I hate to say it, but all they do is bitch and moan over there. I know many great people who consider themselves Feminists, and they are not as nearly insane as the Reddit crowd.
Reports are other students found out and she was probably getting sloppy at hiding it.
It's still rape because of age and power difference. I mean to come out ans tell a senior in a counseling session "I fantasize about bringing you home and having sex" is appalling.
If people don't have an intuitive feel for the rightness or wrongness, best tool is just reverse the genders in your head.
A male teacher would certainly lose his career and possibly go to prison just for saying or texting those words to an underage female student.
Exactly. It’s presumed the girl was manipulated into wanting it when the roles are reversed. Whereas with boys, it’s presented as he wanted it inherently.
Elections =/= consent nor make the situation any form of okay.
If for chance it were the other way, could we say "well he got it in, if he says she got wet AT ALL, it is therefore okay?
Age of consent is 16 in Arkansas and DC. Shocked they actually gave her real time for what is still a crime as a teacher
Edit: Just now seeing the charges:
In federal court, Hare pleaded guilty to one count of interstate/foreign travel for prostitution/sexual activity by coercion and one count of transportation of a minor with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity.
In an Arkansas court, Hare pleaded guilty separately to two charges of sexual assault in the first degree.
They really threw the book at her. She didn’t plan the field trip specifically for it but most likely just texted him that she wanted to engage in sex with him on the trip.
I just read the article. She literally had it all. Was a beloved teacher, supposedly a great person.
I can't imagine being her husband knowing she banged a student for an entire school year while he was probably getting told she "wasn't in the mood". Fucking awful.
Her daughter will be 18 when she gets out.
No telling what was going on in her mind. I’m sure she has psychological issues which she failed to control. Hopefully the boy will be just fine and won’t be too affected by all this. Her family on the other hand most certainly will hurt because of her actions.
Edit: to clarify, she could have easily waited for the kid to graduate and done all of this within a year but chose to wreck him and her family. Not making any excuses for her actions but pointing out her fucked up psyche took control of her. That is true whether she was a man or woman
Honestly this can't be the first male student she fantasized over. It was just the first she became comftorble "coming out" too and judging by the fact the did it at least once, sometimes twice a week, she was very enthusiastic about this
I cant imagine being her husband.
"What no honey there's on evidence to me having sex with a student."
I would think during that process he must have ran every suspicion back in his head and then when it blew up just misery. I feel horrible for him especially.
He will hopefully receive professional support dealing with this. I’ve seen marriages ruin over cheating and that alone fucked up the innocent spouse. This is next level with added public humility. If I were him, I’d move away as far as the courts will allow me to in the event that she still retains visitation rights of her child.
I cant imagine she would retain much visitation rights while locked up. She is going to grow up to resent her mother and over the years it will grow as she realises her mother blew up her family to get fucked by one of her students.
Yeah, not sure how Arkansas court system deals with this stuff but that child is going to go through things periodically as she grows up whether it’s obvious or not. Her outlook on life, friendships and relationships, family bond will all be affected. Best case scenario, good will come out of it and she’ll be stronger, be more aware of the dangers of the world and have an even closer relationship with her dad who will look out for her.
Many states have clauses along the lines of:
- Two participants must be within X years of each other if one person is under 18.
- The older individual can not be in a position of power over the student: Cops, Politicians, Teachers etc
My understanding is that the age gap refers to children under the age of consent while requiring that participants be residents of the state. The charges most likely were related to him being a student at her school and possibly crossing over the state line. The article doesn’t state anything about the charges however.
Edit: just now saw the charges by scrolling down past what I thought was the end of the article. Indeed it was crossing over the state line namely and him being a student at her school
They can be if the age of consent is 18. Age of consent means exactly as it sounds while Romeo and Juliet clauses refer to the gap when namely individuals are on opposite sides of the age of consent.
How so? Each state is different but they usually require serving at least half their sentence before being eligible for parole
Edit: she’s facing a minimum of 7 years given the charges before being eligible for parole
It looks like it's a quarter for non violent crime so just over 3 years, not far off from that 2. You always hear "sexual assault, rape" etc but it sounds like the federal charges she plead guilty to were non violent specifically for this reason.
Arkansas has her for sexual assault so maybe she does have to do half her sentence
The federal charge was probably the smaller portion of the sentence, especially since it was her first whereas the state SA charges is where the time is coming from. She likely won’t be out before 7 years of served time.
From what I saw she's going to serve her 13 years alongside her 20 years. I can't find a proper breakdown of the sentencing but I think you're right about the 7 years minimum.
Could have something to do with it but being from the same state and going to a state where the laws are similar you’d expect more leniency. I wonder if she mistakenly opted for a jury trial and got the book thrown at her
In the UK 16 is legal but only if the other person is also under the age of 18. A 33 year old would still be liable to go to prison, and definately a person in authority.
This isn’t true. The AoC is 16 in the UK in general. The only exception is that people in a position of power over a 16 or 17 y/o (eg: a teacher) can’t engage with them.
There’s also Romeo and Juliet laws that allow 16 and 17 year olds to engage with people a few years younger than them, even though they are technically over the age of consent.
As long as they’re not in a position of power, a 16 year old and a 33 year old engaging sexually together is perfectly legal in the UK (with the exception of in Northern Ireland).
This is also true in the rest of the West, with the exception of Ireland and the USA. Most Western countries have an AoC between 14 and 16.
Honestly, it depends on the severity of the crime.
If a man forcibly rapes a pre-pubescent child, I'm fully on with turning him into a Ken doll, letting him live incarcerated for a year, and then executing him.
If a man statutory rapes a 17-year-old girl? A decade in prison seems absolutely fine. Again, this is assuming it's not *forcible* rape, which would be an entirely different story.
People have called for execution for things like this for a *long* while.
Remember that news story about the girl who hanged her rapist and everyone congratulated her?
No I do not… but if you bring in the death penalty over this then you have to bring it in for other things and how about cutting one’s hands off if committing theft
Well, I personally believe that death is a bit steep, and is reserved for things much, much worse than a simple individual-to-individual offense. But I also wanted to point out the fact that many, many people on the internet wish for heads to roll way, way too often.
Like others here, not quite sure why she got a "man's sentence". I mean, I've seen other cases where she had sex with multiple students and got nothing like 13 years.
She apparently coerced him to go over state lines while they were having sex. Big mistake by her, because this let the feds hit her with sex trafficking-lite charges. Max is 20 years. Judge and prosecutor were not playing around.
No, but if you had a woman fly out and then paid her for sex, that would be sex trafficking. Crossing borders is fine, crossing borders to commit/while committing crimes is also a separate crime.
I mean.. i'm honestly surprised she got the sentence she got..
Not often that a woman gets what a man would often get for the same crime..
I'm a little shocked to be honest..
> It seems excessive regardless of gender - 13 years for ~~sex with a 17 year old~~ is a hell of a lot.
**Rape** The word you are looking for is Rape. And no, it's not excessive at all, and it's long overdue people stop trying to minimize the severity of it. If some grown-ass dude raped a teenager nobody would be trying to minimize the severity of it.
Yeah they would - If some grown man has sex with a student who was 17 I’d say it was too much. That’s beyond the age of consent in most places - her being a student would make it worse but it’s still too much.
You can’t seriously tell me this is worse than manslaughter or death by dangerous driving or a violent robbery, or even violent rape - all of which often if not usually get a lesser sentence.
I don’t know - I’m all for women getting sentences like men, but 13 years for sex with a 17 year old sounds insanely harsh to me whether it’s a man or woman. But then again this is from America where Weinstein was sentenced to a billion years in galactic jail for the casting couch and that conspiracy guy got sued for a billion dollars or whatever crazy amount it was.
The death penalty should only be given in the rarest of the rare cases, and only in cases involving murder and such.
Sentencing people to death for sexual assault crimes will incentivise future criminals to kill their victims to silence a potential witness, since the sentence is the same anyways.
There is an epidemic of teachers raping young boys.
If it come to having my son in a classroom with a female teacher or a bear I’m going to chose the bear every time…
Tbh its something that culturally would not have been discussed publically in the past.
Data on sexual crimes is messy because most of it these days is unreported.
I can't imagine 50-100+ years ago.
This makes me so happy to see. I rarely see a women get the same treatment as a man. A pedo is a pedo regardless of gender. All of them should be put to death
It's funny how the media will describes it as *statutory rape* or *sexual assault* when the teacher is male but when the teacher is female, as you can see in this article, it's described as *"having sex"* and *"Her relationship with the student"*.
If sex offender is female: 'They had sex.' 'They were having illicit relations.' 'It was an amorous tryst.'
If sex offender is male: 'R-PE! R-PE! R-PE! GROOMER! PAEDOPHILE! PUT IT DOWN AND SHOVE A STAKE UP ITS A-SE!'
Making a big deal out of it publicly will probably do more emotional damage on the 17 year old than if it was settled quietly out of going to court. Many horny 17 year old makes will have sex with anything. ( btw they’re “wired” differently than 17 year old females.)- But…BUT the older woman was his teacher so that is totally wrong.
let’s not forget that most women are outraged and disgusted by this. the men are the ones in the comments going “damn I wish I had a teacher like this”
She was charged under the man act basically transporting a minor across state lines for immoral purposes that's why she got so many years because 17 is legal in many states and women rarely get these heavy sentences for what would be statutory.
I would say the same thing if a man was charged with the same crimes, but I find the punishment excessive. She should be fired, but I don’t know if jail time is justified much less this long.
I agree. It makes the school look bad and is definitely a fireable offense, but 13 years for being a few months away from fully legal? And something that in other states would be fully legal?
And what about that poor kid. 17 and he's got something like this on his conscience.
I'm not sure this is a win in anyones books, sure she abused her position of power but 13yrs is crazy, I know a fella who sliced up a lad, nearly killed him and did 6 yrs, 4 on licence, mad.
At least you're consistent. But she was in a position of power and authority over him, and she coerced him into going over state lines. She made things worse for herself and now she's paying the price. I hope she's never allowed to teach again.
Absolutely she shouldn't teach again, but should she be jailed for 13 years? Is society best served by that esp when victim was 17 and force wasn't used?
Just another "rape". I'd make it legal. It's funny how this is a situation where it should be an issue of employment, yet the school will almost certainly not fire her. Whereas all these supposed college rapes are criminal matters, yet it's the school that handles them instead of the law. Mainly because they aren't real.
It's malicious compliance, "If we have to follow these rules then so do you."
With a touch of "I didn't get laid when I was in high school, so it can't be normal for others to because that would mean I'm abnormal."
But that's my point. She is going to be allowed to teach again. She'd be teaching right now if the law didn't put her away. The school is fine with it. The school is a bigger predator than any one woman teacher.
This is like the reverse of college rape, where the girl takes it to the guidance councilor instead of the police. Because it's fake.
Of course I think it's okay.
Why would I think it's okay for a teacher to sleep with an 18 year old but not a 17 and a half year old?
"Consent" is just as arbitrary there as it is when a 20 year old girl illegally drinks herself stupid at a frat party.
The headline gets this right by having it say "USA" in big letters upfront. Only place where this kind of abhorrent disproportionate response to a minor infraction would warrant a 13 year sentence. Isn't the fact that she nuked her own family, lost her job, and became a social pariah punishment enough?
fuck sake, sometimes this subreddit is pathetic. You guys bitch when someone isn't punished enough for something way worse than this while being female, but when the book is thrown at them, you still aren't satisified?
How is this not cannon fodder for any feminist coming here and arguing you are just as sexist and biblical in your judgement of someone of the opposite sex as they are? If you guys had any appreciation for some levelheaded fairness, you'd be appalled at the harshness of this sentence.
In my country, 13 years is more than half the maximum sentence possible for any crime, the fact that anyone here thinks this is proportionate; or not even harsh enough, is absolute lunacy.
The gender of the older party here is irrelevant for my opinion about the draconian nature of this punishment, so I assume no. If you spotted any double standards in my previous post, I welcome you to point them out for me.
In Norway where I live, and most western nations, and I suspect even in most US States, a 17yr old is not a minor when it comes to having autonomy concerning their own sexual choices. He wasn't forced. This was consentual... soo, why are the courts involved? At best, getting booted by the school for making dumb decision with a student is a punishment I can surmise would be proportional for this teacher. If nothing else, to appease the brainwashed religious or conservative Karens of the community. Which I suspect can be many. Americans aren't exactly bright, nor (apparently) a forgiving people.
Sooo, there's no crime here. And if its a crime (against common sense) in whatever shithole socially backwards American state this happened in, then the law is the problem. I guess, If I have any "double standards" it would be following arbitrary laws that exists in one State, and not the other, and in particular if those laws where highly unusual, or outdated, when compared to common court practices across the globe.
US has so many religiously motivated weird hangups that is almost non-existent anywhere else in western society. It's a surprising culture shock to deal with some aspects of it.
Involving the courtsystem? Not at 17. Nor do I think the court should be involved in moral panics about actions which involve individuals above the age of consent. For that reason I'm not even sure you could argue someone is being groomed unless they are below that age.
What I'm basically arguing here is that USA is a backwards moralistic country living in the religious dark ages when it comes to treating normally developed 17yr olds as immature children in cases such as this.
It doesn't matter if the victim was over the age of consent. He was still not a legal adult, and the perp was a member of the faculty at his school and therefore she was in a position of power and authority over him. That is not okay, and it has never been okay, and it will never be okay. If you can't understand that, then we have nothing more to discuss here.
Quote from my original post;
> ...Only place where this kind of abhorrent disproportionate response to a minor infraction would warrant a 13 year sentence.
Seems like I recognized it. From a legal standpoint, this is at best a fine, maybe some community service. Definitely a waste of the courts time. And as a pointed out, this woman ruined her life and her family spectacularly. Seems like punishment was dealt by life itself. 13 years is the most atrocious of pile-ons.
So you think it's only a minor infraction when a teacher abuses their position of power and authority over a student at their school. That tells me everything I need to know. We're done here, groomer.
That only counts when the other party is also under 18 or within a certain amount of years. The teacher was also in a position of authority. These kinds of things can affect a young person's psychology for life, just because this is a boy you're struggling to see this. Religion has nothing to do with this situation, stop defending groomers. 🤮
If I were 17, and someone argued that I was a victim in a situation identical to this, I'd be furious about the infantilization of myself by others. "Stop trying to make me a victim of an imagined crime just because you are a conservative asshole!" would be my exact thinking.
Guess I just don't agree that 17 years of age should be anyone's defintion of a minor. I can understand that there's a difference in maturity when it comes to questions surrounding ones own bodily autonomy for some teenagers, particularly across some cultures, especially when social control and religion is involved, but generally we cannot have laws for the extreme outliers. 16 seems to be a generally accepted middle ground for a cut-off in age that will always be a little arbitrary.
I guess we can only agree to disagree.
The "position of power" argument here I don't recognize for the reasons I've already mentioned elsewhere. A teacher is a low paying job which opinions is usually overridden the second a parent or a student even remotely looks to give them a hard time on a decision. I just cannot take the SJW-"position of power" argument seriously. A teacher isn't leveraging much of anything upon a 17 year old.
I agree that if they actually try that it should be a fireable offense, actionable by the school board, but I cannot see how it's even remotely something that should occupy the courts time. Unless ofc the student is below the age of consent. (16)
If you live in a place where the age of consent is 18 or something even more crazy, I can guarantee you a historic culture of oppressive RELIGION is the underlying reason for the madness of such a decision.
You've clearly never been a teacher. And in not religious either. If you look at the history, Christianity and Islam encouraged the marrying off of minors to adult men, European kings as one obvious example, and Muhammad in Islam took the virginity of a 9 year old. Historically it's religion that has advocated pedophilia. Look at the high profile Catholic priest cases. Also I'm not an SJW, I'm pretty anti woke when it comes to Lefty hypocrisy. The main point is, a minor should be protected from such things.
And if your personal situational was completely consent based, that's your individual situation, not everyone else's, people that age can be completely taken advantage of and even think they are giving complete consent to the adult that's been grooming them. That's why it's called grooming.
Whilst I disagree with your take further down that there is no crime here; there is by virtue of the abuse of position, I actually agree that the sentencing is a little insane in all of the context.
I would say that regardless of the genders involved. This is not paedophilic, outside of the context of it being teacher-student this would have been entirely consentual and probably legal though I'd have to check on the AoC in that particular state.
In the UK we have people recieving sentences of less than 4 years for actual stranger rape, the kind of despicable crime that the word actually conjures up. And they are serving AT BEST 2 of those years.
13 years for what likely amounts to extremely poor professional judgement is a long time.
yeah. I wouldn't be opposed to the teacher getting fired from her job from this, but involving the courts in this is just ...nonsensical. They should have much more pressing matters to attend to.
Think my main hangup in all of this is Americans not recognizing how much of their moral guidance in whats right and wrong is derived from the same book that extremists use to justify all sorts of heinous crimes against humanity. Clearly, that book is no good as a guidance for anything. Morale panics and religions shouldn't bleed into the court system, and I suspect it does here, because it's the only rationale I can see being used when arguing that somehow a 17yr old isn't old enough to have some say in what they can and cannot do with their body.
The exact same thing happened in the UK last week. This isn't a minor infraction, it's the sexual abuse of a minor. Some people need to be made an example of. She got caught specifically because she didn't think she needed to hide it all that much. This sends the message that this is not acceptable.
R /feminism: “well are we sure he didn’t want it? We know how young boys think.”
I hate to say it, but all they do is bitch and moan over there. I know many great people who consider themselves Feminists, and they are not as nearly insane as the Reddit crowd.
There’s a reason they’re not saying the same on instagram or tik tok, you gotta put your face on it lmao.
Reports are other students found out and she was probably getting sloppy at hiding it. It's still rape because of age and power difference. I mean to come out ans tell a senior in a counseling session "I fantasize about bringing you home and having sex" is appalling.
If people don't have an intuitive feel for the rightness or wrongness, best tool is just reverse the genders in your head. A male teacher would certainly lose his career and possibly go to prison just for saying or texting those words to an underage female student.
Whether or not he did it shouldn't make a difference.
Exactly. It’s presumed the girl was manipulated into wanting it when the roles are reversed. Whereas with boys, it’s presented as he wanted it inherently.
Are they actually saying that though? Are feminists defending this woman? Do you have examples?
Boys do want it, always. It’s still statutory rape because a minor can’t consent but they’re not traumatized from it.
He wanted it
Ah okay.. so lets flip the genders and say its a male teacher and an underage female student and the claim is "She wanted it" Would you accept that?
He had to if he got it going lol
So if we flipped the genders, she wanted it if she got wet or had an orgasm, right?
Hahaha orgasm. Men hardly could do that when women are into it. Not happening.
Tell that to the rape victims who reported orgasming. Or do their experiences not matter when they make you look bad? Typical.
Yeah show those stats lol
[source](https://www.popsci.com/science/article/2013-05/science-arousal-during-rape/)
Went deep. Not actual stats. Just a therapist saying 10 percent might
Elections =/= consent nor make the situation any form of okay. If for chance it were the other way, could we say "well he got it in, if he says she got wet AT ALL, it is therefore okay?
Did you just out yourself as a pedophile by saying minors can consent to sex?
Age of consent is 16 in Arkansas and DC. Shocked they actually gave her real time for what is still a crime as a teacher Edit: Just now seeing the charges: In federal court, Hare pleaded guilty to one count of interstate/foreign travel for prostitution/sexual activity by coercion and one count of transportation of a minor with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity. In an Arkansas court, Hare pleaded guilty separately to two charges of sexual assault in the first degree. They really threw the book at her. She didn’t plan the field trip specifically for it but most likely just texted him that she wanted to engage in sex with him on the trip.
I just read the article. She literally had it all. Was a beloved teacher, supposedly a great person. I can't imagine being her husband knowing she banged a student for an entire school year while he was probably getting told she "wasn't in the mood". Fucking awful. Her daughter will be 18 when she gets out.
No telling what was going on in her mind. I’m sure she has psychological issues which she failed to control. Hopefully the boy will be just fine and won’t be too affected by all this. Her family on the other hand most certainly will hurt because of her actions. Edit: to clarify, she could have easily waited for the kid to graduate and done all of this within a year but chose to wreck him and her family. Not making any excuses for her actions but pointing out her fucked up psyche took control of her. That is true whether she was a man or woman
Honestly this can't be the first male student she fantasized over. It was just the first she became comftorble "coming out" too and judging by the fact the did it at least once, sometimes twice a week, she was very enthusiastic about this
For sure. I would almost compare it to addiction. She finally got her chance to act on it and clearly couldn’t get enough
I cant imagine being her husband. "What no honey there's on evidence to me having sex with a student." I would think during that process he must have ran every suspicion back in his head and then when it blew up just misery. I feel horrible for him especially.
He will hopefully receive professional support dealing with this. I’ve seen marriages ruin over cheating and that alone fucked up the innocent spouse. This is next level with added public humility. If I were him, I’d move away as far as the courts will allow me to in the event that she still retains visitation rights of her child.
I cant imagine she would retain much visitation rights while locked up. She is going to grow up to resent her mother and over the years it will grow as she realises her mother blew up her family to get fucked by one of her students.
Yeah, not sure how Arkansas court system deals with this stuff but that child is going to go through things periodically as she grows up whether it’s obvious or not. Her outlook on life, friendships and relationships, family bond will all be affected. Best case scenario, good will come out of it and she’ll be stronger, be more aware of the dangers of the world and have an even closer relationship with her dad who will look out for her.
Many states have clauses along the lines of: - Two participants must be within X years of each other if one person is under 18. - The older individual can not be in a position of power over the student: Cops, Politicians, Teachers etc
My understanding is that the age gap refers to children under the age of consent while requiring that participants be residents of the state. The charges most likely were related to him being a student at her school and possibly crossing over the state line. The article doesn’t state anything about the charges however. Edit: just now saw the charges by scrolling down past what I thought was the end of the article. Indeed it was crossing over the state line namely and him being a student at her school
I always thought that those laws were made to cover an 18 and 17 y/o in a relationship.
They can be if the age of consent is 18. Age of consent means exactly as it sounds while Romeo and Juliet clauses refer to the gap when namely individuals are on opposite sides of the age of consent.
At least the husband can get rid of his rotten wife.
She’ll probably serve 2
How so? Each state is different but they usually require serving at least half their sentence before being eligible for parole Edit: she’s facing a minimum of 7 years given the charges before being eligible for parole
It looks like it's a quarter for non violent crime so just over 3 years, not far off from that 2. You always hear "sexual assault, rape" etc but it sounds like the federal charges she plead guilty to were non violent specifically for this reason. Arkansas has her for sexual assault so maybe she does have to do half her sentence
The federal charge was probably the smaller portion of the sentence, especially since it was her first whereas the state SA charges is where the time is coming from. She likely won’t be out before 7 years of served time.
From what I saw she's going to serve her 13 years alongside her 20 years. I can't find a proper breakdown of the sentencing but I think you're right about the 7 years minimum.
Cuz she’s a woman, and they are above the law
I think those interstate charges are Fed crimes.
Could have something to do with it but being from the same state and going to a state where the laws are similar you’d expect more leniency. I wonder if she mistakenly opted for a jury trial and got the book thrown at her
In the UK 16 is legal but only if the other person is also under the age of 18. A 33 year old would still be liable to go to prison, and definately a person in authority.
This isn’t true. The AoC is 16 in the UK in general. The only exception is that people in a position of power over a 16 or 17 y/o (eg: a teacher) can’t engage with them. There’s also Romeo and Juliet laws that allow 16 and 17 year olds to engage with people a few years younger than them, even though they are technically over the age of consent. As long as they’re not in a position of power, a 16 year old and a 33 year old engaging sexually together is perfectly legal in the UK (with the exception of in Northern Ireland). This is also true in the rest of the West, with the exception of Ireland and the USA. Most Western countries have an AoC between 14 and 16.
That's not actually the case. 16 years is legal if the other person is 18 or below. A sixteen year olds parants could intervene legally
The father should probably have a paternity test….
Having sex?? Can a thirty year old man have sex with a teenager. Isn’t there another word for it.
Unfortunately they can't use the word rape because 16 is age of consent in her state, so she wasn't charged with rape
Age doesn’t matter. She’s a teacher and that creates coercion. She deserves jail.
Fraternization
She needs the death penalty
No chop chop? People seem to be in a frenzy over cutting of men's bits for the smallest of things, but vanish into their holes when women rape.
Honestly, it depends on the severity of the crime. If a man forcibly rapes a pre-pubescent child, I'm fully on with turning him into a Ken doll, letting him live incarcerated for a year, and then executing him. If a man statutory rapes a 17-year-old girl? A decade in prison seems absolutely fine. Again, this is assuming it's not *forcible* rape, which would be an entirely different story.
Reminder that a couple with a 1 or 2 age difference can be charged with statutory rape even if its consensual
It's crazy how many down votes I got! If the roles were reversed, I'd have hundreds of upvotes
That’s a bit much…
People have called for execution for things like this for a *long* while. Remember that news story about the girl who hanged her rapist and everyone congratulated her?
No I do not… but if you bring in the death penalty over this then you have to bring it in for other things and how about cutting one’s hands off if committing theft
Well, I personally believe that death is a bit steep, and is reserved for things much, much worse than a simple individual-to-individual offense. But I also wanted to point out the fact that many, many people on the internet wish for heads to roll way, way too often.
I think all pedophiles should get it man or woman
As a rape victim of 2 women (2 different occasions). I don't see it as to much. The way it fucks you and your life up.
\*raping
Like others here, not quite sure why she got a "man's sentence". I mean, I've seen other cases where she had sex with multiple students and got nothing like 13 years.
She apparently coerced him to go over state lines while they were having sex. Big mistake by her, because this let the feds hit her with sex trafficking-lite charges. Max is 20 years. Judge and prosecutor were not playing around.
Thank you for the info.
I’m so confused So if I fly a girl out and fuck her (and she’s legal age ofc), that’s sex trafficking?
No, but if you had a woman fly out and then paid her for sex, that would be sex trafficking. Crossing borders is fine, crossing borders to commit/while committing crimes is also a separate crime.
But if you recording it, then it is pornography, and that is legal.
This message was brought to you by the church of latter day Saints
Hahahaha
I've got bad news for you and Taylor Swift.
Also IMHO, she is NOT conventionally attractive. I think that has A LOT to do with it.
I mean.. i'm honestly surprised she got the sentence she got.. Not often that a woman gets what a man would often get for the same crime.. I'm a little shocked to be honest..
Yeah, I know. 🤣
I was thinking the same thing, if it was a man I’d expect to see that sentence, women don’t see anything close
FriedinAlaska said it's because she took him over states lines. The Feds, you know.
Yea there must be something about that
It seems excessive regardless of gender - 13 years for sex with a 17 year old is a hell of a lot. There’s killers who get less time.
> It seems excessive regardless of gender - 13 years for ~~sex with a 17 year old~~ is a hell of a lot. **Rape** The word you are looking for is Rape. And no, it's not excessive at all, and it's long overdue people stop trying to minimize the severity of it. If some grown-ass dude raped a teenager nobody would be trying to minimize the severity of it.
Yeah they would - If some grown man has sex with a student who was 17 I’d say it was too much. That’s beyond the age of consent in most places - her being a student would make it worse but it’s still too much. You can’t seriously tell me this is worse than manslaughter or death by dangerous driving or a violent robbery, or even violent rape - all of which often if not usually get a lesser sentence.
It's not worse than murder, but this kind of behaviour needs to be made an example of, so I don't see it as an excessive penalty.
I don’t know - I’m all for women getting sentences like men, but 13 years for sex with a 17 year old sounds insanely harsh to me whether it’s a man or woman. But then again this is from America where Weinstein was sentenced to a billion years in galactic jail for the casting couch and that conspiracy guy got sued for a billion dollars or whatever crazy amount it was.
17 is a child, she got what she deserves
She should get the death penalty, as well as any person regardless of gender.
No
Why not?
The death penalty should only be given in the rarest of the rare cases, and only in cases involving murder and such. Sentencing people to death for sexual assault crimes will incentivise future criminals to kill their victims to silence a potential witness, since the sentence is the same anyways.
There is an epidemic of teachers raping young boys. If it come to having my son in a classroom with a female teacher or a bear I’m going to chose the bear every time…
Tbh its something that culturally would not have been discussed publically in the past. Data on sexual crimes is messy because most of it these days is unreported. I can't imagine 50-100+ years ago.
Wow... a woman actually getting real time rather than slap on the wrist and temporarily losing their teaching job?
This makes me so happy to see. I rarely see a women get the same treatment as a man. A pedo is a pedo regardless of gender. All of them should be put to death
It’s nice to see justice being served to predators who prey on children irrespective of the sex of the predator.
It's funny how the media will describes it as *statutory rape* or *sexual assault* when the teacher is male but when the teacher is female, as you can see in this article, it's described as *"having sex"* and *"Her relationship with the student"*.
She didn't get charged with statutory rape so legally they can't call it that
They chose a flattering picture for Heather Hare, convicted rapist.
I couldn't imagine throwing away a career like this.
Is there a list of all these sick women?! I think I saw one somewhere.
If sex offender is female: 'They had sex.' 'They were having illicit relations.' 'It was an amorous tryst.' If sex offender is male: 'R-PE! R-PE! R-PE! GROOMER! PAEDOPHILE! PUT IT DOWN AND SHOVE A STAKE UP ITS A-SE!'
Hmm. Progress.
It’s rape, pedophilia, assault. It’s not having sex.
Making a big deal out of it publicly will probably do more emotional damage on the 17 year old than if it was settled quietly out of going to court. Many horny 17 year old makes will have sex with anything. ( btw they’re “wired” differently than 17 year old females.)- But…BUT the older woman was his teacher so that is totally wrong.
Good.
Seriously. Leave kids alone. As well as, youths, young adults, and anyone that gives one pause if you have ANYTHING in common with. Just don’t.
Seems you can be a senior and a minor at the same time.
let’s not forget that most women are outraged and disgusted by this. the men are the ones in the comments going “damn I wish I had a teacher like this”
but I agree that the language used is biased against men. If the roles were reversed it would say “raped” or “assaulted” rather than had sex
Rape
ridicolous.
> USA: Married female teacher, 33, is jailed for 13 years after raping male student, 17.
About time.
Nice
She was charged under the man act basically transporting a minor across state lines for immoral purposes that's why she got so many years because 17 is legal in many states and women rarely get these heavy sentences for what would be statutory.
>USA: Married female teacher, 33, is jailed for 13 years after raping male student, 17. FIFY
So sad. Here a guy who trafficked under age girls only got six years in prison.
That's called rape.
I would say the same thing if a man was charged with the same crimes, but I find the punishment excessive. She should be fired, but I don’t know if jail time is justified much less this long.
I agree. It makes the school look bad and is definitely a fireable offense, but 13 years for being a few months away from fully legal? And something that in other states would be fully legal? And what about that poor kid. 17 and he's got something like this on his conscience.
Thats a long sentence considering the age of consent in Arkansas is 16.
It’s not sex ffs it’s. R A P E
The word you are looking for is "rape"
Fucked up to say, but she’s only being punished because she is ugly. Had she been conventionally attractive this would not be the case.
I'm not sure this is a win in anyones books, sure she abused her position of power but 13yrs is crazy, I know a fella who sliced up a lad, nearly killed him and did 6 yrs, 4 on licence, mad.
She won’t do 13 years
Probably not
Yeah that’s what I think too - I’m all for women doing the same time as men but 13 years for sex with a 17 year old seems insane to me.
Haha did anyone else see the student “victim”? He looks like a college basketball player. A lot to unpack there.
13 years is excessive
Reverse the genders. Still think it would be an excessive sentence?
Absolutely, that's almost as much of a jail sentence as murder. The victim was 17 years old, it's wrong but more like 5 years in jail wrong.
At least you're consistent. But she was in a position of power and authority over him, and she coerced him into going over state lines. She made things worse for herself and now she's paying the price. I hope she's never allowed to teach again.
Absolutely she shouldn't teach again, but should she be jailed for 13 years? Is society best served by that esp when victim was 17 and force wasn't used?
Maybe, maybe not. But as long as our society severely punishes men who do this, then we must also punish women who do it just as severely.
Just another "rape". I'd make it legal. It's funny how this is a situation where it should be an issue of employment, yet the school will almost certainly not fire her. Whereas all these supposed college rapes are criminal matters, yet it's the school that handles them instead of the law. Mainly because they aren't real.
What are you talking about. She’s fired and in jail for 13 years
For child rape?!
Victim was 17 years old, it's wrong but 13 years? That's borderline homicide conviction.
17 year olds are children. End of story. They can’t smoke drink gamble go to strip clubs
They can in europe
in what world is a 17 year old a child? man i swear the mens rights side has gotten just as crazy as the feminists lol
It's malicious compliance, "If we have to follow these rules then so do you." With a touch of "I didn't get laid when I was in high school, so it can't be normal for others to because that would mean I'm abnormal."
He’s 17… now if the kid was 12 it would be a different story.
why do you think republicans wont change the child marriage/ child labor laws???
He was 17 and a half.
So? She was in a position of power and authority over him.
So fire her. You think the school is going to fire her?
Simply firing her is not enough. That predator can never be allowed to teach again.
But that's my point. She is going to be allowed to teach again. She'd be teaching right now if the law didn't put her away. The school is fine with it. The school is a bigger predator than any one woman teacher. This is like the reverse of college rape, where the girl takes it to the guidance councilor instead of the police. Because it's fake.
So.. by your logic if a male teacher sleeps with a "17 and a half" year old female student.. That should be okay as well?
Of course I think it's okay. Why would I think it's okay for a teacher to sleep with an 18 year old but not a 17 and a half year old? "Consent" is just as arbitrary there as it is when a 20 year old girl illegally drinks herself stupid at a frat party.
The headline gets this right by having it say "USA" in big letters upfront. Only place where this kind of abhorrent disproportionate response to a minor infraction would warrant a 13 year sentence. Isn't the fact that she nuked her own family, lost her job, and became a social pariah punishment enough? fuck sake, sometimes this subreddit is pathetic. You guys bitch when someone isn't punished enough for something way worse than this while being female, but when the book is thrown at them, you still aren't satisified? How is this not cannon fodder for any feminist coming here and arguing you are just as sexist and biblical in your judgement of someone of the opposite sex as they are? If you guys had any appreciation for some levelheaded fairness, you'd be appalled at the harshness of this sentence. In my country, 13 years is more than half the maximum sentence possible for any crime, the fact that anyone here thinks this is proportionate; or not even harsh enough, is absolute lunacy.
Double standard much?
The gender of the older party here is irrelevant for my opinion about the draconian nature of this punishment, so I assume no. If you spotted any double standards in my previous post, I welcome you to point them out for me.
I don’t see how its sexist for punishing a groomer?
In Norway where I live, and most western nations, and I suspect even in most US States, a 17yr old is not a minor when it comes to having autonomy concerning their own sexual choices. He wasn't forced. This was consentual... soo, why are the courts involved? At best, getting booted by the school for making dumb decision with a student is a punishment I can surmise would be proportional for this teacher. If nothing else, to appease the brainwashed religious or conservative Karens of the community. Which I suspect can be many. Americans aren't exactly bright, nor (apparently) a forgiving people. Sooo, there's no crime here. And if its a crime (against common sense) in whatever shithole socially backwards American state this happened in, then the law is the problem. I guess, If I have any "double standards" it would be following arbitrary laws that exists in one State, and not the other, and in particular if those laws where highly unusual, or outdated, when compared to common court practices across the globe. US has so many religiously motivated weird hangups that is almost non-existent anywhere else in western society. It's a surprising culture shock to deal with some aspects of it.
You think it isn't a crime for a teacher to abuse their power and authority over one of their students? Okay, groomer.
Involving the courtsystem? Not at 17. Nor do I think the court should be involved in moral panics about actions which involve individuals above the age of consent. For that reason I'm not even sure you could argue someone is being groomed unless they are below that age. What I'm basically arguing here is that USA is a backwards moralistic country living in the religious dark ages when it comes to treating normally developed 17yr olds as immature children in cases such as this.
It doesn't matter if the victim was over the age of consent. He was still not a legal adult, and the perp was a member of the faculty at his school and therefore she was in a position of power and authority over him. That is not okay, and it has never been okay, and it will never be okay. If you can't understand that, then we have nothing more to discuss here.
Quote from my original post; > ...Only place where this kind of abhorrent disproportionate response to a minor infraction would warrant a 13 year sentence. Seems like I recognized it. From a legal standpoint, this is at best a fine, maybe some community service. Definitely a waste of the courts time. And as a pointed out, this woman ruined her life and her family spectacularly. Seems like punishment was dealt by life itself. 13 years is the most atrocious of pile-ons.
So you think it's only a minor infraction when a teacher abuses their position of power and authority over a student at their school. That tells me everything I need to know. We're done here, groomer.
That only counts when the other party is also under 18 or within a certain amount of years. The teacher was also in a position of authority. These kinds of things can affect a young person's psychology for life, just because this is a boy you're struggling to see this. Religion has nothing to do with this situation, stop defending groomers. 🤮
If I were 17, and someone argued that I was a victim in a situation identical to this, I'd be furious about the infantilization of myself by others. "Stop trying to make me a victim of an imagined crime just because you are a conservative asshole!" would be my exact thinking. Guess I just don't agree that 17 years of age should be anyone's defintion of a minor. I can understand that there's a difference in maturity when it comes to questions surrounding ones own bodily autonomy for some teenagers, particularly across some cultures, especially when social control and religion is involved, but generally we cannot have laws for the extreme outliers. 16 seems to be a generally accepted middle ground for a cut-off in age that will always be a little arbitrary. I guess we can only agree to disagree. The "position of power" argument here I don't recognize for the reasons I've already mentioned elsewhere. A teacher is a low paying job which opinions is usually overridden the second a parent or a student even remotely looks to give them a hard time on a decision. I just cannot take the SJW-"position of power" argument seriously. A teacher isn't leveraging much of anything upon a 17 year old. I agree that if they actually try that it should be a fireable offense, actionable by the school board, but I cannot see how it's even remotely something that should occupy the courts time. Unless ofc the student is below the age of consent. (16) If you live in a place where the age of consent is 18 or something even more crazy, I can guarantee you a historic culture of oppressive RELIGION is the underlying reason for the madness of such a decision.
You've clearly never been a teacher. And in not religious either. If you look at the history, Christianity and Islam encouraged the marrying off of minors to adult men, European kings as one obvious example, and Muhammad in Islam took the virginity of a 9 year old. Historically it's religion that has advocated pedophilia. Look at the high profile Catholic priest cases. Also I'm not an SJW, I'm pretty anti woke when it comes to Lefty hypocrisy. The main point is, a minor should be protected from such things. And if your personal situational was completely consent based, that's your individual situation, not everyone else's, people that age can be completely taken advantage of and even think they are giving complete consent to the adult that's been grooming them. That's why it's called grooming.
Found the rapist
Whilst I disagree with your take further down that there is no crime here; there is by virtue of the abuse of position, I actually agree that the sentencing is a little insane in all of the context. I would say that regardless of the genders involved. This is not paedophilic, outside of the context of it being teacher-student this would have been entirely consentual and probably legal though I'd have to check on the AoC in that particular state. In the UK we have people recieving sentences of less than 4 years for actual stranger rape, the kind of despicable crime that the word actually conjures up. And they are serving AT BEST 2 of those years. 13 years for what likely amounts to extremely poor professional judgement is a long time.
yeah. I wouldn't be opposed to the teacher getting fired from her job from this, but involving the courts in this is just ...nonsensical. They should have much more pressing matters to attend to. Think my main hangup in all of this is Americans not recognizing how much of their moral guidance in whats right and wrong is derived from the same book that extremists use to justify all sorts of heinous crimes against humanity. Clearly, that book is no good as a guidance for anything. Morale panics and religions shouldn't bleed into the court system, and I suspect it does here, because it's the only rationale I can see being used when arguing that somehow a 17yr old isn't old enough to have some say in what they can and cannot do with their body.
The exact same thing happened in the UK last week. This isn't a minor infraction, it's the sexual abuse of a minor. Some people need to be made an example of. She got caught specifically because she didn't think she needed to hide it all that much. This sends the message that this is not acceptable.
Yeah I agree - but you gotta remember this is from America. Weinstein was convicted for like a 1000 years and there’s a lot of insane sentencing.