this post was submitted on 25 Dec 2025
390 points (97.6% liked)

World News

51499 readers
1273 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Rebecca Joynes is currently serving a six and a half year prison sentence

A teacher who was convicted for having sex with two boys, becoming pregnant by one, has been banned from the profession.

Maths teacher Rebecca Joynes, 31, was jailed for six and a half years in July last year after being found guilty of six counts of sexual activity with a child, after sleeping with one pupil before falling pregnant by a second while on police bail.

The Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) convened earlier this month via a virtual hearing, which Joynes did not attend, to consider her professional conduct. A panel recommended she be banned from teaching.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BaroqueInMind@piefed.social 24 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Why do this? There's millions of legal age men who would love to start a family with this crazy woman. Why did she rape kids?

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/news-life/former-maths-teacher-rebecca-joynes-banned-from-teaching-after-grooming-two-school-boys/news-story/0fe2070f15e4694d585491d7ea183cdb

One kid was 15, the other 16.

She was 30 or 31.

... the answer is because she's a groomer, a pedophile, by how those terms are generally used.

She gets off on the power imbalance, she gets off on manipulating and exploiting those who don't and can't reasonably be expected to know better.

She either wouldn't prefer to be or just couldn't be in a relationship with someone on an equal playing field.

She's a sexual predator, the kind you'd stereotypically call Chris Hansen to investigate.

[–] SayJess@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 3 days ago

She’s a pedophile, that’s why.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago (4 children)

We don't get to choose who and what we are attracted to. 🤷🏻‍♂️ However, that does not absolve one of immoral actions.

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

... Imagine saying this regarding a male teacher aged 30/31 who groomed a 15 year old and 16 year old student, and got the 15 year old student pregnant.

(This woman got pregnant by the 15 yo student she groomed... and she had that child.)

"Oh I dunno, I guess some people are attracted to kids! 🤷 Its a bad thing to do though."

What the fuck.

No, its a lot more than just a bad thing, merely immoral actions. Its three innocent lives massively damaged, thrown off course, poetentially fucked up for life, because of the manipulative and selfish actions of a person in a position of trust and authority absuing that trust and authority.

And yeah its three lives, not two, because there's no way this doesn't massively negatively affect the life of her baby.

https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/news-life/former-maths-teacher-rebecca-joynes-banned-from-teaching-after-grooming-two-school-boys/news-story/0fe2070f15e4694d585491d7ea183cdb

... this woman is a serial sexual predator, who pursued the second relationship after being investigated for the first one and more or less getting away with a slap on the wrist.

Thats not just 'immoral actions', it's basically downright evil, which, according to the judge of the most recent trial, was carried out with "breathtaking gall" and "astonishing arrogance."

Downplaying the magnitude of how fucked up this is, is itself fucked up.

[–] oascany@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

"MAP" type excusatory bullshit, fuck off. Pedophilia is not a sexuality because "child" is not a sex or gender expression.

[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I don't understand how that comment was excusing anything. They explicitly said that it was inexcusable.

[–] oascany@lemmy.world -1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Yeah, but prefaced it by saying you can't help who or what you're attracted to. Right out of the MAP playbook. The thoughts and attraction in itself is a problem and requires counselling because "children" are not a sexuality. You can and should help what you're attracted to when that what is a child! If you're having suicidal thoughts, you should see a counsellor. If you're having thoughts about harming others, you should see a counsellor. If you're having thoughts about diddling kids, you. should. see. a. counsellor.

[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

No one's disagreeing that it's wrong and needs to be addressed. The disagreement is on whether pedophiles get to choose who they're attracted to. This is an important distinction because firstly, the origin of their thoughts/actions determines the course of action necessary to keep it in check. Second, shaming someone for something they can't control is one of the most effective ways of discouraging treatment. Third, that wasn't a preface. It was the answer to the question they responded to.

Regarding suicidality: I believe that the approach of stigmatizing and criminalizing was often taken in the past and found to be ineffective. I've been seeing a big movement towards more open dialogue and encouraging treatment in the past decades.

[–] oascany@lemmy.world 1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

And I'm disagreeing that pedophiles can't help their feelings. This dialogue only occurs because of the recent conflation between sexuality and pedophilia. I've always been of the opinion that they need to see a professional, and that needs to be a non-negotiable. I reject any conversation on their feelings being a choice because as evidenced in this thread, people conflate ideas that apply to sexuality to pedophiles. I just responded to someone who accused me of arguing for conversion therapy. It's pedophilia, it needs to stay stigmatised because of how huge the consequences are if they act on it.

[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 1 points 14 hours ago

I think you and shalafi might be using different definitions of "gets to choose". Using a depressed person as an analogy since I think this is better understood: You don't get to choose to be happy, but you can choose to take steps towards getting help so that you can better manage it. It sounds like they're talking about the former while you're talking about the latter.

Similarly with stigmatization. It's one thing to stigmatize acting on your suicidal ideation. It's another to stigmatize having suicidal ideation in the first place.

[–] amorpheus@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Do you accept that people can prefer partners older or younger than them? If so, do you really think that's something that can be dealt with by some kind of "conversion therapy"?

[–] oascany@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Bizarre equivalencies here. Firstly, regardless of my personal beliefs on large age gaps, those are consenting adults. You're equating them to children. Children are not consenting adults, it is a problem if you feel sexual attraction to them. Same thing with animals. They cannot consent. You have some really messed up ideals if you're equating psychiatry and therapy, especially modern-day versions of them, to conversion therapy forced onto gay people. This is exactly why I called it excusatory MAP bullshit because you go right down this slippery slope. Being sexually attracted to children is not a sexuality.

[–] amorpheus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What does consent have to do with attraction?

[–] oascany@lemmy.world 1 points 17 hours ago

If there is a conscious being that cannot consent, object, or otherwise appropriately respond to one's attraction, then that attraction should not be held onto. Ways should be explored to move past that attraction, whether they be through counselling or self reflection.

Nonononono NO.

Child rape teachers are knowingly taking advantage of social trust in order to exploit kids. Absolutely nothing in the ball park of "pedos can't help it". Rape is not a kink, fetish or identity, it's a selfish, harmful, devastating crime with decades of repurcussions.

Please, I implore you to please never use this type of LGBTQIA acceptance language for pedophila. Child rapists are light-years away from two queer consenting adults and conflating the two only harms the innocent.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today -1 points 3 days ago