This is not a comfortable case to discuss, and it raises many contentious questions.
Quiet Riot Girl takes issue with the use of the word ‘rape culture’ in the context of this scenario. One reason for agreeing with her response might be that the phrase would be unlikely to be used if the gender roles were reversed. And it seems important to be precise about such crimes; to acknowledge shades of grey isn’t the same as whitewashing. I think this is why Peter Tatchell has been irritated by the use of the word ‘abduction’ to describe what happened. What the teacher did was both wrong and illegal. But there is no evidence that he used force – to say that is not to excuse him, but to leave some space for more horror and indignation in the face of still worse crimes.
If Megan had been 16, or even 18, he would still have been breaking the law under the sexual offences act. I remember, years ago, going to a party while staying with relatives and listening to my aunt chatting about the other people there. She said, quite casually, that Mr x had been Mrs x’s teacher – that there had been a bit of talk, but then they had got married and that made it, I inferred, ok. Was it ok?
The questions raised are complicated. Many react with more unease to a 40/16 pairing than to a 17/15 one, and think the law should reflect this distinction. People don’t stop being vulnerable to abuse and exploitation when they are 16 or even 18. And women can be abusers as well as men.
