Mary Kay's defenders see her as a victim of a miscarriage of justice. To them this is a "Romeo and Juliet" true-life tale of impossible love. They assert that in other times and other cultures cross-generational love was tolerated, sometimes even encouraged for reasons of state (in 1152, 30-year-old royal heiress Eleanor of Acquitaine married Henry, Duke of Normandy, 11 years her junior). LeTourneau's young boyfriend professes his undying devotion to his jailed lover, vehemently denying that he was exploited. As it happens, the kid has so far come out of it smelling like a rose, pocketing many thousands of dollars from a supermarket tabloid for telling all.
Much of the public has little sympathy for Mary Kay. Her behavior threatens their worldview, their concept of rightness and propriety. Conservatives in particular reserve their special fury for her, since as the daughter of radical right-wing icon John Schmitz, her actions reek of treason against all their espoused ideals of "family values". Even more tolerant folks might well feel a shiver of fear at the thought of an older woman seducing a young son of theirs. Making an example of Mary Kay, a harsh example, seems the easiest solution.
Where then does the truth lie? As usual, somewhere between the extremes. Looked at objectively, Mary Kay is neither an archfiend nor a tragic heroine. Her tale is one of all-too-common human misfortune. Her marriage a shambles, lonely, desperate for understanding, for sympathy, hungry for human touch, here is the classic portrait of the vulnerable woman, ripe for the first predator to happen along. And one did. Her young "boyfriend" was the aggressor throughout the relationship, constantly pursuing her and pressing her for sex. He had confidently bet a friend $20 that he could seduce his teacher (one can't help wondering whether the friend paid up). In a moment of weakness, Mary Kay yielded, and that was the beginning of her downfall.
So it would seem that Mary Kay Letourneau is not much of a poster
child for either the "True Love Persecuted and Hounded by the
Authorities" true believers or the "Execute This Fiendish
Child Molester" lynch mob.
For the author of this essay, the single most distressing aspect of
the matter is reading the comments of all the sanctimonious little
s--ts, those know-it-all 20-year-olds whose entire life experience
consists of watching television soap operas. These paragons of virtue
condemn the poor woman for a crime they would, oh no!, never, never
imagine committing. (Just wait a few years, fellows and gals... Life
has some wonderful surprises waiting for you.) Self-righteous fools are
ultimately responsible for far greater social harm than persons making
tragic mistakes.
So I suppose you wouldn't mind if a 34-year-old woman was sexually
involved with your 12-year-old? How is a boy of that age physically or
emotionally prepared to be involved in that sort of relationship? I'm
curious as to how you can justify what Mary Kay Letourneau did to this
CHILD. Yes, he was a child. A little boy. She was the adult, she should
have known better. Would you feel the same way if it was a male teacher
with a young female student? Or do you carry that old double standard?
Either way, it would be a crime and would be wrong. She is not the victim
here. He is. Many of us have felt lonely and rejected in our marriages
and lives but we do not go out and rape children. You should be ashamed
of yourself. If you think what she did was fine then I suggest you get
yourself into some heavy duty counseling FAST.
Spouting raw emotions is no doubt very satisfying to the spouter, but
hardly conducive to settling differences of opinion. It's difficult
to escape the conclusion that it takes grownups to deal with grownup
problems - an observation that both Mary Kay LeTourneau and the writer
of the above screed could have benefited from.
This is a human tragedy. It is unfortunate that it has fallen into the
hands of the sensationalists and agenda mongers.
What should be done with Mary Kay? Certainly, she violated the canon
of professional ethics and is no longer fit to be a teacher. Her firing
may be justified, but jail time seems grossly inappropriate. She needs
treatment, not incarceration. She deserves a judicial pardon, but should
remain under supervision.
That brought in the following reply.
From: address-deleted@aol.com
To: thegrendel@theriver.com
Subject: Mary Letourneau
Unfortunately, a productive dialog requires a minimum level of
intelligence from both participants, and additionally an
atmosphere of mutual respect and courtesy... as opposed to hysteria
and indiscriminate ranting. It also helps to know where paragraph
breaks go and to be able to disengage the caps lock key at appropriate
times.*
* USING ALL-CAPS is the equivalent of
trying-to-scream-with-your-mouth-full.