before having consensual sex, has resulted in a conviction for sexual crimes.

Part of his offence was to solicit and keep naked images of her. Apparently, and this isn't generally known in the UK, it is illegal to have naked pictures of people under 18, despite the UK age of consensual sex being 16.

Stay with Lit's 'nothing happens before the 18th birthday' rule...

Ogg, the Sexual Crimes Act 2003 isn't meant to be used to prosecute under 16s who have mutually consensual sex and are of a similar age provided there is no exploitation.

Under 13s can't give consent.


At Lit college it seems all the female students don't bother about a degree-jthey just want to get boffed by a professor and 'come louder'.



Ogg, it isn't just under 16 photos that are illegal in England (Scotland has different laws). Any depiction of a naked person who is under 18 will get you in trouble, sketch, tracing, painting, etc.

Lolita would have had trouble in modern Britain.

 

[oggbashan]

Ogg, the Sexual Crimes Act 2003 isn't meant to be used to prosecute under 16s who have mutually consensual sex and are of a similar age provided there is no exploitation.

...

Ogg, it isn't just under 16 photos that are illegal in England (Scotland has different laws). Any depiction of a naked person who is under 18 will get you in trouble, sketch, tracing, painting, etc.

Lolita would have had trouble in modern Britain.

Thank you. That is what I was trying to say in the original post.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Sigh.

Yes, I suppose it is physically possible for two people to have sex. At shockingly young ages. In an asymmetric power relationship.

It is physically possible.

And the dry and ponderous legalities of the issue will vary from region to region.

I suppose what I was referring to, was the morality of the issue. I would suggest that whenever a teacher/student relationship exists, there is an unequal power balance. For this reason, in real life, students and teachers should never have a social, and certainly not a romantic, and most certainly not a sexual, relationship.

It makes for a great fantasy on Literotica. And I would suggest it is best left there.

And on a completely different topic...

Perhaps we might petition Laurel and Manu to create a specific 'Flame Wars' category, where people could go and scream insults at each other as often as they wish. The creation of such a category would foster the growth of creative insultery, taking the art of verbal defecation to a whole new level. It would provide a source of sorely needed emotional release for some individuals, and probably leave a lasting mark on the Internet.

It would also make it much easier for those of us who wish to have a reasonable discussion, to do so.

Just a thought.

Geez...feeling hurt that easily...maybe you should have post this instead of a simple statement that could be taken two ways. So I called you on one way.


You want a flame wars category...it's called the general board.

 

[DeYaKen]

Ogg, the Sexual Crimes Act 2003 isn't meant to be used to prosecute under 16s who have mutually consensual sex and are of a similar age provided there is no exploitation.

Under 13s can't give consent.


At Lit college it seems all the female students don't bother about a degree-jthey just want to get boffed by a professor and 'come louder'.



Ogg, it isn't just under 16 photos that are illegal in England (Scotland has different laws). Any depiction of a naked person who is under 18 will get you in trouble, sketch, tracing, painting, etc.

Lolita would have had trouble in modern Britain.

Thanks Lloyd. 2003, that would be about the time when it was made illegal for a teacher to have sex with their student, over the age of 16. Up to that point the age of consent was 16 and that covered everything. The newspaper I mentioned used the defense that the girl's father told them she was 16.

Lolita or rather Humbert would have had problems in Britain when the book was written. Wasn't she 12?

 

[sr71plt]

Thanks Lloyd. 2003, that would be about the time when it was made illegal for a teacher to have sex with their student, over the age of 16. Up to that point the age of consent was 16 and that covered everything. The newspaper I mentioned used the defense that the girl's father told them she was 16.

Lolita or rather Humbert would have had problems in Britain when the book was written. Wasn't she 12?

Aren't you mixing up what you can do with what you can write? Humbert was a fictional character when the book was written. So was Lolita.