The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Is Your Child’s Public School Teacher Cruising Online for a ‘Sugar Daddy’?

Posted on | August 18, 2013 | 128 Comments

Reading, writing and rent-a-dates:

SeekingArrangement.com, which bills itself as “the #1 online dating website for sugar babies and generous men,” is now boasting that some 40,000 public school teachers of a certain moral caliber have joined the website in an attempt to . . . seek wealthy, older men for “mutually beneficial relationships.” . . .
According to SeekingArrangement, the top five school districts in the country for sugar-baby teachers are (in order): the School District of Philadelphia, Miami-Dade County Public Schools, Los Angeles Unified School District, the Clark County School District (in the Las Vegas area) and the New York City public schools.

Why aren’t you home-schooling yet?

 

Category: Education, Sex

Comments

128 Responses to “Is Your Child’s Public School Teacher Cruising Online for a ‘Sugar Daddy’?”

  1. NeoWayland
    August 19th, 2013 @ 9:00 am

    Now that is interesting. I don’t agree, but it’s certainly interesting.

    I do agree that they might be foolish (obviously it depends on who is involved), but I also say that freedom means making mistakes and learning to deal with the consequences.

    Take away that choice and you deprive that person.

  2. RS
    August 19th, 2013 @ 9:11 am

    The teachers in the classic 1-8 grade, one room school houses were single, female high school graduates. States began creating “Normal Schools” for teacher education beginning in the 20th Century. That was a time when an 8th grade education was the norm, and not many people went to high school. That’s why we still have 8th grade graduation. It’s an artifact from those earlier times.

  3. rmnixondeceased
    August 19th, 2013 @ 9:15 am

    Incorrect conclusion. No one wanted to live under the rules of an official state church but they believed that everyone should live under the rules of their own church, i.e., have a moral foundation.
    Very astute to cherry-pick the documents for your example rather than discuss an awareness from reading ALL of the documents written by the founders. By cherry-picking facts and documents, I can prove that you are a hermophriditic dwarf who worships Kali and is left-handed. That is called intellectual dishonesty, a practice you just engaged in.
    I tire of your assclownish behavior, unless you can post an honest and factual comment, I shall ignore all future comments from you on this thread.

  4. rmnixondeceased
    August 19th, 2013 @ 9:17 am

    My own father had an 8th grade education. He began working immediately upon graduation and remained employed until his death.

  5. NeoWayland
    August 19th, 2013 @ 9:52 am

    Look again.

    The English Civil War and the religious squabbles between the colonies were still fresh in their minds.

    Some did think that a state religion was a good idea. They just didn’t agree on which one.

    And yes, some thought that an individual relationship with the Divine was more important than any church or institution. I thoroughly approve of that idea, BTW.

    I picked the documents I did precisely because they were the end products. You don’t have to have the whole of English literature to appreciate Mark Twain or David Weber. The DOI and the Constitution stand on their own, the “source documents” do not.

  6. Palin Copyright Infringement! Gays Claim Ownership to ‘Gay Old Time’ | Regular Right Guy
    August 19th, 2013 @ 3:56 pm

    […] Is Your Child’s Public School Teacher Cruising Online for a ‘Sugar Daddy’? […]

  7. Alessandra
    August 20th, 2013 @ 1:00 am

    You think you have proven something by not having proven anything? You need to work on your definition of “proven.”

    It’s not what you think it is.

    I have already proven you wrong and I’m just getting more proof of it right now.

    I asked you to show me where anyone on this site said that “perverted” equals “Italian immigrants” – your claim written just a scroll above, remember? Or the “music of Elvis Presley” or the writings of Whitman, or equality between men and women. Alas, I see no proof of anything.

    I also don’t see any proof on your part about anyone’s definition of perversion here being dependent on some kind of unwarranted and temporary question of convenience.

    Having unequal rights for women is perverted, but it is not equal to sexual perversion. Racism is perverted, but it is not sexual perversion. You’re just obessessed in lying about what sexual perversion refers to. As I have already pointed it out, for a pervert, as you keep proving, nothing is perverted – whether we are talking about sexual or non-sexual perversions – that is your working and stated definition. Denial at all costs.

    As it’s clear, your objective here is to stereotype conservatives in a way to malign them and to smear them, while being in denial about how sexually deformed and perverted so many people in society are.

  8. Alessandra
    August 20th, 2013 @ 1:21 am

    Are you too dense to realize that sexuality and relationships involve a lot more than adults and “consenting” adults?

    So sexuality and relationships is everybody’s business exactly because of how much harm people do in society in these spheres. And harm is society’s business.

    And it’s exactly in the minds of what you call “consenting” adults that the ideas for harmful and non-consensual activities are hatched. As was pointed out in another thread recently, the majority of harassful and abusive acts in the area of sexuality are perpetrated by people who also engage in consensual behavior, so-called “normal” people – including the LGBT trash so desperate to be called “normal.” But given how many perverts we have in society, they are just a step away from a number of non-consensual acts, any time they want. Surely you know this very well?

    Not to make this reply too long, I’ll end with a note of what a fraud your ideology is. You state that “consent” equals ” lack of harm” and should never warrant any accountability.

    As one of many examples, if millions of people want to spread HIV/AIDS and syphilis consensually, this causes widespread harm and destruction in society, aside from billions in wasted health care. Yet it’s all consensual. As you probably know, turds of homosexual and bisexual men are currently society’s greatest spreaders of HIV and syphilis. And that is society’s business. Sexuality and relationships are ALWAYS society’s business. Only the perverts want to hide what they are doing to escape accountability.

  9. NeoWayland
    August 20th, 2013 @ 9:01 am

    Please stop trying to put words in my posts that aren’t there.

    I never said lack of harm. I’ve also never said that people should escape responsibility for their actions.

    Guess what. That’s any activity, not just sex. Freedom to choose means responsibility for the results.

    And in case you haven’t noticed, I abhor the word “pervert.” I’ve seen it destroy innocent lives way too often.

    I don’t believe you should police people’s sex lives. I don’t think you should police people’s lives, period. That doesn’t mean people shouldn’t be accountable for what they do, I just think the costs of tyranny far outweigh the illusion of safety.

  10. NeoWayland
    August 20th, 2013 @ 9:11 am

    I said in an earlier decade, it might have been Italian or Irish immigrants. Or the music of Presley, the writings of Whitman, or the notion that all men are created equal.

    I added women in parentheses because I thought the statement should be qualified here.

    My point is that every one of those things was considered perverted. You don’t even want to know what was written about Irish and Italian immigrants, some of it actually makes the Westboro Baptist Church seem classy.

  11. Alessandra
    August 20th, 2013 @ 10:37 am

    The only thing I’m seeing is people who are perverted calling themselves normal and doing a great deal of harm with impunity.

    The only way you can hold people accountable is if you know what they are doing. Just a re-statement of why sexuality and relationships are society’s business.

  12. Alessandra
    August 20th, 2013 @ 10:45 am

    My point is that you are just making it up that most people on this site considered Italian immigrants as perverted, now or in an earlier decade. Or any of the other things you mention.

    An additional point that needs to be made is that many people with your perverted views about sexuality also hated all kinds of immigrants, women, and children – and still do.

  13. NeoWayland
    August 20th, 2013 @ 3:05 pm

    Well, I’ll give you this much, you’re persistent.

    Look again at the original article that began this thread. It was about people selecting companions and partners in an unorthodox way.

    Not illegal, but unusual.

    There was nothing except comments from readers like you to link that to pedophilia or homosexuality.

    To me, it’s immoral and perverse that you’ve taken it on yourself to pass judgement when there is nothing to show that these people did the things you say that you oppose.

    Would you accept them passing judgement on you?

    Obviously not, from your response to me. And all I’ve done is defend their right to make their own choices.

  14. NeoWayland
    August 20th, 2013 @ 3:07 pm

    No, what I did was show what was “perverted” is not necessarily what is “perverted” today.

  15. Alessandra
    August 21st, 2013 @ 3:24 am

    The criticism to the type of relationship discussed in the article is due to the fact that these are harmful types of relationships; they are dysfunctional and parasitic; therefore, analogous to other dysfunctional and parasitic types of relationships or sexualities. But for a pervert like yourself, nothing is perverted.

    Obviously you know very little of what I think about relationships. Or you wouldn’t claim that I approve of such relationships. But you can’t really reply to me without lying about what I think, can you?

    What you don’t want is accountability for yourself or for these people. Accountability is what you find immoral.

  16. Alessandra
    August 21st, 2013 @ 3:34 am

    Interesting that you were trying to show something that was not being disputed and that doesn’t change the fact that for a pervert nothing is perverted, nor does it change the fact that the relationships in question are perverted. But here, show us something else: what is your definition of perverted in regard to relationships and sexuality?

  17. NeoWayland
    August 21st, 2013 @ 8:31 am

    You don’t know the relationships are harmful. That’s another pretty vague word.

    If “dysfunctional” and “parasitic” are your standards, you’ll have to tell a lot of Americans they aren’t allowed to have relationships anymore. Ah, look at all the lonely people…

    And now I’m a “pervert,” even though you know next to nothing about me. Are you sure you don’t want to take another look at that working definition?

    I think that people are accountable to themselves and those whose lives they share.

  18. NeoWayland
    August 21st, 2013 @ 8:37 am

    I’ve shown that your slur word is just that, a slur word whose meaning changes with time and is routinely applied to anyone you might not agree with.

    Frankly, I try not to use that word. Unless there is harm other than some ever-changing moral standard, it’s not my business to know what my neighbor does in his house, anymore than it’s his business what I think of sushi and motorcycles.

  19. Alessandra
    August 21st, 2013 @ 11:57 pm

    Among the many things that I do know is that you keep running away from giving your definition of perverted.

    I’m asking you: What is someone who is sexually perverted?

  20. Alessandra
    August 22nd, 2013 @ 12:50 am

    You clearly have not shown that “my” word perverted is a slur.

    Because you haven’t shown anything about the reality it describes. A slur is a false statement. And the last thing you have shown is that there are no sexually perverted people in the world. Thus “perverted” is the right word to describe people who are sexually perverted *in reality*. That’s no slur. You are also wrong to claim that the word is used to describe people whom I merely disagree with about anything. That is not my definition of sexually perverted. And that is also not the standard definition of perverted.

    What you have shown is that you have a definition of perversion that says perversion isn’t perversion (hence your claim that it’s a slur). Thus you’re once again proving that for a pervert, nothing is perverted.

    How can I call you a pervert, you ask? By examining the views and attitudes you display here. No slur at all.

    If you don’t know what your neighbor does, you can’t hold them accountable for anything, including harm. That’s your goal, for you and for them.

  21. Alessandra
    August 22nd, 2013 @ 1:11 am

    I have used no smear word. And debate isn’t being quashed at all – if you haven’t noticed, you continue to try to debate, without much success, it’s true, but the failure is on your part. No one is quashing you.

    “How are these people perverted again?”

    Which people are you referring to now?

  22. NeoWayland
    August 22nd, 2013 @ 8:09 am

    Smear words are used to quash dissent. It works, unless someone questions it.

    I meant the people in the original article. You know, the ones you called perverted, and then tried to link to sexual practices that you find even more repugnant.

    Just so no one would question your original allegation.

  23. NeoWayland
    August 22nd, 2013 @ 8:12 am

    It’s not a valid premise.

    It’s like asking me what food is kosher to me when I am not Jewish.

    I abhor the word. I’ve seen it abused to many times. I prefer not to use it.

    How many times can I say the same thing?

  24. NeoWayland
    August 22nd, 2013 @ 8:17 am

    Except your definition keeps expanding.

    You don’t know the people who the article describes, yet you link them to homosexuals and pedophiles. And then you called me perverted.

    I certainly disagree with you, but you would be hard pressed to show anything else.

  25. Alessandra
    August 22nd, 2013 @ 8:36 am

    This is no false premise. Have you noticed that you are trying to debate a word whose meaning you refuse to define? Unless of course you are ready to admit that for a pervert nothing is perverted.

    Your Jewish analogy is a false one. Are you not a human being who has views, attitudes, and behaviors about sexuality and relationships? You are certainly a “Jew” then who has his own ideas about what is “kosher” when it comes to relationships and sexuality.
    To summarize, you hate facing the reality of our world, which includes many sexually perverted individuals. When I use the word perverted, it has a specific meaning about a reality that you hate to face. In other words, you hate holding perverted people accountable, especially for any harm that they do in the sphere of sexuality and relationships, or in the ways that they are dysfunctional.
    I actually had once written a definition of both “perverted” and “perverse” which I tried to find to post here today, but couldn’t. It should be somewhere on my blog. If I find it, I’ll post it.

  26. Alessandra
    August 22nd, 2013 @ 8:48 am

    Another strawman: my definition of perverted wasn’t as restricted as you assumed. So the definition itself hasn’t expanded, there are many ways that one can be sexually perverted. I called you perverted because you are defending perverted attitudes and behaviors. See, no slur.

    I think the most important point that I have shown is that for a pervert nothing is perverted. Denial and lack of accountability about your perverted attitudes and behaviors is what you are after.

    As for your claim that I don’t know anything about the people in the article – the article presents us with information about women basically prostituting themselves. That is very perverted and the same is true for the trash of losers who pay these women.

  27. NeoWayland
    August 22nd, 2013 @ 12:27 pm

    No, I have pointed out that you keep using and changing your definition of a slur word. You still haven’t shown how the people in the original article have done anything except use an unusual method to pick a bed partner.

    For that you’ve condemned them.

    The really sad thing is that you don’t see anything wrong with that.

  28. NeoWayland
    August 22nd, 2013 @ 12:32 pm

    I’m defending the right of people to make their own choices with out society policing them for the “greater good.”

    If you take a harder look, you’ll see that what the women in the article have done isn’t all that far removed from what some ladies have done for centuries. It’s part of civilization.