B.C. teacher may get jail for sex with student

104 posts / 0 new

Tue, 2009-07-21 02:29

Infosaturated

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/07/20/bc-burnaby-se...

The student's face turned red in B.C. provincial court in Vancouver on Monday as the act was described and the Crown revealed it was the teacher herself who told other male students they "did it" and called his performance disappointing. It was the other male students who told authorities.

The crown is recommending 8 to 9 months which means if she gets that she will probably end up serving a couple of months. I do hope it makes it impossible for her to be in a position of authority over youth ever again. This is a perfect example of how sex between adults and youth places them at a disadvantage.

Tue, 2009-07-21 04:31

Michelle

Good lord. That's awful. :(

Tue, 2009-07-21 04:52

Michelle

And what the hell is up with other teachers "blaming" this poor kid for getting the teacher fired? I see that it says that this is according to the mother that the boy feels like he is being blamed by other teachers. I certainly hope that this is the boy's perception and that teachers aren't really blaming him - and that the school will do something to reassure this boy that the other teachers do not blame him.

This is a good example of how sexism that stereotypes women hurts males as well as females. (No, I'm not talking "reverse sexism", a concept I don't believe in - I'm talking the usual kind of sexism against women.) Some sexist stereotypes: teen girls who have sex are sluts, or need protection from themselves and others when it comes to sex, whereas teen boys are expected to want, and try to get, sex all the time, and if they're successful, they're studs; girls attach emotion to sex, boys don't. These stereotypes make it so that when a boy is sexually exploited by a female teacher, it's not taken as seriously by a lot of people, including men who joke that they wish THEY had a teacher like that, etc. The idea being that he should love it because heck, all boys want to get laid, and think with their dicks, and don't have any emotional connection to sex, right?

The female teacher is also often painted in sexist tropes too - the designing, manipulative, wicked temptress and seductress (whereas male teachers who do the same thing are considered sexual predators or "pervs").

Tue, 2009-07-21 08:34

cps

I definitely think that it's made to feel more insidious when older men have sex with young women than the other way around, and this story is a good example. I feel absolutely horrible for the young man who has been publically shamed and revictimized by the courts. Imagine sitting in a court room and being told you were a lousy lay.

The prinicipal of that school needs to assert some leadership and help staff pull their heads out of their asses before it gets any worse for this kid.

The sad thing is, as a former teacher, I can't tell you the number of times really innaporpriate things happened in class rooms which never made the news. It's a bit like the Catholic Church at times with 'indiscretions' being swept under the rug with quiet censure in order to not embarass the teacher and his family/children. It's absolutely horrible.

Tue, 2009-07-21 08:49

martin dufresne

"I definitely think that it's made to feel more insidious when older men have sex with young women than the other way around"

First, 'the other way around' seems to be rather rare, with or without any abuse. Second, no, looking at relationships and couples in restaurants and bars, not to mention prostitution venues, it is anything but insidious.

Tue, 2009-07-21 09:15

Caissa

When I was 17 and in grade 12, I had a "crush" on my 30 year old English teacher. I'm not sure how common these types of feelings are.

It sounds like in this case the teacher pursued the student, an egregious violation of professional standards.

Tue, 2009-07-21 10:16

cps

martin dufresne wrote:

"I definitely think that it's made to feel more insidious when older men have sex with young women than the other way around"

First, 'the other way around' seems to be rather rare, with or without any abuse. Second, no, looking at relationships and couples in restaurants and bars, not to mention prostitution venues, it is anything but insidious.

I agree that 'the other way around' is rare; sexual exploitation is almost exclusively the dominion of men. That said, sexual exploitation is just that, and examining how victims and predators are treated is a useful tool in examinig the sexist tropes that run through society.

On your second point, I'm having a difficult time extracting how I and those I associate with feel from how society feels. I'm not sure that outside of those men that use sex-trade workers, your point about prostitution holds...unless it is society's apathy which defines their tacit consent.

Cassia, the crush thing happens all the time. When I see teachers acting innapropraitely, it is usually as a mechanism for boosting their self-esteem. Everyone wants to be cool, and everyone wants to be seem as attractive, however, inviting students to bolster your self esteem is not the way to do it. It is very easy to ensure that as a teacher, you are friendly but not a friend.

Tue, 2009-07-21 10:36

martin dufresne

cps: On your second point, I'm having a difficult time extracting how I and those I associate with feel from how society feels. I'm not sure that outside of those men that use sex-trade workers, your point about prostitution holds...unless it is society's apathy which defines their tacit consent.

I am sorry, I don't understand your point.

I was just saying that almost no one is treating as "insidious" ("awaiting a chance to entrap, harmful but enticing" - Merriam-Webster) relationships where men are older than their female partner. That pattern is the norm, reiterated by most films, TV shows, novels, therapists, teachers and other father-figures, etc. Par for the patriarchal course. It's when a woman exerts that privilege that the powers-that-be are mobilized against her.

I also resent the "mechanism to boost one's self-esteem" excuse for abusers.

Tue, 2009-07-21 10:59

cps

Martin, my point about self esteem was not an excuse. It was a reflection of what I have seen, that's all. Too often, I have seen folks get caught up in the adoration/admiration of their students. Clearly it's a sliding scale; I am talking about those breeches of trust that are not as clear cut as intercourse with a student.

I think we agree on the insidious bit. I was merely trying to express that I am having a hard time seeing male-female sex trade relationships as anything less than insidious though I take your point about popular culture expressing patriarchal norms. Put it down to a "i can't believe people think like that" moment on my part...

Tue, 2009-07-21 11:27

#10

martin dufresne

cps: I have seen folks get caught up in the adoration/admiration of their students.

I agree; I taught a universiry class a few decades ago and I remember having tried for such admiration. I guess it was the word "boost" that I objected to. Men always seem to benefit from this social perception that their self-esteem isn't high enough, that they always need more. (There is a good case to be made that it is usually exaggerated.)

Tue, 2009-07-21 11:39

#11

Michelle

I'm trying to figure out what consensual relationships between a couple where the male is older and the female is younger has to do with the topic of this thread, which is sexual abuse by a teacher towards a student.

Male teachers who sleep with female students is just as unacceptable as female teachers sleeping with male students. But in popular culture or consciousness, I think it's more common for people to recognize female victimization by male teachers than the other way around, because boys are supposedly supposed to want sex all the time, from anyone, anywhere, and not attach emotional significance to sex.

Also, I can't figure out how prostitution has anything to do with this thread either, other than the apparent need to drag it into EVERY thread that has anything to do with sex, sexuality, or sexual abuse.

Tue, 2009-07-21 11:51

#12

Snert

Quote:
But in popular culture or consciousness, I think it's more common for people to recognize female victimization by male teachers than the other way around, because boys are supposedly supposed to want sex all the time, from anyone, anywhere, and not attach emotional significance to sex.

Torontonians might remember a case several years back involving a young attendant at a gas station, who was "held up" by a female robber with a weapon and forced to submit to oral sex.

Lotsa jokes and "where can I get me some?" comments, until they caught the "woman" and she was a man. Well!! Suddenly the most desirable bandit in town was just another rapist for the gallows! The attendant's status was quickly changed from "lucky bastard" to "victim".

Tue, 2009-07-21 11:56

#13

martin dufresne

...boys are supposedly supposed to want sex all the time, from anyone, anywhere, and not attach emotional significance to sex

Yeah, despite their best efforts to disabuse women of this notion.

Tue, 2009-07-21 12:07

#14

cps

Michelle wrote:

I'm trying to figure out what consensual relationships between a couple where the male is older and the female is younger has to do with the topic of this thread, which is sexual abuse by a teacher towards a student.

When I brought it up I was speaking in the context of relationships in which one person has an authority over another and I didn't make that clear. I appologise. I was merely trying to echo the point you made about how the different instances of the same thing are treated. I have no problem with any consensual relationship between adults.

Tue, 2009-07-21 12:12

#15

martin dufresne

It's OK, cps. Sexual "consensus" - regardless of power differentials - is kind of a sacred cow here.

Tue, 2009-07-21 12:26

#16

sachinseth sachinseth's picture

similar case recently in brampton. so sickening

Tue, 2009-07-21 13:55

#17

Michelle

martin dufresne wrote:

It's OK, cps. Sexual "consensus" - regardless of power differentials - is kind of a sacred cow here.

Horseshit. First of all, it's "sexual consent" not "consensus". Means two different things. Secondly, we're talking about a case where there WAS a power differential because it was a teacher and a student. And no one was treating that like a "sacred cow". So go smear someone else.

Tue, 2009-07-21 14:29

#18

Maysie

Okay folks, let's dial it back a bit. This means you, Michelle (post#16), and martin (post#14).

Thanks.

Let's try to stay focussed on the delightful topic, 'kay?

Tue, 2009-07-21 14:30

#19

Infosaturated

I found the age differences interesting and the fact that had she not made the derogatory comment their "relationship" would have been defended as "not that bad" or even, as others have mentioned, something to envy on the part of males. After all, he was 17 not 13, almost the age of full consent. Her behavior highlights why it's wrong for older people to enter into sexual relationships with youth. 17 is not a child and 30 isn't "old" but it is eons apart in emotional development and power. People try to portray sex between the young and old as simply a fun activity that feels good like water-skiing but sex isn't that simple. Sex between a 17 year old and a 30 year old probably is "fun" sometimes and sometimes it might not do any particular harm but like drunk driving it can also have devastating results. The issue is not that the younger person always suffers harm, but that the harm can be far worse due to the imbalance in power regardless of who initiated the relationship. I also found the note on sexual orientation interesting. Had this been a homosexual relationship I think the outrage would be far greater and 6 to 8 months would have been considered appallingly low.

I do admire the teens who recognized criminal behavior when they saw it and reported the incident to the police. The teacher probably thought they would be tripping over themselves to impress her with their physical prowess.

Lastly I think it is very clear that her actions weren't really about sex. Like rape, they were about power. Had it been about sex she wouldn't have humiliated him she would have just moved on.

Tue, 2009-07-21 15:27

#20

martin dufresne

Good points.

Just received an Action Call from Plan USA about violence in schools.

"(...) We are urging the United Nations to encourage every country to:
Work with non-governmental organizations and governments to establish data-collection systems so that we can better understand the severity of violence in schools;
Work with teachers and education authorities to develop and implement plans of action for achieving violence-free schools; and
Establish a procedure for children to report violent incidents.
Protecting children from sexual abuse, corporal punishment and bullying should be a global priority. Plan is integrating programs to prevent school violence into our education and child protection projects, and we are working with governments, teachers, parents, and educational authorities to implement plans of action to end violence in schools.

But we need your help to ask the United Nations to demand that every country takes steps to achieve violence-free schools.

Watch our video and ask the United Nations to stop violence against children in schools worldwide!

Thank you for supporting Plan USA as we fight to protect every child's right to Learn Without Fear.

For the children,

W. Ahuma Adodoadji
President/CEO
Plan USA"

Tue, 2009-07-21 17:17

#21

Fidel

I thought this kind of thing only happened in Catholic schools? What is the world coming to?

Tue, 2009-07-21 19:50

#22

Michelle

Actually, Infosaturated, I think it shows nothing of the kind. I started dating a person much older than me (11 years, to be exact) when I was 17, and it was a relationship of equals. Why? Because he was not in a position of authority over me in any way, and I was old enough to make decisions about my sexuality at that point, having been experimenting with sex with people closer to my own age for several years (before the current age of sexual consent, I might add).

If he'd been my teacher, on the other hand, that would have been sexual abuse.

Tue, 2009-07-21 21:54

#23

Infosaturated

Michelle wrote:

Actually, Infosaturated, I think it shows nothing of the kind. I started dating a person much older than me (11 years, to be exact) when I was 17, and it was a relationship of equals. Why? Because he was not in a position of authority over me in any way, and I was old enough to make decisions about my sexuality at that point, having been experimenting with sex with people closer to my own age for several years (before the current age of sexual consent, I might add).

If he'd been my teacher, on the other hand, that would have been sexual abuse.

In your particular case it worked out but laws can't be based on individual cases. Compare it to driving. Some 13 year olds are mature enough to drive and some 23 year olds aren't mature enough to drive. We can't pick an age like 25 just because some people don't mature until that age but neither can we choose 13 because some kids at that age are mature enough. We can't just not have an age law. We are left with having to choose an arbitrary age cut-off. Concerning sex we have the added tool of using "Romeo and Juliet" clauses to ensure that we don't criminalize behavior between teens of similar age or between teens and adults of similar age.

I wonder if you really mean you had sex before the age of consent because right now in Canada that is only 12 years old. A 12 or 13 year old can have sex with someone that is within two years of their age. At 14 and up it is 5 years. So, a 14 year old can have sex with a 19 year old without breaking the law.

The question is not whether or not you or any other individual teen is capable of handling such a relationship and able to correctly discern the motives of the older person. The question is if the average teen at that age is emotionally and intellectually equal to the older person. I would say most 17 year olds are not the emotional and intellectual equal of a 28 year old.

The only means of determining age cut offs is considering the costs and benefits. Many people are supporting themselves independently by the age of 18 and sometimes they need the ability to drive. If we deem them old enough to support themselves and to live alone and to drive it doesn't make a lot of sense to protect them from potentially destructive sexual relationships even though some of them may still be very vulnerable.

There is little difference between 17 and 18 but we do have to pick an age. Preventing mature 17 year old from having sex with people over the age of 24 doesn't seem that arduous a limitation in comparison to preventing the harm that could befall an immature 17 year old. At the absolute most the mature teen and partner only have to wait 12 months to initiate sex with whomever it is they are interested in (assuming the relationship started on their 17th birthday). If the relationship is important than waiting up to a year to have sex isn't the end of the world. If the relationship isn't important than missing out on some fun sex isn't that great a cost either. It's about potential harm not inevidable harm.

In this story what if the woman wasn't his teacher but instead had been a well-liked and admired waitress at the coffee shop across the street from the school. I don't think it would have significantly changed the outcome for him. I question the motives of people who attempt to have sexual relations with significantly younger people. It some cases it may be harmless but I suspect in many cases it is because the older person feels they can exert control over someone considerably younger than themselves.

The only aspect of the law I disagree with is singling out anal intercourse for separate treatment.

Tue, 2009-07-21 23:57

#24

Unionist

Infosaturated wrote:
Preventing mature 17 year old from having sex with people over the age of 24 doesn't seem that arduous a limitation in comparison to preventing the harm that could befall an immature 17 year old.

This sounds to me like condescending contempt for youth under the guise of protecting youth. Just my opinion, you understand.

Wed, 2009-07-22 00:29

#25

Infosaturated

Unionist wrote:

Infosaturated wrote:
Preventing mature 17 year old from having sex with people over the age of 24 doesn't seem that arduous a limitation in comparison to preventing the harm that could befall an immature 17 year old.

This sounds to me like condescending contempt for youth under the guise of protecting youth. Just my opinion, you understand.

Of course, but I know that at 17 I would have been very flattered by attention from an older man and I also would have thought that having sex meant we were falling in love. That was a long time ago, but teens falling in love easily remains a reality for many. I also think that the ability to identify ulterior motives comes with age as well as increasing ability to protect oneself emotionally and to take more time and care in evaluating decisions. In particular impulsivity lessens with age and a greater ability to recognize danger.

What kind of laws would you support? Is it okay for a 40 year old to have sex with a 14 year old?

Wed, 2009-07-22 00:34

#26

Unionist

Infosaturated wrote:
Is it okay for a 40 year old to have sex with a 14 year old?

This is a huge social problem, right? We have an epidemic of young people being seduced by adults, right? That's why Stephen Harper and Vic Toews, the great friends of women and young people, introduced this legislation, right? And young people are getting stupider and more immature with each successive generation, so we need to keep increasing the age when we "allow" them to engage in sexual activity, right?

Sorry, I'll stick to my conclusion.

Wed, 2009-07-22 00:41

#27

Infosaturated

Unionist wrote:

Infosaturated wrote:
Is it okay for a 40 year old to have sex with a 14 year old?

This is a huge social problem, right? We have an epidemic of young people being seduced by adults, right? That's why Stephen Harper and Vic Toews, the great friends of women and young people, introduced this legislation, right? And young people are getting stupider and more immature with each successive generation, so we need to keep increasing the age when we "allow" them to engage in sexual activity, right?

Sorry, I'll stick to my conclusion.

You didn't answer my question. If you think the current law that allows 12 year olds to have sex is too strict what kind of limits do you think are appropriate?

At what point do you consider that it is exploitative for an adult to have sex with a youth and how young is too young? I'm assuming you aren't promoting pedophila.

Wed, 2009-07-22 00:55

#28

Unionist

Infosaturated wrote:

You didn't answer my question. If you think the current law that allows 12 year olds to have sex is too strict what kind of limits do you think are appropriate?

You're correct, I didn't answer your question. I don't appreciate being baited. Why do I say that? Because I never said anything about any law that permits 12-year-olds having sex being too strict. So go ask someone else, please.

Quote:
At what point do you consider that it is exploitative for an adult to have sex with a youth ...

When the relationship is exploitative - irrespective of age.

Quote:
... and how young is too young?

Oh, I know some 30-year-olds that are too young for sex. Would you like to include them in your improvement on Toews's law?

Quote:
I'm assuming you aren't promoting pedophila.

Don't assume that. I might be stalking some children as we speak. You just never know with these sex fiends.

Wed, 2009-07-22 03:06

#29

Infosaturated

Unionist wrote:

Infosaturated wrote:

You didn't answer my question. If you think the current law that allows 12 year olds to have sex is too strict what kind of limits do you think are appropriate?

You're correct, I didn't answer your question. I don't appreciate being baited. Why do I say that? Because I never said anything about any law that permits 12-year-olds having sex being too strict. So go ask someone else, please.

Quote:
At what point do you consider that it is exploitative for an adult to have sex with a youth ...

When the relationship is exploitative - irrespective of age.

Quote:
... and how young is too young?

Oh, I know some 30-year-olds that are too young for sex. Would you like to include them in your improvement on Toews's law?

Quote:
I'm assuming you aren't promoting pedophila.

Don't assume that. I might be stalking some children as we speak. You just never know with these sex fiends.

It is currently legal for people 12 and up to have sex. That's just a fact. The only proviso is the limits on age difference. So, if there were no boundries concerning age adults could have sex with 12 year olds. You said it is condescending for it to be illegal for a 17 year old to have sex with a 25 year old. "It's against the law to have exploitative sex with people" makes no sense as a law. "Expoitative" is subjective. I didn't realize that between 16 and 18 the only limitation is with adults in a position of authority. I disagree with it but I haven't gone on a crusade or anything I just expressed a simple opinion. I've asked you what you think the law should be which seems to me to be a pretty straight-forward non-offensive question. Why are you so hostile and outraged?

Wed, 2009-07-22 07:44

#30

Caissa

drift/Re. 17.

I started university at 17. I was in the Canadian Armed Forces Reserves at 17. I was drinking legally on Base at 17. I think given the other decisions I was considered old enough to make that at 17 I was old enough to make decisions about my sexuality.

/end drift

Wed, 2009-07-22 08:00

#31

Maysie

The thread drift is fine, since clearly we're not done arguing about age of consent laws.

But it is very important to make the distinction that Michelle made at post #21. Here it is again:

Michelle wrote:
I started dating a person much older than me (11 years, to be exact) when I was 17, and it was a relationship of equals. Why? Because he was not in a position of authority over me in any way, and I was old enough to make decisions about my sexuality at that point, having been experimenting with sex with people closer to my own age for several years (before the current age of sexual consent, I might add).

If he'd been my teacher, on the other hand, that would have been sexual abuse.

When talking on the thread topic, it's the power imbalance that makes this situation abuse, the legal part is about the laws about age of consent. Age of consent alone doesn't account for what is problematic about any adult in a position of power over a youth. And I define youth as anyone under 18.

Not that there can't be exploitative relationships at any age of course. However, the legal and moral issues of having power over (which is usually the older person, but not always) is what makes incidents of teachers and students cases of abuse and exploitation.

When I was 16 I too dated someone who was much older than me (12 or 13 years I think). I was way more mature than him, by the way.

Wed, 2009-07-22 08:08

#32

Stargazer

I had the exact oppositite experience than Michelle. I was 17, soon to be 18 and he was 35. It was no relationship of equals. It was a grown man and an immature kid. He used my age (this was a pattern of his) because he knew at my age I didn't have a ton of experience in relationships, so he used me as a toy. I was purely a sexual toy. I fell in love with him, being only 17 and not knowing any better, while he went on to abuse me in every manner possible. He was not the only older man who did the same thing to me at a young age. These "relationships" were not healthy for me, and I certainly was not old enough to fully comprehend the decision I made when I had sex with them. BTW, I was already a parent and had been having sex for a few years. But in the case of the older men, it was clearly an attept tp get at me because I was young, vulnerable and could be easily used and abused by these older men whose only desire was to do to me what they could without complaint from me as I had no real idea of what a "normal" relationship was.

Just because a young girl has a child or had already been engaging in age appropriate sexual relationships does not make it okay, or equal. That's been my experience and the experiences of most of the women/girls I know now and did know then.

I have a 26 year old son and I can tell you without a doubt that he in no way was mature enough at 17 to make a decison to sleep with a woman or man nearly twice his age.

Wed, 2009-07-22 08:29

#33

Unionist

Infosaturated wrote:
I've asked you what you think the law should be which seems to me to be a pretty straight-forward non-offensive question. Why are you so hostile and outraged?

Because we've been having this discussion since 2006 and you purport to have forgotten my views. I don't like being baited. It's just a personal quirk of mine. I also find it repugnant that on a progressive discussion board, someone would propose criminalizing non-exploitative relationships that are currently lawful, based solely on age, as if there is some huge social problem that needs addressing.

I subscribe to the views that many organizations published when they were condemning the Harper-Toews legislation, which you have long said doesn't go far enough (except that you oppose the discrimination on anal intercourse):

Quote:
Canadian Federation for Sexual Health supports the current age of consent and the provisions of current legislation, which protect young people from sexual exploitation.

[b]Canadian Federation for Sexual Health does not support raising the age of consent to sexual activity from 14 years to 16 years, as there is no evidence that this increased restriction on individual rights will increase protection of youth from sexual exploitation or provide any other benefit sufficient to justify the intrusion into personal privacy and consensual activity. Rather, the prospect of legal sanction and third party disclosure could seriously discourage youth from accessing preventive and therapeutic health services and other forms of information and assistance.[/b]

Canadian Federation for Sexual Health believes that the age of consent should be universal, without regard to gender or type of sexual activity. The current law makes discriminatory distinctions among various types of sexual activity that are not supportable on health or other objective grounds. Furthermore, the distinction is a barrier to comprehensive sexual health education.

[b]Canadian Federation for Sexual Health believes that, at any age, consent should be informed. CFSH further believes that the best way to protect and support young people is to ensure that they have access to accurate, comprehensive, timely and non-judgmental sexual health education and services that inform them about their rights and options, and the risks and benefits of engaging in sexual activity.[/b]

From the [url=http://cfsh.ca/About_CFSH/Position-Statements/age-of-consent.aspx][color... Federation of Sexual Health.[/color][/url]

Wed, 2009-07-22 09:58

#34

Snert

[url=http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2009/07/22/10216986-sun.html]A similar case in Calgary[/url]

Quote:
Noting the important role teachers have in the lives of our children, provincial court Judge Barb Veldhuis said a stern sentence was warranted.

Let's see if this trial judge agrees.

Wed, 2009-07-22 10:17

#35

Ghislaine

Stargazer, thank you for sharing your experiences and I am sorry that had to happen to you. I know that you don't believe it unionist, but older men seducing younger girls IS a problem in this country. It is happening on the internet, it is happening near schools and it is happening to girls with self-esteem issues, messed-up ideas about love/sex (due to the hypersexualization mentioned in previous threads and thinking they will be valued/loved if they "put out"), who have been abused by fathers or other men, etc. ,etc.

It has been my experience in working with youth that it usually goes the way stargazer described. There is a lot missing from sex ed in this country, which seems to focus solely on the "plumbing".

Wed, 2009-07-22 10:37

#36

Unionist

The [url=http://www.cdnaids.ca/web/position.nsf/pages/cas-pp-0298][color=blue]Can... Aids Society[/color][/url], July 2006:

Quote:
Currently, the Government of Canada is exploring increasing the legal age of consent for sexual activity from 14 to 16 years of age. The Canadian AIDS Society does not support this action.

[b]The Canadian AIDS Society is concerned that increasing the age of consent could result in young people being more secretive about their sexual practices and not seeking out the information they need.[/b] This will place youth at an increased risk of contracting HIV and other sexually transmitted infections.

Furthermore, the proposed ammendments to the age of consent do not address an existing law prohibiting anal intercourse for individuals under the age of 18. Age of consent should be universal and not discriminate by type of sexual activity.

[b]The Criminal Code of Canada already protects people under the age of 18 from sexual relationships that happen under circumstances of exploitation, pornography, prostitution or in relationships of trust, authority or dependency. [/b]

Passed by Parliament in July 2005, Bill C-2 created new protections for youth under 18 years of age against exploitative sexual activity. Bill C-2 takes into account the nature and circumstance of the relationship, including the age of the young person, the difference in age between the youth and the other person, how the relationship evolved, and the degree of control or influence exercised over a youth under 18.

The average age of first sexual intercourse is 14.1 years for boys and 14.5 years for girls as reported in the Canadian Youth, Sexual Health and HIV/AIDS Study (2003) by the Canadian Council of Ministers of Education. In 2000, 29% of all positive HIV tests in Canada were reported by youth ages 15-29. Young people between the ages of 15 and 19 already have the highest rate of sexually transmitted infections in Canada.

The Canadian AIDS Society believes that the Canadian government should be focussing their efforts on promoting consistent, comprehensive HIV/AIDS and sexual health education across Canada. The best way to protect and support youth is to ensure that education and services are available to inform them about their rights and options, and the risks and benefits of engaging in sexual activity. [b]Educating youth to make informed choices that are right for them is better addressed through parental guidance and comprehensive sexual health education than by using the Criminal Code.[/b]

Wed, 2009-07-22 11:32

#37

writer

There is a problem with abuse, at any age. There is a problem at work. There is a problem at home. There is a problem at school.

It's abuse.

And yes, girls are messed up by incest. Again, that's about POWER, yes? As it is with a manager at work. As it is with the bully or teacher at school.

Should we not be putting energy there - in stopping abuse such as incest - instead of waiting till a survivor is 16 and dating an older creep? Like a younger creep would be better?

Wed, 2009-07-22 12:23

#38

The Bish

Quote:
I know that you don't believe it unionist, but older men seducing younger girls IS a problem in this country. It is happening on the internet, it is happening near schools and it is happening to girls with self-esteem issues, messed-up ideas about love/sex (due to the hypersexualization mentioned in previous threads and thinking they will be valued/loved if they "put out"), who have been abused by fathers or other men, etc. ,etc.

Presumably, then, we should also prosecute 50 year old men who seduce 30 year old women, right? There are plenty of adult women with self-esteem issues who are taken advantage of by manipulative men. Certainly if we're throwing in jail men who take advantage of young women's self-esteem, we should also be throwing in jail men who take advantage of slightly older women's self-esteem as well, right?

Wed, 2009-07-22 12:27

#39

Snert

Neverminding the fact that by the time a guy feels a need to "score" with anyone who'll let him, his self-esteem probably isn't at all-time highs either.

Wed, 2009-07-22 13:35

#40

remind

writer wrote:
There is a problem with abuse, at any age. There is a problem at work. There is a problem at home. There is a problem at school.

It's abuse.

And yes, girls are messed up by incest. Again, that's about POWER, yes? As it is with a manager at work. As it is with the bully or teacher at school.

Should we not be putting energy there - in stopping abuse such as incest - instead of waiting till a survivor is 16 and dating an older creep? Like a younger creep would be better?

exactly, writer!

Wed, 2009-07-22 15:41

#41

sachinseth sachinseth's picture

well said, writer.

Wed, 2009-07-22 17:24

#42

Unionist

I'll add my voice to that - kudos!

Wed, 2009-07-22 18:04

#43

Stargazer

The Bish wrote:

Quote:
I know that you don't believe it unionist, but older men seducing younger girls IS a problem in this country. It is happening on the internet, it is happening near schools and it is happening to girls with self-esteem issues, messed-up ideas about love/sex (due to the hypersexualization mentioned in previous threads and thinking they will be valued/loved if they "put out"), who have been abused by fathers or other men, etc. ,etc.

Presumably, then, we should also prosecute 50 year old men who seduce 30 year old women, right? There are plenty of adult women with self-esteem issues who are taken advantage of by manipulative men. Certainly if we're throwing in jail men who take advantage of young women's self-esteem, we should also be throwing in jail men who take advantage of slightly older women's self-esteem as well, right?

That's a BS argument and not what Ghislaine had meant at all. There is clearly a vast difference between a 17 year old and a 30 year old. I can't believe I have to explain this on a progressive board. Older men abuse and use younger woomen (girls) all the time! This isn't a one off thing. And I could give a rat's ass about the guys supposed low self-eseteem. Some of these guys get off on using and abusing young girls because a) they can and b) because they have a very very twisted sense of that young girl as his own possession. Apparently the experiences of young girls should just be tossed aside because some men, without young girls I would imagine, think that it is okay for an older man to prey upon a young female. It is not okay. I spent years in a shrinks chair afterwards, and never again was I able to have a fully caring and healthy relationship.

If this pisses some people off, I don't care. It is REAL experience. Not just for me, but for a lot of young girls who have self-esteem issues. It is NOT health and it is NOT right.

Wed, 2009-07-22 18:10

#44

Stargazer

And Unionist, what makes you think me or any of the other young girls who fell prey to these twisted screws should have done? Report them to the police? We didn't even fully realize how wrong this was at the time, and how badly it would effect us. On top of that, the cops don't care about rape so much, and especially cases where an older pervert has completely screwed up a young girl.

writer - exactly. We need to spend more time and resources on educating girls and women. I wish we could educxate men on this topic but apparently the majority think there is nothing wrong with an older man and a very young girl. Look at Hollywood. Old predators everywhere, casting couches for the starlets. Did you know Meagon Fox was told to wash the Director's car as an audition for her part in Transformers 2? Twisted screws with power. I won't even get into the amount of "barely legal" porn men consume...

Wed, 2009-07-22 18:21

#45

Unionist

Stargazer wrote:

And Unionist, what makes you think me or any of the other young girls who fell prey to these twisted screws should have done? Report them to the police? We didn't even fully realize how wrong this was at the time, and how badly it would effect us. On top of that, the cops don't care about rape so much, and especially cases where an older pervert has completely screwed up a young girl.

Stargazer, I feel both shock and sympathy at what you had to undergo, and a pretty big sense that I never had to suffer anything remotely like that and will never be able to fully understand that. I'm glad you survived.

But the comments I made have nothing to do with your case or anyone else's. I agree with what Planned Parenthood and the Canadian Aids Society and the NDP Youth and LGBT caucuses and many many others had to say. They said criminalization will inhibit reporting, not encourage it. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

Wed, 2009-07-22 18:28

#46

writer

Stargazer, as you know, I have experienced some of what you've experienced. I feel we are something like sisters in this bullshit patriarchy, this world of denial, this culture of predatory exploitation, and I hold that relationship close to my heart.

And I agree completely with Unionist's last paragraph.

The new rules wouldn't have helped me one bit when I was a baby, a toddler, an 11-year-old. By then, I had been well groomed for what was to come. And there was no way I would destroy my family by disclosing my reality. And the mythology of keeping children safe was nothing but a strange joke. A mythology that came from my own parents' mouths, as I sat there mute and dumfounded. Invisible.

Wed, 2009-07-22 18:36

#47

The Bish

Stargazer wrote:

That's a BS argument and not what Ghislaine had meant at all. There is clearly a vast difference between a 17 year old and a 30 year old. I can't believe I have to explain this on a progressive board. Older men abuse and use younger woomen (girls) all the time! This isn't a one off thing. And I could give a rat's ass about the guys supposed low self-eseteem. Some of these guys get off on using and abusing young girls because a) they can and b) because they have a very very twisted sense of that young girl as his own possession. Apparently the experiences of young girls should just be tossed aside because some men, without young girls I would imagine, think that it is okay for an older man to prey upon a young female. It is not okay. I spent years in a shrinks chair afterwards, and never again was I able to have a fully caring and healthy relationship.

If this pisses some people off, I don't care. It is REAL experience. Not just for me, but for a lot of young girls who have self-esteem issues. It is NOT health and it is NOT right.

I've never said that I thought it was OK and I've never said that I thought that any particular person's experiences should be discarded. I'm not "pissed off", I'm trying to understand why some people feel the need to declare that "the children need protecting!" and then use that as an excuse to control their behaviour.

Yes, there is a vast difference between a 17 year old and a 30 year old. There is also a vast difference between a 30 year old and a 50 year old. There are vast differences between people of virtually any age group. What I want to know is why we should classify people in a particular way based entirely on one seemingly abritrary characteristic - the number of times that person has rotated around the sun. I do not accept that "children" or "youth" or any similar category deserve to have their behaviour controlled by another group that has deemed itself to be superior, in this case "adults". Both of those categories are social creations. If there is something specific which you can identify in "youth" that requires their behaviour to be controlled by "adults", I'd be very much interested in hearing what it is.

Wed, 2009-07-22 19:16

#48

remind

Stargazer, I hear your words in that you feel/realize women need to protect other women, and girls, from that of patriarchial preditory exploitation.

If so, I agree and see no reason for male involvement in that whatsoever.

Wed, 2009-07-22 19:37

#49

Stargazer

So do you think it is a good thing that 30 year old men can date 15-17 year old girls? Obviously there is a vast difference between the maturity of a 17 year old compared to a 30 year old.

I'm not agruing for "control" over anyone. I'm explaining a reality. Do you have any suggestions how how we can program men to stop abusing young girls? because that sure is a big problem.

Edited to add - yes remind. That is pretty much what I am talking about however, I think we need to stop focusing on the youth and start focusing on these grown men who feel the need to get involved with teens.

Wed, 2009-07-22 20:13

#50

remind

well that's hard for me to answer stargazer, as I never saw 20 and 30 year old men as being desirable when a teen ager, I thought they were old and yucky, and would not give them the time of day as an person of intimate interest. And the first act of violence and patriarchial abuse against me, as a teen ager, came at the hands of a male 3 years older than I, who was himself a teenager when it first started happening.

When I was 16, I knew that I was more mature than, Colin Thatcher, for example. And treated him as the immature 30 something patriarchial puke he was. But that awareness, did not save me from failing to recognize someone from my own age gradients propensity to be abusive.

Moreover, we had 2 young male teachers who were very involved with us as teen agers, (mixed male female group) and who we related to, that kept us out of a world of trouble in out of school situations. Nowadays their actions would be suspect in doing the same thing, so I can't see it happening. But never once did they ever breach boundaries of sexual space. And frankly if I ran into them nowadays I would thank them for caring enough to keep us out of trouble when teens, by being positive mentors in social situations out side of school.

Wed, 2009-07-22 21:41

#51

Ghislaine

The Bish wrote:

What I want to know is why we should classify people in a particular way based entirely on one seemingly abritrary characteristic - the number of times that person has rotated around the sun. I do not accept that "children" or "youth" or any similar category deserve to have their behaviour controlled by another group that has deemed itself to be superior, in this case "adults". Both of those categories are social creations. If there is something specific which you can identify in "youth" that requires their behaviour to be controlled by "adults", I'd be very much interested in hearing what it is.

wow. Perhaps the fact that they are dependants, they are not-fully-developped children who require guidance, financial protection and every other bit of care under the sun? As well, adults have quite different legal responsibilities in many areas towards children as compared to their fellow adults.

There have been a lot of ages thrown around, and I agree with child welfare law (in most provinces) and age of consent laws that 16 is a good number to use to define the end of childhood. Obviously every person on this planet is unique and will have a different exact time they are mature (if ever!), however there needs to be a legal line and it will seem arbritary sometimes. Youth are also not allowed to drive until age 16. Is that controlling behaviour by adults? Definitely and it is necessary! I would submit that the drinking age and voting age should be lowered to 16 as well.

The exception as in the case being discussed, is when those in positions of power are involved - such as teachers with 16, 17 and 18 yr olds.

B.C. teacher may get jail for sex with student

Pages