Archive for the 'Sex' Category

“Let Teachers Have Sex With School Children”

3 Comments

sexy-teacherUnions. What rubbish they spout:

Teachers should not be prosecuted for having affairs with their sixth formers, a union chief has said.

NASUWT general secretary Chris Keates said it was an “anomaly” that a teacher who had sex with a pupil aged over 16 could go on the sex offenders register… because a teacher could legally enter a relationship with a sixth former at another school. (BBC)

Teachers who have such relationships should be prosecuted, found guilty, and punished appropriately if they have a sexual relationship with any pupil at their school. Whether they are 11 or 18.

It isn’t because 18 year-olds shouldn’t have relationships with older people even if they still are at school, but because of the position of authority which that teacher inhabits. Whether that child is of the age of consent or not, it is wholly inappropriate for their to be any form sexual relationship between them.

Teachers are undeniably in a position of authrotiy and responsibility over every young person in their school, whether or not they teach them directly. The law must remain clear that any sexual relationship between them are regarded as a sex offence.

One could even say that this should be extended to include an period after either have left that school as well, since that authoruty still exists - if I came across one of my old school teachers, I’d be hard pushed to not automatically refer to them as “sir” or “miss”, and I left school five years ago.

What the NASUWT’s revision would do is open every sixth former to the possibility of seduction by an older teacher.

Spank-gate

4 Comments

As TD has admitted that F1 is the only sport he really watches, I thought I’d save this for the weekly guest post instead of putting it ‘Bites.

That, and the visual images created by the News of the World’s classic reporting techniques when the story broke on Sunday morning meant I was too busy being violently ill to write about it myself. If you’re having breakfast, put the porridge down.

[Max Mosley, t]he son of infamous British wartime fascist leader Oswald Mosley is filmed romping with five hookers at a depraved NAZI-STYLE orgy in a torture dungeon.
Then, head bowed and tied up in chains, he is interrogated by a dominatrix before being chained up and LASHED so hard over a TORTURE BENCH that he WHIMPERS for mercy and has to have a wound dressing put on his backside. (News of the World)

I have commented on a couple of posts on the topic over the past week, but now the initial furore has passed, things a bit clearer to pass an objective eye over the entire fiasco - that will inevitably be suffixed “-gate”, so I’ll settle on “Spank-gate” until someone directs me to another title.

Mosley’s reactions has been very telling. As far I can tell, he’s not expressly admitted anything. But, he’s sueing the NOTW for “Breach of Privacy”. There’s no allegation of libel. Therefore, I think it’s safe in assuming that he did it.

I think that the debate in the past week can safely be divided into three camps.

First of all, there’s the “Innocent until proven guilty” camp. Fair enough, but I think it’s a bit naive given the evidence that exists. There is a video that was on the NOTW website, and I understand is still very much available around youtube etc. I don’t want to need to prick my eyes with a pin after seeing it, so can’t directly comment - but I understand it’s pretty damning.

Then there’s the “Max must go” camp. It’s a pretty large camp, with some pretty important people including Jackie Stewart, BMW & Mercedes, and a few publications. Thing is, it’s impossible not to draw a link between these publications and previous problems with Mosley. Tom Rubython has had a very torrid history with the FIA, and has written a very damning (if lengthy) comment on Mosley.

Given that there does appear to have been a “sting operation” to catch Mosley - why was Max the target? Well, the NOTW is owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News International, along with the Sunday Times. The Sunday Times are presently being sued by the FIA after Martin Brundle decribed the governing body of acting in a “Witch Hunt”. Could just be a co-incidence, and like Mohamed Al-Fayed I make no accusations, but the brain can’t help draw its own conclusions.

There’s no doubt that his actions have brought the sport unwanted publicity. He could well be considered to have brought the sport into disrepute. It’s probably only a matter of time before Mad Max does indeed resign.

But, given what we know at the minute, I fall into the third camp. The “So What?” camp.
There’s too much invasion into people’s privacy at the moment. I doubt anyone doesn’t have some skeletons in the cupboard - but rarely do they impede on professional roles.

The NOTW were quick to pick up on the German / Nazi connection in Mosley’s “sex romp”. However, I don’t believe that if it had been anyone else caught in Mosley’s position, such emphasis would have been paid to it. Not that I’ve ever frequented one of these, erm, “establishments” - but surely these dominatrix scenarios draw on historical references, and I doubt German prisoner role plays are that unusual?

As far as I can see, no crime was committed. So, why should his private life have such an impact?

Thing is now, it has had an impact. And people are talking about it more than the sport. Mosley’s got to go. And whilst I’m not his biggest fan (he’s had some wacky ideas for the sport), I think it will be a shame. There’s no-one ideal to replace him, and a sudden transition of power is never good for any institution.

Henry Hoover Sucks Cock

Add a comment

Well, Henry the Hoover has been used in such a way.

A HOSPITAL builder has been sacked after being caught having sex with a Henry the hoover.
The Polish contractor – who was supposed to be locking up the site – was found naked and on his knees with the smiling cleaner in the staff canteen.
A horrified security guard at Great Ormond Street Children’s Hospital told him to “clean himself and the hoover” before kicking him out.
The shameless builder later told bosses he was vacuuming his underwear – “a common practice in Poland”. (The Sun)

And he just had to pick the hoover with a face! Maybe that made it a bit more of a personalised experience and less like having sex with a piece of machinery?

He does get extra points for the attempt at evading ridicule though for the excuse that he was vacuuming his underwear, though, especially as a culturally significant act. Even if it is just absurd, and the fact that he was at work at the time, and so shouldn’t have been vacuuming his underwear anyway.

1 Comment
Viagra: Sex but no consequences.
The anti-impotence drug Viagra could harm men’s fertility, scientists have warned.
New research suggests that the drug can damage sperm and so prevent some men from starting a family.
The findings mean that young men who take the drug recreationally could be damaging their chances of starting a family… (The Telegraph)

This doesn’t have to be a bad thing, but it depends on the reasons behind taking Viagra in the first place! Though why young men would need to be taking Viagra recreationally, I don’t know…

1 Comment
This is a, shall we say, “interesting” and “different” restaurant dish:

Especially since it’s free, too.

Political First Ladies

1 Comment

How come we don’t get political partners who look like this? It’s just not fair.

2 Comments
Monkeys purchase sex?
Male macaque monkeys “pay” for sex with females by grooming them, scientists have revealed.
The availability of females even affects the “price”. Where there are fewer females, males are forced to groom their partners for up to twice as long before they are able to have sex, the research found. (The Telegraph)

Those monkeys better make sure that they keep away from Harriet Harman then, or she’ll have them all locked up!

UPDATE: Wilberforce Monk has admitted that it is he who has paid for sex. He better be very careful to keep out of Harman’s way should he achieve his goal of entering Parliament!

2 Comments
I suppose the best we can do is be grateful for small mercies, that this wasn’t Prescott:
Malaysian Health Minister Chua Soi Lek has admitted that he is the man who features in two widely circulated DVDs of an unmarried couple having sex.
He said he had apologised to the prime minister and other ruling party leaders but would not resign…
Mr Chua said he had taken no part in the making of the DVD recordings, one of them said to be almost an hour long. (BBC)

Had it been Prescott, it would have been so wrong on so many levels. The mental image is bad enough, without the inevitable tabloid stills.

Pole Tax

Add a comment

No, not the poll tax or even a tax on poles [or even Poles] - but rather a tax on pole dancers.

Customers at strip clubs in Texas are facing a controversial $5-a-head “pole tax” which is intended to pay for sex crime prevention programmes and rape crisis centres.
The surcharge, backed by women’s rights campaigners, comes into effect on Tuesday and is expected to raise an estimated $40 million (£20 million) each year from those paying for lapdancers and pole dancers. (The Telegraph)

This tax is opposed by strip clubs and the pole dancers themselves, who fear that it will mean that fewer men will visit them, and also “resent the implied link between their industry and sex crimes” which is fair enough, since it is more than likely that the ability to watch girls gyrate will prevent rather than cause rape.

Their legal defence, that the tax “violates their constitutional rights to freedom of expression”, is less than convincing in itself, however, since it isn’t preventing them from doing it, just taxing those who watch them. This tax is ridiculous, but not because it infringes on the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Source: The Telegraph

There’s No Ending The Oldest Profession

3 Comments

Selling and buying sex has never been illegal in the UK. Yet Harriet Harman seems to think that that’s simply not good enough, and that the precedents set by centuries of history - covering even the most prudest eras - isn’t good enough for her. What she is attacking she says “just because something has always gone on, it doesn’t mean you just wring your hands and say there’s nothing we can do about it” she is ignoring the very foundation of British society, law and democracy - precedent and organic development, taking into account the past. Of course this doesn’t mean that what has gone before is always right, but it certainly means that there needs to eb damn good reason before you even consider changing it.

Let’s look at this from a rights perspective. I own my body, right? We all agree on that point. So I can do whatever the hell I like with it. After all, that is what manual labourers - the people Harman’s party claims to represent - do when they sell their labour. And what we all do when we work - we sell our labour in whatever form. Thus, we can do what we want with out own bodies.

Then we have the fact that the money I earn, after I have paid my taxes to the State, are mine to dispose of as I wish. This money I can spend on anything I wish, as it is my money, that I have earned, and on which no-one else has any claim. Right?

So, why should I not be allowed to buy or sell sex if I so wish - wish my own body or my own money? It is right that some activities associated with prostitution - such as pimping and brothel-keeping - are illegal. But the simple activity of selling and buying sex certainly should not be. It is referred to as the “oldest profession” for a reason, and it will long outlive Harman and her ilk. After all, sex is a one of the basic needs of mankind - and not everyone can or wants to get it without paying.

Sources: BBC, The Telegraph, The Times, The Guardian