TEACHERS DISCUSSION FORUM
Return to Index › Re: Summation of the debate.
#1 Parent San Migs - 2012-08-02
Re: Summation of the debate.

And unlike some of our more prolific long-term posters, I've got lessons to plan, er, because I'm a serious teacher.

Your call. You still don't know anything about UK law however.

#2 Parent Clyde - 2012-08-02
Re: Summation of the debate.

San Migs said:

Because they can't see the flipside, and

NOONE has said anything about sleeping with 16 year olds

or their current students.

On July 29:

Sex with students is a FELONY in some States in the US, including with students over 21 years old.

San Migs' response:

Well, that law is just outdated and ridiculous if you are asking for my opinion, you are going to get it!!

The age should be 16, not 21.

As I said it is an issue of employment law, therefore, not criminal law.

I don't know . . . it looks like SOMEONE did say sleeping with anyone over 16 years old "should be" okay (does 16 1/2 count or must they reach that magical 17th birthday?). And laws prohibiting sex with students are "outdated" and "ridiculous"? I guess no more need be said.

Thanks so much for tackling that one IMHO. You saved me the trouble. And unlike some of our more prolific long-term posters, I've got lessons to plan, er, because I'm a serious teacher.

#3 Parent IMHO - 2012-08-01
Re: Summation of the debate.

San Migs said:

Because they can't see the flipside, and
NOONE has said anything about sleeping with 16 year olds
or their current students.

On July 29:

Sex with students is a FELONY in some States in the US, including with students over 21 years old.

San Migs' response:

Well, that law is just outdated and ridiculous if you are asking for my opinion, you are going to get it!!

The age should be 16, not 21.

As I said it is an issue of employment law, therefore, not criminal law.

I don't know . . . it looks like SOMEONE did say sleeping with anyone over 16 years old "should be" okay (does 16 1/2 count or must they reach that magical 17th birthday?). And laws prohibiting sex with students are "outdated" and "ridiculous"? I guess no more need be said.

#4 Parent San Migs - 2012-08-01
Re: Summation of the debate.

I suppose they're all GWs too, hmmm?

Yes they are.

Because they can't see the flipside, and NOONE has said anything about sleeping with 16 year olds or their current students. Sleeping with ex students is a different matter entirely, you just aren't intelligent enough to see it, or are totally pig ignorant.

Simple truth is, mate, that the vast majority of the ESL world looks at your sad little protestations about sexually liberating your students and sees you for exactly what you are.

Slander now? You make threats about reporting some of us somewhere, under Chinese law you could also be in prison for what you are writing. Heard of the new cyber laws?

Lie to yourself all you want, everybody else knows the truth.

Yes, we all know the truth and we are lying to noone, and are not "spinners" who worked for a devious place like EF, unlike you. That says all anyone needs to know about you, and I am done with replying to you, you will always be a GW just to justify your own lack of ethics and greed, don't mention education again. Later ace.

Return to Index › Re: Summation of the debate.





Go to another board -