Here is a photo of Karen Ellis. She is 36 years old and used to be a physical education teacher at a secondary school. Yesterday she was found guilty of having sex with one of her 16 year old students. She received a 22 month jail sentence, wholly suspended. Contrast this with Gavin Hopper, a tennis coach at a secondary school, who earlier this year was sentenced to 3.5 years imprisonment for having sex with a 14 year old female student.

It is always difficult to compare individual cases because there are so many factors. One factor is the "damage" done to the victim. The female victim of the latter case claimed that she had been permanently scarred by the incident. The male victim of the former claims that he has suffered no damage from the affair which he claims he initiated. Further he says he would be damaged if Ellis were imprisoned.

There are so many interesting facets to this case it is hard to know what to focus on.

Is a female teacher having sex with a male student not as bad as a male teacher having sex with a female student?

Does the claim by the male student that he was not harmed matter, given that Ellis had no way of knowing before hand whether harm would result?

Should the fact that the victim claims he will suffer psychological harm if Ellis is imprisoned alter the sentencing?

However a more complex issue, and one I would like to explore here, is the extent to which societies expectations affect the degree of harm experienced by the victim. With respect to the victim in the Ellis case I can say quite confidently that the first thought of most young males and many adult males is "lucky bastard". Most of his peer group will be in awe of him and our culture will view him more as a conquerer rather than a victim. He may have been damaged by the experience, even if he does not know or acknowledge it, but the support and admiration that he will receive will go a long way to fixing that.

The female victim of Gavin Hopper on the other hand is clearly viewed as a victim by the bulk of society. The spotlight has been on her victimisation and there is little or no opportunity for her to feel good about herself with respect to the whole incident. The legitimate psychological damage that she sustained will take longer to heal precisely because of societies expectations of teenage girls are so different to that of teenage boys.

One of the most complex issues that surround sexual abuse of this nature is the extent to which society causes the psychological damage that arises from the abuse. The initial damage is clearly inflicted by the perpetrator, whether that damage is minimised or exacerbated depends on how the victim is treated and the messages they receive from those around them and society generally.

Here is a completely hypothetical example which you can consider. Let us suppose a sexually mature teenage girl, say 15, has sex with a 36 year old male teacher upon whom she has a crush. She initiates the affair which lasts 6 weeks and ends amicably with her feeling really good about the whole thing. (This is exactly the Ellis case above except that the gender of the victim and perpetrator are reversed.) Society may regard the girl as a victim but she doen't think she is. Is it societies role to damage her by convincing her that she is?

Before you start flaming, let me state unequivically that I believe that the sexual abuse is inexcusable. We must however be careful that societies attitude and the process of prosecuting the perpetrator does not do more damage to the victim than the original incident.

Read more in The Age.