Liberating Female Sexuality

Every day we read another story about a high school teacher arrested for having sex with a student. Some of the students are underage, but often they have reached the age of consent. In most jurisdictions the law does not care. The implied power imbalance—you recall how outraged everyone was when Bill Clinton used his power to take advantage of Monica Lewinsky—makes it that the sex is non-consensual.

Today’s it’s Alabama teacher Carrie Witt, indicted for having sex with two male high school students, aged 16 and 19. I see that the Daily Mail, in reporting the story, scrubbed all references to Witt’s victims’ gender. Other newspaper reports have been less prissy.

Witt’s defense argued that the law was unconstitutional. Yesterday, an Alabama judge agreed and dismissed the charges. He saw no evidence that the students has been coerced in any way. Since both had reached the age of consent, they had the right to consent to the sexual encounter freely. He found no evidence that Witt having used her position to force them to have sex. And he did not accept that a power imbalance, by itself, made the sex non-consensual.

The Daily Mail reports:

Morgan County Circuit Judge Glenn Thompson said the court found the statute 'unconstitutional' and that there was no proof Witt used her position of authority to force the two students to have sex.

The judge noted that state law allows students to legally have sex at age 16, as long as someone doesn't use their position of authority to obtain that consent.

Judge Thompson said that position of power 'clearly does not exist between every school employee and every student regardless of where that student is enrolled.' 

'It is this court's finding that the law grants these students the capacity to consent until and unless there is some showing that authority was used to obtain illegitimate or coerced consent,' Thompson wrote in his ruling. 

'If no such position of authority is alleged, the defendant must be permitted to show consent as a defense.'