If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   Cute 27-year-old teacher arrested for sex with students. This week's teacher sex trifecta now in play (w/mugshot)   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 105
    More: Dumbass, Colorado, Amanda Rowles, position of trust, SEAL Team  
•       •       •

41314 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Dec 2012 at 10:51 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



105 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-24 12:01:41 AM
One of the commentators FTFA "not be sexually molested by a teacher who can't find a guy her own age who wants to date her"

I think she has that backwards - this teachers does not date guys her own age BECAUSE she is getting 17 year olds. Molesting? I gotta say I don't think the term applies to sex that these boys wanted. Everything I read in that article seems to lead to them very much wanting that sex. Like having it over 40 times. The boy kissing her and initially being pushed away.

I went to school. Teachers get hit on constantly. I doubt in many of these stories that the teachers was the instigator. Weak willed and unprofessional? Sure. But not rapists by any logical, sane definition.

I think these teachers get caught so much because in most cases - the student can't help themselves from bragging about banging that hot teacher. I think it is pretty much a given that is going to happen.
 
2012-12-24 12:02:07 AM

JesusJuice: Gawdzila: I'd totally hit it.
Her hair and makeup-free face make her seem pretty Plain-Jane, and the mugshot thing never does anyone any favors, but I think she'd clean up well.
In fact... here is another picture of her. Tiny, but the only size I could find. Not a model, but certainly cute.

She's not bad looking, but knowing what a raging slut she is kind of kills it.


Trying to figure this one out...
 
2012-12-24 12:04:12 AM

JesusJuice: mrbach: GlobalThunder: Very,very plain. Would hit if she was at the bar around closing time.

/plenty of jack and coke consumed

I think we mean, would hit it if we were 17 again in high school. Pedo? Really? It's different if an older woman has sex with a 17 year old boy. Come on. Double standard? Yes. There are two sexes. Of course there is a double standard.

Ok, let's toss out all this 'equality' nonsense, then.


What does this have to do with equality? Men and women are different, at least when it comes to sex. The law can and should recognize this without rolling back women's rights.
 
2012-12-24 12:06:23 AM
I for one would not be a teacher unless they made farking the student OK. It's too easy for a student to say "he touched me". So for me, just make doing your student (high school) a perk of the job.

Hell, I'm surprised the teachers union haven't already negotiated this as part of their benefits package.
 
2012-12-24 12:07:41 AM
Would definitely hit that.
 
2012-12-24 12:16:16 AM
need to see the butt, then I will decide
 
2012-12-24 12:19:23 AM
I'm gettin' drunk on Vodak an' Kahlua...with a splash of leche.

www.drinkinginamerica.com

/would fark that shiat in a New York minute!
 
2012-12-24 12:19:25 AM

omgwtfetc: JesusJuice: mrbach: GlobalThunder: Very,very plain. Would hit if she was at the bar around closing time.

/plenty of jack and coke consumed

I think we mean, would hit it if we were 17 again in high school. Pedo? Really? It's different if an older woman has sex with a 17 year old boy. Come on. Double standard? Yes. There are two sexes. Of course there is a double standard.

Ok, let's toss out all this 'equality' nonsense, then.

What does this have to do with equality? Men and women are different, at least when it comes to sex. The law can and should recognize this without rolling back women's rights.


Equal rights means equal responsibility. Why can't feminists understand this?
 
2012-12-24 12:20:40 AM
i212.photobucket.com
 
2012-12-24 12:22:02 AM

omgwtfetc: JesusJuice: mrbach: GlobalThunder: Very,very plain. Would hit if she was at the bar around closing time.

/plenty of jack and coke consumed

I think we mean, would hit it if we were 17 again in high school. Pedo? Really? It's different if an older woman has sex with a 17 year old boy. Come on. Double standard? Yes. There are two sexes. Of course there is a double standard.

Ok, let's toss out all this 'equality' nonsense, then.

What does this have to do with equality? Men and women are different, at least when it comes to sex. The law can and should recognize this without rolling back women's rights.


Yes men and women ARE different. Women are not allowed to crave and enjoy sex. Men are expected to - but women... SLUTS! WHORES! SKANKS! Since we know that women are not sexual beings at all - any case of a 17 year old girl with that teacher (that she won't shut up about how she thinks he is so hot) is automatically a case of violent rape that will scar her for life.
 
2012-12-24 12:32:33 AM

Snargi: Gawdzila: I'd totally hit it.
Her hair and makeup-free face make her seem pretty Plain-Jane, and the mugshot thing never does anyone any favors, but I think she'd clean up well.
In fact... here is another picture of her. Tiny, but the only size I could find. Not a model, but certainly cute.

[images.schoolinsites.com image 150x210]

But now we've seen her without makeup. I'd rather plan for a plain jane then to start the night off with a model and wake up with coyote ugly.


Reminds me of the time I was thinking about making a move on a friend's roommate. Then I stopped by early one morning to meet my friend and this middle-aged woman opened the door. I thought, "Huh. I didn't know they lived with Megan's mom." Then I realized that was Megan!!! Still gives me chills. That girl was a hard 25. Rode hard and not even put away. Just left to wander around in the rain.

And that story reminds me of the first time I saw Bo Derek at the post office in curlers and a housecoat back in the early 80s. I didn't believe my mom until she pointed out the personalized plate on the Jag that spelled out something related to the movie "10". I'd never seen the movie (I was just a kid at the time) but I'd heard of it and seen the cover at the video store. Usually a celebrity sighting was exciting news to tell all your friends but not this time.
 
2012-12-24 12:40:03 AM
I'm going to go ahead and assume that in many of these cases, the sex has stopped and the boys spilling their secrets comes after they can no longer, well, spill with the teacher.
 
2012-12-24 12:40:55 AM

Brick-House: And one has to wonder how may students out there know how to keep their mouths shut and not screw up a good screw.


They will learn teir lesson in a few weeks when their buddies show them not to mess up a good thing.
 
2012-12-24 12:41:43 AM
Cute? I think I need to stop clicking these "(insert level of attractiveness) female does something illegal/and or awesome" links.
 
2012-12-24 12:44:10 AM

jtown: personalized plate on the Jag that spelled out something related to the movie "10"


was it "Bolero"?
 
2012-12-24 12:45:43 AM
Homely chick is homely.
 
2012-12-24 12:48:34 AM

thenooch: jtown: personalized plate on the Jag that spelled out something related to the movie "10"

was it "Bolero"?


Um...no. Because then it would have been related to the movie "Bolero".
 
2012-12-24 12:57:14 AM

bk3k: omgwtfetc: JesusJuice: mrbach: GlobalThunder: Very,very plain. Would hit if she was at the bar around closing time.

/plenty of jack and coke consumed

I think we mean, would hit it if we were 17 again in high school. Pedo? Really? It's different if an older woman has sex with a 17 year old boy. Come on. Double standard? Yes. There are two sexes. Of course there is a double standard.

Ok, let's toss out all this 'equality' nonsense, then.

What does this have to do with equality? Men and women are different, at least when it comes to sex. The law can and should recognize this without rolling back women's rights.

Yes men and women ARE different. Women are not allowed to crave and enjoy sex. Men are expected to - but women... SLUTS! WHORES! SKANKS! Since we know that women are not sexual beings at all - any case of a 17 year old girl with that teacher (that she won't shut up about how she thinks he is so hot) is automatically a case of violent rape that will scar her for life.


The law doesn't deal in particulars. Generally speaking, a 17 year year old girl is far more likely to be hurt or manipulated in a sexual relationship with a 27 year old male than a 17 year old boy is in a relationship with a 27 year old female. That's not politics, it's just life.
 
2012-12-24 01:04:03 AM

JesusJuice: Gawdzila: I'd totally hit it.
Her hair and makeup-free face make her seem pretty Plain-Jane, and the mugshot thing never does anyone any favors, but I think she'd clean up well.
In fact... here is another picture of her. Tiny, but the only size I could find. Not a model, but certainly cute.

She's not bad looking, but knowing what a raging slut she is kind of kills it.


Even if I considered sleeping with sleeping with 2 people (or sleeping with 1 person an average of once every 4-5 days) to be indicative of a "raging slut", I can't for the life of me figure out what the hell is wrong with sluttery. Why is it stigmatized specifically for women? Why would I, as a guy, consider it a BAD thing for a woman to enjoy sex? Why would I WANT to try and steer women towards prudishness by calling them nasty things for having casual sex? Nobody would ever criticize a guy for being morally degenerate enough to sleep with upwards of two people, I don't see what makes this chick any worse.
 
2012-12-24 01:15:15 AM

Snargi: Gawdzila: I'd totally hit it.
Her hair and makeup-free face make her seem pretty Plain-Jane, and the mugshot thing never does anyone any favors, but I think she'd clean up well.
In fact... here is another picture of her. Tiny, but the only size I could find. Not a model, but certainly cute.

[images.schoolinsites.com image 150x210]

But now we've seen her without makeup. I'd rather plan for a plain jane then to start the night off with a model and wake up with coyote ugly.


I understand what you're saying, but I personally never really see things that way.
I generally find it very easy to look past makeup (or the lack thereof), and conversely, I also find it easy to look past blemishes or complexion issues. It's all about face shape, and structure, and proportions, and those things don't change with lipstick and blush so I've never really been surprised by someone's "morning face".
 
2012-12-24 01:37:01 AM

Gawdzila: I can't for the life of me figure out what the hell is wrong with sluttery. Why is it stigmatized specifically for women?


In a word, babies.

Before easy contraception and proof of paternity, the only way to ensure that the kid was yours was to secure the pussy, by hook or by crook. That includes slut-shaming.
 
2012-12-24 02:07:35 AM

Amos Quito: DanZero: Once again -


[img.photobucket.com image 761x446]


You're cuttin' into Drew's revenue stream, dude.

You want the price of TF to go up to $50?

/Click$


Hope the price of FarkLite doesn't go up.... that would ruin EVERYTHING.
 
2012-12-24 02:09:04 AM

omgwtfetc: bk3k: omgwtfetc: JesusJuice: mrbach: GlobalThunder: Very,very plain. Would hit if she was at the bar around closing time.

/plenty of jack and coke consumed

I think we mean, would hit it if we were 17 again in high school. Pedo? Really? It's different if an older woman has sex with a 17 year old boy. Come on. Double standard? Yes. There are two sexes. Of course there is a double standard.

Ok, let's toss out all this 'equality' nonsense, then.

What does this have to do with equality? Men and women are different, at least when it comes to sex. The law can and should recognize this without rolling back women's rights.

Yes men and women ARE different. Women are not allowed to crave and enjoy sex. Men are expected to - but women... SLUTS! WHORES! SKANKS! Since we know that women are not sexual beings at all - any case of a 17 year old girl with that teacher (that she won't shut up about how she thinks he is so hot) is automatically a case of violent rape that will scar her for life.

The law doesn't deal in particulars. Generally speaking, a 17 year year old girl is far more likely to be hurt or manipulated in a sexual relationship with a 27 year old male than a 17 year old boy is in a relationship with a 27 year old female. That's not politics, it's just life.


Poor little girls are just incompetent and defenseless because they don't have a penis?

And no teenage boy could ever get farked up or taken advantage of by an older woman.

Hell let's just make all sex illegal. Women are too stupid to consent so it's all rape. This teacher was raped.
 
2012-12-24 02:15:50 AM
These kinds of stories really start to make me sad. Why? It's just sad when someone ruins their life for just a bit of fun.
 
2012-12-24 02:27:32 AM

theorellior: Gawdzila: I can't for the life of me figure out what the hell is wrong with sluttery. Why is it stigmatized specifically for women?

In a word, babies.

Before easy contraception and proof of paternity, the only way to ensure that the kid was yours was to secure the pussy, by hook or by crook. That includes slut-shaming.


Okay sure but we've had the pill for a half-century now. Besides, that's a good reason to stigmatize cheating, not sluttery.
Even without contraception, if a girl doesn't have any kids what does it matter what her sexual history is?
 
2012-12-24 02:33:35 AM

Smackledorfer: omgwtfetc: bk3k: omgwtfetc: JesusJuice: mrbach: GlobalThunder: Very,very plain. Would hit if she was at the bar around closing time.

/plenty of jack and coke consumed

I think we mean, would hit it if we were 17 again in high school. Pedo? Really? It's different if an older woman has sex with a 17 year old boy. Come on. Double standard? Yes. There are two sexes. Of course there is a double standard.

Ok, let's toss out all this 'equality' nonsense, then.

What does this have to do with equality? Men and women are different, at least when it comes to sex. The law can and should recognize this without rolling back women's rights.

Yes men and women ARE different. Women are not allowed to crave and enjoy sex. Men are expected to - but women... SLUTS! WHORES! SKANKS! Since we know that women are not sexual beings at all - any case of a 17 year old girl with that teacher (that she won't shut up about how she thinks he is so hot) is automatically a case of violent rape that will scar her for life.

The law doesn't deal in particulars. Generally speaking, a 17 year year old girl is far more likely to be hurt or manipulated in a sexual relationship with a 27 year old male than a 17 year old boy is in a relationship with a 27 year old female. That's not politics, it's just life.

Poor little girls are just incompetent and defenseless because they don't have a penis?

And no teenage boy could ever get farked up or taken advantage of by an older woman.

Hell let's just make all sex illegal. Women are too stupid to consent so it's all rape. This teacher was raped.



Men and women have different evolutionary strategies. Surely you can deal with that without infantilizing women.

Link
 
2012-12-24 02:38:10 AM
I can't believe people think they should throw the book at this woman. You shouldn't throw the book at consensual intercourse. Save the book for actual rapists.
 
2012-12-24 03:12:48 AM
Headline says cute, but not cute at all!
HAHAHA!
I totally get it!!
 
2012-12-24 03:34:18 AM
Gawdzila: "I'd totally hit it.
Her hair and makeup-free face make her seem pretty Plain-Jane, and the mugshot thing never does anyone any favors, but I think she'd clean up well."

Agreed. Big (tear-filled)eyes, nicely shaped lips.
 
2012-12-24 03:34:58 AM

omgwtfetc: Smackledorfer: omgwtfetc: bk3k: omgwtfetc: JesusJuice: mrbach: GlobalThunder: hit?

OMG:   Ok, let's toss out all this 'equality' nonsense, then.

What does this have to do with equality? Men and women are different, at least when it comes to sex. The law can and should recognize this without rolling back women's rights.

SD: rape?



Would not even with Subby's pathetic excuse for a male organ. And how do you get raped 40 times without being chained to something?

If you fail to raise your daughter well enough that she knows not to fool around with old or middle-aged men when she is age 17, don't run to the police if she does.  Maybe encourage her to be sexually active at the right time in her life for her, with age-appropriate partners.

OMG, the law or rather the process that gets people charged does treat male and female young people differently, but maybe not in a good way. In the US a law that singles out women and girls for special treatment runs a high risk of being unconstitutional. Criminal laws generally do not discriminate based on the gender of the victim. Everywhere, but especially in places where the boys will be boys attitude prevails among police and prosecutors, the discretion of those state actors affects who ends up with criminal charges, so gender can be a factor.  Mandatory reporting laws are designed in part to impede the exercise of such discretion, and they result in more prosecutions.  When they do charge someone, prosecutors may try to get a guilty plea to a lesser offense if they think that the victim was only technically a victim.  If the accused can't afford to fight it, they almost always plead to something, maybe do a little time then go on probation and register as sex offender.  If you are confident police and prosecutors will always use that discretion wisely, then why are you here?

A law that criminalizes sex with all 17-year old people is overbroad.  That means it captures marginal cases like this one.   A better law would not have a bright line in this age range.It would say for every child under age X, they can't consent; for those aged 17 or X-17 or X-X, a court can find someone not guilty on the grounds that the young person consented.  Can be combined with Romeo & Juliet. This allows police, prosecutors and the court to take into account the actual maturity of the victim and decide if consent was possible in their opinion, the same as they do with any other alleged victim of rape.
 
2012-12-24 04:03:11 AM

4tehsnowflakes: omgwtfetc: Smackledorfer: omgwtfetc: bk3k: omgwtfetc: JesusJuice: mrbach: GlobalThunder: hit?

OMG:   Ok, let's toss out all this 'equality' nonsense, then.

What does this have to do with equality? Men and women are different, at least when it comes to sex. The law can and should recognize this without rolling back women's rights.

SD: rape?


Would not even with Subby's pathetic excuse for a male organ. And how do you get raped 40 times without being chained to something?

If you fail to raise your daughter well enough that she knows not to fool around with old or middle-aged men when she is age 17, don't run to the police if she does.  Maybe encourage her to be sexually active at the right time in her life for her, with age-appropriate partners.

OMG, the law or rather the process that gets people charged does treat male and female young people differently, but maybe not in a good way. In the US a law that singles out women and girls for special treatment runs a high risk of being unconstitutional. Criminal laws generally do not discriminate based on the gender of the victim. Everywhere, but especially in places where the boys will be boys attitude prevails among police and prosecutors, the discretion of those state actors affects who ends up with criminal charges, so gender can be a factor.  Mandatory reporting laws are designed in part to impede the exercise of such discretion, and they result in more prosecutions.  When they do charge someone, prosecutors may try to get a guilty plea to a lesser offense if they think that the victim was only technically a victim.  If the accused can't afford to fight it, they almost always plead to something, maybe do a little time then go on probation and register as sex offender.  If you are confident police and prosecutors will always use that discretion wisely, then why are you here?

A law that criminalizes sex with all 17-year old people is overbroad.  That means it captures marginal cases like this one.   A better law w ...


I'm drunk and I really want to argue with you. Say something stupid.
 
2012-12-24 04:22:19 AM

Begoggle: Headline says cute, but not cute at all!
HAHAHA!
I totally get it!!


Link

Direct link to gis, because it can't be restated enough.
 
2012-12-24 04:51:18 AM

skinink: For those of you saying "no way I'd touch her" you do realize these are two 17 year old kids farking the choir teacher. What a setup for them! Besides she looks Plain Jane in those pics, and she may have a smoking body for all we know.

But, she is a pedo and I hope they throw the book at her. Is it that hard for her to find two adult men she can use as a booty call only?


17 ain't pedo, but it is an abuse of authority on her part.
 
2012-12-24 04:56:41 AM

cowgirl toffee: cowgirl toffee: Riotboy: She's HOT!!! I wish she was my teacher.

/loves me some green eyes

Really? You like green eyes? My eyes are a blue/green color. Wanna see?

[img195.imageshack.us image 320x212]

A lot of people say they are pretty. :P

Hummm... maybe that was a bit too close.


These guys have a pretty concise graph, if you ask me...
 
2012-12-24 04:59:07 AM

skinink: But, she is a pedo and I hope they throw the book at her. Is it that hard for her to find two adult men she can use as a booty call only?


I hope someone has informed the school district that it is not uncommon for 17 year-old boys to claim to have had sex dozens of times without actually having done so even once. Despite the disparaging remarks being made here, it's entirely possible that she is the youngest, cutest teacher at that particular high school, and thus a potential target for such boasts.
 
2012-12-24 05:01:30 AM

Alleyoop: Teacher, please, put on some make-up, it does wonders...

[fezion.com image 500x441]

/maybe get you out on the "to pretty to send to prison" defense


I honestly find her more attractive in the "rough" photo. The "plastic barbie" look gives me nothing.
 
2012-12-24 05:24:49 AM

omgwtfetc: ...

I'm drunk and I really want to argue with you. Say something stupid.


There is a legion of Farkwits at hand to do that for me
 
2012-12-24 06:05:49 AM
"Show the average teenage American male a lug-wrench, and his mind will turn to thoughts of lust!"
 
2012-12-24 06:08:37 AM
see?
 
2012-12-24 07:21:52 AM
Oh, the yaller rose of Texas
The cutest on this Earth
Her right eye looks at Dallas
Her left one at Fort Worth
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJbLeSL2ic0
 
2012-12-24 07:37:29 AM

4tehsnowflakes: see?


What? It's a quote, you clod.
 
2012-12-24 08:52:35 AM
The simple solution:

Force every teenager to undergo a psych evaluation every year once they turn 14. If the evaluator determines that the teen is sexually active, or ready to be sexually active, they are then placed into a a national register along with every adult over the age of 18.

Then, when it's revealed that a teacher and a student has engaged in sexual intercourse, the 2 individuals can be cross referenced to the national DB. If they check out and have been cleared and approved for sexual intercourse, then it falls to the school to then reprimand the teacher for her conduct.
 
2012-12-24 09:07:21 AM
That is cute? I do not know what that is.
 
2012-12-24 09:18:59 AM

dickfreckle: Meh, I'd hit it. Don't sit here and tell me that every last-call girl at the bar you tracked into your house was a perfect "10."


If you meet her in a bar, is she still a call-girl, or is she "off duty"?
imgs.xkcd.com
 
2012-12-24 09:35:02 AM

omgwtfetc: Smackledorfer: omgwtfetc: bk3k: omgwtfetc: JesusJuice: mrbach: GlobalThunder: Very,very plain. Would hit if she was at the bar around closing time.

/plenty of jack and coke consumed

I think we mean, would hit it if we were 17 again in high school. Pedo? Really? It's different if an older woman has sex with a 17 year old boy. Come on. Double standard? Yes. There are two sexes. Of course there is a double standard.

Ok, let's toss out all this 'equality' nonsense, then.

What does this have to do with equality? Men and women are different, at least when it comes to sex. The law can and should recognize this without rolling back women's rights.

Yes men and women ARE different. Women are not allowed to crave and enjoy sex. Men are expected to - but women... SLUTS! WHORES! SKANKS! Since we know that women are not sexual beings at all - any case of a 17 year old girl with that teacher (that she won't shut up about how she thinks he is so hot) is automatically a case of violent rape that will scar her for life.

The law doesn't deal in particulars. Generally speaking, a 17 year year old girl is far more likely to be hurt or manipulated in a sexual relationship with a 27 year old male than a 17 year old boy is in a relationship with a 27 year old female. That's not politics, it's just life.

Poor little girls are just incompetent and defenseless because they don't have a penis?

And no teenage boy could ever get farked up or taken advantage of by an older woman.

Hell let's just make all sex illegal. Women are too stupid to consent so it's all rape. This teacher was raped.


Men and women have different evolutionary strategies. Surely you can deal with that without infantilizing women.

Link


While I enjoy psychology, evolutionary psychology is simply a way to explain current behavior through educated guesswork, not a reason to justify continuing it - even if the guesswork explanation hits the nail on the head.

The fact that so many thinking humans, male and female alike, disagree with old social norms suggests there is no evolution at work here. Rather it is merely a fleeting social construct that can change completely in a generation. Evolution is a highly unlikely cause for something to change so much within a generation.

Either you misunderstand both psychology and biology, or you just want an excuse to be sexist.
 
2012-12-24 09:50:16 AM
Well she is a choir teacher so I assume I'd not really have to look at her face......
 
2012-12-24 10:57:05 AM
I wouldnt be particularly proud of myself about it, but I'd tap it.
 
2012-12-24 11:56:17 AM
Jeez.... I wouldn't hit it with the Subby's shiat. NASTY
 
2012-12-24 12:14:10 PM
i.dailymail.co.uk

Cute? I suppose that's a relative term.... I'm having a hard time seeing her as cute.

 
2012-12-24 02:13:12 PM
Smackledorfer:
"While I enjoy psychology, evolutionary psychology is simply a way to explain current behavior through educated guesswork, not a reason to justify continuing it - even if the guesswork explanation hits the nail on the head.

The fact that so many thinking humans, male and female alike, disagree with old social norms suggests there is no evolution at work here. Rather it is merely a fleeting social construct that can change completely in a generation. Evolution is a highly unlikely cause for something to change so much within a generation.

Either you misunderstand both psychology and biology, or you just want an excuse to be sexist."

Agreed, minus the last sentence. Evolutionary biology is used far too much to justify barely-tenable theories as fact.
 
Displayed 50 of 105 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report