The sentence of Jennifer Fichter, who received 22 years for sexual relations with students and lying under oath, caused massive sympathy and outrage on Russian social networks. Were the youths really harmed psychologically? Expert opinion of sexologist and psychotherapist Irina Panyukova.
“In order to understand both this situation itself and the public reaction to the verdict, one must initially understand that the psychosexual development of boys and girls occurs differently. In general, the formation of our sexuality goes through three stages — platonic, erotic and actually sexual. And in girls, the platonic and erotic stages are quite long. This has an evolutionary rationale: a long platonic stage is necessary for a girl to understand the qualities of a partner, choosing the best father for her children. And the actual sexual attraction is often formed in women already in the process of long-term relationships, ideally with one emotionally significant partner.
In the majority of boys — especially temperamental boys with a strong sexual constitution — sexuality develops with an emphasis on the biological component. And for teenage boys, the biological component of sex is more important than anything else. Usually they have a short platonic stage, a very short erotic stage — and a great desire to go straight to the point, to the sexual stage. And this is also understandable from the point of view of evolution. For centuries, young men have had many chances to die quickly — in war or hunting, for example. So, it was necessary to rush to leave offspring. Hence the obvious difference between the intimacy of a teenage boy with an adult woman and the intimacy of a young girl with an adult man. In the first case, everything happens, most likely, to the mutual pleasure of both parties. And the second one is incredible.
It is not difficult to imagine what the reaction of society would be if it were a 35-year-old man who had a relationship with underage students. No one would have thought to try to defend him or resent the severity of the sentence. And in the opposite situation, we tend to be condescending, to consider what happened almost normal. And to be surprised: what damage could be caused to teenagers, what injury could they get?
- From childhood love to adult libido: the formation of sexuality
If it were not for the relationship between teacher and students, this reaction would be understandable. Suppose an adult woman hires a teenage boy to mow her lawn in front of the house or clean the pool — and then they are suddenly seized with a passionate desire. Of course, that would be a completely different story. I highly doubt she would even go to trial. But even if the trial had taken place, the sentence would have been much lighter. If we are talking about a teenager with a strong sexual constitution and a healthy psyche, and his sexual relationship with an adult woman ends successfully, without any aggravating consequences, then this, of course, does not have a catastrophic effect on him, does not become a trauma for him.
A woman in her 30s and 35s is often at the peak of her sexuality. And when she does not have a harmonious personal life, she may gravitate towards short-term sexual strategies in relation to available objects. That is, an object is chosen that, firstly, seeks intimacy itself and with whom, secondly, it is safe to establish sexual relations in a certain sense. I am almost certain that this was the case with both convicted teachers. Either they were not married, or they were not satisfied with it, or they did not have relationships with men of their age. And the teenage students were just perfect for the role of sexual objects.
The decisions of the courts follow from the logic of feminism. Equality is not only the right to do the same thing, but also the right to bear the same responsibility for one’s actions.
To meet their needs, women used the psychological characteristics of younger men, and even those in a position dependent on them. This, of course, is unacceptable, and such a situation, of course, is traumatic. Not even so much in connection with its sexual content: I would rather talk about a trauma of a moral character. Indeed, as a result, young people have the idea that such relationships within the walls of an educational institution are possible: between a student and a teacher, between people, one of which in many respects depends on the other. They were pushed to the idea that there are no moral boundaries. And you can break any prohibitions in order to satisfy your needs, entering into relationships with those who are younger, weaker (in this case, not in the physical sense, but in terms of social positions), with those who depend on you. It is easy to understand that such ideas in the future can cause a lot of problems for both the young people themselves and their environment. Of course, I am not a lawyer and will not undertake to assess the fairness or unfairness of the sentences, but the danger of this situation, the damage it causes, is obvious to me. And the decisions of the courts, oddly enough, are quite consistent with the logic of feminism. Because equality is not only the right to do the same thing, but also the right to bear the same responsibility for one’s actions.
But the truth is that a serious trauma — and already a psychological one — could be for teenagers the trial itself. Imagine: young people have to testify against a woman with whom they have voluntarily entered into a sexual relationship. And to understand that on the basis of these testimonies she will be sent to prison. This situation destroys the harmonious model of sexuality, separating sex from ideas of love and decency. After all, for hundreds of years, the unspoken male code of honor demanded to be silent about intimate relationships with a woman. In a litigation situation, this principle is violated at every turn: sex, decency and emotionally close relationships are on different planes. I don’t know how things were in reality, but, in my opinion, a psychologist must be present during proceedings of this kind in order to try to minimize the negative consequences. Because in some teenagers, who easily displace unpleasant situations from their memory, this story may be forgotten. But others will be convinced that it is possible to testify against a person with whom you were in a close relationship, it happens, and there is nothing wrong with that. And for others, it can cause a devaluation of both sexual intimacy and interpersonal relationships in general — up to disgust for women and sexual contacts.
It’s a pity for both the boys and the teachers, who probably didn’t want to harm their students. For me, this is a story about how important it is to regulate your sexuality and control your actions — especially in relation to those who are younger, who are addicted. In order not to fall into such situations under any circumstances.