Lots of interesting stuff in the news. There is a teacher from Delaware I think it is, that was caught having sex with one of her students, 13 years old. What the fuck was she thinking? The boys father is saying the boy lied to him about things that were going on, the boy was even allowed to spend the night at her house. The father thought he was with someone else, his mother I think, but didn't he fucking check? All the stories I read, though only a few, only skim over the father's actions while all this was going on. How is it that this guy is so unaware of his son's activities that the boy can get away with having sex with his teacher, hell have sex with anyone, 28 times in one week. In one news account I read the teacher talked to the father's girlfriend on the phone, posing as the boy's mother. There is a lot that is not making it to the press about the boy's home life that is suggested along with these facts. The father is living with a girlfriend, which means he is divorced, one would hope. Although this in itself is no big deal, coupled with the fact that he was so unaware it says a lot. All the news accounts are pointing the finger at the woman, which is warranted. What is equally warranted though are questions about what the fuck the father was thinking.

Then there is the government official was caught talking with a minor on the internet. The report I read didn't say whether it was a real person, the 12 year old, or fictitious as part of a sting operation. The point is moot though, and it's another case of what the fuck was he thinking.

In another story, one that has been going on for a while, the principle of a catholic school has allowed a prom to be sponsored by the school, after denying it months before. He got fed up with the increasingly lavish accommodations the proms were promoting. Apparently everyone had to be outdone with the biggest limo and the best dresses and tuxedos. Then there were the after parties, where expense was not a concern when renting villas for unrestrained festivities.

My question is, why is it the principle that has to curb the behavior? Why are the parents not setting limits? As with the student and the teacher, if there is something wrong with the behavior, why is there nobody raising the issue over whether the parents could be at fault? The principle is even warped in his reasoning, in my opinion. He says he is worried about 'the flaunting of affluence'. It isn't even brought up that maybe these kids learned these things from their parents, and half the reason the kids have to outdo one another is because it's the parents who can't be outdone. After all, it's the parents spending the money, and more often than not I'd be willing to bet the kids get the extravagance because the parents have a need to outshine everyone else, to show all the others that they too can afford to indulge.