Magister
- 2012-07-30
Oh, I’ve just noticed another one!
Now it’s cannibalism that comes under Clyde’s moral microscope and is placed on a par with legal sex between two consenting adults.
http://www.eslteachersboard.com/cgi-bin/forum/index.pl?noframes;read=78391
I don’t know that there’s been such a debate on this board but if there were I’d imagine the post to start it all would be something along the lines of the following……..
Hi All
I’ve a bit of a dilemma to discuss. There’s this 21year old student at my university, great lean body, sexy long legs and nice choice breasts. At first I thought I’ll just fool around with her as she seems really up for coming to my apartment for a bit of fun. However, now I’m thinking it’s been a while since I’ve had a nice cut of meat, you know what it’s like in China all that fatty and greasy pork, so now I’m thinking that I’d like to eat her.
I just feel a bit guilty, because she is a student at my university. If she was not at my university I would have had her in the wok by now.
But then I’m hungry, why should I feel any guilt?
Some advice from more experienced foreign teachers would be appreciated.
Thanks
Hannibal
Enter Clyde to put the world to rights and show us all that eating students just isn’t right!
Up and up the morals go
Where they stop , only Clyde knows
.
Magister
- 2012-07-30
What you can now see about Clyde's posts and his arguments are that they are not just going round in a circle but also spiraling up, setting the moral bar higher and higher in an attempt (as he he himself has conceded) to win the argument at all costs.
We've all doubtlessly heard stories from others, I can think of one where a serial rapist of students was finally fired after a student escaped his apartment screaming and putting her clothes on.
every place I've worked has had scandals involving men dating students (including teenagers)
We're talking about consensual sex between adults not rape or paedophilia.
Further examples then include, wife beating, incest and the holocaust (in a different post to the one I'm replying to). Is he suggesting that these heinous crimes are some how relevant to the situation described by the OP? At which point did the OP suggest that he was going to beat the girl up or was there somewhere in that post that he stated she was his sister? I definitely missed the part where after he beds her he indulges in a spot of ethnic cleansing.
This isn't about some Platonic form out in the ether, we're talking about actions which are "felonies" in the West, and about teacher/student relationships, all of which has been hammered out very thoughtfully and carefully, and the conclusions are practical and sound.
But these conclusions are not universally accepted either by individuals or by law makers. They are subject to debate and change. To give you a taste of your own medicine I'll draw on the example of pre-marital sex, something which you yourself have admitted to having done and to which you therefore must feel is not immoral. Yet during the 20th century many of the same US states that you have used to try and argue a legal precedent against sex with a 21 year old student (Texas, Utah, etc.) passed laws regarding fornication that made pre-marital sex illegal (many have since been repealed or are simply ignored by law enforcement). Let's be honest such laws that restrict the rights of adults in their private lives are generally made without careful and practical conclusions and do not always match the moral standards of the people that they govern.
Furthermore, are all questions of morality on a level playing field? No, every individual holds different beliefs at various levels. while you think it's ok to have sex with women you're not married to others will argue it's immoral and wrong. Many of the tactics you've used to argue against the situation described by the op could be used against you in such a debate. But does that mean that if we find a difference in our moral values on one such issue that we wouldn't find many more similarities? It's why it is rather unfair of you to bring in topics like rape, paedophilia, etc. to support your claims for this area. It gives the impression that there is some sort of universal, unchangeable criteria that covers all possible topics for debate in regards what is right and wrong and that individual is either standing on one side (good) or the other (bad). By all means pick up a history book and you'll soon see that this is simply not the case.
Stop raising the moral bar! Debate the topic itself and concede the fact that you can't win an argument over what an individual feels to be morally right or wrong. Furthermore such a debate is never going to be as black or white as the shape of the earth example that you used as an analogy.
Clyde
- 2012-07-29
Cunninglinguist wrote:
However, apart from Romeo (Ricky) and let's call the young Chinese woman Juliet, not one person writing here will be directly affected by the decision they make.
If I thought that were true I wouldn't bother, but I think people will read this stuff, and some poster are actually encouraging teachers to "bonk" their students. Some men may even feel that if they don't bonk a student, they are less of a man. I think you know how common this problem is, and every place I've worked has had scandals involving men dating students (including teenagers). We've all doubtlessly heard stories from others, I can think of one where a serial rapist of students was finally fired after a student escaped his apartment screaming and putting her clothes on. Therefor, I think the mindless goading of people to fuck students is so reprehensible that it is worthy of squashing.
Attempts have been made by both sides to define "morality"
This isn't about some Platonic form out in the ether, we're talking about actions which are "felonies" in the West, and about teacher/student relationships, all of which has been hammered out very thoughtfully and carefully, and the conclusions are practical and sound. By your argument, one could say that question of wife beating or incest or pedophilia could be mere philosophical quandaries of vague notions of morality. We know child abuse is wrong, and we don't need to consult Wittgenstein about it. Most of us (except sexpats living in their own bubbles of delusion), also know that teachers fucking students is wrong.
On teacher-student romantic relationships, there will always be a tacit acceptance that there may be an element of abuse of power.
Do you think you could water that down anymore? Oh, dear, "In regards to axe-murderer, there will always be a general agreement among the cognoscenti that perhaps they'd stepped somewhat out of the bounds of polite society." This is not new stuff anymore, shit, 6 years ago in Texas it became a punishable felony of up to 20 years to have sex with students.
Well, when one of them goes around boasting that he is "liberating Chinese women sexually" I think the antidote may need to be as strong as the venom. Besides which, having lived in Asia for 6 years and in 3 different countries, I've seen for my own eyes that this is the general trend. It's usually older guys, a bit shabby, who are the ones going to Asia for sex or boasting about having sex with Asian girls. Of course there are exceptions, but, I think you've probably noticed the same trend yourself.
There's far too much of an image being presented of those who may be in this situation being Western peverts - old men, slobs etc.
I wonder if the indignation would have been less if say the age difference was only 5 years. I don't say this flippantly because I supect there would more more tolerance due to the prospect of meeting the parents and a future marriage. In that case, how they got together becomes an irrelevance but provides the conundrum.
Interestingly, and I think appropriately, some laws have larger punishments for age differences of more than 4 years. I don't think anyone would have any trouble seeing how a 26 year old teacher could fall for a 22 year old student. So, yes, when the difference is more than 4 years, there is a bigger problem. That's pretty obvious. We can try to sound like we are all accepting by saying there's nothing wrong with a 70 year old man sleeping with a 21 year old student, but we know it's weird (even if the old bugger really, really wants it to be OK).
We have in the debate those that say go ahead, those who urge caution, and the view that it is always morally wrong because of the nature of the relationship. So there will be no common ground, and Romeo is still left with his dilemma - which is how it should be.
What you are saying is like saying: "We have some people who believe that the world is flat, and others who are certain it is round, while the geographers and astronomers say it's an 'oblate spheroid'. And thus, with no agreement in sight, we are at a loss as to what the shape of the Earth is, finally leaving it as it should be, up to children to decide for themselves."
Guess what? The jury isn't out on this. This has already been decided just as it's been decided that it's wrong to beat your wife or kids. That's why it's against the "code of conduct" of ANY educational institution in the West, and is against the law in most places (if the student in under 18) and in some regardless of the age of the student. Do some research. This isn't just a matter of surmising in the smoking chair, and making a gentle, milquetoast conclusion that sounds vaguely wise but is actually, in it's spinelessness, allowing teachers to go on taking advantage of their students in stark violation of the code of conduct, and in many places, the law.
In British English we have a saying: " Don't shit on your own doorstep."
That applies to dating coworkers, not dating students. You can be forgiven for somehow being apparently oblivious to the laws pertaining to this particular violation of trust, and social norms. Now that I think you are probably fully aware that it is NOT something that's just left to opinion, but is a serious crime, and would certainly lose one one's job, I hope you can see that it's not just up to Romeo as an issue with minor moral misgivings.