[quote]Sodomy tends to be the act of forceful anal intercourse, not consensual.[/quote]Which is the exact reason why I questioned its use as opposed to “Intercourse” or “sex”, which are neutral terms. ‘Sodomy’ implies to me that it is evil or wrong.
I have no idea how old this kid was, or how old “Junior High” is, noone answered me so can I assume it’s early teens ? In which case, the teacher in question is sick man and the word ‘sodomize’ might be justified
Main Entry: sod
Sodomy by itself is anal intercourse. Consent is a whole other matter apparently.
See law.com:
[quote]sodomy
n. anal copulation by a man inserting his penis in the anus either of another man or a woman. If accomplished by force, without consent or with someone incapable of consent, sodomy is a felony in all states in the same way that rape is. Homosexual (male to male) sodomy between consenting adults has also been found a felony but increasingly is either decriminalized or seldom prosecuted. Sodomy with a consenting adult female is virtually never prosecuted even in those states in which it remains on the books as a criminal offense. However, there have been a few cases, including one in Indiana, in which a now-estranged wife insisted that a husband be charged with sodomy for sexual acts while they were living together. Traditionally sodomy was called “a crime against nature.” Sodomy does not include oral copulation or sexual acts with animals (bestiality).[/quote]
Sure, it’s (historically/linguistically) synonymous with buggery, based on a 13th Century misreading of the Bible (apparently); in usage it has become more assciated with forceful entry, wouldn’t you agree?
I think most gay guys would say they fuck their boyfriends; if they’re over 50 and British they might bugger him; none would, I am sure, talk of sodomizing their lover; Its usage has distinct negative connotations, whatever the dictionary says. It started off as referring to homosexual rape, became synonymous with gay lovemaking, and now again I’m sure most would use it to refer to forceful entry. It’s quite an interesting word for linguists and English teachers; I’m going to use it in a test I’m writing today 
[quote=“Neo”]Sodomy by itself is anal intercourse. Consent is a whole other matter apparently.quote]
Again, that’s true in law, but the history of the word (Sodom and Gommorah=sodomy) refers to male RAPE not consensual sex.
And I’ll call what I do with my lover whatever I want to call it, not what straight, probably Christian, white lawyers and academics call it, thank you very much 
I didn’t say sodomy is evil. At a medical or legal level, ‘sodomy’ means exactly the same as ‘anal sex’. But to me ‘Sodomy’ has an negative connotation, so when someone uses the word “sodomy” instead of “anal sex” I question why, to me it either implies that it is forced (what other negative meaning could be implied ?) or that the speaker is homophobic (or doesn’t know the negative connotation, which I presume is the case with Ax). Not quite sure why we’re discussing this, it was a story in Chinese (But on the other hand, we all know how impartial and non-judgmental the Taiwanese media is, especially when foreigners are involved), paraphrased by some whose first language isn’t English.
Nobody said you did!
And I agree, but my point being, sodomy only means the same thing as anal sex for people who don’t do it! 
If the term sodomy carries a negative connotation for some that’s because (a) it’s probably performed most often by homosexuals (and many people are bothered by that) and (b) it’s up the poop-shoot (which many people feel is icky).
But if homosexuals don’t use the term that’s, in my opinion, not because of the above but because it’s such a clinical term. People also don’t generally ask their partner, “honey, would you mind giving me some fellatio?” On the other hand, the news media has to use euphemisms and clinical terms because otherwise some viewers might be offended.
The fact that a biblical city by the same name was destroyed because of such practices probably doesn’t do much in terms of PR either…
Steady on there, it’s the WORD ‘sodomy’ I’m unsure about not the act, ok ? It’s not my cup of tea, but if 2 people want to do that, I couldn’t care less as long as I’m not involved.
What if ‘sodomy’ has a negative connotation, but ‘anal sex’ doesn’t ?
Maybe because it’s old word from times less enlightened from ours ?
Sorry, I didn’t mean a couple using language intimately with each other, I meant when describing it to a third or thirteenth person, down the pub for example, along the lines of: I buggered him rotten, cf. I fucked her ragged. IMO, sodomy implies male rape, sodomize=brutalize. Gay people don’t use the word because of that, not because it’s a clinical term. It’s a word that straight religious people have used to demonise taking it up the shit-chute, hence the confusion. I repeat, it’s a word used by people who don’t do it
Thus, going back to the original post, I agree that if the student was raped, “sodomize” would be the correct, albeit archaic and heavily-loaded, word to use.
Matthewh: Am I missing some posts? Is someone attacking you?
No, I was saying the word ‘Sodomy’ has negative connotations, then someone seems to midunderstands and says I think that sodomy(the act) is evil because I’m homophobic 
Just wanted to clear up that is the WORD that bothers me. The ACT does not bother me, ok ?
[EDIT] Looking back over the thread, I can’t find the post I’m referring to, oh bugger
Matt, I didn’t mean that sodomy is evil. I merely meant that that is its implied meaning, given that anal intercourse has always been found disgusting by “ordinary” folk.
No one wants to be sodomized, they assume.
Therefore sodomy, unjustly, has become to mean a violation.
I haven’t found anything mathewh has said as being remotely homophobic, or anything else as accusatory. I guess I’m missing the subtle little ways you straight guys slur each other. Do you have a secret handshake too?
I haven’t found anything mathewh has said as being remotely homophobic, or anything else as accusatory. I guess I’m missing the subtle little ways you straight guys slur each other. Do you have a secret handshake too? [/quote]
I’m not saying Matthew is homophobic. Society in general has been for a long time. There are laws against anal intercourse. In some places it’s a capital crime.
People, therefore, mistakenly equate sodomy with rape.
Sodomy is consesual. Rape is not.
Given that sex with minors is illegal as they are unable to consent by law, this guy, if in fact so, is guilty of rape.
[quote]Do you have a secret handshake too? [/quote]Not a handshake, but something like that 
Oh I’ll bet you do! If I show you mine will you show me yours?
I think we should let the great Frank Z have the last word on this:
“Rammit, rammit, rammit, rammit up your poop-chute
(CORNHOLE!)”
My point is that Taiwan is a free and democratic society. In such a society the government and its policies are a direct reflection of the population. If the government is more concerned with the accreditation of a teachers credentials than checking to see if the person is a dangerous criminal. That is a direct reflection of the population
What about former criminals who have changed their ways and become very good teachers? I know at least one, and maybe others who keep their pasts to themselves. We have a system in the UK whereby convictions become ‘spent’, ie need not be declared, after a period of time related to the gravity of the offence.
I’ve seen plenty of people here alluding to smoking the occasional spliff. That makes them criminals in this country, but does it necessarily make them unsuitable as teachers? It’s becoming more and more widely accepted - just as homosexuality is - in many parts of the world. Here it’s a crime. In the UK you can pretend it never happened after a few years, because it’s accepted as being irrelevant.
Of course, a penchant for sphincter-stretching under the guise of teaching is a very different matter. Buggery of minors probably stays on your record for ever, and I for one don’t have a problem with that.
I think before you condemn all criminals as being guilty of absolutely everything you have to draw a distinction between child-molesters and people who have been jailed in California because they committed three misdemeanours of the kind that many foreigners commit here on a daily basis.
Just my uninformed opinion.