Is this fair?

[Noor]

They're still together and I think they have 3 kids now. Mary Ann Tourneau (sp)

It seems like there is a lot of that going on now. You hear about it weekly. Not male teacher/female student either. It's the other way around - female teacher/male student.

They eventually divorced and she died a cancer a few years ago. He was still in her life though in a fashion.

 

[Dapperguy]

Wasn't she 15 or 16? And in that state it's a crime to have sex with a student even at 18? His wife did say shag all the women you want but why target your students?

Not watched third ep yet. How the fuck did he find time to sleep and eat?

Green cheese is inedible.

 

[KateAt55]

Life isn't fair

Wait are we sure about this?

 

[policywank]

I think that one of the things that makes it so hard to assess circumstances like this is society's aversion to making distinctions as to what type of sexual assault occurred and all the details as to how it came about. It is treated as one big homogenous category.

I think I understand why. There is a serious concern that by accepting that there are different categories of severity we facilitate those who try to make the argument that "oh it wasn't that bad." And there certainly seems to be precedent that historically courts were effectively manipulated by defence lawyers who downplayed their client's behaviour or tried to introduce doubt around matters of consent or dragged past behaviour into the discussion even if it had nothing to do with the event under scrutiny.

But I think that cancel culture has taken us too far in the other direction if we feel compelled to label any and all suspect activity with the worst characterization. We must resist those who would seek to invalidate a victims experience, but I don't see how we can have honest conversations without being able to be explicit about what did or didn't happen.

For instance, as others have said an adult having sex with a 16 year old student is clearly a crime because she is underage. But if she has reached the age of consent and did in fact consent I don't think it is a crime. It is inadvisable because of the power dynamics and he should most certainly expect to be fired. But that is not the same as a crime. Nor does the existence of a power imbalance automatically mean the person in power abuses that imbalance. Companies and institutions frequently have policies against people in such circumstances fraternizing because it is impractical to adjudicate exactly when an abuse of power has occurred and the only rationale approach is for the company or institution to implement a policy against it (which also insulates it from any accusations that it facilitated inappropriate behaviour). But that should not be equated with the premise that one of the two people who knowingly ignoring that policy have committed a crime.

In fact, I have known many couples who got together in defiance of their employers' policies and just kept it quiet by mutual agreement. The partner in a position of power didn't abuse it. And they ended up getting married and living a happy life. Obviously that isn't what happened here and it sounds like the guy was a total dirt bag, but like it or not that isn't a crime. Is it possible that any adult women he was with thought it was true romance and got angry when it turned out it wasn't. Could they try to use the power imbalance argument as a premise to criminalize being a jerk even if he never did abuse that imbalance?

 

[NancyPan]

The age difference is only one (albeit significant) of the issues. More important, in my view, is the clear abuse of the power differential. Any sexual relationship between teacher/student, boss/employee, therapist/client, coach/player, doctor/patient, etc. is a clear ethics violation and abuse of power. All those professions have standards of practice strictly forbidding it. So-called “consent” by a student to have sex with her teacher is not viable.

No teacher should be having sex with his/her students whether high school, college, grad school, or adult learners.

 

[Dashing_Sir]

Exactly. Have you ever seen the “Friends” episode where Ross was dating a student and was saying it is not against the rules, merely “frowned upon” and his fellow protesters were like “nah dude, you’re gonna be fired”. And that was at a university level….

Yes! I was like - wait, you’d never get away with that thinking now…

 

[LickableWallpaper]

So I have a question and I am not trying to villainies or shame the victims but I am watching a documentary about a man who was arrested for sexually assaulting students. He had multiple affairs during his marriage and I am not saying that is right or the wife shouldn’t be upset. A significant portion of these relationships began prior to them dating and getting married. Now, I say “students” but they were adult students, not children. After he was arrested, understandably, the wife was hurt, I don’t fault her nor can I imagine but is it fair for him to be painted as the villain in the sense of “sexual assault” when there is clear correspondence of women actively engaging him and pursuing him? I’m not saying that he may not have assaulted any of the women and for that he should absolutely be punished, but how fair is it that the other women whose messages prove that they pursued him and were willing participants now claim “assault”?
Again, I get his wifes anger because he was slanging that dick around everywhere and gave her an STD. I am not saying that I know the entire situation but I am legit confused. I hope that I do not come off as insensitive, I am asking for input and to get different perspectives.

Finally! Someone asks the tough questions. What about the rapists? Are they being treated fairly? I mean I'm glad that you are a man who gets straight to the heart of the matter.

It's a bold move in several ways.

You don't understand consent.

You think you are smarter than the police, the school, all of Netflix, because you don't see it as an assault. So because you are smarter- it can't be.

Real talk though. We both know this is disingenuous as fuck. You don't want to know Why this is assault. You side with the trash bag and you want other trash bags to give you support so you can feel like a good guy again.


If you cared about what consent and assault and coercion are (issues every woman and men who are good partners have gone out of their way to understand) you wouldn't be on a porn site looking for "perspectives on assault. I mean the fact you typed that shit out. Clearly understand at least some of what this guy did was wrong and you still posted?Questioned if that guy that did all that is a villan or not? Come on now. That guy is a villan full stop.


It's a gross thread.A gross insensitive question that you didn't want an answer to, but you didn't want to outright support the dude cause you are a "nice guy" . Please stay away from women until you understand consent.

Ps Kudos to the lit name being so appropriate for someone who would say shit like this.

Also it must have taken years of this kind of behavior to show zero real empathy or sympathy to this degree. To encapsulate it so perfectly. I mean chefs kiss my guy.

 

[Massive_Ass69]

Finally! Someone asks the tough questions. What about the rapists? Are they being treated fairly? I mean I'm glad that you are a man who gets straight to the heart of the matter.

It's a bold move in several ways.

You don't understand consent.

You think you are smarter than the police, the school, all of Netflix, because you don't see it as an assault. So because you are smarter- it can't be.

Real talk though. We both know this is disingenuous as fuck. You don't want to know Why this is assault. You side with the trash bag and you want other trash bags to give you support so you can feel like a good guy again.


If you cared about what consent and assault and coercion are (issues every woman and men who are good partners have gone out of their way to understand) you wouldn't be on a porn site looking for "perspectives on assault. I mean the fact you typed that shit out. Clearly understand at least some of what this guy did was wrong and you still posted?Questioned if that guy that did all that is a villan or not? Come on now. That guy is a villan full stop.


It's a gross thread.A gross insensitive question that you didn't want an answer to, but you didn't want to outright support the dude cause you are a "nice guy" . Please stay away from women until you understand consent.

Ps Kudos to the lit name being so appropriate for someone who would say shit like this.

Also it must have taken years of this kind of behavior to show zero real empathy or sympathy to this degree. To encapsulate it so perfectly. I mean chefs kiss my guy.

Oh. You’re one of THEM. Fuck off because you’re on here JUST like I am. I am a woman and I have been assaulted but I also know a MULTITUDE of women who have constructed LIES about being assaulted.
You definitely sound like a fucking idiot.

 

[Dapperguy]

So I have a question and I am not trying to villainies or shame the victims but I am watching a documentary about a man who was arrested for sexually assaulting students. He had multiple affairs during his marriage and I am not saying that is right or the wife shouldn’t be upset. A significant portion of these relationships began prior to them dating and getting married. Now, I say “students” but they were adult students, not children. After he was arrested, understandably, the wife was hurt, I don’t fault her nor can I imagine but is it fair for him to be painted as the villain in the sense of “sexual assault” when there is clear correspondence of women actively engaging him and pursuing him? I’m not saying that he may not have assaulted any of the women and for that he should absolutely be punished, but how fair is it that the other women whose messages prove that they pursued him and were willing participants now claim “assault”?
Again, I get his wifes anger because he was slanging that dick around everywhere and gave her an STD. I am not saying that I know the entire situation but I am legit confused. I hope that I do not come off as insensitive, I am asking for input and to get different perspectives.

You should not be on this site. Trying to be the feckin liberal thinking ‘good guy’ when in reality you’re getting off, and no doubt masturbating, to any replies you get from the womenfolk on this platform. Just ‘Fuck Off.’ When a woman says i‘No’ it means ‘No’ under any circumstance, so ‘Fuck Off.’

 

[policywank]

The abuse of authority dynamic is somewhat akin to conflict of interest rules.

For instance, suppose I am a lawyer bringing a class action suit against a company in which I own shares. I am, by definition, in a conflict of interest because I am acting for people trying to sue the company but I have a vested financial interest in that company not losing the lawsuit. The existence of that conflict does not mean I will act unethically. It only means that I might have some motivation to do so. In that case the proper thing to do may be to remove myself from the case or sell my shares in the company. But there are plenty of circumstances where a party in a conflict of interest declares their conflict to the affected parties and they decide that they are ok with it for any number of reasons.

Likewise the fact that a professor or boss is in a position of authority over students or underlings does not mean that they will abuse that position. It only means that they are in a position to do so. As a result it makes sense to steer clear of circumstances wherein they could be accused of abusing power. But if they do enter into those circumstances that is not by definition an abuse of power.

On more than one occasion I have had sex with my boss. And back in university I had sex with a professor. In none of those cases did those men use their position of authority to abuse me in any way. In most cases I was the one who pursued them and they all diligently steered clear of even the slightest hint of impropriety. Therefore the fact is that they did not abuse their power over me in any way. And I most certainly was not naive or gullible. The prospect that they could have used abused their position of power does not mean that they did abuse their position. While their actions may have been imprudent and they could legitimately be punished for violating a policy where such a policy existed I should not have the unfettered power to simply level a baseless accusation against them and have it be deemed valid with no proof. The fact that they were in a position of authority is an important factor and may lead one to give greater benefit of the doubt to me if I were to level an accusation, but it does not on its own constitute definitive evidence.

I whole heartedly embrace the "no means no" premise. Whether I fucked you in the past or led you on or wore slutty clothes or lead you right to the brink of having sex then change my mind does not change that. At the same time the fact that a man behaved inappropriately in one sexual situation does mean he did in every sexual situation.

Meanwhile, I do not believe in the premise of "always believe the woman". All humans have the potential to act out of malice or vindictiveness, to misunderstand another person's actions or to alter their own recollection (consciously or subconsciously) of events for a variety of reasons. Evidence matters.

 

[Dapperguy]

The abuse of authority dynamic is somewhat akin to conflict of interest rules.

For instance, suppose I am a lawyer bringing a class action suit against a company in which I own shares. I am, by definition, in a conflict of interest because I am acting for people trying to sue the company but I have a vested financial interest in that company not losing the lawsuit. The existence of that conflict does not mean I will act unethically. It only means that I might have some motivation to do so. In that case the proper thing to do may be to remove myself from the case or sell my shares in the company. But there are plenty of circumstances where a party in a conflict of interest declares their conflict to the affected parties and they decide that they are ok with it for any number of reasons.

Likewise the fact that a professor or boss is in a position of authority over students or underlings does not mean that they will abuse that position. It only means that they are in a position to do so. As a result it makes sense to steer clear of circumstances wherein they could be accused of abusing power. But if they do enter into those circumstances that is not by definition an abuse of power.

On more than one occasion I have had sex with my boss. And back in university I had sex with a professor. In none of those cases did those men use their position of authority to abuse me in any way. In most cases I was the one who pursued them and they all diligently steered clear of even the slightest hint of impropriety. Therefore the fact is that they did not abuse their power over me in any way. And I most certainly was not naive or gullible. The prospect that they could have used abused their position of power does not mean that they did abuse their position. While their actions may have been imprudent and they could legitimately be punished for violating a policy where such a policy existed I should not have the unfettered power to simply level a baseless accusation against them and have it be deemed valid with no proof. The fact that they were in a position of authority is an important factor and may lead one to give greater benefit of the doubt to me if I were to level an accusation, but it does not on its own constitute definitive evidence.

I whole heartedly embrace the "no means no" premise. Whether I fucked you in the past or led you on or wore slutty clothes or lead you right to the brink of having sex then change my mind does not change that. At the same time the fact that a man behaved inappropriately in one sexual situation does mean he did in every sexual situation.

Meanwhile, I do not believe in the premise of "always believe the woman". All humans have the potential to act out of malice or vindictiveness, to misunderstand another person's actions or to alter their own recollection (consciously or subconsciously) of events for a variety of reasons. Evidence matters.

You to can “Just Fuck Off too.”

 

[Dapperguy]

You to can “Just Fuck Off too.”

Your justa feckin apologist for rapist and sexual abusers. So Just Feck Off!

 

[policywank]

Your justa feckin apologist for rapist and sexual abusers. So Just Feck Off!

What the hell are you talking about? All I am saying is that before someone is convicted of rape or abuse there needs to be actual evidence.

 

[Dapperguy]

Awwwww! Evidence? That’s original thinking, old anal mucus whore, that you are! I would never have brought such a concept into it. Well done

 

[SlutAddicted]

Awwwww! Evidence? That’s original thinking, old anal mucus whore, that you are! I would never have brought such a concept into it. Well done

Are you having a seizure or are you just a dumb cunt?

 

[Dapperguy]

Awww! Some one is getting the sweats! Away and clean the pubes that are stuck between your teeth. Perhaps if you were to change your diaper the world would smell better. And, by the way, a cunt is a useful thing, you wank king.

 

[LickableWallpaper]

Oh. You’re one of THEM. Fuck off because you’re on here JUST like I am. I am a woman and I have been assaulted but I also know a MULTITUDE of women who have constructed LIES about being assaulted.
You definitely sound like a fucking idiot.

LOL I haven't been on here in a while. I sound like a fucking idiot?

You layed out all the terrible things this guy has done and none of them are bad enough for you to think he should be held responsible.

You are a woman? And you know women? I question both of these. Thanks for the laughs. Its clear you are an incel. I love when incels get he-motional when they get called out as rape apologists.

You sound like a very lonely and sad person. I hope you get the help you need.

 

[Kenrychard]

My brother abused his position as a University professor for relationships and sex. He was fired and deserved it. He didn't commit a crime, the sex was consensual. But he did offer favoritism in the class and even adjusted grades in their favor from previous classes. He ALSO used his position to HARM those who turned him down.

 

[ericalauren]

No teacher should pursue their students for romance and/or sex.