Neither of that. The thing is, that sometimes teacher gets romantically involved with his/her student, and it might be completely fine and consensual. In some other cases, it might be very wrong. The point is that making one law for all cases is just too blunt.
I disagree with that as it’s a case where we should err on the side of protection. OTOH there’s cases like Macron and his wife and while the official story is that they only really got together once he was 18 kinda everyone knows that that’s rather unlikely, but it’s also not warranted to prod too much. If she hadn’t been his teacher the relationship would’ve been 100% above board according to French law.
These aren’t takes that warrant a lynch mob, but they’re takes that keep a lynch mob going. What got the lynch mob started is Kovarex quoting Uncle Bob for programming advice, being asked to put in a disclaimer warning people of Uncle Bob’s (absolutely and objectively terrible) politics, and Kovarex responding along the lines of “shove that cancel culture up your ass”. Must’ve hit a nerve somewhere.
Neither side dealt with the situation in an ideal manner.
statutory rape was an “sjw term”.
It’s most of all an English term used in Common Law, while Kovarex is Czech and not a native speaker. Czechia uses civil law, of the German variety, and there’s no such thing as “statutory rape” in that tradition the applicable German statute would be sexual abuse of juveniles (dunno about Czech law you do your own research). Rape itself isn’t even a crime: Sexual assault is, and a particular aggravation step of sexual assault, if it involves penetration of the body, gets called rape. You can incur the same penalty without the thing being called rape. EDIT: Specifically in the teacher/student case it’s this. There’s a “you can get off scot-free if the wrongfulness of the act was minor” clause, which mirrors Kovarex’ sentiment.
It’s perfectly thinkable that Kovarex thought that statutory rape is a term recently made up by activists because in a civil law context, the one he’s accustomed with, it just doesn’t make sense. But that would necessitate giving people the benefit of doubt, the patience to hear people out, the cool to ask follow-up questions to make sure they actually mean what you think they’re saying, instead of shooting from the hip the second you think they say YHVH to signal that you, too, consider yourself righteous. Politics isn’t about in/outgroup dynamics and polishing each other’s shibboleths.
And in that sense I really do have to agree with Kovarex: Shove that cancel culture BS up your ass it’s actively harmful. That said disclaimers when linking to Uncle Bob are always a good idea the guy is nuts when it comes to politics, alas also has some real good takes on programming. I’m not dismissing Chomsky’s takes on CS and linguistics just because he’s a serial genocide denier, either.
Quoth Kovarex:
I disagree with that as it’s a case where we should err on the side of protection. OTOH there’s cases like Macron and his wife and while the official story is that they only really got together once he was 18 kinda everyone knows that that’s rather unlikely, but it’s also not warranted to prod too much. If she hadn’t been his teacher the relationship would’ve been 100% above board according to French law.
These aren’t takes that warrant a lynch mob, but they’re takes that keep a lynch mob going. What got the lynch mob started is Kovarex quoting Uncle Bob for programming advice, being asked to put in a disclaimer warning people of Uncle Bob’s (absolutely and objectively terrible) politics, and Kovarex responding along the lines of “shove that cancel culture up your ass”. Must’ve hit a nerve somewhere.
Neither side dealt with the situation in an ideal manner.
It’s most of all an English term used in Common Law, while Kovarex is Czech and not a native speaker. Czechia uses civil law, of the German variety, and there’s no such thing as “statutory rape” in that tradition the applicable German statute would be sexual abuse of juveniles (dunno about Czech law you do your own research). Rape itself isn’t even a crime: Sexual assault is, and a particular aggravation step of sexual assault, if it involves penetration of the body, gets called rape. You can incur the same penalty without the thing being called rape. EDIT: Specifically in the teacher/student case it’s this. There’s a “you can get off scot-free if the wrongfulness of the act was minor” clause, which mirrors Kovarex’ sentiment.
It’s perfectly thinkable that Kovarex thought that statutory rape is a term recently made up by activists because in a civil law context, the one he’s accustomed with, it just doesn’t make sense. But that would necessitate giving people the benefit of doubt, the patience to hear people out, the cool to ask follow-up questions to make sure they actually mean what you think they’re saying, instead of shooting from the hip the second you think they say YHVH to signal that you, too, consider yourself righteous. Politics isn’t about in/outgroup dynamics and polishing each other’s shibboleths.
And in that sense I really do have to agree with Kovarex: Shove that cancel culture BS up your ass it’s actively harmful. That said disclaimers when linking to Uncle Bob are always a good idea the guy is nuts when it comes to politics, alas also has some real good takes on programming. I’m not dismissing Chomsky’s takes on CS and linguistics just because he’s a serial genocide denier, either.