16 Year Old Marries Her 40 Year Old High School Track Coach - Page 5 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-29-2007, 02:13 AM   #81
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
*browneyedgirl*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: clueless
Posts: 3,692
Local Time: 04:54 PM
I was 16 when I met Mr. Brown and he was 31 and we've been married 24 years though they are even 10 years more age difference than us.
__________________

*browneyedgirl* is offline  
Old 06-29-2007, 06:55 AM   #82
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 05:54 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by intedomine

There is an age where the loose "age is just a number" concept cannot apply, but I think 16 is perhaps too high. I'm thinking that anything 14 and under is when moral questioning should be undertaken and that a case of peadophilia might indeed be at hand.

They started dating when she was 14....
__________________

anitram is offline  
Old 06-29-2007, 07:49 AM   #83
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 04:54 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by intedomine
I'm probably coming from a different set of values and experiences, but I personally think 16 year olds are of a more heightened maturity then society tends to stereotype them as.

There is an age where the loose "age is just a number" concept cannot apply, but I think 16 is perhaps too high. I'm thinking that anything 14 and under is when moral questioning should be undertaken and that a case of peadophilia might indeed be at hand.
From what experience or values do you come from where you think kids of 15 are emotionally capable of these types of relationships?
Quote:
Originally posted by intedomine

And I did overlook the issue of authority before, and again I'm coming from another mindset all together, but I've always felt that for kids over 13, teacher's should no longer necessarily be figures of authority but figures of support. Tutorers more so than teachers if you like. I feel that teens would enjoy and get more out of their learning experience if the educators were more friendly with the students, rather than being the traditional "mean, old bossy boots" Guidance officers if you like, and ones who don't mark student exams And a good guidance officer is not one would take advantage of someone who might lack maturity.

Authority figure doesn't equal "mean, old bossy boots", and you are right a GOOD guidance officer wouldn't take advantage, but as you and I know they aren't all good.

I'm very good friends with my boss, but I understand the lines that are there due to our work relationship. I also had teachers that I was very close with, but once again understood the lines of the relationship.
BVS is offline  
Old 06-29-2007, 01:52 PM   #84
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Washington State
Posts: 3,861
Local Time: 09:54 PM
well, I definitely agree with you on your second point about how young people are patronized. I'm in college and I've felt man times that the younger students in the class (including me) were treated much differently than the older students (some in their 40's). My last math teacher would constantly yell at the younger people for talking even a tiny bit (I didn't even notice they were talking until he had coniption fits about it). But when the adults did the same thing, but worse, he just looked at themwith a sort of awkward smile on his face. A lot of these teachers know what they can get away with, and they take advantage of it.

The way to help students is to provide them with help and information as they need it. Not dump busy work on them, push silly rules on them and treat them like imbeciles. It's ridiculous how a lot of my professors treat their students. And I'm talking young people even in their early twenties.

But about 16 year olds, yeah, I agree they're getting more mature. In a way. I know a LOT of young people around 15-18 and I find them extremely immature and silly sometimes regarding important things.
shart1780 is offline  
Old 06-29-2007, 02:49 PM   #85
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,856
Local Time: 05:54 PM
ultimately, we cannot allow each 16 year old to decide for him/herself whether or not they are mature enough to decide to be able to participate in an adult relationship with someone significantly older. i can look back at myself at 16, and if some hot athletic 30 year old guy at the gym wanted to have a relationship with me, i'd like to think that i would have been able to make a good decision at the time. but i might have been wrong. so, as a society, we have basically determined a specific age when one is considered an adult: 18. and it makes sense -- at the age of 18 you have presumably finished the education the state is required to provide you. you can vote, you can drive a car, you can buy cigaretts and porn and get a credit card and you can be drafted and have your legs blown off. (but you still can't have a beer). so it makes sense, then, that if you are entrusted with all this responsibility at 18, then you ought to be able to pick and choose your sexual partners so long as they, too, are adults.

the cut-off line is somewhat arbitrary, but it seems to me that there's more logic to 18 than to 16.

is it possible that these two will be in love and stay together forever? of course. but this exception doesn't do anything to alleviate the great potential for the abuse of power by an authority figure, and that's a greater concern to me than the possibility that we're keeping two individuals -- one of whom is a child -- apart. for 2 years.

for the life of me i don't see why they couldn't have waited until she was 18.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 06-29-2007, 06:46 PM   #86
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Bono's shades's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: The back of beyond
Posts: 5,046
Local Time: 04:54 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
is it possible that these two will be in love and stay together forever? of course. but this exception doesn't do anything to alleviate the great potential for the abuse of power by an authority figure, and that's a greater concern to me than the possibility that we're keeping two individuals -- one of whom is a child -- apart. for 2 years.

for the life of me i don't see why they couldn't have waited until she was 18.
Bingo. If this girl is so mature, wouldn't she be willing to wait two years? The fact that she is insisting on getting married right now and won't listen to anyone tells me she isn't that mature. Of course there's no guarantee she will automatically become more mature upon reaching the age of 18, but at least there's a chance.
Bono's shades is offline  
Old 07-01-2007, 05:58 AM   #87
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
intedomine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 8,105
Local Time: 07:54 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


From what experience or values do you come from where you think kids of 15 are emotionally capable of these types of relationships?

If someone forced me to end a relationship with an older woman, merely because of my age, I would have been furious.

When I was 15-16, there were a lot of sheilas going out with blokes around 19-22. They were not mere sexual relationships, they were proper relationships based on love and sex and faith and fear and all the things that keep us here. Some of those couples are still kicking on. Age shall not weary or deny them...

If anything, it is the advantage of youth that will can make an individual better at entering a relationship with someone. At 15-16-17, there is no pressure to marry by a certain age, no birth-clock, and the advantage of fresh and updated sexual education.

You're more likely to enter a relationship with someone who you really want, rather than someone you just wanna marry so you can share a bank account, or in an urgency to have kids, only for a marriage to deteriorate a few years later and for everything to end in tears, not just for the couple, but also for the kids.

And 15-16-17 year olds, at least in my experience, never viewed someone as eligable for the fact that they might have money or their parents might be rich. They valued the person more than their fortune (or lack of).
intedomine is offline  
Old 07-01-2007, 12:46 PM   #88
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 04:54 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by intedomine


If someone forced me to end a relationship with an older woman, merely because of my age, I would have been furious.
So? Oh no a 16 year old is pissed off at his parents, that's something new...

Quote:
Originally posted by intedomine

When I was 15-16, there were a lot of sheilas going out with blokes around 19-22. They were not mere sexual relationships, they were proper relationships based on love and sex and faith and fear and all the things that keep us here. Some of those couples are still kicking on. Age shall not weary or deny them...
Not sure what a Sheila is... But 19-22 is completely different from 14-16.

Quote:
Originally posted by intedomine

If anything, it is the advantage of youth that will can make an individual better at entering a relationship with someone. At 15-16-17, there is no pressure to marry by a certain age, no birth-clock, and the advantage of fresh and updated sexual education.
There's also a huge lack of emotional maturity, big disadvantage.

Quote:
Originally posted by intedomine

You're more likely to enter a relationship with someone who you really want, rather than someone you just wanna marry so you can share a bank account, or in an urgency to have kids, only for a marriage to deteriorate a few years later and for everything to end in tears, not just for the couple, but also for the kids.
So the difference from 16 to 25 becomes bank accounts? Come on. Give me something, you're reaching...

Quote:
Originally posted by intedomine

And 15-16-17 year olds, at least in my experience, never viewed someone as eligable for the fact that they might have money or their parents might be rich. They valued the person more than their fortune (or lack of).
This is bullshit...
BVS is offline  
Old 07-01-2007, 01:47 PM   #89
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 07:54 AM
Kids have sex, 16 seems to be as good as any time to make it legal, abuse of authority is an entirely different matter than a 16 year old having sex with a 40 year old. And as far as manipulative and warped relationships go is it really the duty of the law to prevent them?

If only the naturally annoying nature of teenage girls was able to repel more of the time.
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 07-01-2007, 03:17 PM   #90
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 04:54 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
And as far as manipulative and warped relationships go is it really the duty of the law to prevent them?

It's the law's duty to protect children.
BVS is offline  
Old 07-01-2007, 03:30 PM   #91
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 07:54 AM
But if the younger party is consenting (im not talking about 14, im talking 16) then that isn't the issue. Whether at 16 some or many can't become properly invested in a serious relationship is irrelevent.

Example of an acquaintance who started dating a guy in his late 30's when she was in high school and still with him five years later, a perfectly normal couple with an age difference when they started that would fall under the bad category in other parts of the world. Perhaps a sharp legal mind could explain how much discretion is allowed in the spectrum between child abuse and a consensual sexual relationship.
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 07-01-2007, 03:30 PM   #92
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2girl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: slovenija
Posts: 21,081
Local Time: 11:54 PM
at the parents.

at the sleaze.
U2girl is offline  
Old 07-01-2007, 04:59 PM   #93
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 04:54 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer


Example of an acquaintance who started dating a guy in his late 30's when she was in high school and still with him five years later, a perfectly normal couple with an age difference when they started that would fall under the bad category in other parts of the world. Perhaps a sharp legal mind could explain how much discretion is allowed in the spectrum between child abuse and a consensual sexual relationship.
How is this example similar to a teacher dating a student?
BVS is offline  
Old 07-01-2007, 07:50 PM   #94
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
intedomine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 8,105
Local Time: 07:54 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar

So? Oh no a 16 year old is pissed off at his parents, that's something new...


Not sure what a Sheila is... But 19-22 is completely different from 14-16.


There's also a huge lack of emotional maturity, big disadvantage.


So the difference from 16 to 25 becomes bank accounts? Come on. Give me something, you're reaching...


This is bullshit...
The older a couple is, the more likely it is that the union has developed out of a desperate need to find a partner quick. Whether it be because the woman is getting too old to have kids, to satisfy some " 'you-must-marry' old school" parents, or to marry into financial security.

With mid-teens, relationships are usually based on a genuine physical or emotional desire to be with someone.

Is there really something wrong about a relationship between a 22 year old and a 15 year old?

Who is likely to be more emotionally capable and mature at handling or entering a relationship? An 18 year old girl who has already been involved in a 2 year sexual and emotional relationship with someone, or a 31 year old never-been-kissed virgin who is petrified of speaking to the opposite sex.
intedomine is offline  
Old 07-01-2007, 08:25 PM   #95
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 04:54 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by intedomine


The older a couple is, the more likely it is that the union has developed out of a desperate need to find a partner quick. Whether it be because the woman is getting too old to have kids, to satisfy some " 'you-must-marry' old school" parents, or to marry into financial security.
This is bullshit. You're comparing 15 year olds with 40 year olds, what about everything in between?

Quote:
Originally posted by intedomine

With mid-teens, relationships are usually based on a genuine physical or emotional desire to be with someone.
Emphasis on the physical part...

Quote:
Originally posted by intedomine

Is there really something wrong about a relationship between a 22 year old and a 15 year old?
What would any 22 year old have in common with a 15 year old? I would have to question the maturity or the intent of any 22 year old dating someone in high school.

Quote:
Originally posted by intedomine

Who is likely to be more emotionally capable and mature at handling or entering a relationship? An 18 year old girl who has already been involved in a 2 year sexual and emotional relationship with someone, or a 31 year old never-been-kissed virgin who is petrified of speaking to the opposite sex.
What the hell does this have to do with anything?
BVS is offline  
Old 07-02-2007, 12:36 AM   #96
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 10:54 PM
Let's keep it calm with the discussions here, huh...there aren't really extreme enough questions to get highly agitated about.
Quote:
Originally posted by intedomine
The older a couple is, the more likely it is that the union has developed out of a desperate need to find a partner quick. Whether it be because the woman is getting too old to have kids, to satisfy some " 'you-must-marry' old school" parents, or to marry into financial security.
I see from your profile that you're 21. How many recently married older couples do you know, and know well? I'm 36, have seen a lot of friends and coworkers and relatives in the 30-50 age group get married over the last several years, and I don't get the impression from that, that these "desperate need" scenarios you speak of are very common at all (nor do I know of any sociological data that supports that they are). On the contrary, I'd say the more common pattern seems to be that these relationships are already several years old before they turn into marriage (and for that matter, it's not infrequently a second marriage for one or both partners). I can't think of an instance where rushing into it because the woman was nearing menopause, or 'old school' parents were pushing for it (not many people my age have that sort of dependence on their parents nowadays anyhow), or dire need for a serious cash infusion on the part of either partner appeared to play any role. You almost come across as if you assume 'older' people getting married for the first time must be basket cases in some way or another that they hadn't gotten around to it sooner, or perhaps (formerly) hellbent-on-permanent-singlehood types who recently experienced a total collapse of self-confidence and thus threw all caution to the winds.
Quote:
With mid-teens, relationships are usually based on a genuine physical or emotional desire to be with someone.
Relationships, period, are usually based on that, in Western societies anyhow. Of course 'genuine' doesn't always mean mature or healthy, but to be fair that can be true at any age, too.

Again, it almost sounds as if you think 'older' people must necessarily be driven by all kinds of wildly dysfunctional motives in their romantic lives, otherwise they'd surely have found 'genuine' love sooner. I suspect the response of most 'older' people to that would be that they've already had several relationships from their teen years onward as it is, thank you very much, and in fact they trust themselves a lot more now to be ready to commit to sharing the rest of their lives with someone than they did at 18 and certainly at 15; that they have a clearer-eyed view from experience of what their own flaws as a companion are, what kinds of fulfillment anyone other than themselves will never be able give them and thus shouldn't be expected from a romance, and so on. Does that mean all teenaged relationships are 'doomed' not to have those qualities, or that all 'adult' relationships will automatically have them; no, obviously not. But I don't think you'll find too many 'older' people lamenting that they sure wish they could know 'genuine' love again like they did in their teenage years, and that now that they're older it's all become one long sordid tale of desperation and ticking biological clocks and an inability to recapture what 'desiring' someone 'genuinely' feels like.
Quote:
Is there really something wrong about a relationship between a 22 year old and a 15 year old?
Not intrinsically, no. On the other hand, 'marriageable age' worldwide is generally based on what by consensus is seen as the average minimum age at which a person is ready to assume adult responsibilities as that society understands them. Are you OK with 15-year-olds being subject to the draft, for example? Being fully financially responsible for themselves (whether they want to be or not)? In the US at least, many states require you to be in school until age 18 (some states allow you to leave at 16 with parental permission). And in most all states, your parents are still legally responsible for you until age 18. How far would you be willing to go to change those things in the interests of letting 15-year-olds marry whomever they want, whenever they want? I think most Americans would agree with Irvine that there are few good reasons for not waiting until you've at least attained the age of majority (and completed high school) to get married. Your partner isn't going to disappear off the face of the earth.



As far as the legal issues surrounding the case in question, those are pretty cut-and-dried really--the marriage itself broke no laws. But I'm still dumbfounded that this school's principal found "nothing inappropriate" in his employee regularly giving one of his 14-year-old charges of the opposite sex private rides home, and text-messaging her at 2 AM. Legality before the state--in the abstract sense of their ages only--is one thing; the professional appropriateness of a coach dating his 14-year-old student is something else. Like I said earlier, your students are not there (and a captive, paying audience at that) in order to to supplement your social circle and dating pool. And not many people could honestly say they perceived their relationships to their teachers in high school no differently than they perceived those to their peers--there's almost always a felt level of beholdenness, and a presumption of overall life competence, with the former that there wouldn't be with the latter.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 07-02-2007, 01:11 AM   #97
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
intedomine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 8,105
Local Time: 07:54 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by yolland
I see from your profile that you're 21. How many recently married older couples do you know, and know well? I'm 36, have seen a lot of friends and coworkers and relatives in the 30-50 age group get married over the last several years, and I don't get the impression from that, that these "desperate need" scenarios you speak of are very common at all (nor do I know of any sociological data that supports that they are). On the contrary, I'd say the more common pattern seems to be that these relationships are already several years old before they turn into marriage (and for that matter, it's not infrequently a second marriage for one or both partners). I can't think of an instance where rushing into it because the woman was nearing menopause, or 'old school' parents were pushing for it (not many people my age have that sort of dependence on their parents nowadays anyhow), or dire need for a serious cash infusion on the part of either partner appeared to play any role. You almost come across as if you assume 'older' people getting married for the first time must be basket cases in some way or another that they hadn't gotten around to it sooner, or perhaps (formerly) hellbent-on-permanent-singlehood types who recently experienced a total collapse of self-confidence and thus threw all caution to the winds.

Relationships, period, are usually based on that, in Western societies anyhow. Of course 'genuine' doesn't always mean mature or healthy, but to be fair that can be true at any age, too.

Again, it almost sounds as if you think 'older' people must necessarily be driven by all kinds of wildly dysfunctional motives in their romantic lives, otherwise they'd surely have found 'genuine' love sooner.


As far as the legal issues surrounding the case in question, those are pretty cut-and-dried really--the marriage itself broke no laws.
Good post.

Note that I said, older couples might be MORE LIKELY to get hitched due to reasons other than love (children, financial security, social pressure). I'm not saying that all older folk are married for these reasons. While it's true I do not socialise as frequently with folk in their 30-40s than folks in their teens and twenties, I just sense that older couples can sometimes view their wedlock as a sense of obligation (can't turn back the clock, stay together for the kids, no one else will want me) than a 100% willing commitment.

Also regarding marriage. While I think it's a grand and appealing concept, it certainly is NOT for everyone. Of every 100 couples (of any age) that might exist, it might not be too drastic to suggest that 30-40 of those couples would have been better off not ever marrying someone, and they often might feel this way. This is purely speculative though. That said, shame on society and our history for expecting folk to get married. The idea of a bastard child as being inferior or "lacking" in some way is an idea that should be entirely annihilated for the sake of humanity.

For me, there is nothing quite like young love (or a young person being in love) and experiencing the physical and emotional rollercoaster ride in their mid-teens. They should not be deterred. Experience things when you are young.

The issue has probably been sidetracked by a few of us so maybe it should get back on track. But ultimately, if there is nothing legally wrong with the impending marriage at hand, then we all probably have no right to object, especially if none of us really know anything about the couple. We're just playing around with numbers
intedomine is offline  
Old 07-02-2007, 01:34 AM   #98
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 04:54 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by intedomine


The issue has probably been sidetracked by a few of us so maybe it should get back on track. But ultimately, if there is nothing legally wrong with the impending marriage at hand, then we all probably have no right to object, especially if none of us really know anything about the couple. We're just playing around with numbers
Yet you keep forgetting he's her teacher. What part of that do you not understand?
BVS is offline  
Old 07-02-2007, 06:00 AM   #99
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 07:54 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


How is this example similar to a teacher dating a student?
It's not, and I thought that everybody here was against people in positions of authority abusing that power for sexual gains (apparently as in this case). What I was saying is that at 16 if somebody wants to have sex with a 40 year old it shouldn't be against the law.
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 07-03-2007, 12:07 AM   #100
Blue Crack Addict
 
RedRocksU2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Murrieta, CA.
Posts: 26,437
Local Time: 02:54 PM
FYM always delivers
__________________

RedRocksU2 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×