But the other question is whether it is wrong for a 20 yo to date a 15 to, so long as the parents have no issue and there is no inappropriate sex.
Although I would never allow it, who am I to judge a parent who does? That's my view. But I'm in the minority.
I just informally polled about thirty people at the courthouse, and they all said it is wrong. This is without knowing the 20 yo in question is a school director.
I decided that I should ask males, too. Every one of them said it is wrong, too. "I refuse to accept the premise," noted one dude, who insisted there would be sex.
So I'm in the minority here.
30 comments:
You could spend a few years analyzing the different factions in Emmaus and why the liberals hate Stolz so much.
There's hate on the conservative side too, it's equally bad.
It's embarrassing and no side is innocent.
The Banker
The "factions" in Emmaus are in a death struggle. Nothing new.... been like this for years. It's vicious. Banker is correct. BOTH sides.
Emmaus is the epicenter, but it consumes the entire East Penn area.. Macungie, Burtis, Emmaus and Township.
He trolls a teen web site for girls. Under the law she is a child. he sits on a School Board and dates an underage student,. he claims "nothing " went on sexually?
Yet you attack those who point o=out how immoral, stupid and wrong this is.
hey you can sell your daughter in some parts of the world, as long as the parents approve of it. You must be OK with that too.
the guy is a scum bag worse than Gregory. Stop being an as O'Hare.
Bernie, there are a few things I find troubling about your post:
1) Whether the parents consent or not really has no part in whether this is morally acceptable.
2) Children (including teenagers) cannot "consent" to relationships with adults, because the power dynamics at play between a teenager and an adult are numerous. When you try to find ways around this, you end up with a culture that allows things like Judges excusing rapists because the victim is "older than her chronological age."
3) Whether the relationship was sexual or not is only relevant from a legal perspective, not a moral one. As others have said, nonsexual relationships still fall within the realm of "grooming" and the fact that Julian points to his resumed relationship as a defense for having an inappropriate relationship with her when she was underage is really disconcerting.
I think Julian has often been a walking punchline, but I have no political agenda involving the East Penn School Board (or even broader Lehigh County politics). I do have an agenda against rape culture, and I'm sure many of those concerned by this revelation feel the same way. Dismissing those concerns as being political is really doing a disservice to any kind of dialogue about this issue beyond some sort of political back and forth, as if this is a "right vs left" issue - which it clearly is not.
I cannot believe you consent and applaud this whacko's pedophiliac behavior.
You both are crazy and perverted!
How many teen sites do you belong to with bare chested photos?
I don't applaud it, but I don't condemn it. It is not pedophilic. I do think that the people who posted this 5 yo relationship have an agenda.
You ran a photograph of Barron taken at his work (at the time). Bloggers have few filters.
Trawling teen websites for young girls is unacceptable behavior for a sitting school director. The creep factor is germane. Minor kids are routinely preyed upon by creepy older dudes. The five years between 25 and 30 are inconsequential. The five years between 15 and 20 are light years. Somebody's dad should have rearranged his dental work. Perhaps he was working on fatherless girls for a reason.
Illegal? Don't know. Creepy? Without a doubt. School directors should expect to have to answer for being creepy.
I don't know what relevance my phot of barron at NCC has to this issue. it was taken to demonstrate that he was spending his workday there instead of at the courthouse where a full-time controller belongs. The photo of Julian at his job was just mean-spirited and to be honest ... creepy.
There is no evidence that Julian was "trawling" teen websites. Once again, we have insinuations. It is a site he joined when he was a teen and that he still used, more and more infrequently, mostly to talk to those around his age who were using it, more and more infrequently.
And why do you refuse to identify yourself while being so sanctimonious about someone's private affairs?
Why wasn't this brought up 5 years ago? And why is this an issue now? He stopped dating her back then when he thought it would becoming a topic that would stand in the way of progress on the School Board.
So we are going retro-actively into people's history and persecuting them? If that is the case, almost all of people in politics would be gone.
And so is Julian. If you read on his blog, he resigned effective immediately.
Too bad, people get caught up in the fringes instead of the bigger picture. If you are really upset over this, where were you when Clinton was with his intern? That was a relationship of a superior over a subordinate. And he was married.
This wasn't even close to what we had 5 years ago.
I'm pretty sure most people who are disgusted by this are also disgusted by Bill Clinton. Or I can at least say that I am.
no, Bill Clinton is a "rock star" to libs and their union thugs
Ah the teabaggers they are so into the victim mentality they don't condemn the act but complain it is all about them and their screwy political views.
Whether Bill Clinton or Stoltz it was wrong. Both used authority to get a subordinate. In the case of Stoltz it was a child. But of no difference, they were both wrong.
Shake those teabaggs in anger. Then cash your disability and social security checks.
Grrrr!!!!!!
That Emmaus-Lower Macungie area has always been weird. I think the grown adults stalking the guy are way out of line. I hope they get outed. There are some lines you shouldn't cross and thats one. Somebody let their emotions get the better of them and they coasted into creepystalker town.
Lets all forget about the child. Its all about the adult.
It is unconscionable, the relationship between a 20 year-old adult and a 15 year-old child.
But what is with the stalking of Julian Stoltz?
Taking his pic at work in the mall?
Leaking an old "quasi-criminal" relationship.
The relationship is disgusting, but yes, Bernie, it looks like an attempt to discredit him personally rather than have to vote him out at the ballot box.
I am particularly disturbed by the pic of him handing out tea at the mall because it sends the message that whoever took the pic and joked about it is inherently better than someone who works a menial job.
Don't forget that it's those people who work menial jobs who make up the backbone of America. No one should be made fun of for working when they would probably make more money collecting unemployment.
But his relationship was beyond disturbing and creepy as Hell.
anon 6:36
The 15 year old is a CHILD. A decent society protects its children.
Bill Clinton abused his authority over a subordinate. Also disturbing.
But nothing is as disturbing as the abuse of a child.
I don't think it was creepy but am in a distinct minority on that one. I know Julian.
I don't wan't to harp on this, Bernie, but I do want to give you this thought in response to your last comment.
Often times people have a gut response to allegations of abuse, rape, harassment, assault, etc. that go something along the lines of "I know this person. This person is not a monster, and therefore there must be extenuating circumstances, or not all is as it seems."
This is natural for two reasons. The first is that overwhelmingly, we've been led to believe that these kinds of attacks are only perpetrated by "terrible" people, terrible people who set out with the explicit goal of attacking someone. Unfortunately, the reality is that most acts of sexual violence (and I include the grooming of a child as a romantic partner to an adult as an act of sexual violence, regardless of whether the relationship was explicitly sexual) are in fact perpetuated by "good" people who often do not even question whether their behavior is inappropriate. That doesn't excuse the behavior and it certainly doesn't make it "okay."
The second reason is the extension of that, which is that when people we hold in high esteem violate what we assume to be shared values, it causes us to call into question our own judgment and standards, which is truly uncomfortable.
Obviously you are entitled to your opinion here, but I hope you'll take a few minutes to think about this. By offering up a defense here under the premise that you "know Julian," you are perpetuating the myth that sexual violence isn't perpetuated by people we know and trust, even though it almost always is.
I don't applaud it, but I don't condemn it. It is not pedophilic. I do think that the people who posted this 5 yo relationship have an agenda.
Obviously there was an agenda. Is this a revelation? Some anonymous opponents have been doing opposition research for some time now to find something bad enough to get him ousted. Well, they finally found it. That does not excuse the behavior and it does not invalidate the opponents views that this person espoused many controversial and sophomoric opinions.
So, in summary, what he did was morally reprehensible and as a sitting school board member it's multiplied by 100 and people had a political vendetta against the person because of his own vitriol. Politics.
it sends the message that whoever took the pic and joked about it is inherently better than someone who works a menial job.
Sure. I agree.
But then again Stolz is the one who called public schools "brain rotting" and yet he can't find anything other than a part time retail job in his vast mental superiority.
Translation: Working retail is for losers.
Capri, I know Julian and have been subjected to false allegations. That is perpetuated by terrible people. Now all of a sudden we have morphed from poor judgment to sexual violence. How the hell did that happen? Geez. Do you even realize what you just said?
This goes way past right or wrong.
The issue is that he was conducting in behavior which offended the vast majority of his constituents. And he knew it. Which is why stopped those activities when faced with possible public exposure.
Bernie, as I said in my post, I consider grooming a child for a romantic relationship to be an act of sexual violence.
False allegations are few and far between, but they do happen - I think you have documented fairly well that you've been the victim of such. The existence of false allegations is certainly disgusting - but it is a straw man fallacy in any conversation of this topic.
There is no "false allegation" in this instance - Julian has admitted this relationship. What he and you are arguing is that its perfectly acceptable for an adult to pursue a romantic relationship with a child. You're wrong, and I think if you want to brush the topic aside as simply gossip and mean spirited politicking, all I can say is that you are in plentiful company.
Sorry that was me.
I made no such argument. I would never approve it in my family. What I said is that IF the parents approve and there is no possibility of any sex, I am not going to judge that parental decision. Moreover, as someone who knows Julian, I find the notion of sexual violence or grooming to be completely ridiculous. Save that nonsense for Oprah.
It appears that all that happened was that it was a friendship under the supervision of adults, who were parents. If this is consider taboo, then people should have friends that are only the same age as they are? I feel sorry for the people that work in settings where they deal with small children. Anyone can allege or blow any type of circumstance into grooming or sexual predatory behavior or violence. I pity the children of the future, especially some of the commentators on here. Unless of course, they aborted their children.
for once bernie and i agree... i know julian. and i remember when i was 15 dating a 19 year old. nothing happened in that relationship either. my parents knew who i was dating, and there were very clear boundaries. hell, my parents even let me spend the weekends with my then boyfriend. i see nothing wrong with this relationship, ESPECIALLY since now he is engaged to the girl. and frankly obama has made it perfectly clear with obamacare that you are a child and not responsible for yourself until the age of 26.
julian is being falsely accused of some horrible crime, of which there is no evidence. these people who have been stalking julian should be ashamed of themselves. and on a further note. i have and will continue to trust julian around my minor children. he is a great guy and i still believe a good role model. hang in there julian, don't let this get the best of you!
Bernie thinks the photo taken of Julian at his work was creepy yet he posted it on his blog o hate. Who's the real creep?
Unbelievable. I don't support or hate Stolz, but putting down a 25 year old who has a retail job in a down economy in an area that has 9% unemployment just shows the poster is out of touch with reality. I applaud Stolz for having a job where he's at least learning valuable people skills vs. following the rest of the twenty somethings to get in line to be fired from Amazon right before they are scheduled to become permanent.
Post a Comment