Double standards with touchy subjects. Did you ever have a crush on a teacher?

  Well another female teacher sleeping with a male student of hers.  29 year old Kathryn Ronk has been charged with multiple counts of first degree sexual misconduct, one count of child pornography (presumably a picture of the boy, and one count of providing a minor alcohol.  The boy is 15 years old.  So I'm going to go some of the things many people think but few will openly discuss.  It may make you feel uncomfortable but stepping outside your comfort zone can very often be a good thing.  Some times doing it is a necessity to really start to make change that is needed within our society.  If you don't care about making change then feel free to click "x" now.

   First off it is inappropriate for multiple reasons in my view.  The age being the first.  The position of authority being the second.  There are some interesting issues we, as society, need to look at these types of things.

  I've seen arguments, in the past, how something like this isn't that bad.  Honestly there is running jokes about hooking up with hot teachers while you are in high school.  It is a huge fantasy of a large number of students of both sexes.  Our culture both demonizes and glamorizes it.  The list of movies and songs that show how it is just normal "young love" is very long.  From movies like Blame it on Rio, American Beauty, Private Lessons, My Teacher's Wife, Circle of Two and many more.  Sting wrote the song "Don't stand so close to me" in the late 1970s and won a Grammy in 1981 for the song. Re-released in 1986 right when I was just 16.  Sting reportedly says the song is not autobiographical but he was a teacher and it really isn't a stretch now is it.

  These days we seem to have more views of predatory pedophiles lying and manipulating "grooming" young people on-line.  Before the internet such grooming was much more personal.  Actual pedophiles had to put themselves in roles where they would be around young people constantly but that is for another blog post.  I'm not sure I'd class Kathryn as a predator or a pedophile but is that because of culture I grew up in?  It reminds me of this episode 10 from season 10 of South Park.  I've got a clip here for you. Basically Kyle's little brother, Ike, who can barely talk, is having an affair with his kindergarten teacher.

  You might not find South Park funny but the sentiment isn't really far off the mark if Ike was 10-11 years older.

  When I was in high school  there were 2 young female teachers I had a crush on and would have been ecstatic if I hooked up with either of them.  Lets be honest, like most young men, I probably would have been over joyed if I hooked up with almost any of the young women in the whole student body back then.  The attitude is boys are boys and, well, as young men we are naturally horny little bastards.  So when I was 15 if I had a teacher like Kathryn that I had an affair with I can say that I'd have come out of the whole ordeal with very minimal metal scaring.  I'm sure it would not last and would be very sad when it ended.  At the time it would be very hard emotionally but hormones would have kicked in and some other girl would have caught my eye.  I'm sure I wouldn't have been scarred for life.  I'd wager that probably 95% of the guys I went to high school with wouldn't have ended up any worse for the wear if it happened to one of them either.

  We, as a society, don't like to think of young women in the same light.  We hold them in a better light for the most part.  In a way everyone just accepts the way young men will act.  But females...they aren't controlled by hormones like boys aren't they?.  They are looking for long term love!  Their crushes on a teacher are motivated differently in our eyes as society.  But I wonder how many of the women I know had such crushes and what was honestly going through their heads.  My experience is that young women are not all that different then young men.  Young men are controlled by hormones but most guys I know at 16 were not out to play the field.  We were, for the most part, happy to try to latch on to one girl for as long as we could.  Bird in the hand mentality.  Tho the 2 in the bush would get us in trouble even if we never got close to them.  Males and Females have our differences for sure but girls aren't the princesses we expect them to be.  That is fine too.  Because once we stop trying to hold them to unrealistic expectations they'll have less pressure and can  be who they want to be.  A young woman that does have sex shouldn't be looked down upon and called a 'slut' while young men get a pat on the back and a 'that's my boy!'

  So looking at this situation I know I should look at this in the same manor that I'd look at it if it was a 29 year old male teacher and a 15 year old female teacher but it is hard to keep that in frame.  Maybe because I've got a strong protection instinct.  I've gone through so many phases looking at age differences between couples from different perspectives.  When I was 18 and based in Georgia I had a girl friend that turned 17 just a month after we. I also dated a 28 year old woman when I was barely 18. Was the fact that I was a Marine a reason people didn't look at that as a bit odd?  When I was just 22 in and stationed in Hawaii I met a 20 year old woman I fell head over heels for but I remember thinking when I first met her "Hold on! She's only 20...she's pretty young!" when in reality it was me that wasn't as mature as I would have liked to think.  Years later after getting married, leaving the Marine Corps, having a child and broken up with my ex I found myself 28 and in the same year I dated two women that were very different.  One woman that was 9 years older then me and one that was 9 years younger then me.  The younger woman was much more mature then the woman that was over twice her age.  In my mid 30s I once again found that I couldn't bring myself to date women that realistically where only 7-8 years younger then me.  In 26+ years of dating my views on age have changed.  The rule of 1/2 your age plus 7 years seems pretty safe but I still wouldn't want a relationship with a 29 year old.  Not because she'd be to immature but realistically the problem would be years down the line when the 15 year gap doesn't get smaller but actually bigger. I relate to people younger then me just fine these days but when I'm 85 and needing some care I'd hate to think I'd be hindering a partner just 70 and still very much in the game of life

  So I've had a roller coaster ride with my personal views on ages and relationships but I've realized a few things.  Age is often a poor factor when it comes to the emotional maturity of a person.  At the same time we have to have some lines.  Many courts are now starting to factor in age differences in situations where current laws are fairly stupid.  For example a 17 year old boy and his 15 year old girlfriend's relationship shouldn't suddenly become illegal because he turns 18.  The age difference didn't really change and he shouldn't face a sex offender charge because of it.  Was dating a 19-20 year old when I was 28 wrong?  Some might say so and if she wasn't the woman she was I would have agreed but it still wouldn't be illegal just like when I just turned 18 and dated a 28 year old while stationed near D.C.  So is 29 and 15 all that different then 28 and 18.  Realistically the difference between 28 and 29 is nothing.  The difference between 15 (probably almost 16) and 18 is just over 2 years.  Even going through boot camp I'm not sure I  was all that much more mature at 18 then I was at 16.

  So where does this leave my opinion of the matter.  Surprisingly enough I'm pretty clear in my head despite what I've said up to this point.  She's gone to far.  Most places the age of consent is 16 and we have it there for a reason.  She faces up to 15 years in prison because she couldn't seem to wait just a few months.  Do I think she deserves 15 years?  No.  Partly, I'm sure, because of how society has framed my view about this topic.  Partly because I think the current laws in many places need to be further reformed and some judgement should remain in the power of the Judge.  If Kathryn is convicted and there was no evidence that something more devious was going on then yes I think she needs to be rehabilitated but I think it should be more mental health treatment then hard core jail.  I'd have to say the same thing, and this is difficult, if it was a 29 year old male teacher and a 15-16 year old female student.  Hell, the student could be of the same sex as the teacher and I don't think it should matter.  If the teacher was found to have been grooming more then one student then the picture starts to drastically change from a bad indiscretion to predatory behavior. The liberal in me starts going out the window and I'd want the judge to throw the book at the teacher.  Our teachers need to be stronger morally because of the position they are in.

  Finally some random thoughts that I know are just not informed.  OK call me shallow but she's very attractive.  If she wanted a young guy she'd have an easy time with young men just in uni or the military.  First thought I think of is why?  Just go pick up an 18 year old. I'd like to think that she did fall for him.  I don't know what they are feeding some of these young men but they seem to look much older then anyone I went to high school with.  This is what an under 18 player in Australia looks like these days.  Would you look twice if you saw the woman above kissing this young man?

With young women we might try to say it is all the make up and that is partly true.  In reality it is our media that is changing our views and changing the outlook of our young men and women.  I'll wait and see if I can get a transcript of the court case when it happens but in reality I'll never know the real true story.  I hope she gets the help she needs and hopefully someone talks to the young man and puts the whole thing in perspective for him at least.  Hopefully the whole process of her going to trial doesn't traumatize the young man.

NRA Stupidity

  Last week NRA Executive Vice President, Wayne LaPierre, made a set of stupid and blatantly false statements in reaction to the Newtown shooting.

"How do we protect our children right now, starting today, in a way that we know works?

The only way to answer that question is to face up to the truth. Politicians pass laws for Gun-Free School Zones. They issue press releases bragging about them. They post signs advertising them.

And in so doing, they tell every insane killer in America that schools are their safest place to inflict maximum mayhem with minimum risk."

  

  This is false.  By in large the shooters target the places they do because they have some tie to that location.  In fact Columbine and Virginia Tech both had armed police officers at them.  Virginia Tech not only had armed police officers but a whole police station.  The other thing is schools all over the world don't allow guns in them but you don't see the number of shootings at schools that the USA has.

"The truth is that our society is populated by an unknown number of genuine monsters — people so deranged, so evil, so possessed by voices and driven by demons that no sane person can possibly ever comprehend them. They walk among us every day. And does anybody really believe that the next Adam Lanza isn't planning his attack on a school he's already identified at this very moment?

How many more copycats are waiting in the wings for their moment of fame — from a national media machine that rewards them with the wall-to-wall attention and sense of identity that they crave — while provoking others to try to make their mark?

A dozen more killers? A hundred? More? How can we possibly even guess how many, given our nation's refusal to create an active national database of the mentally ill?"

  Did you know that 1 in 4 people require or receive treatment for mental health issues. Look at you and a handful of your friends and if you think they are all "completely sane" then it is probably you that has some mental health issues.  I myself have seen a few different psychologists over the years and have even scene both psychologists and psychiatrist while in the U.S.M.C. with a large number of other Marines.  

  The fact is that if you try to instate some national register then you have to think about who decides who goes on it and who doesn't?  Most military that encounter combat would fit the criteria for requiring mental health treatment in some form.  I'm not saying we are all nut jobs just stating the truth.  Our training involves very specific techniques to make us able to function properly in combat conditions.  Conditions which are horrific and most people that have ever been in them wouldn't wish them on anyone else ever.  Basically the human brain is designed to stop higher order brain functions, including memory retention, in times of high stress.  Through training members of the military and certain other professions, without even knowing it, become accustom to high stress situations allowing them to think, and unfortunately remember, in these situations.  This is why military, police, fire fighters, ambulance drivers, doctors and other similar professions have such a high rate of P.T.S.D.   Are you ready to label most military members coming back from the middle east as mentally ill?  Are you ready to label many police officers as being mentally ill because of the very trait that allows them to function while under stress? 

  Don't get me wrong.  Mental health is important to me.  I don't hold a stigma with mental illness any more then I hold one against someone that has cancer because so many people have these health issues and just because someone has had an issue in the past doesn't mean that they are changed for the worse for the rest of their life.  I think we as a society need to embrace those around us that need help not make them feel more ostracised.  But that is a whole other rant for me to go into in the future. 

  Basically if you think someone is struggling with emotions reach out to them and or someone that can help them.  The facts are clear too.  People with "mental health issues" are not statistically more likely to be the perpetrator of violent crimes on others.  But they are more likely to be injured or killed by fire arms.  The fact is depression actually inhibits people from violent acts because they lack the motivation and drive to carry out acts of self harm.  Sadly it is when they start to get better that they are more likely to take their own life.  You might say "but how can a sane person kill so many people?"  Stereotyping everyone with mental health issues as violent and dangerous is like saying all young men should be viewed as potential rapists because they are so interested in sex.  It is like saying "Every gun owner is a reckless homicidal maniac because they like guns!"  The statements are blatantly false.

"Add another hurricane, terrorist attack or some other natural or man-made disaster, and you've got a recipe for a national nightmare of violence and victimization."

  This is a deliberate ploy to conjure up images in the mind of some mad max society where only those with guns have power.  Guess what, all these dooms day prepers aren't doing any good.  They aren't going to save us in some post apocalyptic  society.  They aren't going to save you from the next Adam Lanza.  In fact Adam Lanza's mother was one of them.  So in one breath Mr. LaPierre screams that those with mental health issues, like those that believe the world should have ended on  the 21st of December, should be put on a list but then wants us all to be that type of person who prepares for the end of civilized society.

On to Mr. LaPierre's idiot notion that movies and video games are to blame.

"And here's another dirty little truth that the media try their best to conceal: There exists in this country a callous, corrupt and corrupting shadow industry that sells, and sows, violence against its own people.

Through vicious, violent video games with names like Bulletstorm, Grand Theft Auto, Mortal Kombat and Splatterhouse. And here's one: it's called Kindergarten Killers. It's been online for 10 years. How come my research department could find it and all of yours either couldn't or didn't want anyone to know you had found it?

Then there's the blood-soaked slasher films like "American Psycho" and "Natural Born Killers" that are aired like propaganda loops on "Splatterdays" and every day, and a thousand music videos that portray life as a joke and murder as a way of life. And then they have the nerve to call it "entertainment.""

  I know many Americans have no real understanding of the rest of the world but guess what.  The rest of the world see's the same movies you do.  The rest of the world plays the same video games as you do.  Yet the rest of the world doesn't have the same level of problem.  So either people in America are more easily manipulated and twisted mentally by "entertainment" or that isn't a significant factor in these shootings.  Video games an movies don't make people into violent killers tho violent people may be drawn to those as a form of release.  

"A child growing up in America witnesses 16,000 murders and 200,000 acts of violence by the time he or she reaches the ripe old age of 18." 

  I question that stat.  That means from the day a person is born they would have to see 3 murders in entertainment a day, every day until they are 18.  I wonder if they count watching a video of Hiroshima being bombed as counting as multiple murders...in that case they are off by a factor of 10 or more.  

  In the NRA's mind playing a game with violence is worse then learning to use an item that sole purpose if for killing or maiming another person.  A .223 bush master is sole purpose is for killing multiple people quickly.  Not hunting.  Not home protection.  Killing people, at ranges where any normal person is absolutely no threat to you.

"The media call semi-automatic firearms "machine guns" — they claim these civilian semi-automatic firearms are used by the military, and they tell us that the .223 round is one of the most powerful rifle calibers ... when all of these claims are factually untrue. They don't know what they're talking about!"

  I think everyone knows that journalist aren't perfect but a .223 is very similar to the rounds I used while in the Marines with an M16A2 rifle.  The rounds are designed with the same purpose.  Not for taking down a rabbit like some will make you believe because the .223 isn't much bigger then a .22 which most people think of as small.  The issue isn't just the size of the projectile but the amount of power behind the round.  As you can see those 2 rounds can have the same amount of gun powder behind them.  Ask a normal person which they'd rather be shot by if they had to choose do you think that one of those would be picked a lot less then the other?  Ask a average person the difference between a M16A2 and a Bushmaster .223 do you think they would know?  Do you think there is enough of a difference to care when one is being pointed at you?

"As parents, we do everything we can to keep our children safe. It is now time for us to assume responsibility for their safety at school. The only way to stop a monster from killing our kids is to be personally involved and invested in a plan of absolute protection. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Would you rather have your 911 call bring a good guy with a gun from a mile away ... or a minute away?"

  Again Columbine High School had armed police officers in the school and it DIDN'T HELP!  Why because the cops are not equipped to go up against someone with assault rifles and have to deal with the fact that the people that go on these sprees with these weapons all to often don't care if they get killed.

  This next bit is rich.

"A gun in the hands of a Secret Service agent protecting the President isn't a bad word. A gun in the hands of a soldier protecting the United States isn't a bad word. And when you hear the glass breaking in your living room at 3 a.m. and call 911, you won't be able to pray hard enough for a gun in the hands of a good guy to get there fast enough to protect you."

  There is a HUGE difference between cops with guns and a neighbour like George Zimmerman that is a bit to trigger happy.  Part of what I want to see for better gun regulation is mandatory classes for gun owners.  Classes mostly in how to safely carry and more importantly store a fire arm.  Testing on the laws regarding their firearms wouldn't go astray either.  You'll also notice most police don't carry assault rifles and the ones that do have even more firearms training on the use of them.  They didn't just go down to the gun convention, when it rolled through town, and buy a AR-15 for their squad car.

"The budget of our local police departments are strained and resources are limited, but their dedication and courage are second to none and they can be deployed right now.

I call on Congress today to act immediately, to appropriate whatever is necessary to put armed police officers in every school — and to do it now, to make sure that blanket of safety is in place when our children return to school in January"

  Yea law enforcement budgets are strained because the GOP is happy to cut back on that "discretionary spending".  You know what else is also stretched to the limit...educational resources.  His plan would cost an estimated $5,000,000,000.00 a year.  Yes FIVE BILLION DOLLARS!  How about we raise that money on yearly licences fees on firearms.  The more dangerous the fire arm the more you pay per  year towards this safety fund. We do similar things with cars so why not firearms.  

  So  $5,000,000,000.00 to put an armed security guard in every school in the nation thinking that will solve the problem.  How did that work out for Columbine High School?  The whole statement is deflection from the real issue here and that is the U.S.A. needs to decide if it wants a safer society with sensible gun regulations or if it is happy letting almost any Tom, Dick and Harry buy assault rifle at the cost of these still of mass shootings.  The U.S.A. needs to decide if one child killed by guns every 3 hours of every day, of every week, of every month, of every year is worth more then making sure gun owners are qualified and responsible enough to own the firearms they wish to possess.  They have to decide if it is ok that a child under the age of 5 is killed every 4 days by firearms.  If a child killed every 2 days because of an "accident" by a fire arm is acceptable.  People keep telling me thinks like "cars cause more deaths then guns!".  Well guess what ... we've regulated the fuck out of motor vehicles and deaths from them have gone down.  That little thing called a seat belt...REGULATION.   That speed sign saying 55...REGULATION.  Making someone take a drivers test before driving...REGULATION.  Inspecting cars to make sure they are road worthy...REGULATION.

  Why should assault rifles, which unlike cars don't have a valid every day purpose, be exempt from better regulation?  Simple answer is they shouldn't be exempt.

Exercise your brain!

It is funny that the older I get the more I want to learn.  I often wish I had this much passion for learning when I was younger but there are many things that we do when we are younger that don't make a lot of sense.

Studies show a strong correlation between mental exercises and the slowing of brain related conditions like Alzheimer's.  Not only does it appear to delay the onset but it seems it can counter act the speed at which the condition progresses. I've recently found a web site http://www.lumosity.com that specialises in "brain" games that work different aspect of your mind and lets you know how you are doing in each area.  I'm totally addicted to it...ok not totally because I don't log in every day but I like it just the same.

Perhaps you don't want to flip the bill for such a site and in this day in age where so much of the world is screwed up, largely because corporations have gotten very good at gathering wealth, often circumventing the regulations were ever they can...anyway that's for another rant.

Even if you don't subscribe to the site.  Give the free trial a go.  Then move onto other things like sodoku or crosswords or word searches.  Even if you don't like it at first.  Especially if you don't like it at first.  The best way to exercise you mind is to make it do things it doesn't normally do.  Read more.  Read things you normally would not.  Ask questions.  Ask questions about things you normally would not ask about.  Find out about the world outside of your little world.  Reflect on the world around you.  If you don't know why there are riots in Greece then find out.   If you think there are riots because they just spend money they don't have all the time then go and find the real reason.  If you didn't know the American government handed prisoners over to Egypt to be tortured go find out.   If you did know and agreed with it go read the Geneva Convention.  If you think it is OK for the USA to do things to other countries that you think would be totally unacceptable for other countries to do to the USA go travel and see what the world is really like.

Don't let yourself think that to be educated is to be an "Elitist" and that it is better to be a common person then to try to constantly better yourself.  We all have the ability to grow.  We all have the capacity to get smarter.  The same tool you are using here can be used to help you exercise your mind.  And just like normal exercise you'll find the more you do it the better it feels to do it.  The same rush you get from watching your favourite sport can be felt every time you realise you have learnt something new.  

Don't get me wrong.  It won't all be easy.  You'll often find yourself frustrated.  Growing up English was arguably my worst subject but over the years I've forced myself to use those types of skills.  I'd like to think that today I'm half way decent at expressing ideas both verbally and via the written word.  Now to just find out how I can learn not to go on rants on all the time.