The Classroom Narcissist


I am Chloe. I am 18 years old and I had an affair with my teacher, Mr Stevens or Phil as I came to call him.

I am not some silly girl, although they have repeatedly tried to tell me that I am. Believe me, I have felt the weight of my opponents as they tried to convince me, no doubt orchestrated by Phil, that I dreamt the whole thing up. Still, it is to be expected isn’t it, that they, the teachers, will close ranks and look out for one another. That is what they do isn’t it? I have lost friends because of this, but I realise they are just jealous and they fancied Phil just like me, only I got to have him. I don’t blame them for fancying him, he is good looking and funny and he has that easy air about him that makes him so likeable, but what they don’t realise that it is all an act. Phil the Flirt, Phil the Mate but when it suits him he remains Phil the Teacher, set apart and to stay apart.

He started it of course. I won’t deny that I liked him from the beginning. Everybody does. He is a popular teacher and being good-looking as well is never going to cause him a problem in the popularity stakes, but you see, he knows all of this, he plays on all of this and boy does he use it. He uses it to reel you in and then, and here is the clever part, he uses it as his defence. “I cannot help it if they take advantage of my popularity,” he protests as he maintains his innocence. He is not innocent. And he took my innocence.

He started it. I recognised the way he looked at me. He always looked for me in class before anybody else, as if ensuring that I was there in my usual seat and then giving me ‘that smile’. Oh, he smiles at everyone I was told. He does not smile for them the way he does, or rather did, for me. I am not stupid. I may be young but I saw how he would stare at me, how I could feel his gaze on me, how I could tell from the corner of my eye that he was stood besides me and was looking down my blouse. Who wouldn’t? I am attractive, I have my fair share of boys chasing after me and Mr Stevens is a man, he is flesh and blood, so he is bound to look isn’t he? He wasn’t meant to touch though but he did. Oh he touched me, in so many ways and he knew what he was doing.

I had heard that others had become besotted with him before. Rumours of some girl a few years ago who had to be persuaded to move to another school because she fell in love with him and would not leave him alone. I tried to find her actually but got nowhere. Some say he got her pregnant and she had to have an abortion, her parents hushing it all up as they did not want the scandal. Some say it is all made up. They have said the same to me.

I know what I saw. The cheeky winks just for me, the slightly longer smile than usual aimed at me. The way he usually asked me first when I put my hand up to answer a question. He was besotted with me first. I tried to tell them this but they dismissed what I said. Told me I was reading too much into him just being friendly, that I was trying to see things which were not there because I was desperate for his approval.

He was always encouraging, praising me for my work. I always enjoyed history but it became even better when he was allocated as my teacher. I worked hard because I wanted good results and I wanted him to be pleased with my work. I got high marks from the beginning and I now realise this was his way of reeling me in, making me feel special, marking me out for special treatment. He advocated on my behalf that I should be a candidate for Oxbridge (prestige British universities) and that meant extra tuition ; with him of course. Now, I am good enough to get in to Oxford or Cambridge (I chose Oxford) but he clearly saw this as his opportunity to isolate me from the other students and cleverly, from witnesses. After all, plenty of people across the various subjects have these Oxbridge tutorials after college hours, but he used his to teach me about more than the Tudor dynasty and the English Civil War.

Once he had me in those special tuition one-on-ones, then it was inevitable where it would end up. I was not complaining. I wanted his attention, absolutely, although of course he should have known better. He was the one in a position of trust, a man in a position of authority and I was just the pupil. Yes, I wanted him, but I didn’t realise that he was the one who had engineered for me to feel that way. That is what these predators do. They make it seem like your doing, but he hypnotised me and made me fall under his spell.

He was always so assured, doing just enough to maintain an element of doubt should he have misjudged the situation, just enough to be able to protest it was an innocent gesture. The hand on the shoulder, the hug of congratulations, the slightly-too-long touching of fingers when passing a book or an essay to one another. Oh, he was good, he knew what he was doing, steadily reeling me in and making me the centre of the universe. He chose me from the very beginning and little by little he reeled me in. He used his influence to bring me to heel and have me on my knees (how he relished seeing me on my knees) and I lapped up his attention and more besides.

Soon the secret trysts began. Arrangements made in his office with that Stuart family tree covering the door window so nobody could see what went on in his office. So much for transparent government, he still subscribed to the idea of an absolute monarchy. He never used his ‘phone, clever old Phil. He made it seem romantic, the whispered instructions of where to meet and when, always outdoors, never in places where we would be seen. No traces left, no observers, no evidence. He was a master at this game and I was clearly naive, but I am not a silly little girl.

And then he dropped me. No explanation. He became cold. Civil yet cold. I tried to get my friends to see how he treated me differently but they told me that I was imagining it. My grades remained excellent but the Phil that held me and read to me from historical texts and delighted me with his knowledge was gone. The Oxbridge tutelage came to a conclusion as the entrance examinations loomed ; he had no reason to be alone with me and even though I sought an audience with him, this absolute monarch would not grant me admittance.

So I spoke out. Why shouldn’t I? He told me he loved me and I loved him too. Yet once he had my innocence (or rather once he had it two score) he considered me conquered and of no great interest to him anymore. Nobody treats me like this. I will bring him down. He is not going to get away with it. Oh, I know they think I have made this all up, some kind of revenge for not getting my way, but they have underestimated me. I am not going to be denied and I will make the all see, even my parents who for some inexplicable reason have sided with him. I shouldn’t be surprised though, the have always hated me for some reasons, they are frauds to think they can call themselves mother and father. No, I know this is how his kind behave. They turn everyone against you, cut you off and paint you as the trouble maker. That is not me. I am the victim.


I am Mr Stevens. I am 30 years old and a teacher of history. I still am, although I am currently suspended as a consequence of the ridiculous allegations of a fantasist. It is an outrage that someone’s made-up fantasy has the potential to ruin a man’s career.

I am no fool. I have taught for nearly a decade and I know the tricks pupils get up to. I have seen them all. I have always been a teacher who adopts the ‘carrot’ approach. You always get further with honey rather than vinegar. Oh, I know there are one or two sticks in the mud in the staff room who regard my popularity with sniffed disdain, but that is just jealousy on their part. My results speak for themselves. Plenty of students choose to study history and between Miss Kelshaw and I, we make a formidable team. Thankfully Miss Kelshaw has supported me in this unpleasant matter although I always knew she would do so. Sensible lady.

You do walk a tight rope at times when you are friendly, yet firm, with the students. I am not their friend but I do not have to be their enemy either. I love history and my natural enthusiasm for the topic is something I try to install in my charges too. If you love something, you always do better don’t you? It does not feel like a bind or a chore. By ensuring those who choose to study history with me really love it and want to live and breathe it, I weed out the ones where it is not for them nice and early and they move to a different subject in the first two weeks. Plus doing that ensures that I am only going to get those who are going to get the best grades, so it is a win-win all around. I want to make my mark on this college. I will be the principal one day, although at present it appears that moral principles are ones which are trying to attract my attention to a greater degree.

Chloe Fowler is a good student. She will do well. Polite if something of an attention-seeker. Always first to stick her hand in the air an one to air an opinion on absolutely anything and everything. Nothing really wrong with that I suppose, at least she has learned the mantra of make a point and then ensure you have something to back it up when she advanced her arguments. I taught her just as I taught everybody else ; to the best of my ability.

Unfortunately for me, she mis-read my concern for her education as meaning something else. What can I do about that? I am not going to sit behind a screen and isolate myself from my students am I? That is not how I operate. I am not a ‘no smiles before Christmas’ kind of guy. Not at all. History needs to be alive, accessible and most of all enjoyable. It is like anything in this life – if you enjoy it, make it yours and you will succeed. I want all my students to succeed.

Yes, I selected Chloe Fowler for Oxbridge tutelage. That was the right selection and I still say it is, despite her ridiculous allegations. She has her keen mind, too keen as it happens. I have read what she has accused me of, or rather the police office read it to me and it is all nonsense, a made-up fairy tale. I see she has been clever though, she has ensured that she has accused me when there was nobody else available to witness our interactions. It is always the case that those chosen for Oxbridge tuition see their tutors in their offices. That has always been the case and I am pleased that my fellow teachers and the principal have confirmed that to be the case. I knew they would back me on this. It is an occupational hazard of ours, infatuated students who start to think they are the apple of your eye. Usually it is nothing more than a harmless term-long crush and they grow out of it, but not this girl. She has something seriously wrong with her. Has to have to come out with the lies she has spouted. Suggesting we had sex beneath ‘the tree that Charles the Second hid in’. I know that to be a lie ; that tree was destroyed hundreds of years ago. Everything she has spouted is just the slops of the mind of a fantasist and she is dangerous. Nobody is going to believe her. I know the police have to go through the motions but it will be soon kicked in to touch. She has done this because I rejected her. I didn’t reject her outright, after all there was nothing to reject, we had no romantic relationship, there was no flirtation, nothing. It is clear, however, she thought otherwise and in that warped mind of hers, she has felt rejected in some way and this is the result. An expensive and unnecessary investigation, plus the interference to the other students, no wonder so many have turned against her.

I know she liked me. I am a likeable person but I maintained a proper teacher-student relationship and she has seen fit to dream up something else. What can you do? Put cameras everywhere I suppose but then who wants that, surely there has to be some element of trust between us? Am I annoyed? Of course I am. I haven’t done anything wrong and along comes this girl and she spouts all manner of idiocy and she is treated seriously. I mean, anybody can see this is a tissue of lies. This had better not affect my promotion prospects or I will be taking legal action too. Thankfully the local paper have not reported anything about it so far, that conversation I had with the deputy editor seems to have worked, so far so good on that front. He is a good friend and does not want to see the reputation of a hard-working and successful teacher sullied. What annoys me most is how easy it is for someone like her to make these things up and next thing it is suspension and investigation. They tell me that it is a neutral act but I know there will be those trotting out the old ‘no smoke without fire’ rubbish.

I realise that when you are decent-looking chap like me and because you are friendly and get to share a joke with the students, some might blur the boundaries but it is one thing for them to be blurred and another for them to be crossed. Am I to be punished just for being popular, because that is what she is trying to do?

I am not going to change my style though. I am a hands-on teacher and that always gets results and one besotted fantasists is not going to make Phil Stevens change how he teaches. No way.

It is ridiculous. As if I would be interested in some 16 year old (which is how she says she was when this started) when I have a gorgeous wife at home. That in itself should tell those looking into this that this is a witch hunt by a disturbed adolescent who should be studying for her exams and getting help with whatever problem she has, rather than trying to ruin the life of an honest and decent man. I am the victim in all of this.

Who is the class room narcissist?


Who do you think is the narcissist?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...


313 thoughts on “The Classroom Narcissist

  1. Chihuahuamum says:

    I just watched a movie along the lines of thos called submission. Basically a student…im a terrible spoiler go watch it its on utube for rent lol

  2. LL says:

    Hi HG –

    This exercise has been in the back of my mind for 1.5 years now.

    I do not remember how I voted at the time I first read it, but now with 1.5 years worth of expanded knowledge, I view them both as narcs. She was young and hadn’t honed her skills yet, but the red flags are there. He was much more obvious.

    I do believe that it happened though. Narc vs narc situation.

    I skimmed through the comments and do not see that you gave the answer. Did I overlook it? Who is/are the narcissist/s?

    1. HG Tudor says:

      The pupil is.

      1. LL says:

        Omg nooo! All that bragging seemed grandiose, flying monkeys, triangulation, smear campaign – at least that was how I read it this morning. I’m going to have to go back and read it again through another lens. I’ve been concerned lately that I’m starting to think everyone is a narc. Your reply makes me believe I am becoming paranoid. Ugh! I thought for sure they both were! Thanks for responding.

  3. Clarece says:

    This was an excellent article HG. You should run it again or write another scenario with a vote on which party is the narcissist.

    1. HG Tudor says:

      Thank you.

    2. MB says:

      Thank you for sharing that Clarence. I had not read that article. I think it’s the teacher that is the narcissist.

      1. Clarece says:

        In the writing, the way the POV’s are presented, I say the teacher is the Narcissist. I still get stunned even in a fictional story at the extent of lying and cover-up one will go to. The teacher is the authority figure and has to uphold complete professionalism without any room to blur the lines.
        Although the female student may have some higher narc traits, she is also a teenager where the world revolves around them anyways. Also, studies now show the brain is not fully developed and mature until the age of 25. Teacher, again, needs to be more accountable.
        I believe in a real life scenario there would be more angst in the written “report” from the female student. This was written from HG and his goal, I believe, was to present a narcissistic spin from her angle too. But nothing can be more frantic and frenetic than a teenage girl feeling rejected by the object of her affection.

    3. Serene says:

      I agree. I like reading them with my family to see what they think.

  4. NarcAngel says:

    Arrived late to the party but will state for the record:


    1. jenna says:

      Narcangel, lol!!!

    2. jenna says:

      Narcangel, i know u try to limit ur posts because u r mindful of hg’s many comittments and his time, but some of the comments he is so gracious to post are not so time worthy (i am guilty here too). Surely, ur posts would be more meaningful, so i encourage u to comment when u have time. Sometimes, in the middle of a tense situation, it is nice to see a comment frm u!

  5. Buh bye says:

    The classroom narc is peace out.

  6. Mona says:

    I meant that you expect too much from them in terms of being accurate, logical and bringing their emotional thinking under control.
    (I repeat your words to avoid a new misunderstanding.)
    I never said that you attacked her… I said that you are not able to be more compassionate That is a difference. You are able to be polite and rational and to repeat your arguments very patiently, but you cannot give her what she needs most at the moment: someone who shares her pain and gives her pain a more healthy direction. This is no critic, this is only my opinion.
    As far as I see, many women would disagree with me. They also demand too much from her at the moment.
    Here we disagree. I am of the opinion, that she has to go through her rage and her frustration until she is able to calm down and be more logical and fair again.
    You yourself know that it has no sense to talk to you in your private life, when you are in a fury. There in no logic anymore. There is only fury. Even the best arguments can not reach you.
    We will see what kind of person she really is if she comes back and calms down. After a while we all show who we really are.
    And there have been some surprises for me and new knowledge about women. A lot of my new knowledge is very disappointing and disenchanting.

    1. HG Tudor says:

      “I said that you are not able to be more compassionate That is a difference. You are able to be polite and rational and to repeat your arguments very patiently, but you cannot give her what she needs most at the moment: someone who shares her pain and gives her pain a more healthy direction. This is no critic, this is only my opinion.” – I accept this is accurate Mona.

  7. Diva says:

    I just stumbled across this articles comments whilst looking for another…….jeez…….this is what happens when you don’t make a comment and you do not get any notification of what is being stated……ignorance was truly bliss in this case. To be fair, I am a coward……I did not comment on this article myself, as I have some issues of my own to address and I did not believe that I could make any constructive or unbiased opinions, so although I read it, I left it well alone. It was a difficult read for me so I walked away, thinking that I might revisit it at a later date, when I can read it without my blood pressure and heart rate being affected. You see HG, I could well be learning about this logical thinking as opposed to emotional thinking…….but they could also be my famous last words so I won’t be putting any of my money on it just yet!!! Anyway, as much as the article affected me, I wish I hadn’t read some of those comments, but it does prove one thing…..HG is not holding anything back…..because if he had chosen not to publish some of these comments, I certainly would not have blamed him. It’s just as well you are a narc, but sometimes……on extremely rare occasions, even a Greater narc deserves an apology………Diva

    1. HG Tudor says:

      And that is evidence of adopting a constructive approach to this blog, Diva. Thank you.

      1. Mona says:

        HG, I think, sometimes you demand too much from people who were freshly traumatised. They are not able to talk rational about their experience. You are in a superior position in that case. That must be enough for you. Of course – you are allowed to reject false accusations.

        1. HG Tudor says:

          On the contrary, I recognise why people respond as they do, however it is always important to correct inaccuracies which is all I did. There was no attack from me, no name-calling, no ignition of fury. I rejected the inaccuracy and pointed out the accurate facts. I know why some people present here in the way that they do and I have never responded in kind despite those who launch ad hominem attacks against me.
          If perhaps you mean I expect too much from them in terms of being accurate, logical and bringing their emotional thinking under control, I can see how that may be the case but that is what must be done by people to enable them to make sense of the situation and progress. I repeatedly allow people to voice themselves here, I only halt it when it becomes repetitive, nonsensical or descends into repeated ad hominem attacks.

    2. SuperXena says:

      Well put Diva!

    3. SuperXena says:

      Diva ..wanting to add as well that it is disappointing to see as well that this behaviour is excused stating that one person behaves like that because of his/her difficult background ( abuse?).
      Taking that position is like giving the narcissist green light for all the abuse because he was himself/herself abused or because he/she is just the way she/he is. This type of abuse should not be excused under any circumstances…without “ifs” or he/she does or says that because”…
      Personal attacks,insults,
      bullying,smearing,devaluation etc. should not be accepted either coming from a non narcissist to a narcissist or viceversa. There are no excuses for such should work both ways. I think this is one of the main reasons people stay in an abusive relationship: always trying to find reasons to excuse the narcissist’s behaviour…

      1. Diva says:

        Hi SuperXena……I agree……I personally believe that everyone on this blog has been abused one way or another…….albeit some worse than others…..however if we all behaved in this manner the blog would be of no addition to any of us. That is not to say that I don’t understand how difficult some of these articles are…..I could vomit after reading some of them (no offence HG but some of them really hit home)…..maybe some of us need other assistance as well as this blog… HG won’t be stood there with the sick bucket and the box of tissues that’s for sure……..Diva

        1. HG Tudor says:

          I may hold your hair back and rub your back though if you are an excellent prospect in the golden period.

          1. K says:

            Awwww…how sweet.

          2. Diva says:

            Hey K…..I guess that’s what happens when someone slips you a Mickey Finn…..I recall him stating that is what his girlfriends drink……Diva

          3. K says:

            Oh, yes, Diva! I most certainly recall “the Micky Finn” comment. They are tricky devils, those narcs. Never turn your back on one. K

          4. Diva says:

            “I may hold your hair back and rub your back though if you are an excellent prospect in the golden period.”………hmmmmm……..further corroboration of narc traits. Any weak stomached “normal” bloke would be vomiting up rings at your side, (if he hadn’t already made a quick exit down to the pub.) You would then be left cleaning up his vomit as well as your own………..Diva

          5. jenna says:

            HG, rub the back or pound the back for some foreshadowing of what’s to come during deval? Then use it against the poor lady later, telling her she should have realized it when she was throwing up that u tried to warn her. I would not be surprised if that is part of ur manipulation. In addition, u have expressed disgust towards filth such as dog droppings, urine sprinkles, etc. So, vomit and other bodily fluids would disgust you too, no?

            Do u have ocd as well? I have some ocd esp w bodily fluids. I will clean like a maniac until there is no drop of bodily fluid anywhere in the house. I even bought one of those uv ray flashlights that can detect urine, blood, etc. when used in the dark. During sex, i have my partner wear the condom b4 we even start so that there is no pre-ejaculatory fluid on the bed, and i place a disposable underpad underneath us to keep the bed clean. It takes away frm some of the spontanaeity, but this is the only way i feel comfortable. I will not allow anyone’s bare bottom on my sheets. Yuck! Maybe if they have just showered, otherwise no.

            I suspect u may have slight obsessive tendencies. Maybe i’m wrong.

          6. HG Tudor says:

            I do not have OCD.

          7. Jenna says:

            Thank u hg.

        2. Mrs Linton says:

          There are very few resources that pierce through the denial like this one. Personally I want to see the truth about these people. The fluffy stuff doesn’t cut it. I do agree though, it helps to have other writing/ youtube to help put us back together again afterwards.

        3. SuperXena says:

          Hello Diva!
          …yes, the articles are strong…but then again: sometimes the medicine tastes worse than the disease ( hoping my translation to English is understandable) …

          1. Diva says:

            Hi SuperXena…..I think your English translation is brilliant……I don’t know what nationality you are but it would appear to me that most foreigners know more about English grammar, than the majority of English people do themselves……Diva

          2. SuperXena says:

            Thank you for your compliment Diva, I am a mixture of two “worlds ” : latin and scandinavian . Almost extremely opposite in mentality and culture …

      2. Windstorm2 says:

        Very true. Everyone can come up with an excuse for their bad behavior. We’ve all of us been hurt and abused in some way. But just because we were hurt doesn’t make it alright to hurt others. Gandhi said it best, “An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.”

        1. SuperXena says:

          Hello Windsdstorm2!
          It feels good hearing from you! I see you have a grandchild now! Congratulations. I totally agree with you and you couldn’t have expressed it better than with Gandhi’s wise quote.This craziness has to stop somehow.
          I hope you are fine!

          1. Windstorm2 says:

            Good to hear from you, too! She is actually my 8th grandchild, but she’s definitely the youngest! I’m doing ok. Hopefully you are well.
            I love Ghandi quotes. I think my favorite is, “Be the change you want to see in the world.” I try to live that one.

          2. SuperXena says:

            Your 8th grandchild..amazing. Thank you I am doing well. I have always found your comments here on the blog very supportive and giving. I like Gandhi’s philosophy as well although it is hard to follow it sometimes but it is absolutely inspiring..

  8. Mona says:

    Peace out, I really understand your pain, disappointment and anger.

    It would be very helpful, if there was a law against emotional sadism, emotional rape and/or emotional abuse. There is no law yet.
    It is a shame, that emotional violence is still underestimated by mankind. Most people do not see the damage which is done by emotional violence and abuse. (This is meant also for you, HG)

    Please accept that HG is right about his interpretation of law. It was an exact description of law in Britain. There was no lie in it.

    And he had no compassion for you and no understanding for your reaction. He withdraw himself on rational standpoints. He is not able to react in a more compassionate way.

    I am no supporter of him. I challenge him very often.

    Please come back and talk about your wounds to heal them. He was not your own aggressor. He only talks shameless about his deeds. And he seems to be proud of it.

    And this is sometimes very hard to accept.

  9. E. B. says:

    I would like to add some things I find useful to detect Ns when they are playing the victim role. This is not about obvious red flags but about the more subtle ones and those are included in this article.

    -The N makes a positive statement about the victim followed by a negative one. First, the N gives the impression that he likes the victim, that he has nothing against her and that it was the victim who got it all wrong.
    (‘Chloe Fowler is a good student. She will do well. Polite if something of an attention-seeker. Always first to stick her hand in the air an one to air an opinion on absolutely anything and everything’. )

    -The N says he wanted to do something good for the victim but it did not turn out as expected. The victim is to blame for the outcome.
    (‘she mis-read my concern for her education as meaning something else.’ ; ‘Yes, I selected Chloe Fowler for Oxbridge tutelage. That was the right selection and I still say it is, despite her ridiculous allegations.’)

    -The N speaks highly of himself. He also wants his audience to believe he is an honest, upright, moral, trustworthy, responsible individual who will not cross the line.
    (‘I am a likeable person but I maintained a proper teacher-student relationship’ ; ‘when you are decent-looking chap like me and because you are friendly and get to share a joke with the students…’ ; ‘…trying to ruin the life of an honest and decent man.’ ; My results speak for themselves. Plenty of students choose to study history.’)

    -Ns want their audience to believe that they are popular and *everybody* likes them.

    -The N knows how the majority of the population think, what their values are so he tells them things almost everyone will agree with, like for example, what they expect from a good teacher:
    (‘History needs to be alive, accessible and most of all enjoyable. It is like anything in this life – if you enjoy it, make it yours and you will succeed. I want all my students to succeed.’ ; ‘You do walk a tight rope at times when you are friendly, yet firm, with the students. I am not their friend but I do not have to be their enemy either. … If you love something, you always do better don’t you? It does not feel like a bind or a chore. By ensuring those who choose to study history with me really love it and want to live and breathe it, I weed out the ones … doing that ensures that I am only going to get those who are going to get the best grades, so it is a win-win all around. ’)

    -Ns want people to believe that *Everybody is on their side*, that everybody likes them, that they have many *friends* (acquaintances are supposed to be friends) and they are the good guy:
    (‘Plenty of students choose to study history and between Miss Kelshaw and I, we make a formidable team.’ ; ‘Thankfully the local paper have not reported anything about it so far, that conversation I had with the deputy editor seems to have worked, so far so good on that front. He is a good friend and does not want to see the reputation of a hard-working and successful teacher sullied.’)

    -The N wants people to believe that *Nobody is or will be on the victim’s side*, that *Everybody is against the victim*:
    (‘Nobody is going to believe her.’ , ‘anybody can see this is a tissue of lies’ , ‘…no wonder so many have turned against her.’)

    -The N praises those who are his side. Reliable people are those on his side and not just anyone who cannot be trusted. Those who are not on the N’s side will be belittled or invalidated.
    (‘between Miss Kelshaw and I, we make a formidable team’ ; ‘Thankfully Miss Kelshaw has supported me in this unpleasant matter although I always knew she would do so. *Sensible lady*.’)

    -He minimizes the problem.
    (‘They tell me that it is a neutral act.’ ; ‘I know the police have to go through the motions but it will be soon kicked in to touch.’)

    -The victim is crazy, mentally ill, disturbed, dangerous, weird, a liar:
    (‘Everything she has spouted is just the slops of the mind of a fantasist and she is dangerous.’ ; ‘She has something seriously wrong with her. Has to have to come out with the lies she has spouted.’ ; ‘…in that warped mind of hers’ ; ‘a disturbed adolescent who should be studying for her exams and getting help with whatever problem she has..’)

    -Many Ns speak about themselves in third person. 🙂
    (‘one besotted fantasists is not going to make *Phil Stevens* change how he teaches.’ )

    1. HG Tudor says:

      A thorough and engaging analysis, EB, thank you for your observations.

  10. ;peace out says:

    it also wouldn’t surprise me, if instead of your family and colleagues loving you and being part of your design, they despised you, and are eager to fob you off on unsuspecting others.

    1. SuperXena says:

      ; peace out

      Your comments on this topic are informative from your perspective and your research.
      Your arguments lose force though when you turn them into a personal attack .The anger within you is very transparent perhaps arising from your own experience and it is understandable. But the target of your anger should be placed somewhere else if you want your arguments to be valid.

      An argument loses its force when it is based on theories and without any facts or fundament to support them. This is clear ( at least to me ) in this particular case since:
      A) The attack to the moderator of this site, Mr. Tudor lacks of fundament since he has done nothing to you.
      B) Either you or me ( and I assume the rest of the bloggers ) know what he has done or not. That is to say you do not have facts or evidence that support any of your accusations.

      It is just an observation that you can welcome or not but perhaps is worth reflecting on for any further arguments that you want to defend here or on any other forum.

    2. narc affair says:

      Peace out…i get how you can be angry bc anyone in a narcissistic or any type of abusive dynamic feels violated and deeply damaged. However your insults to HG were uncalled for imo. Even if you dont agree with him he didnt go out of his way to attack you. Hes helped a lot of people here. Hope you find healing and happiness.

    3. Noname says:

      ;peace out, my dear dear girl,
      I completely understand your point of view and your anger.

      But, like SuperXena said, “your arguments lose force though when you turn them into a personal attack”. PERSONAL ATTACK. It is a mistake that many people make.

      When you criticize the BEHAVIOR (“bad deals”, abusive words, etc.) it is a constructive position. You show your disagreement and different point of view. It is absolutely normal.

      But when you criticize the PERSONALITY, it isn’t the constructive position at all. Saying “you are the bastard, idiot, loser, coward, liar, etc.”, you go to nowhere. Always to nowhere.

      The real goal of criticism is not to offend the person, but to show your different point of view to him/her, and you have to do it without involving the “personality matter”.

      Accept this rule, girl, and your life would be much easier. I wish everything good for you.

    4. HG Tudors # 1 fan says:

      ;peace out, Welcome back!

      1. HG Tudors # 1 fan says:

        That was fast, this blog is addicting, isn’t it.

    5. Mrs Linton says:

      Peace out sexual abuse takes many forms, and I am sure we all agree, all of it is horrific. It is also notoriously difficult to prove.. My fear is that unwittingly by making this argument we only weaken our case for justice for victims as rape means penetration and that, like it or not is the definition. I agree it is true that the emotional experience of an assault is the most significant thing, but it also helps to have other measures. Victims are frequently accused of exaggerating, unfair I know, but this does not help a victims case. In cases that go to court the judge
      considers the effect on the assault on the victim regardless of whether it is rape or not and this is important to focus on.
      I have to say just because you are angry does not mean you are right, just because you feel righteous does not make you right about the law or HG for that matter.

  11. ;peace out says:

    the reason why you selectively comments, HG, is because i’m right. i get to witness what a coward you are when you’re exposed, which amuses me.

    the cold play on tech definitions of terms, without moral consideration or interpretation, while downplaying sexual abuse, is also very weak.

    you’re not a flamboyant dragon at all, you’re a slimey grifting weasel who exposes himself to all but the most dense.

    1. HG Tudor says:

      Incorrect. You labour the point so certain of your comments are not posted as it is clear what your perspective is, we do not need the repetition and/or they are ad hominem attacks which are a dollop of fuel to me but boring for others to read.

      1. ;peace out says:

        i understand that, but i don’t actually care about the forum or the sychopantic women with no self respect who hate other women and their own vaginas. they can be your daily batteries, you all make the perfect sexless union.

        i’m happy to flood you – that’s what narcs can do for me because they trigger my defences… and it’s been immensely productive to me. i realise that i had some core issues around sexual trauma and reducing sexual violence in our culture to ‘rape’ as a technically specific term for forced penetration, is in itself misogynist. i think this positivism under neoliberalism where we sacralise human rights has completely lost the plot. the horror of sexual abuse cannot be reduced to penetration.

        this whole concept i have with mapping psychological trauma to technical terms, is a better discussion. i have poor cognitive structure because i’m so emotional, but when i get there, i really do.

        you on the other hand, are a tedious pedant caught up in his own bullshit. if you had said “no, sexual abuse” in the first instance, you’d have been less biased and more worthy of being a consultant, instead of hypocritically hiding behind technicality.

        but, as i said, you’re a fraud. a silly, pathetic and vain man who cons women into abusive relationships and doesn’t realise how this very act intended to hurt others, actually compounds your own utter lack of self-worth.

        i’m not visiting your site and our communication is at an end. i dove into the core of your rape, sorry, sexual abuse blog and my own issues and got what i needed.

        i’m seeing a bomb disposal guy, post-narc (the impotence gets sooo tiring) and hopefully he can defuse me 😉

        enjoy your life! such as it is.

        1. HG Tudor says:

          Mind how you go. See you soon.

        2. Windstorm2 says:

          Peace Out
          I am very sorry for what you endured growing up and for your continuing pain. I will keep you in my thoughts and prayers. You chose a very positive screen name. That is my hope and wish for you.

    2. jenna says:

      Peaceout, i can understand that u are angry due to ur traumatic past.
      But hg is not a coward. He fears nothing, except maybe the ‘beast.’
      Many mid-rangers, on the other hand, are cowards.

      1. HG Tudors # 1 fan says:

        What does HG’s fears or midrange narcissist being cowards, have to do with the topic of discussion, Jenna? It’s irrelevant at this point.

        At this point on, HG is being attacked, and framed of false accusations which, is slandering his character.

        ;peace out, you can’t handle the truth of the argument because you were wrong, which is why you resorted into name calling. It was completely unnecessary, and shows poor character on your part.

        Be an adult woman about situation, move on, and continue to learn from, HG, about Narcissitic Personality Disorder, so you can move on with your life in peace.

        After all, we are all here for a reason.

        HG Tudor, is here to help you, not harm you. In my opinion he has been nothing, but a respectable, polite gentleman to all of us on here, including you. The services he provides all of us, is to help you with your path and journey to healing.

        1. Twilight says:


          I have sat back and watched this discussion
          between HG and peace out it reminded me of those with ED, for many reasons.
          I believe more is going on here. They want people to see him in a different light, they do not want him to have the attention he has. Or if he does it should be in the way they see him or their opinion of how people should see him.

          My question now is why? Maybe they are not getting what they want….

          1. Windstorm2 says:

            I try to stay out of these things too. It seems to me that some people deal with their pain thru anger. The more pain, the more anger. This seems to make them quick to judge and criticize and slow to think deeply on others words and differences.

            Not that I have much of a handle on this. My standard approach to anger is to just stay quiet and back away. We’re all on our own path to healing and at different points on the path. Being quick to anger and being overly judgmental are just points on the path. When they’re ready, people will move on beyond that point. Until then all I know how to do is try to be as understanding as I can. My mil was really good at that. For me it’s more of a struggle to not take offense.

          2. Twilight says:


            For the most part I sit back and let things work themselves out. We all have been affected in some way, both sides. Pain and anger can manifest in different ways depending on each one of us.
            It doesn’t matter which side of the fence you are on, we all have been affected.

        2. jenna says:

          Hgt1f, i am stating that hg is NOT a coward because peaceout has stated that he is. Hg fears nothing except perhaps the ‘creature.’

          I also recognize that some mid-rangers are cowards, as hg himself claims in an interview. I make this point for contrast. Hg is not a mid-ranger, and is therefore not a coward.

          He is not a rapist. He is not a coward. It is relevant here because he is being accused of it. I wanted to voice my views. Pls see my posts above.

      2. Dr. Harleen Quinzel PsyD. says:

        Okay I see this situation flying out of hand real fast.

        HG1fan – Jenna was just trying to show peace out she understands why she is so emotional about the topic but doesn’t perceice that HG is a coward.

      3. ;peace out says:

        Jenna, as my friend just said:
        “the obsession with technical details when it comes to “rape” (to forcibly take, to strip away) as a word to be used in colloquial English to suddenly expect it to be in agreement with legal languaging is disingenuous, and that the legal definitions of rape are indefensibly feeble compared to the strength of sexually violent actions which are often equally upsetting whether or not a penis meatglob enters an orifice.”

        i’m not following this blog because, gross! <3

        1. HG Tudor says:

          Back so soon.

          “Hello, Metropolitan Police.”
          “Yes, officer I have been raped.”
          “We will send a specially trained officer to you straight away.”
          (A little time later)
          “Could you provide us with happened please Miss X”
          “Yes, two men entered my home and committed a rape. Look, they removed all of the wallpaper from the living room.”
          “Sorry, you mean they have stripped away the wallpaper so you wish to report a rape?”

          “Hello Metropolitan Police.”
          “Hello, I have been raped.”
          “We will have officers to you right away.”
          (Shortly thereafter teenage child answers door)
          “Hello, is your mother in?”
          “Oh I called you.”
          “You have been raped?”
          “Good lord, how old are you?”
          “What happened?”
          “A boy at school raped me. He snatched my iPhone from me.”
          “And then?”
          “That’s it.”
          “Wait, because he forcibly took your phone away from you, you have been raped?”

          Preposterous as these examples may be, it underlines why there is a need for specificity with regard to the commission of the crime of rape. Whilst somebody groping a person’s intimate area may well be as distressing to that person as if they had sexual intercourse without their consent, they are different acts which constitute different crimes and are described as such. Your obsession with trying to use rape in a wide, generic sense is both dangerous and misguided.

    3. E. B. says:


      You sound very angry and I can understand that you have your reasons to feel that way: what your father did to you was inexcusable.

      However, I can see that you have turned a discussion into a never-ending Circular Conversation/Word salad and a personal attack to the blog owner.

      You are also mixing half-truths (about narcissistic behaviour) with unfounded accusations about his personality and behaviour.
      Half-truths are lies.

      Why are you attacking him? What do you want to achieve?

  12. ;peace out says:

    there’s a lot of moral weaklings here. i imagine you attract them HG.

    1. Dr. Harleen Quinzel PsyD. says:

      Peace out ,

      I understand why this article incites some serious and intense feelings. I have them as well; however I am temporarily moving mine to the side to see it through other people’s eyes. I’m channeling my cognitive empathy.

      I also understand why you perceive some people as moral weaklings but that is not necessarily true – they are just trying to see things from another’s perspective – they aren’t necessarily accepting someone else’s thoughts and going “okay” lol.

      I see points made on both sides. I still stand by my post that said I clearly don’t support or think this situation is okay in any way and listed just a few reasons why (I can think of many lol)….

      Rape and sexual abuse are touchy and tricky subjects. I fully understand how confusing the situation can get – especially for the victim.

    2. Scout says:

      Ha ha Peaceout, demonstrating contempt for others illustrates a judgemental character that exposes you to be the weaker one. Peeps here and HG, have graciously given you time and responded, often with kindness. It’s clear you don’t value other peeps opinions concerning the fundamental aspects of UK law and that’s up to you, but how sad that you feel the need to belittle others. Your spiteful comment was ill called for. Imo.

  13. ;peace out says:

    i just don’t understand the moral hierarchy of rape vs sexual abuse.

    rape, for me a description of emotional as well as physical violation. it doesn’t have to involve penetrative sex. i was raped by acts of sadism where my Dad sublimated his sexual aggression into violence. it was very psychological, sexually degrading, yet no conventional ‘sex’ took place.

    1. HG Tudor says:

      That is your view and you are welcome to express it, but in the context of what was being discussed ‘rape’ has a precise legal definition.

      You may regard emotional violation as rape, I do not.

      What do you mean by “the moral hierarchy of rape vs sexual abuse”? Rape is a form of sexual abuse.

    2. HG Tudors # 1 fan says:

      It sounds more like he was, physically ,and emotionally abusive to you.

      1. ;peace out says:

        there’s a lot of sexually violent behaviours including sexual intimidation, unwanted touching, sexual objectification and sexual violence – that do not involve penetration. you still go through feelings of being invaded, shame, terror, feeling unclean. feeling alien in your body.

        a boyfriend once forced me to have sex with him. i don’t consider that to be very traumatising, it was technically rape. i feel raped by my Dad because of the sexual trauma i experienced.

        the law wouldn’t have used rape to convict him, but that doesn’t make it not rape, the law would use other terms that helps the criminal code recognise it. but a therapist and friends and partners would be dealing with someone who was raped.

    3. Jenna says:

      The abuse by ur father is not something u should have had to endure. I’m so sorry.

      1. K says:

        Sorry about what your father did to you and your sister. No child should suffer such heartbreaking abuse. I hope you stay and continue to share your sorrow and anger.

    4. Scout says:

      Hi ;peace out, I’ve read most of the comments in relation to your posts… It’s my belief that what you are describing is not rape but Grooming. There can be no argument that narcissists predate their targets then groom their victims to comply with their agenda. Now, irrespective of the school narcissists come from (this is another subject), grooming is not rape and no matter how unpleasant grooming is and what it leads to with a consenting adult, (arguably an unwitting victim in most cases), no crime has been comittited. I recognise this subject is highly emotive and we all have our own pov.
      I can see where you are coming from and I feel your pain. We all suffer at the hands of predators no matter who we are or what age. Wishing you well. Best wishes. Scout.

  14. ;peace out says:

    can you make another post involving rape / sexual abuse and all of that. then i can take more time in digging up theories about rape.

    1. HG Tudor says:

      I’m not sure the internet can take it.

      Perhaps if you asked nicely.

    2. HG Tudors # 1 fan says:

      “Ball washing bastards” I literally just choke on my oat meal, that was hilarious. I am going to have to use that line.

      1. C★ says:

        in agreement…. i was thinking what you wrote

  15. ;peace out says:

    wait, you really don’t believe you’re a rapist? oh that explains so much here.

    you con women into trusting you, have sex with them, then use the emotional bond to degrade and reject them, which is rape.

    i don’t care about legal definitions at this point, that’s a psychological description of rape.

    many women who have been raped write lover letters to their rapist, because the situation is so complicated.

    1. HG Tudor says:

      A psychological definition is not going to result in a conviction.

      Futher, it would not assist you in defending a defamation suit if you bandied around such comments about other people.

      1. HG Tudors # 1 fan says:

        Are you sure you were not a lawyer at some point In your life, HG? You sure do know a lot about the law.

        1. HG Tudor says:

          No, but I have had to deal with the ball-washing bastards on a number of occasions.

  16. ;peace out says:

    why else would sex with a minor be persecuted if it wasn’t abuse?

    ok instead of saying ‘rape’ i’ll just say sexual abuser.

    this guy is a sexual abuser. happy?

    1. HG Tudor says:

      At last, some accuracy. If he has engaged in a sexual relationship with Chloe Fowler he has committed the criminal offence of an abuse of trust and therefore would be deemed to be a sexual abuser.

    2. HG Tudors # 1 fan says:

      My mother had 3 kids by the time she was 17 with her ex husband, who was a Cormen Doctor in the Navy, who was 33 years of age at that time.


    3. Dr. Harleen Quinzel PsyD. says:

      I would just like to state I do not agree or support a teacher that has sex with a student – especially a minor for a variety of reasons.

      1. The person is in a position of authority – it is an abuse of power and trust.
      2. We also don’t know if the student has a mental health conditions that would make her even more vulnerable to being manipulated (just something to keep in mind).
      3. The student who is a minor – her frontal lobes aren’t even fully developed yet which would negatively impact her judgment.

      I mean I have more points – but this is a very complicated matter that goes into like a whole philosophical discussion.

      I see both parties perspectives. I just think HG shouldn’t be labeled as a serial rapist because there is no evidence to back that up. I think that is a really harsh and unfounded statement that could seriously damage someones reputation – so please just be careful of throwing that label around.

      1. ;peace out says:

        yes, let’s just say that HG is a fraud who cons women into giving consent. he then uses a sexual relationship to emotionally abuse them. this is an addiction and i think it comes from the mentality of a sexual predator.

        structural abuse is often far more devestating than a single rape act. i think he is worse than an average date rapist. he is an abuser and that is as severe as calling someone a rapist, if you want to fairly map psychological trauma to technical terms.

        1. Twilight says:

          Peace out

          Why are you projecting? Why are you insisting for others to look at HG from your definition of your rape?

          This entire back and forth reminds me of “discussions” with another that went by ED.

        2. jenna says:

          Peaceout, yes hg “cons women into giving consent” but he is not a sexual predator. He is a predator who seeks victims for fuel, but not a sexual predator who seeks victims for sex. He withdraws sex also, for the same fuel.

          Because the victims want to be loved, we ignore or do not recognize all the questionable behaviors – how quickly the relationship escalates, how much in common we have, how the narc declares love so quickly, etc. I personally feel selfish for not running. My ex wanted to marry me after one wk of texting. Why did i not see this as awkward? Instead, i thought it was romantic. Why? Because i was selfish and ignored it, as i wanted his love so badly.

          The victims are indeed suffering, but who is ultimately responsible for this suffering? The narc who himself was abused? The narc’s parent who neglected him, but who herself was abused? Everyone is suffering really. The entanglement w a narc is so complicated.

  17. ;peace out says:

    HG you’re also a serial rapist, so i don’t care how you define or do not define or cherry pick the law to define rape.

    1. HG Tudor says:

      Am I now? Evidence?

      I think you will find that the law of rape is denied by statute in the United Kingdom. I do not cherry pick it. You on the other hand have evidenced an entirely elastic approach to the concept of rape.

    2. HG Tudor says:

      “HG you’re also a serial rapist” – let’s see the evidence to support YOUR statement.

      To be clear, “serial rapist” in terms of someone who has committed repeated rapes as per the Uk statutory definition of rape, not your elastic concept.

      I will save you the time. There is none.

    3. HG Tudors # 1 fan says:

      What Evidence, that’s right, because she has none. Which is why you change the topic of discussion to another topic. The topic of discussion went, from consent, to rape, to pedophilia, and then to politics.

      ;peace out, you tend to jump from one subject to another subject, when the true facts are stated to you. ;peace out, rather than dance in circles and accuse, HG of false accusations that you have no evidence of, be an adult woman and admit you are wrong. Instead of being a sore loser.

    4. Dr. Harleen Quinzel PsyD. says:

      Peace out,

      I’m not attacking you at all – I am asking because I want to understand how you came to this conclusion – What evidence are you referring to?

      There is no evidence to suggest that HG is a rapist that I am aware of.

      I understand that you have strong feelings on this matter but lets try to be mindful of accusing someone of being a serial rapist when there is no evidence to back it up. That is really harsh label to put on someone.

      1. C★ says:

        in agreement with that comment….

      2. ;peace out says:

        “That is really harsh label to put on someone.”

        HG describes himself as a murderer. i see it more as rape. we’re both talking about the same thing. the subject of violence is played around with… because he doesn’t hit women, he can deny he is violent towards them. he will channel violence in other ways that have a deeper impact and also be harder to prove to others and harder for the victim to not internalise.

      3. Dr. Harleen Quinzel PsyD. says:

        Peace out,

        I understand what you are saying and I’m not excusing those acts – but it’s your perspective – your perspective on what rape is – you said in his mind it’s murder – in your mind it’s rape – different definitions and ideas and interpretations of what certain things are… different perspectives…..

        So all I’m saying is you may feel he is a serial rapist – in your eyes- from your perception and the definition of rape but it doesn’t make it right.

        There is no evidence to suggest that HG rapes women – as in the legal definition of the word.

        Are you trying to get HG to accept your perspective or understand your perspective?

        He understands it but he doesn’t accept it as his own because -he doesn’t perceive it that way – that isn’t how he interprets the situation and what not.

        Most of HG posts are about perspective – not about what is right or wrong….

    5. Jenna says:

      Peaceout, don’t forget hg must have the last word as he is a narc.

      I think i will regret the following comment because i have gotten myself into trouble in the past, but here i go again.
      Hg is not a serial rapist. His intimate sources are all consenting adults. Hg is definitely a predator who seeks prey, as per his article. He seeks ‘victims/appliances’
      and explains that his side of the entanglement is an ‘extraction’ of fuel only, nothing more. He clearly corrects anyone who sees it as anything otherwise.
      But a rapist, he is not. All of his intimate sources consent, very whole heartedly, with great anticipation, but unfortunately based on lies and misconceptions. They are also well above the age of 18. Though he misleads, puts on a mask, lies, mirrors, manipulates, it is not rape.
      You may disagree with me and that is ok too. We can agree to disagree.

  18. ;peace out says:

    HG is the one who convoluted a conversation about existing and clearly available to public viewing, laws in his own country.

    1. HG Tudor says:

      Utter nonsense and the comment trail shows I was consistent from the beginning. You on the other hand were not and anybody who cares to read the relevant sections of the statutes concerning the offence of rape and the offence of abuse of a position of trust will see that is the case. It is you who commenced advancing an elastic concept of rape, not I.

  19. ;peace out says:

    you’re confusing a position of authority which you assume, and the actual process of legal discursivity which is informed by psychology and social sciences, which forms a law, where consent is not even an issue, because the child can’t consent. this is a very clever thing to do, because it avoids defining rape from a consent angle.

    all the clauses in the abuse of trust case, involve sexual abuse.

    a person charged with this is a sexual offender. to deny that would be crazy.

    end of story, man!

  20. ;peace out says:

    the law is a code.

    1. HG Tudor says:

      Not in this country it isn’t.

    2. HG Tudors # 1 fan says:


      United Kingdom/no

  21. ;peace out says:

    so yes, emotional rape is given legal terms and prosecuted.

    1. HG Tudor says:

      What is emotional rape?

  22. ;peace out says:

    abuse of trust, is a sex offence term, btw. it is a description of a type of rape.


    Is it always abusive?

    Those who seek to justify relationships between students aged 16+ and teachers suggest that a student is not always ‘vulnerable’ and that there is not an automatic inequality between teacher and student.

    The law disagrees. Consider a situation where a teacher is vulnerable (perhaps there are mental health problems, personal issues or stress) and an almost-18-year-old student is particularly mature, and pursues the relationship. That teacher would, if prosecuted, be guilty.

    1. HG Tudor says:

      Abuse of trust is NOT a type of rape.

      It is a specific offence in itself which is not rape.

      It is evident that you use rape as an elastic concept to accord with your own political agenda and whilst you are of course entitled to your opinion, it is too amorphous for the point being advanced.

      1. ;peace out says:

        no, i just know how these laws are made.

      2. C★ says:

        I’m getting kinda tired of this rape issue… rape is simply physical sexual penetration against someone without their consent. Why is it becoming some complicated debate here?

        1. HG Tudor says:


  23. ;peace out says:

    i do not mean the conservative political party, but the mentality, of course.

    1. HG Tudor says:

      One understands that as otherwise you would have written ‘Conservative’ and not ‘conservative’.

      1. ;peace out says:

        i’m not debating how all-this-works, i’m explaining it to you.

      2. ;peace out says:

        it’s also so weird to draw an arbitrary line around the sex part and still call it abuse. like, everything about the abuse of power and trust with a minor was bad, EXCEPT the sex.

        what kind of puritan political correctness is that?

        “what’s emotional rape?”
        “you were dead when you met me”

        – what’s emotional murder?

        you’re hilarious.

  24. ;peace out says:

    but it’s also a conversation between Russia and Scandinavia. so, whatever!

    1. HG Tudor says:

      And with that I shall declare QED.

      1. Twilight says:

        Now that didn’t come as a surprise

  25. ;peace out says:

    i’m not being an original thinker here, i’m informed by the ethics of my social environment, which includes people who work in this area.

    it’s very difficult to explain systemic processes, and that’s because conservative language is inbuilt, it relies on understanding terms as common sense norms.

    systemic thinking lacks such embedded definitions, it has to be descriptive. so i understand that it’s not easy to follow, especially in these broken boxes that respond at different times to different input. it does all match up though.

  26. ;peace out says:

    “It was not about the power trip, it is about the use of the word paedophile.”

    – i explained that regressed pedophilia is a kind of power trip. a secure adult would not act on sexual attraction (it would be more appreciation), to a 16 year old, because they wouldn’t be able to objectify the 16 yr old’s vulnerability. but most people are weak minded scumbags.

    1. HG Tudor says:

      But it isn’t padeophilia, that is the point.

  27. ;peace out says:

    i wouldn’t not = would not
    the support she as an individual, needs

  28. ;peace out says:

    let’s just be clear here: you cannot avoid the power differences between 16 and 30. it’s not a sexual attraction based on admiration of personal qualities and desire. it’s a power trip.

    1. HG Tudor says:

      But that is not what was being discussed. It was not about the power trip, it is about the use of the word paedophile. You keep changing the nature of the argument which is telling.

  29. ;peace out says:

    conservatives think that child protection laws are evil…

    1. HG Tudor says:


      1. ;peace out says:

        the link i provided above. you yourself can also look it up.

        i’ll break it down more situationally:

        conservatives are causality thinkers. they think that rape = a violent, physical, forced sex act. left-wingers (not liberals), are systemic thinkers. so i see in this situation a field of symbolic power with effects and it is there that the rape happens. she may enjoy the sex but she will feel degraded and disempowered by it, in the end.

        this is a situation where the teacher is power-tripping off a developmentally and socially vulnerable person, who cannot give informed consent.

        so rape would be in my mind. i wouldn’t not go crying to the courts and school councils about it, where rape is very political. that could damage this girl even further, not everyone will sympathise with her and she also needs to pick her battles. giving her the support will make or break her recovery.

        1. HG Tudor says:

          Unfortunately for you, if you are seeking a remedy then it is the legal definition of rape which matters, not ‘feeling raped, even though no actual rape occurred’ (which is the thrust of what you are saying) and that has nothing to do with politics.

          Are you suggesting that if you ‘feel raped’ there ought to be some kind of remedy one can rely on?

  30. ;peace out says:

    there are similar cases where teachers have been convicted of a sex offence and of course, conservatives don’t like it.

    1. HG Tudor says:

      Why mention conservatives? This isn’t a political discussion.

  31. ;peace out says:

    *i mean, in porn, the symbolism is what counts. in real life interactions, age plays more of a role.

  32. ;peace out says:

    “It is ridiculous. As if I would be interested in some 16 year old (which is how she says she was when this started) when I have a gorgeous wife at home.”

    ^ responding to that. btw

    1. HG Tudor says:

      In the UK, having a sexual relationship with a 16 year old is not being a paedophile. If a 20 yr old has a sexual relationship with a 16 year old, he or she is not a paedophile. If it a 32 year old has a sexual relationship with a 16 year old, he or she is not a paedophile. There may be other complexions to it – abuse of a position of trust is say teacher and pupil, incest if it is between family members, or just regarded as ill-judged, but the older person is not a padeophile.

      If the younger individual is pubescent, say 11-15, the older individual would be a hebephile.
      If the younger individual is pre-pubescent, younger than 11 for instance, the older individual would be a paedophile.

      1. HG Tudors # 1 fan says:

        In Louisiana the legal age for consent Is 17, and in some states to get married, you have to be emancipated.

        1. HG Tudor says:

          In some European countries the age of consent is as low as 14, though in some instances that is linked to the age of the other participant.

  33. ;peace out says:

    this isn’t ancient Greece, she’s a minor if she is under 18 and the other person is older than 18 and in a position of responsibility – or substantially older. the age of consent at 16 is filled with legal stipulatons. he’s also what i’d call an opportunistic, regressed pedophile, if he has a thing for his students.

    obviously my morals are different to yours, HG.

    1. HG Tudor says:

      Now you are showing you do not understand what the word paedophile means.

      1. ;peace out says:

        no, i do. opportunistic / situational pedohilia is different from the ‘pathological’ kind. a lot of people don’t understand that. eg. teen porn, school girl fetishes, On the Road by Jack Kerouac, my Dad’s abuse of me and my sister.

        1. HG Tudor says:

          No. ‘Teen porn’ on porn sites is 18+. The individual is a teenager but of the age of consent. If someone watches this teen porn they are not a paedophile (situational or pathological). If they watch teen porn which involves younger than 18, subject to the relevant jurisdiction, the individual would be a hebephile. A school girl fetish again depends on the relevant age.

          1. ;peace out says:

            let me explain, it doesn’t matter what the real age is, the symbolism is what matters.

            a pathological pedophile likes the symbolism of childhood. they want an emotionally equal relationship with a child, they want emotional intimacy with the child on their level. it’s a serious condition they can’t help.

            an opportunistic pedophile acts as if the child or teen is another adult and they sexualise them as such. they use their position of power to get what they want, that would be harder to get from a more mature woman who can reject them.

          2. HG Tudor says:

            I understand your point. The discussion concerned the commission or otherwise of a criminal offence and therefore it is the real age which is material, not symbolism.

  34. ;peace out says:

    Windstorm2, she’s 16. he’s a sex offender. that’s the law in the UK.i linked it above.

    1. HG Tudor says:

      If it happened and he was convicted. You jump to conclusions far too often.

      1. ;peace out says:

        the whole excersize is speculative! i said before “if it happened”. if this and that then… i know it’s hard to moderate a forum of many responses.

        1. HG Tudor says:

          Fair enough.

    2. Mrs Linton says:

      You can give consent at 16 in the UK however it can be classed as an abuse of power in this instance as she is under18 and he is her teacher. He would not be considered a rapist here but would be in deep trouble with his professional body for abuse of power if she put in a complaint.

      1. HG Tudor says:

        Correct Mrs L. He would also have committed a criminal offence of the abuse of a position of trust.

      2. ;peace out says:

        he can be convicted as a sex offender. i use the word rape, because to me, it is. rape has different interpretations and scope, depending on your moral definitions, and it changes with the social consiousness of an era.

        1. HG Tudor says:

          Sounds to me like your defamation lawyer will be rather busy on your behalf.

        2. Jenna says:


          “… my Dad’s abuse of me and my sister”

          I’m so sorry peaceout. Such sexual abuse towards children is so very disturbing and sad. I wish u continued success in ur path towards healing. 🌷

  35. ;peace out says:

    “It is an offence for a person aged 18 or over to have any sexual activity with a person under the age of 18 if the older person holds a position of trust (for example a teacher or social worker) as such sexual activity is an abuse of the position of trust.”


    there you go – no, she cannot legally consent. so, HG, you don’t understand consent. that’s not surprising…

    1. HG Tudor says:

      You are wrong. Consent is not relevant to whether the offence of an abuse of trust has been committed.

      She can consent and if she did so,the offence of rape cannot be committed. That is why a separate offence of abuse of a position of trust (which I mentioned earlier) was enacted. Consent is not a factor in determining whether an offence has been committed concerning an abuse of the position of trust, so you are not understanding the relevant offences correctly by trying to involve the issue of consent. I was correct, she can legally consent to sexual intercourse – thus it is not rape. If she does not consent to sexual intercourse , it would be rape. Even if she consents, it will be the offence of an abuse of trust. I understand consent, you do not understand the offence of an abuse of a position of trust – it does not involve consent.

      1. Windstorm2 says:

        It’s obviously very different here. According to Kentucky law a minor under 16 can not ever legally consent, therefore it is considered statutory rape. What the minor thought or wanted is irrelevant.

        Where abuse of trust comes into play is if the adult is in a position of trust, then the age of legal consent becomes 18. Therefore with a teacher it would still be rape and Chloe could not legally have consented. It would be tried here as statutory rape.

        I guess every area has slightly different laws.

        1. HG Tudor says:

          Yes I see the different operation of law in the example you describe WS2.

      2. Windstorm2 says:

        Also the teacher would not be nearly so blasé about it. An accusation like hers could end his career – certainly no smug plans of a principalship.

      3. ;peace out says:

        it doesn’t involve consent because she can’t give it. due to her social development, political agency to self-represent against adults, and dependency on an authority figure. so, sure.

        1. HG Tudor says:

          For the sake of clarity, the offence of abuse of a position of trust does not involve the question of consent.
          Rape does and the question of consent and the capacity to be able to provide it is governed by a variety of factors and these are considered in the guidelines which are made available to crown prosecutors (those who prosecute on behalf of the state in England and Wales) when they decide whether a rape allegation should be prosecuted.

        2. Jenna says:

          Peaceout, talk abt ‘chess game.’ I am enjoying this back and forth btwn u and hg, but at the same time i am getting nervous. Let’s wait and see what the next chess move will be. I admire ur courage!

          The only back and forths i do w hg are pertaining to silly matters, like my unquenching need to know where he goes when he’s away frm the blog, etc. which he just ignores. Lol!

  36. Sophia says:

    There was another puzzle like this. What was the name again? Have you gave the answer?

  37. in LALA Land says:

    First comment, although I have been reading you for a long time. This hit close to home…I was 21 and he was 47. My College professor….long seduction, had me practically begging for a relationship. Oh, he was very patient….waited till all my classes with him were done.
    I will never forget the first look… was a dark, intense, almost primal look, that said “you are mine”. Long story short, a 3 year affair that left me in pieces. I don’t think I ever recovered, even though I got married, left the country, had kids, became quite accomplished.
    He did the whole nine yards….unhappy marriage, kids would get hurt, we will get married, yada, yada, yada…supported by him living in another town, wife did not have his home phone number, he even arranged for a sabbatical close to me when i was doing my Master’s, etc.
    Years later, we reconnected, and after a brief affair between two continents no less, he repeated some behaviors…I was older and wiser, but it hurt just the same. I cut the cord for good.
    Therapy became the key that unlocked not only that puzzle, but also the origins…narcissistic father, and a couple more narcissistic relationships…I was drawn to them like a moth to light.
    Finally realized he was more of a psychopath…maybe a greater…it was no wonder I was so trapped.
    I am healing beautifully, and continuing to learn more about these creatures. i think the last 3-4 years have been devoted to educate myself. Everything you say resonates perfectly with my experiences. Whatever your reasons, thank you for uncovering what is going on behind the mask.

    1. HG Tudor says:

      You are welcome In LALA Land and good to see you comment.

  38. 12345 says:

    I’m not totally convinced that either of them are narcissists. Neither one are telling the truth and they are both speaking from their own point of view. They are both arrogant but I’m not sure why. They either really believe they’re great or they may hate themselves and be overcompensating.

    I think Chloe is a spoiled rotten brat but I do understand falling for a professor. My daughter is a junior in college and she has had two crushes on professors so far. She told me about them but she never engaged them. It’s not because she isn’t confident or intelligent, it’s because she was embarrassed that she was crushing on them. And she was crushing on them because the professor treated each person in the class like an adult and he was engaging their minds. It wasn’t physical attraction from how she described it. She described them physically as “smart, funny, nerds.” That’s a 21 year old for ya!

    However, I can also see it going the other way. When I was my daughter’s age I wanted affirmation any way I could get it whether it be through words or physical touch but I was way too ashamed to tell anyone.

    The professor did have a responsibility not to engage with her in any way except that of a professional. He may be a narcissist or he may just be a garden variety stupid asshole.

    I’m not convinced either one are narcs. They might be people who did something foolish and used extremely poor judgment…especially the professor. I think we have to look at their whole lives first. What is that saying …. the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior? Something like that.

Vent Your Spleen! (Please see the Rules in Formal Info)

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Previous article


Next article

The Mockery of Mimicry