@GoatBoy998@i23yvi3 While he walks free... It would help her immensely to know the person who did it was being suitably punished. Do you know how painful it is to watch your abuser take no accountability and be treated like they did nothing wrong while you're made to feel ashamed? Didn't think so.
@GoatBoy998@i23yvi3 A lot of survivors who don't get help end up engaging in risky behaviour, drugs, abusive relationships. Why should she have to suffer and work hard to undo the damage someone else inflicted while he walks free?
@GoatBoy998@i23yvi3 Because sexual trauma is very difficult to overcome. You don't just do six weeks of therapy and you're fixed. I'm still dealing with mine from 35 years ago, and believe me when I say I've put in a lot of work and spent a lot of money on therapy.
@Heccles94 I really think The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists should be required reading. I'm rereading it atm and it it could have been written now. What Tressell wrote in 1914 was the same shit people are spewing now.
@arcaopteryx@hell_line0 You don't understand that women get all those things from each other. When a girl is drunk her girls hold back their hair and bring them a blanket and a bucket. When men are drunk his boys draw a penis on his face.
@JessiBlondy@TheBorg00 I've literally never said it was r@pe. I said your reasoning didn't matter in deciding if it was rape or not. It couldn't have been r@pe because you were right- a woman can't r@pe a man under UK law- not because of consent, but by legal definition.
@JessiBlondy@TheBorg00 I'm not making stuff up. I'm quoting facts based on law and professional knowledge of child abuse and trauma. And you know know pubescent boys get erections over anything. Also, again, enjoyment ≠ consent
@JessiBlondy@TheBorg00 Actually, yes it is. If you're over 18, it's illegal to have sex with anyone under 18 if you are in a position of trust, including teachers, social workers, youth workers, drs.
@JessiBlondy@msn__barca@TheBorg00 If you enjoy something it absolutely doesn't mean it's not r@pe. Are you saying that if a 14 yo girl is groomed by an older man and believes he loves her and enjoys their intimate relationship, it's not r@pe because she enjoyed it?
@JessiBlondy@TheBorg00 But in response to your points, what have legal age and being close in age got to do with the definition of r@pe. A 22 year old can r@pe another 22 year old.
@JessiBlondy@msn__barca@TheBorg00 It actually doesn't matter if he "enjoyed" it. She abused a position of power. Many grooming survivors feel they enjoyed it or are confused because of the attention and pleasant sensations mixed with fear and shame. Saying it can't be r@pe because it was enjoyable is dangerous.
@msn__barca@JessiBlondy@TheBorg00 Because UK law defines r@pe as non-consensual penetration with a penis. Statutory r@pe if they're underage, although a child can't consent so it's kind of a moot point.
@TheBorg00@JessiBlondy The boy was 16, the age of consent in the UK. She abused her position. The two girls are very concerning. While I don't accept her excuse of "being immature" because she was 21, I do think there's an issue with teachers this age blurring boundaries with teenagers.
@TheBorg00@JessiBlondy Under UK law r@pe is defined as non-consensual penetration with a penis in the mouth, vagina or anus. That doesn't mean defending her actions, they are indefensible. But legally, it's not r@pe.
@BroadlandPirate@LeeAndersonMP_ I don't understand how MPs are allowed subsidised food and alcohol, yet while working as a teacher and now at a local council, we have to buy our own tea and coffee because it can't be bought out of public money.