Teacher who had sex with high-school pupils released early from jail.
In looking at the morality of this issue, most people would no doubt start with the teacher and her position of power over the students. Like a reflex reaction, the finger would stiffen up and find its sexy culpable… But doesn’t at least the age of the students involved suggest that something might be missing from this precocious analysis?
Just as it couldn’t be any other way coming from such category of people – parents, teachers and judges – an account of childhood and responsibility – their own responsibility – are missing. Luckily though, there seem to be some in the profession who still have the ovaries to make up for the pain they help to inflict on their students, even if this is done indirectly by seeking their own pleasure or biological fulfilment. Yes, there seem to be some exceptions in these concentration camps, who have the integrity to acknowledge and act upon their legitimate, harmless emotions – instead of leaving it up to “Mr.Hyde” – and that’s good news.
So the problem is an abuse of power… Who abused their power when sending the children to an institution in the first place?
So the problem is that the high-school teenagers – supposedly – at some point or in some instance gave no consent to this activity… When did they give consent to be put into an institution like school in the first place?
Even if we assume that the sex happened without consent on the part of the students, which of these two violations is worse in terms of how forcefully and consistently the child’s will is overridden – with the corresponding pain and distress being inflicted and sustained?
Can the “kid” who denounced his teacher maybe give as much consent to have sex with her as he did to initiate or help the actions that would eventually land her in jail, or can’t he? I want to know this, because taking someone to court is a hell of a consensual action. (” ‘And (I feel) physically sick that Ms. Whitehurst is facing minimal consequences for her stomach-turning violations of me and other boys,’ he continued.” – Ex-teacher convicted of student sex charges released from jail early
How much less of an ability to give consent to “pressing titties” than the consent to pressing charges is required to make the former shenanigans “rape”? Or was it the parents who initiated judicial action without the consent of their son? Should we press charges against the parents for putting their son through the no doubt painful process of judicial action? I think I’d rather press titties… especially if I was in the skin of a 17 year old.
Sure as hell, none of this is taken into account by these parasites of the youth, who go about calling rape on anything that competes with them in matters of “love”. Even if this teacher had abused her power, nothing compares to the abuse of parental power that rapes the hearts of children when they are small and most unable to defend themselves; which is the root of everything that was ever truly sick, damaging and scarring about rape.
No wonder getting into a little sexy play with the teacher is a very tempting thing both for the moralists – who would later lie and claim to have been raped – and the hedonists – who would boast that they had a good time (” ‘I didn’t feel like a victim; I’m not scarred for life or anything. To be honest, I had a good time when it was going on.’ – Teacher charged with 41 sex crimes (Daily Mail)
Clearly both are very conscious and willing, but probably none realise that the reasons they do it, and don’t fully enjoy it, lie in what happened to them at the hands of these predators they cannot blame, who had them for lunch when they were most tender, in the secrecy and legal immunity of home.
Laura Elizabeth is probably one such lost students too – the hedonist kind –, unable to acknowledge that the sex never seemed quite right or enjoyable. Having an intention to become a school teacher – probably with the repressed desire to entrap potential lovers – is not a sign that one has overcome this kind of early family trauma. Still, the action we’re judging here is not the cooperation with a system that forces, indoctrinates and lies to children; but engaging in the voluntary activity of sex.
Clearly there is no magical switch that activates your ability to consent to having sex after your 18th birthday – or whatever the number is. All healthy human beings of all ages have the capacity to say no. What happens is that parents – and their abstract counterparts, state and church – have always been very involved in stripping the children of their own body ownership and of their assertiveness; eventually turning them into the eternally infantile and whiny goo that they are themselves. This is rape!
This being the case, it’s not a mystery that parents will use their children to get more goodies and protection from “daddy state” against the “raping witches”; you don’t want to suddenly have to take responsibility for yourself as a 50 year old when you are prepared to deny it to an 18 year old.
“He said Whitehurst gave him alcohol”
, would you believe it? (!) The man has no pharyngeal control and so will swallow any alcohol “given to him”, but has enough laryngeal control to utter this crap in court. Different “body parts”, you see… Or perhaps he has no control of what he does there either, and is using the machinery of the state to send someone to an actual rape room all without being able to stop…
Some can only draw pleasure out of seeing others in pain.
But the pain Laura Elizabeth will suffer the most is not that of being in jail, but that of bearing the brunt of the shame, guilt and punishment that stem from her own roots. Now her baby being taken care of by her own parents (see news from LA Times
) and so, alas, the cycle continues.
May she be able to identify and blame those in their life who deserve it, to heal the wounds only they have caused and continue to pry open; just like she should only blame herself for falling into that ridiculous teenage trap.
To rape is an expression of power, as it is to lie that one has been raped (a tendency surely not uncommon in feminists). There is nothing with greater moral connotations than the legitimacy of sexuality and children, for a good evolutionary reason; and there is no greater referent for power in society than morality. Any kind of dysfunctional sexual practice is a normalization of the trauma caused by the overwhelming means through which children are owned and conditioned to breed within the moral unit of the family.