So a maths teacher has taken his teenage pupil to Europe? I assume it is just a field trip to show her how many times 30 goes into 15 
If he’s got any sense he won’t have been that stupid until she’s at least 16.
It’s just modern day hypocritical age discrimination and if she’d have gone for another bird of her own age it would have been considered as ok and if any bloke older than her said anything in that case (like what a waste 
) they’d probably have been done for dicrimination against same ■■■couples. 
How things seemed to have changed though from when it was considered as ok for Prince Philip to be chasing the Queen by writing letters to her when she was 13 and when Prince Charles fancied Dianna Spencer when she was 15.
But if there should be any laws against older blokes going for good looking teenaged birds then at least just make it so that it’s only single never married ones who can go for them not the married ones 
.Not all the hypocritical zb which we’ve got now in which those birds are just reserved for someone of their own age who often just dumps them,when they’re over 30, for a much younger model,themselves while expecting an older single bloke to take on their old dumped ex wife. 
Carryfast:
If he’s got any sense he won’t have been that stupid until she’s at least 16.It’s just modern day hypocritical age discrimination and if she’d have gone for another bird of her own age it would have been considered as ok and if any bloke older than her said anything in that case (like what a waste
How things seemed to have changed though from when it was considered as ok for Prince Philip to be chasing the Queen by writing letters to her when she was 13 and when Prince Charles fancied Dianna Spencer when she was 15.
But if there should be any laws against older blokes going for good looking teenaged birds then at least just make it so that it’s only single never married ones who can go for them not the married ones
I sense bitterness in your post :-/
brados:
So a maths teacher has taken his teenage pupil to Europe? I assume it is just a field trip to show her how many times 30 goes into 15
I’m not sure if I should be laughing at this or not?! It appeals to my slightly warped sense of humour. 
Some people forget what is arguably the greatest love story ever told is about forbidden underage love, Romeo and Juliet.
mucker85:
brados:
Some people forget what is arguably the greatest love story ever told is about forbidden underage love, Romeo and Juliet.
It’s actually a load of pc ageist American bs that seems to have travelled across the Atlantic.In addition to the fact that,as I’ve said Prince Philip and Prince Charles amongst loads of others would be child abusers under present day attitudes,technically the law seems to say that it’s legal for a bloke under 18 to marry an under 18 girl with her parents permission but if after that he then reaches the age of 18 before she does and still treats her as his wife not as a ‘child’ he then becomes a child abuser. 
mucker85:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJZqPCvKRgo&feature=youtube_gdata_playerJust about sums it up.
Regardless of my views on the issues of married blokes seeming to get all the luck I really hope I’m wrong but there’s something a bit worrying about this case in the way that nothing’s been heard of them since they decided to run instead of fighting all the ageist bs and telling the hypocrites to zb off and mind their own business.In just the same way as other ‘minority relationship’ groups,who didn’t conform to was expected at the time and place and their supporters have done over the years,probably many of who are the same lot who are condemning couples like these.
mirror.co.uk/news/real-life- … wed-104604
If it’s the worst case scenario then there’s a lot of pc hypocritical zb’s out there who’ll be to blame.
That’s irony for you; one week you’re taking the register, the next week you’re on it.
kemperink:
That’s irony for you; one week you’re taking the register, the next week you’re on it.
If it’s a case of being lucky enough to pull a bird with those looks it’s probably not surprising that he thought it might be worth all the aggro of having to tell all the pc tossers to zb off and shove their register where it belongs.Which seems to be just what they’ve done one way or another.
To be honest I think it’s less to do with ageist BS and more to do with a teacher taking advantage of his position of authority trust and responsibility.
c’mon, a teenage girl is a vunerable, illogical, emotional creature that can knowingly cause trouble for all those around her. As a proffesional, her teacher should have known this.
triple-tango:
c’mon, a teenage girl is a vunerable, illogical, emotional creature that can knowingly cause trouble for all those around her. As a proffesional, her teacher should have known this.
I’m guessing he did and chose to ignore this fact.
dar1976:
triple-tango:
c’mon, a teenage girl is a vunerable, illogical, emotional creature that can knowingly cause trouble for all those around her. As a proffesional, her teacher should have known this.I’m guessing he did and chose to ignore this fact.
I have to agree, he was in a position of trust and may have abused it. If he was really in love he would have waited less than a year and then it would be perfectly legal. He would have been able to put two fingers up to the authorities.
Under the â– â– â– â– â– â– Offences Act 2003, the abuse of a position of trust is a criminal offence
The age of consent for â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– is ordinarily 16, but this does not apply under this Act
Instead, a person over the age of 18, who is in a position of trust over a person under 18, commits a criminal offence if they involve the younger person in â– â– â– â– â– â– activity
neil46:
Under the â– â– â– â– â– â– Offences Act 2003, the abuse of a position of trust is a criminal offence
The age of consent for â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– is ordinarily 16, but this does not apply under this Act
Instead, a person over the age of 18, who is in a position of trust over a person under 18, commits a criminal offence if they involve the younger person in â– â– â– â– â– â– activity
thats why he’s gone to france were the age of consent is 15
neil46:
Under the â– â– â– â– â– â– Offences Act 2003, the abuse of a position of trust is a criminal offence
The age of consent for â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– is ordinarily 16, but this does not apply under this Act
Instead, a person over the age of 18, who is in a position of trust over a person under 18, commits a criminal offence if they involve the younger person in â– â– â– â– â– â– activity
So where’s the proof that he actually engaged in any ‘■■■■■■acitvety’ with her.The act is just American type bs that’s contradictory to British age of consent regulations which effectively seems to be being applied in the American way, outside of that definition,by outlawing any type of relationship whatsoever,involving any over 18 bloke and an under 18 girl regardless of wether any ■■■■■■activety took place or not which seems to come under the definition of ‘grooming’.Which would,as I’ve said,have made Prince Philip a child abuser and produces the contradiction of an under 18 similar age marriage becoming child abuse if the bloke then reaches 18 before his wife and then continues to treat her as his wife not as a child.
It also doesn’t take into account the fact that it’s possible (right) that any decent relationship doesn’t involve getting a bird into bed from the time of first getting to know her.Although it’s no surprise that the hypocrites would think in that way in judging everyone else by their own standards.
The precedent set by the case of the teacher/pupil relationship which I’ve posted above seems to show that there was no reason why this case should have been liable to any aggro by the authorities assuming that he’s left or been sacked from his job which he effectively was from the time they confirmed their relationship by running.
But there’s no proof which suggests that he’s ever been stupid enough to engage in any ■■■■■■relationship in which case he would have been liable for engaging in ■■■■■■activety with a girl under the age of consent which is a totally different type of issue than the one of just getting to know a girl under the age of 18 in compliance with the age of consent laws.
But having said all that,if it was really all about the position of trust bs (in which case all he needs to do when he’s pulled is chuck the job in ) and not just a load of ageist American bs,then at least that would stop those teachers,who get to spend all day surrounded by good looking teenaged birds,getting an unfair advantage over everyone else.
kemperink:
neil46:
Under the â– â– â– â– â– â– Offences Act 2003, the abuse of a position of trust is a criminal offence
The age of consent for â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– â– is ordinarily 16, but this does not apply under this Act
Instead, a person over the age of 18, who is in a position of trust over a person under 18, commits a criminal offence if they involve the younger person in ■■■■■■activitythats why he’s gone to france were the age of consent is 15
I think the reason why they ran wasn’t because he couldn’t wait until she was at least 16.Probably more like that issue of if she’d have gone for another bird who was under 18 that would have been seen as ok by society here but an older bloke over 18 no way.
triple-tango:
c’mon, a teenage girl is a vunerable, illogical, emotional creature
That aplies to all women wether they’re under 18 or over 18 and that issue didn’t seem to bother all the hypocrites in the case of the relationship between Prince Charles and Dianna Spencer let alone the one between Prince Philip and the Queen.
Carryfast:
triple-tango:
c’mon, a teenage girl is a vunerable, illogical, emotional creatureThat aplies to all women wether they’re under 18 or over 18
That’s true, we don’t know when this girl was 16 anyway, plus if they come back and she says he hasn’t ■■■…touched her and she has not been abducted she went of her own free will then the worst that could happen is he could lose his job, which he probably has now anyway. At her age I do not see a problem here, its the girls parents making the problem but I would too if I were in their position.
Carryfast:
triple-tango:
c’mon, a teenage girl is a vunerable, illogical, emotional creatureThat aplies to all women wether they’re under 18 or over 18
This is news to me as I wasn’t aware that Prince Charles had taken Dianna abroad without her parents consent when she was 15, the same applies to Prince Philip and the Queen.
I’m far from being a monarchist but I’m really struggling to understand any comparison between the royal family and this teacher who has abused his position of trust and at the very least taken a 15 year old girl abroad without her parents consent or knowledge.