Coaches at Catholic school

[Raa]

because a person of authority took advantage of students under the age of 18. even if they where over 18 it could be considered rape. 

Considered, maybe.

Legally? Depends on the state/country.

[George P Global Moderator]

In essence because you where a young kid full of hormones who want sex at any time with mostly anyone, you'd let her take advantage of you.

 

you don't consider it rape, not at that time/age anyway, but reality is a bit more complex than that. Just because you want sex doesn't mean you're not being taken advantage of. 

 

I want sex at any time with any good looking female, that part hasn't changed since I was 17.    In this case, in NY anyways, the charge wouldn't be rape, from what I've seen, it'd be sexual misconduct because, as has been said, she was in a position of authority being his teacher.   So even the law, unless I'm wrong here, doesn't view this case as rape.

[Dot Matrix]

I agree, the term "rape" gets thrown around too much. In this case (right or wrong) the acts were consensual and not forced.

[DocM]

I agree, the term "rape" gets thrown around too much. In this case (right or wrong) the acts were consensual and not forced.

Doesn't matter. Save for exceptions in a few states Romeo & Juliet laws sex with a minor or where there is a power disparity is a prosecutable offense. It may be called statutory rape or a violation of a teacher-student ban (often with the student being under 21), but either way it's illegal.