|
Post by Liberator on Apr 21, 2009 2:04:41 GMT
Of course no girl has ever made a pass at a boy or could handle one from him without a fit of the vapours. Who are these feminist wimps?
BOULDER - An alleged crime in Boulder is raising questions about protecting a young sex offender--while at the same time--protecting the students unknowingly around him.
On Wednesday, a 13-year-old registered sex offender turned himself in for suspicion of attempted unlawful sexual contact.
It apparently happened inside a classroom at Manhattan Middle School last Thurday, April 2.
The victim told police a classmate tried to put his foot under her skirt. She pushed him away. And then he allegedly asked if he could touch "particular parts of her body."
"It's a little frustrating--not knowing. I think it's tragic," says one parent, who didn't want to be identified.
He says he wasn't told a registered sex offender roamed the school. And he would have liked to know. But he can understand why the school wouldn't identify the offender.
"As far as a specific person. I don't know if that's fair to someone who may be too young to know what's right and wrong," he says.
Another parent, who also didn't want to be identified, said she'd like to know so she could take protective measures of her daughter, and ask the school what protections they're taking to protect innocent children.
We asked the Boulder Valley School District why this student was at this school? Why parents weren't told? And how many other sex offenders are in the district? They referred our questions to the county's Probation Department, which is supposed to monitor the student, but they did not return our repeated phone calls.
Copyright © 2009, KDVR-TV
|
|
|
Post by beth on Apr 21, 2009 4:28:02 GMT
Of course no girl has ever made a pass at a boy or could handle one from him without a fit of the vapours. Who are these feminist wimps? BOULDER - An alleged crime in Boulder is raising questions about protecting a young sex offender--while at the same time--protecting the students unknowingly around him. On Wednesday, a 13-year-old registered sex offender turned himself in for suspicion of attempted unlawful sexual contact. It apparently happened inside a classroom at Manhattan Middle School last Thurday, April 2. The victim told police a classmate tried to put his foot under her skirt. She pushed him away. And then he allegedly asked if he could touch "particular parts of her body." "It's a little frustrating--not knowing. I think it's tragic," says one parent, who didn't want to be identified. He says he wasn't told a registered sex offender roamed the school. And he would have liked to know. But he can understand why the school wouldn't identify the offender. "As far as a specific person. I don't know if that's fair to someone who may be too young to know what's right and wrong," he says. Another parent, who also didn't want to be identified, said she'd like to know so she could take protective measures of her daughter, and ask the school what protections they're taking to protect innocent children. We asked the Boulder Valley School District why this student was at this school? Why parents weren't told? And how many other sex offenders are in the district? They referred our questions to the county's Probation Department, which is supposed to monitor the student, but they did not return our repeated phone calls. Copyright © 2009, KDVR-TV Not sure about this one, ratarsed. It does not say why this kid is a "registered sex offender". That means he was actually charged with a crime - how serious we don't know. May have been nothing much but might possibly have been something serious. I've known some pretty precocious 13 year olds.
|
|
|
Post by trubble on Apr 21, 2009 9:11:17 GMT
Of course no girl has ever made a pass at a boy or could handle one from him without a fit of the vapours. Who are these feminist wimps? Made a pass? This is not making a pass. A fit of the vapours? You are projecting all sorts of stuff as usual. A 13 year old girl should be permitted to complain that she has to put up with feet being shoved up her skirt and inappropriate suggestions during her education time - or is this something we women should just accept as ok. Just one of these things. Feminist wimps? Oh do grow up.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2009 12:00:29 GMT
Like Beth, I'm not sure about this one. The boy didn't succeed in putting his foot where he shouldn't - he tried, and the girl (bless her!) shoved him off. The way the story reads, it wasn't the girl who made an official complaint but her friend.
Things like that happened when I was a teenager and we learnt to deal. It left a bad taste in your mouth, but a lot worse things happen in adolsecence.
But perhaps Trubble is right, and we should take formal action against rude boys. It would be nice to think that they learn their lesson from the robust "knee-in-groin" brigade but they might just as easily go on to pick a weaker victim who can't say "no".
As for the Sex Offender's Register.... I read a story not so long ago about two children aged about 12 and 13 who had under-age sex and were both preosecuted and put on this register. In the US (of course) but I've forgotten which state.
|
|
|
Post by trubble on Apr 21, 2009 12:33:47 GMT
www.thedenverchannel.com/news/19148452/detail.htmlThe wrong questions are being asked in the OP. The wrong points are being concluded. A girl turns to her teacher to ask for help in fending off unwanted attention from a fellow pupil. This is surely a good thing. The fellow pupil is unbeknownst to the girl a registered sex offender so the teacher is required both legally and morally to report the behaviour to higher authorities - ok, so sex offender lists are notoriously unbalanced, perhaps all he did was grope some other 13 year old in his last school - is this behaviour by him to be tolerated and dealt with by all of us and nothing said or should it be him who learns to control his behaviour? The latter, surely! It's a no brainer. The questions this incident really raise are about what knowledge the public should have of the whereabouts of anyone on a sex offenders register.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2009 13:05:27 GMT
Trubble, that does put a rather different perspective on the whole thing.
Most of us learn to modify our behaviour if we get negative responses from our peers. Most boys would soon realise that pestering gets them nowhere, and a gropes are rewarded with a nasty clout where it hurts, just as all children learn that thumping your classmate doesn't put you at the top of the popularity stakes. But if this had gone on for two weeks and the harassment got worse, then yes, involving a teacher would be sensible.
|
|
|
Post by june on Apr 21, 2009 15:42:33 GMT
www.thedenverchannel.com/news/19148452/detail.htmlThe wrong questions are being asked in the OP. The wrong points are being concluded. A girl turns to her teacher to ask for help in fending off unwanted attention from a fellow pupil. This is surely a good thing. The fellow pupil is unbeknownst to the girl a registered sex offender so the teacher is required both legally and morally to report the behaviour to higher authorities - ok, so sex offender lists are notoriously unbalanced, perhaps all he did was grope some other 13 year old in his last school - is this behaviour by him to be tolerated and dealt with by all of us and nothing said or should it be him who learns to control his behaviour? The latter, surely! It's a no brainer. The questions this incident really raise are about what knowledge the public should have of the whereabouts of anyone on a sex offenders register. good post Trubble
|
|
|
Post by june on Apr 21, 2009 15:44:55 GMT
Of course no girl has ever made a pass at a boy or could handle one from him without a fit of the vapours. Who are these feminist wimps? Made a pass? This is not making a pass. A fit of the vapours? You are projecting all sorts of stuff as usual. A 13 year old girl should be permitted to complain that she has to put up with feet being shoved up her skirt and inappropriate suggestions during her education time - or is this something we women should just accept as ok. Just one of these things. Feminist wimps? Oh do grow up. what she said (Trubs you are on FIRE!)
|
|
|
Post by june on Apr 21, 2009 15:54:30 GMT
Of course no girl has ever made a pass at a boy or could handle one from him without a fit of the vapours. Who are these feminist wimps? BOULDER - An alleged crime in Boulder is raising questions about protecting a young sex offender--while at the same time--protecting the students unknowingly around him. On Wednesday, a 13-year-old registered sex offender turned himself in for suspicion of attempted unlawful sexual contact. It apparently happened inside a classroom at Manhattan Middle School last Thurday, April 2. The victim told police a classmate tried to put his foot under her skirt. She pushed him away. And then he allegedly asked if he could touch "particular parts of her body." "It's a little frustrating--not knowing. I think it's tragic," says one parent, who didn't want to be identified. He says he wasn't told a registered sex offender roamed the school. And he would have liked to know. But he can understand why the school wouldn't identify the offender. "As far as a specific person. I don't know if that's fair to someone who may be too young to know what's right and wrong," he says. Another parent, who also didn't want to be identified, said she'd like to know so she could take protective measures of her daughter, and ask the school what protections they're taking to protect innocent children. We asked the Boulder Valley School District why this student was at this school? Why parents weren't told? And how many other sex offenders are in the district? They referred our questions to the county's Probation Department, which is supposed to monitor the student, but they did not return our repeated phone calls. Copyright © 2009, KDVR-TV I must pick you up on your opening salvo. You seem to be suggesting that the young girl complaining about unwanted sexual attention should 'be able to handle it' and I think you are also suggesting that the malevolent black force of feminism is making her (or someone) make a bigger deal of this than there is. What utter rot! How dare you presume to state what is acceptable for a young girl to tolerate in terms of sexual attention or suggest that she has no right (morally more than anything else) to report this pest. I can only presume that you, as a child, have never been at the receiving end of persistent and unwanted attention (including sexual) because if you had then you would desist from spouting such callous and ill informed opinions from the top of your hat. I also feel that any point you make is somewhat weakened when you see some mysterious feminist plot behind every action you personally disagree with. Perhaps try imagining your Daughter is being pestered by someone at school in a sexual way - how do you think you would feel, how would you like the pest to be dealt with?
|
|
|
Post by beth on Apr 21, 2009 15:57:58 GMT
Made a pass? This is not making a pass. A fit of the vapours? You are projecting all sorts of stuff as usual. A 13 year old girl should be permitted to complain that she has to put up with feet being shoved up her skirt and inappropriate suggestions during her education time - or is this something we women should just accept as ok. Just one of these things. Feminist wimps? Oh do grow up. what she said I agree with this - very well put, trubble. My husband and I were talking about this last night. He thinks that, if the charges against the boy had been very serious (forceable rape, etc.), he would have ended up in a correctional facility rather than back in a mainstream school. Makes one wonder about what his home is like and how seriously those around him have tried to discourage inappropriate behavior. I do not want to appear to advocate violence, but the best cure might be a smack up the side of his head from a girl he has targeted. (Trubs you are on FIRE!)
|
|
|
Post by june on Apr 21, 2009 16:08:11 GMT
what she said I agree with this - very well put, trubble. My husband and I were talking about this last night. He thinks that, if the charges against the boy had been very serious (forceable rape, etc.), he would have ended up in a correctional facility rather than back in a mainstream school. Makes one wonder about what his home is like and how seriously those around him have tried to discourage inappropriate behavior. I do not want to appear to advocate violence, but the best cure might be a smack up the side of his head from a girl he has targeted. (Trubs you are on FIRE!) oo beth - you have posted in my quote bit so I look like I have been chatting with your husband ;D
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Apr 21, 2009 16:08:39 GMT
obviously, the proper response by the girl in such a situation is to put the punk out for the count, whether by fist, knee, or baseball bat. ratarsed has shown in more than a few postings that he has an inate fear of women. he is unable to comprehend that women are completely equal to men, except physically
|
|
|
Post by june on Apr 21, 2009 16:10:50 GMT
I certainly would not want to live in a society where young girls feel that they can't report unwanted sexual behaviour - that they must either fight and win or suffer the consequences.
I hope we are a little more evolved than that.
|
|
|
Post by Liberator on Apr 21, 2009 21:03:27 GMT
I don't think there's any question about not tolerating this sort of behaviour. Why I think of it as 'feminist' is the traditionally American Puritan response that because it involves SEX the girl has to be shown that this is a very serious business to be afraid of requiring police to protect her feminine delicacy, not something she should feel capable of handling the same as she would any other nuisance.
Obviously some action needs to be taken just as much as if he'd put his foot anywhere else. But then it was his foot for God's sake! He didn't shove his hand up her skirt (like young teen boys were always grabbing each other's goolies at my school). Did he really do it as a specifically sexual thing in adult terms or as more of a wind-up knowing that girls often wind up a lot easier than boys? It says that he asked if he could touch certain parts of her body. That's a criminal offence now? He sounds more naive than anything else.
It's making a big Puritan fuss about anything that might have sexual connotations in adult eyes regardless of whether it had the same meaning to the kids - but making sure to teach the girl that she should take anything vaguely sexual as something to be much more frightened of that anything else instead of assuring her that the boy's a wally but nothing to be scared of. She can deal with things with a sexual overtone just as well as with any other unwanted interference.
It says the boy is a registered sex offender. I read that to mean because of this incident. If not it raises the question of whether whatever offence got him registered was as trivial as this. Kids do interfer with each other in various ways they know to be offensive - that's usually why they do it - and they need to be dissuaded. A country where schoolkids sometimes intefer with firearms really should be able to play this sort of juvenile stupidity down instead of up. Boys have always done that sort of thing, girls too sometimes. The last thing they need to to be taught that it's a major offence that should terrify the life out of them. There could even be a negative effect in preventing some acts from being reported because while the kids may want somebody to step in, they do not want to condemn another one for life along with the baby-rapists.
|
|
|
Post by june on Apr 21, 2009 21:19:59 GMT
I don't think there's any question about not tolerating this sort of behaviour. Why I think of it as 'feminist' is the traditionally American Puritan response that because it involves SEX the girl has to be shown that this is a very serious business to be afraid of requiring police to protect her feminine delicacy, not something she should feel capable of handling the same as she would any other nuisance. Obviously some action needs to be taken just as much as if he'd put his foot anywhere else. But then it was his foot for God's sake! He didn't shove his hand up her skirt (like young teen boys were always grabbing each other's goolies at my school). Did he really do it as a specifically sexual thing in adult terms or as more of a wind-up knowing that girls often wind up a lot easier than boys? It says that he asked if he could touch certain parts of her body. That's a criminal offence now? He sounds more naive than anything else. It's making a big Puritan fuss about anything that might have sexual connotations in adult eyes regardless of whether it had the same meaning to the kids - but making sure to teach the girl that she should take anything vaguely sexual as something to be much more frightened of that anything else instead of assuring her that the boy's a wally but nothing to be scared of. She can deal with things with a sexual overtone just as well as with any other unwanted interference. It says the boy is a registered sex offender. I read that to mean because of this incident. If not it raises the question of whether whatever offence got him registered was as trivial as this. Kids do interfer with each other in various ways they know to be offensive - that's usually why they do it - and they need to be dissuaded. A country where schoolkids sometimes intefer with firearms really should be able to play this sort of juvenile stupidity down instead of up. Boys have always done that sort of thing, girls too sometimes. The last thing they need to to be taught that it's a major offence that should terrify the life out of them. There could even be a negative effect in preventing some acts from being reported because while the kids may want somebody to step in, they do not want to condemn another one for life along with the baby-rapists. I get what you are saying - thanks for the further explanation ratarse. I do think that you are reading a lot into the article - you cannot possibly know that What we do know is for whatever reason the girl felt she could not deal with this and sought help, perhaps she had tried unsuccessfully to bat him away, perhaps things were escalating - who knows, the detail is not here for us to make that judgement. So no feminist conspiracy but more an appropriate response at the appropriate time - as far as I can tell.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2009 21:46:19 GMT
Are there any single sex state school in the US? It sounds as though the boy should be sent to one. I'm beginning to think they are a good idea anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Liberator on Apr 21, 2009 22:27:40 GMT
What we do know is for whatever reason the girl felt she could not deal with this and sought help, perhaps she had tried unsuccessfully to bat him away, perhaps things were escalating - who knows, the detail is not here for us to make that judgement. So no feminist conspiracy but more an appropriate response at the appropriate time - as far as I can tell. I wouldn't expect a girl to have to deal with this sort of nuisance herself. What I find worrying is more that the teachers couldn't. Calling the police seems a very inappropriate response to me, wildly over the top just because anything remotely sexual has the staff in a tiswas and of course teaches the girl that traditionally hysterical over-reaction is the proper response to things sexual. I doubt that if he had punched her in the face (or she him), the police would have been involved although actual harm might be greater. I don't think there's any feminist conspiracy at all, just that traditional over-reaction and treating females as delicate creatures in need of shielding from anything with possible sexual connotations is what I expect of modern feminist thinking.
|
|
|
Post by beth on Apr 22, 2009 0:15:38 GMT
Quote: wouldn't expect a girl to have to deal with this sort of nuisance herself. What I find worrying is more that the teachers couldn't. Calling the police seems a very inappropriate response to me, wildly over the top just because anything remotely sexual has the staff in a tiswas and of course teaches the girl that traditionally hysterical over-reaction is the proper response to things sexual. I doubt that if he had punched her in the face (or she him), the police would have been involved although actual harm might be greater. ratarsed, they really had no choice but to notify LE because of the boy's history. It would have been a requirement for registering him as a student. Have you ever lived, or spent any substantial amount of time, in the U. S.? Some of your ideas are not accurate. Except for some rough areas, usually in larger cities, most people here practice civilized behavior - almost to the point of being <gasp> polite. And <sit down and hold on> . . . that even includes teens. ;D This boy's behavior would be a noteworthy exception to the norm. Makes me wonder what kind of environment you're used to.
|
|
|
Post by Liberator on Apr 22, 2009 1:05:49 GMT
I admit prejudice. I see the USA as Victorian England.
|
|
|
Post by beth on Apr 22, 2009 3:54:11 GMT
I admit prejudice. I see the USA as Victorian England. In that case, I'll guess you've gotten the idea everyone here is heavily influenced by the deeply conservative, far right, fundamentalist religion world-view. I can see how you might think that. They yell a lot and are, generally, avid for attention. Basically, there are happy, healthy (non neurotic) Americans everywhere you turn - and a lot of ar's, too. Expect anything, but please try not to lump everyone together in your withering disdain. I'm lucky enough to live in an area that strikes a happy medium. My state usually votes republican, but I don't run into a lot of intolerance and repression. Could be because We live between 2 mid-sized cities and benefit from a less rural outlook. Colorado is pretty conservative, but I don't think that has much to do with this 13 yr. old pain in the tush. Of course, I could be wrong.
|
|