Cheerleading Coach Nicole Kurowski Craved That Hot, Sweet Teen Meat

Posted on | November 9, 2013 | 77 Comments

This is the face of an accused sex offender:

Yeah, I know what some of you are probably thinking: “But she’s nice-looking! What’s wrong with her? She could get a normal guy.”

What you fail to understand is that these degenerate twisted sickos don’t want “normal” sex. They have a perverse appetite for the forbidden fruit, the throbbing passion of adolescent boyflesh:

A cheerleading coach and gym teacher at a Pennsylvania high school is accused of having a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old student.
Nicole Kurowski turned herself in to police Wednesday and was charged with institutional sexual assault, unlawful contact with a minor and corruption of minors for allegedly carrying on a 10-month sexual relationship with a student at Tulpehocken High School, where she taught for two years.
According to state police, the 27-year-old teacher had sexual contact with the male victim numerous times both during and after school hours — and on and off school property — in the 2012-2013 academic year. Investigators said they recovered thousands of sexually explicit text messages and images sent between Kurowski and her victim, according to WFMZ.

Some people would call adults who like sex with teenage boys “predators.” Other people call them “sex offenders” or “pedophiles.” But let’s call them what they really are: Typical Democrat voters.

Category: Crime, Education, Sex

Comments

77 Responses to “Cheerleading Coach Nicole Kurowski Craved That Hot, Sweet Teen Meat”

Alessandra
November 10th, 2013 @ 2:17 am

Americans need to grow the fuck up about sex.
By labeling every pervert out there “normal” and going on “proud to be deformed and dysfunctional” parades?

I think America needs to face how deformed it is regarding sexuality and relationships.
Alessandra
November 10th, 2013 @ 2:19 am

True, but public schools are way too liberal in what they are teaching kids – especially when it comes to underage sex, homosexuality, and porn.
Alessandra
November 10th, 2013 @ 2:23 am

Which is why 18 for all, everywhere is a better solution, I think. This mother of two young men put it very well:

As a fifty year old mother who has raised two young men to adulthood I can state they were both well aware they were ‘prohibited’ from having sex, and in fact are prohibited from doing so well past 18 and as long as they live in my home, unless they are married or have displayed
enough responsibility toward a committed relationship that we might negotiate the situation.

That does not mean I believe they couldn’t have chosen to have sex or won’t choose to. It means I have set a boundary and that boundary relates, to them, that a sexual relationship with anybody is due serious
thought and consideration.

I was also prohibited from having sex with the same rules. I had sex anyway, younger, with a boy my own age but we BOTH knew that we were playing with fire and that what we were doing was not acceptable to our parents. The boy has been my husband for almost 30 years but we recognize now how absolutely stupid we were. Many of my friends were the
same.

As my grandmother was pregnant at 16, and then married, I would suggest this has how ‘prohibition’ of sex has always worked.

Boundaries are set because we recognize our children/teens/young adults require them. They will not always be adhered to but that doesn’t mean they should not be stated.

http://alessandrareflections.wordpress.com/2013/05/27/psychology-today-disguised-nambla-like-author-trying-to-sabotage-age-of-consent-laws/
Alessandra
November 10th, 2013 @ 2:28 am

“Admittedly, there’s something a little bit mentally wrong with he,”
With he, but not with she?!
And if she or they were both ugly, all of a sudden it dawns on you there’s a problem?
Yes, about as sexist as you can get.
Alessandra
November 10th, 2013 @ 2:29 am

Therefore, for LGBTPs and Democrats anything goes folks, it’s par for the course.
gospace
November 10th, 2013 @ 3:15 am

mistype- her, not him. And if they’re both ugly- well, let’s try not to imagine that.
LN_Smithee
November 10th, 2013 @ 4:04 am

“You might be surprised, but I guess it is easier to make asinine assumptions.”

Come off it, Pearson. I’ve heard enough stories from teachers who have objected to the way their unions punish efforts to allow them to opt out of supporting Democrat candidates through their dues. By design, going public against the grain of liberal orthodoxy is a ticket to ostracization, if not harassment.

In my home state of California, the California Teachers Association is the most powerful political entity. Empowered by Jerry Brown’s approval of collective bargaining in 1975 (and helping get him re-elected in 2010), the CTA annually dedicates millions not only to quashing school reforms, but fighting changes to work rules that would punish incompetent or criminal teachers. Educate yourself; Google “Mark Berndt.”

Next time you want to dispute that the overwhelming amount of the time Dems and teachers’ unions act like Siamese twins, bring something besides attitude. I won’t hold my breath.
Evi L. Bloggerlady
November 10th, 2013 @ 4:12 am

She could be #FreeKate’s mother
CharlesHiggins
November 10th, 2013 @ 9:10 am

I live in Mississippi where felons cannot vote. I hope to apply for a pardon from the state where I was convicted but they require all court costs, fines and attorney fees be paid. Without steady employment it is difficult to pay the thousands of dollars the attorney charged me for his inept defense of me but I make the payments as i am able.
Dana
November 10th, 2013 @ 10:33 am

How odd. Our good friends on the left have been very, very adamant about having laws which protect people from the sexual advances/demands of people who have authority over them, and teachers are considered as having authority over students. Yet Jackie somehow believes that this is a matter of “growing up.”

Every school teacher knows that if he copulates with a student, he’s breaking the law.
jakee308
November 10th, 2013 @ 1:06 pm

The easily MANIPULATED boy flesh. (double intendre on purpose).

So women have finally made it. They’re acknowledging that having sex with a naive, inexperienced and emotionally vulnerable CHILD is less difficult (in terms of control) than engaging with one of adult years.

Some men have been doing this for centuries. Lately though, we tend to lock them up when found. I’m hoping the trend to do that increases over previous more recent examples because it seems that a woman preying on a male child isn’t looked at in the same way as the opposite.

Seems everyone find it titillating and the woman gets a suspended and/or light sentence. (double entendre also on purpose)

I think to effectively put some restrictions on this continuing to happen, THEY SHOULD GET THE 10 TO 20 YEARS HARD TIME THAT MEN TEND TO GET.
jakee308
November 10th, 2013 @ 1:06 pm

NO.
jakee308
November 10th, 2013 @ 1:10 pm

Ah, the libtard seminar troll shows up.
jakee308
November 10th, 2013 @ 1:12 pm

Feel free to relocate to a more satisfying regime.
DaveO
November 10th, 2013 @ 2:03 pm

Reducing the argument to it’s basics for the trolletariat:
1. A legally-defined adult had sex with a legally-defined child.
2. Arguing the ages and what-ifs is mere quibbling, and does not prove innocents or extenuating circumstance.
I am reminded of the firestorm over Brooke Shields’s underage modeling and movies, as well as Jodie Foster’s experiences. At the time, Americans deemed it important to defeat conservative Christians, and called Shields’s pictures and movies “art” and “innocent.” America, in order to undermine the conservative Christians, have been sexualizing children ever since. The trolletariat are so busy arguing the Hugh Hefner/Larry Flynt position they can’t even reduce the argument to its basics or know their history of their philosophy.
Art Deco
November 10th, 2013 @ 3:21 pm

Shows not only how arbitrary age of consent laws can be(he’s legal out
of school but since she’s a teacher and he’s a student and even if he
doesn’t go to her school, he’s illegal!)

JackieD, here we have a 27 year old woman (i.e. past the median age women marry and the median age women bear their first child in this country) seducing a youth who has been on this earth 6 years for every 10 she has been on this earth, who has no trade and likely no regular employment, who indubitably lives with his parents, and likely has five or six years ahead of him ‘ere he is standing on his feet. He’s a toy. The prospects of the two every constructing a domestic life (much less a durable domestic life) are minimal and while it goes on both she and he are diverted from what should be the tasks appropriate to their state in life (learning a trade in his case and finding a husband in hers). The fiduciary responsibility she has as an employee of the school district just adds another layer of injury.
Cube
November 10th, 2013 @ 4:38 pm

It’s not news because it doesn’t fit the narrative.
Alessandra
November 10th, 2013 @ 6:46 pm

Loved “trolletariat” ! LOL well done
Bob Belvedere
November 11th, 2013 @ 12:40 am

But, Evi, my dear, she doesn’t look that evil!
cmdr358
November 12th, 2013 @ 7:47 pm

good luck to you.
cmdr358
November 12th, 2013 @ 7:52 pm

Okay, so what would your guess be on the percentage of teachers who are not straight Democrat ticket voters? Just a ball park guess is fine.
5%, 10%, 15% ?

As the President is so fond of saying these days about people getting their insurance cancelled despite his lies “……those are relatively small numbers of people we’re talking about.”

Teachers are union. Unions are Democrat. Period.
cmdr358
November 12th, 2013 @ 7:57 pm

I notice you don’t use the phrase “Many of US did not vote for Obama”.

The fact that you waded into the deep end of this particular pool tells me two things:
1. Courses on logic are not part of the curriculum at teachers college and…
2.Troll.
Jonathan Pearson
November 12th, 2013 @ 8:00 pm

That’s another stupid statement. I’m a teacher; I’m not union. My entire team at my school are teachers. None of them are in the union. It’s funny when your ignorant assertions are shot down by someone who doesn’t fit your preconceived notions. Not everyone who is education is a Democrat and it asinine to try to demonize all teachers because of the actions of a vocal minority.
cmdr358
November 12th, 2013 @ 8:06 pm

1.He’s probably a union steward at his school.

2. Becuase of #1 he hates the categorical group of all union members into one group.

3. Because #2 is true but they’ve be indoctrinated to deny it and present themselves as normal working class Americans- not just unionized public sector leeches who don’t get near the credit for their greatness as they have been brainwashed into believing they deserve.
cmdr358
November 12th, 2013 @ 8:08 pm

Thanks for the concern but don’t worry about it.
I’m used to being shot at by trolls and they’re not very good shots.
cmdr358
November 12th, 2013 @ 8:17 pm

How do I come to the conclusion that your a troll? Your 6 minute elapsed time in responding to my comment.
I’m catching up on some reading of 3 day old blogs.
You are sitting on that blog for three days waiting for people to respond to your 3 day old comments.
FMJRA 2.0: Day Late & A Dollar Short : The Other McCain
November 18th, 2013 @ 3:47 am

[…] Cheerleading Coach Nicole Kurowski Craved That Hot, Sweet Teen Meat […]