Reply to: Different approach to all these gender threads

[original PM]

So your original assertion was incorrect.....? It's almost like, perhaps, it's not quite that simple.

Not really still pretty simple in that when you are being paid etc you are expected to act professionally which does not involve hitting on people.

As long as you obey the second and third rules - the person being approached has the right to say No and the approacher has to respect that.

[BrilloPad]

First it was the jews.
Then blacks
Then it was gays
Now it's women.

When will it be time for white heterosexual men? #menhavefeelingstoo

What about people with poor betting history?

Anyway now it is transgender....

[vwdan]

No because in that instance there is an abuse of trust - he is at that point employed to care for them.

Once they leave his school then it is not illegal.

The question then becomes 'Is it acceptable for a person who is significantly older than the other person to approach them with a view to instigating a physical relationship?'

However then you start straying into the moral argument - which is not the same as a legal one.

Frontender beat me to it!

So your original assertion was incorrect.....? It's almost like, perhaps, it's not quite that simple.

[Jog On]

This depends on if it's a legal or moral question.

If we accept the age of consent as 16, then we have to accept that they haven't broken the law.

Is it morally right though? Of course it's not and that's why certain professions have their own rules and breaking them will get you sacked and make you un-hireable.

Same goes for doctors/patients etc.

Agree 100% - when an older person is entrusted to be in a position of authority over younger people they should be bound by law not to abuse that privilege. Something along the lines of "age of consent laws do not apply in schools - anyone found having physical relationships between teacher/student will be considered illegal"

Point I'm making is no gender specifics.

[original PM]

So you think a Headmaster should be able to approach the 16 year old girls in his care for a physical relationship?

No because in that instance there is an abuse of trust - he is at that point employed to care for them.

Once they leave his school then it is not illegal.

The question then becomes 'Is it acceptable for a person who is significantly older than the other person to approach them with a view to instigating a physical relationship?'

However then you start straying into the moral argument - which is not the same as a legal one.

Frontender beat me to it!

[FrontEnder]

Interesting example seeing as there are several cases of female teachers being jailed for having relationships with their underage pupils. Why do you need to apply a gender to this example? Why not:

This depends on if it's a legal or moral question.

If we accept the age of consent as 16, then we have to accept that they haven't broken the law.

Is it morally right though? Of course it's not and that's why certain professions have their own rules and breaking them will get you sacked and make you un-hireable.

Same goes for doctors/patients etc.

[MarillionFan]

First it was the jews.
Then blacks
Then it was gays
Now it's women.

When will it be time for white heterosexual men? #menhavefeelingstoo

[WTFH]

was discussing all this feminist vs mens rights stuff and #metoo etc with a mate over xmas and we tried an experiment that was interesting.

When discussing what's right or wrong or who should/shouldn't do what - take the gender out of it, eg:

Do [people] have the right to hit on other [people]?

There you go - equality made simple

Funnily enough, that's roughly what I said in the other thread...

People should be allowed to "hit on" each other, but if you are going to do it, you must respect the right of the other person to reject your advances.

If you can't show that respect, then no, you shouldn't have the right.

[Jog On]

So you think a Headmaster should be able to approach the 16 year old girls in his care for a physical relationship?

Interesting example seeing as there are several cases of female teachers being jailed for having relationships with their underage pupils. Why do you need to apply a gender to this example? Why not:

So you think a Head teacher should be able to approach the 16 year old pupils in their care for a physical relationship?

[Jog On]

Yep, removing all historical and social context does tend to make things very easy.

And essential if the word equality is to be used.

Payback, reparations and gender privelidge is a different conversation. Maybe the (justified) anger can be addressed appropriately then

[vwdan]

Yes indeed - any person over the age of consent should be able to approach any other person of the age of consent with a view to staring a physical relationship.

So you think a Headmaster should be able to approach the 16 year old girls in his care for a physical relationship?

[original PM]

Oy. Only mods are allowed to use that phrase.

I'm available for a small (ish) fee!

[NotAllThere]

...bigoted idiot.

Oy. Only mods are allowed to use that phrase.

[original PM]

was discussing all this feminist vs mens rights stuff and #metoo etc with a mate over xmas and we tried an experiment that was interesting.

When discussing what's right or wrong or who should/shouldn't do what - take the gender out of it, eg:

Do [people] have the right to hit on other [people]?

There you go - equality made simple

Yes indeed - any person over the age of consent should be able to approach any other person of the age of consent with a view to staring a physical relationship.

All parties also have the right to say no and expect that right to be respected.

And yes as you say it really is that simple.

If you believe for some reason that only certain people are allowed to do this then you are a bigoted idiot.

[vwdan]

Yep, removing all historical and social context does tend to make things very easy.