Unofficial Christ's Hospital Forum

efsis wrote:I would have thought that at the age of seventeen you knew what you were doing?

No offense - but that is the rationale most abusers use. I may have been 17 - which is considerably wiser than, say, 14 - but - the fact remains, that I was a minor and this was a TEACHER, in a position of trust, and the balance of power was hardly level. Most 17 year-olds THINK they know what they are doing - yet, in the climate of emotional starvation, low self esteem and isolation at CH, it was easy to mistake sexual predation and abuse for something gentler and 'more sophisticated'. He was in his late 30s. Your statement, Efsis, is tantamount to saying "well, she was wearing a short skirt - she asked for it".

Kim2s70-77 wrote:

efsis wrote:I would have thought that at the age of seventeen you knew what you were doing?

No offense - but that is the rationale most abusers use. I may have been 17 - which is considerably wiser than, say, 14 - but - the fact remains, that I was a minor and this was a TEACHER, in a position of trust, and the balance of power was hardly level. Most 17 year-olds THINK they know what they are doing - yet, in the climate of emotional starvation, low self esteem and isolation at CH, it was easy to mistake sexual predation and abuse for something gentler and 'more sophisticated'. He was in his late 30s. Your statement, Efsis, is tantamount to saying "well, she was wearing a short skirt - she asked for it".

Well said Kim, the only one who was offensive was efsis.

Hear, hear, Mary. Dinosaur attitudes like that allow men to get away with all kinds of filth. Talk about blaming the victim! Disgraceful.

This is an emotive subject - and the potential for harm is great.

Kim - you were put in a position that the teacher should have known was out of order. I feel for you.
It is interesting that someone thinks that at 17 you should have known what you were doing - when I was at Horsham, I really didn't know what I was doing and actually most of my early adult life after Horsham was spent learning things that people who hadn't been boarded already knew - I'm not sure even now that I have caught up. Even today I see 14 yr olds ruining their lives because they think they know it all - and yet they aren't as confident as I was (if that makes sense).

So...as a male, can I conclude by saying that I had hoped that stereotypical comments would not be used in a forum as they have and never had a place in any reasonable society. If we are not careful then comments about sex (same and different gender) will cause people a lot of pain and anxiety some years after the actual incident has taken place.

(sorry rant over!!)

Not just men Annie, remember Rose West and those recent women at nurseries.

Confession time ------

I don't know about being worldly wise at 17-------- I was a virgin until 20, when I met my first wife !

I don't know whether this merits a or a or a

Chris Blewett wrote:This is an emotive subject - and the potential for harm is great.

Kim - you were put in a position that the teacher should have known was out of order. I feel for you.
It is interesting that someone thinks that at 17 you should have known what you were doing - when I was at Horsham, I really didn't know what I was doing and actually most of my early adult life after Horsham was spent learning things that people who hadn't been boarded already knew - I'm not sure even now that I have caught up. Even today I see 14 yr olds ruining their lives because they think they know it all - and yet they aren't as confident as I was (if that makes sense).
(sorry rant over!!)

The big problem, especially now, is that 14 and 15 year olds do believe that they "know it all" and demand to be treated like 30 year olds (Kim admits that, wrongly, she felt she was the equal of the teacher involved) and will react if they are "talked down to" as 14 / 15 year olds. Hence you get young girls becoming pregnant and, (I hate to write it), expecting hunks to have intercourse with them. That hunk could well be a teacher and if the teacher refuses then that itself starts to cause trouble such as false accusations. Teachers can be on a hiding to nothing; fact of life.
However, Kim, that is today and not when you were at school and the teacher and, even worse, the headmistress, was way out of line. One has to wonder what had happened to her in her youth that she could act that way.

Chris is totally correct that Horsham (and I guess Hertford) prevented us from learning about the world except in a sanitised and incomplete way. I certainly haven't "caught up"

englishangel wrote:Not just men Annie, remember Rose West and those recent women at nurseries.

Point taken, Mary; but in at least one nursery case, weren't the women acting on behalf of a man? That doesn't minimise their repulsive crime, of course, but I'd suggest that the few women involved, contrasted with the millions of male sexual predators worldwide, tend to be the exceptions.

I'm pretty sure that many of us Hertford people who have posted on that thread would, like Kim, have no hesitation in describing ourselves as emotionally starved, low in self-esteem and very isolated. I myself, after leaving CH and going to grammar school, "fell in love" with any boy who looked at me twice, I was so grateful to feel "normal". That led to some extremely unsuitable entanglements. At University (where the head of my Hall remarked loudly "We've never had a gel from the east end before"- her mistake, I came from SE London, but you get my drift?) I felt as lonely as I had at CH. It is still sometimes an ordeal for me to have to socialise.

I completely understand why Kim acted as she did, & the man who cynically exploited her vulnerability should have been sacked on the spot. The fact that SHE was the one to be punished only serves to underline the antediluvian attitudes then prevailing at CH.

Kim2s70-77 wrote:

efsis wrote:I would have thought that at the age of seventeen you knew what you were doing?

No offense - but that is the rationale most abusers use. I may have been 17 - which is considerably wiser than, say, 14 - but - the fact remains, that I was a minor and this was a TEACHER, in a position of trust, and the balance of power was hardly level. Most 17 year-olds THINK they know what they are doing - yet, in the climate of emotional starvation, low self esteem and isolation at CH, it was easy to mistake sexual predation and abuse for something gentler and 'more sophisticated'. He was in his late 30s. Your statement, Efsis, is tantamount to saying "well, she was wearing a short skirt - she asked for it".

I apologise. I should have read my comment before posting as I realise now that it was bound to cause offence. My mistake was that I forgot how it was in the seventies and was thinking more how it is today. Once again sorry.

Surely he was sacked, Kim?? I didn't realise you'd been put through such a rough time over it; I assumed you would have been supported and treated with compassion, even in the 70s. How awful. Quite apart from anything else, if anyone deserved the Wansey Cup during my time at Hertford, you did - that was petty and unfair.

Wasn't there another male teacher at the same time being even more inappropriate with even younger girls too? Actually the more I think about it, with there being so very few male teachers at Hertford during our time, that makes 50% of them abusers - obviously too small a sample to be statistically significant, but rather a grim thought all the same.

Thank you for the apology, Efsis. I believe that there was a significant abuse of power, however, regardless of the era!

I don't believe he was sacked, Jo - it was suggested that he refrain from teaching at girls' schools. They did not award the Wandsey cup - or the woodwind prize that I would have got - but that one made more sense!!! I am not the least traumatized by the experience - I merely mentioned it because it was an extension of the discussion about repressed sexuality etc. I think CH caused me to have very, very low self esteem and to make VERY poor choices re relationships. I clearly craved affection and attention - what I got was sex. It took me a few years to figure that one out!!! I became involved with my husband because I did not know how to say 'no' without causing offense!!! Lived with that decision for 20 years before I wised up!! lol

I don't think that feeling is restricted to Hertford, Kim. It would be interesting to do some research into boarding schools generally and see if the incidence of divorce is higher or lower than 'normal' schools. That could then be expanded to look at divorce following re-marriage. Don't know if you could show a link - but I often wonder if my life would have been different if I hadn't gone to Horsham!

Kim2s70-77 wrote: I clearly craved affection and attention

I can echo that one and I still do it now when my defences are down (which aint all that often and the only time I get in real trouble (like now) is when my brickwall/armour crumbles and I'm forced to let feelings in!)

Way too deep for a Tuesday morning!

Now I am, further confused ------

Does "Boarding School Experience" lead to divorce and second Marriage ?

Guilty on all three counts !

NEILL THE NOTORIOUS wrote:Now I am, further confused ------

Does "Boarding School Experience" lead to divorce and second Marriage ?

Guilty on all three counts !

Sorry Neill - just my own musings - but it may be a good people of research for some sociology student looking for a Masters or Ph D thesis?

I too am guilty but the current Mrs B is number 3

\

Spoonbill wrote: Did this kind of stuff go on at CH Hertford?

I don't remember this going on at Hertford at all...........but I could have just been oblivious. The only thing relationshipwise I remember is one sixth form girl having a relationship with a male teacher.