Since you and I both know that only a very sick adult will engage in this sort of activity, this child will be emotionally involved with a sick adult -- a sick adult who we know has a history of depressive episodes. Do you think it's healthy for him to be burdened with all the personal problems and travails of this adult? And what if she winds up committing suicide, which she very well could? Do you think he's not going to feel guilty about it, blame himself? And the fact that she's (obviously) promiscuous means he will be at greater risk of getting a sexually transmitted disease, one that may not be so easily cured. He could wind up going through life with chronic herpes or even die of AIDS. But no matter what disease he may pick up, he's unlikely to want to tell anybody about it, isn't he? Because then, he will have to tell the rest and he can't really do that, can he? So it will fester while he vainly hopes that it will just go away. And there are many, many more problems this kid will be exposed to. His moral development will be warped to say the least. I can't believe you would take this so lightly.
The Judge doubtless investigated the possibility of any complications, such as you suggest, and concluded that the punishment was adequate from what she learned in the investigation. The circumstances in which a teenaged boy has his first sexual encounter are really not worth the time I have already spent trying to put a little perspective on this. My only purpose for even posting in this thread, which is not in my opinion a major news item, was to support the traditional view that separate standards do indeed pertain to male and female sexuality, and for very good reasons. Historically, very few ever suggested that male innocence was as important as female innocence; and very few ever tried to protect the former as avidly as the latter. We do not prepare our sons to be mothers.
I was not suggesting that school teachers should be having affairs with the students; only suggesting that this probable slut who wouldn't have even been hired in the days when the double standard was widely understood, is just a promiscuous woman in an loosely moralled age, and not public enemy number one.
William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site
No way to tell what may befall this poor little boy because of this woman. His chances of having a normal life have been forever compromised for all your arguments, mostly his ability to come out of this without a scewed moral compass. Would you want your daughter to date him? If pederasty has a viral component he will also be at risk of visiting this same horror on another blameless child when he goes through his mid-life crisis. That may be OK with Ohioan? Just asking.
What this judge has done is take our society one step further down that Brave New World road: "Everyone belongs to everyone" We are already all flat equal in the eyes of the law so what is OK for a woman to do to whomever will soon be OK for anyone to do with whomever as long as the next milestone for these perverts (male and female) is achieved - as it already has been in Netherlands and England: lowering the age of "consent."
You are wrong Ohioan, and shortsighted.
v.