this post was submitted on 25 Dec 2025
259 points (98.5% liked)

World News

51442 readers
2282 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Rebecca Joynes is currently serving a six and a half year prison sentence

A teacher who was convicted for having sex with two boys, becoming pregnant by one, has been banned from the profession.

Maths teacher Rebecca Joynes, 31, was jailed for six and a half years in July last year after being found guilty of six counts of sexual activity with a child, after sleeping with one pupil before falling pregnant by a second while on police bail.

The Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) convened earlier this month via a virtual hearing, which Joynes did not attend, to consider her professional conduct. A panel recommended she be banned from teaching.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Wizard_Pope@lemmy.world 187 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Rape. She raped those boys. Use the correct terminology.

[–] Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works 64 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (3 children)

Legally speaking women cannot be rapists in the UK at least from what I remember.

[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 30 points 13 hours ago (2 children)
[–] BussyCat@lemmy.world 12 points 10 hours ago

They define rape as penetration

Good news is she did seem to actually be punished with a sizable prison sentence (by uk standards)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Wizard_Pope@lemmy.world 29 points 18 hours ago (4 children)

Do I look like I give a fuck what the law says? They were underage, ergo could not give consent, ergo it was rape. Also power dynamics teacher pupil makes it even more rapey

[–] fonix232@fedia.io 72 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

In the UK, the definition of rape requires penetration from the offending party by their genitalia. So unless the teacher has a monster clit she used to anally penetrate the boys, the definition of rape can't apply. For that there's the broader definition of sexual assault.

Journalists, since their purpose is to serve the public with the truth, have to really carefully choose their words as using the wrong legal term can get them in hot water - libel lawsuits and such, not to mention accusations of trying to shape the public's opinion, and so on.

So yeah, you'll rarely find directly said out statements in the news as most journos will try to get to as close to the definition as possible without exposing themselves to legal action. That's why you'll often see e.g. statements like "the purported killer" even if there's clear evidence of the person being the murderer, simply because the case hasn't been judged yet therefore the legal term murderer - which requires a conviction - cannot be applied, and using it before the trial even happens is a big no-no.

Don't get me wrong, I fully agree with you that if it was a man with two young girls, the article would be going on the offensive much quicker, and even here they should've used the term "sexually assaulted" instead of "had sex with", but specifically the term rape cannot apply here.

[–] Nurse_Robot@lemmy.world 27 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Thank you for the informative reply. As a layman in another country who isn't worried about specific local laws, I'd like to add that she raped at least two children.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 10 points 12 hours ago

New York had (has?) a similar distinction. It came up in the E Jean Carrol saga; specifically Trump suing for defamation after her lawsuit, because it wasn’t- technically- rape.

IIRC it was dismissed with the judge saying that it fits the modern lay definition of rape and that’s not defamation.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 10 points 13 hours ago

They didn’t call it “sexual assault” either, so I’m inclined to not accept that excuse.

[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 7 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

by their genitalia.

So, like not using an object of some sort?

Journalists, since their purpose is to serve the public with the truth, have to really carefully choose their words as using the wrong legal term

Still seems like a more generic term such as "sexual assault" would be applicable here.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] PoastRotato@lemmy.world 27 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

I agree, but there are libel laws to consider here. It serves no one to open yourself up to a lawsuit, especially one from which the rapist can only benefit.

[–] butwhyishischinabook@piefed.social 18 points 17 hours ago

Thankfully I'm not a citizen of TERF Island. She raped them.

[–] Nurse_Robot@lemmy.world 15 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

Hi! I'm not worried about being sued. She raped at least two children.

[–] PoastRotato@lemmy.world 8 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I was more referring to the news outlet. Regular folks like you and I aren't much at risk of being sued for libel.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] uncouple9831@lemmy.zip 5 points 13 hours ago

That's only because uk libel laws are backwards and stupid.

[–] Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works 12 points 17 hours ago

I agree with you, my comment was meant to draw attention to the crappy law.

[–] tomiant@piefed.social 10 points 15 hours ago

Do I look like I give a fuck what the law says? They were underage, ergo could not give consent

Underage is literally a legal definition, so clearly you do care. Calm down.

[–] abbiistabbii@lemmy.blahaj.zone 16 points 14 hours ago

Which is fucked up frankly because that's clearly not true.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 97 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

falling pregnant by a second while on police bail.

She really can't stop fucking kids, can she?

Maybe she has a future in US government

[–] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 32 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

US Government? She's already in the UK, why would she leave a Pro League to go an Amatuer one?

[–] tym@lemmy.world 7 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

UK got rid of prince andrew so US has the market cornered on kid-diddling govt folk

[–] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 6 points 13 hours ago

You think he's the only one? Not a chance...

[–] bunkyprewster@startrek.website 66 points 17 hours ago (11 children)

She forgot to be a billionaire

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] MushuChupacabra@lemmy.world 36 points 18 hours ago

Paedophile teacher who raped two boys is struck off

[–] tym@lemmy.world 19 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

are we still doing phrasing?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BaroqueInMind@piefed.social 17 points 15 hours ago (4 children)

Why do this? There's millions of legal age men who would love to start a family with this crazy woman. Why did she rape kids?

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 13 points 14 hours ago (4 children)

We don't get to choose who and what we are attracted to. 🤷🏻‍♂️ However, that does not absolve one of immoral actions.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 25 minutes ago)

https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/news-life/former-maths-teacher-rebecca-joynes-banned-from-teaching-after-grooming-two-school-boys/news-story/0fe2070f15e4694d585491d7ea183cdb

One kid was 15, the other 16.

She was 30 or 31.

... the answer is because she's a groomer, a pedophile, by how those terms are generally used.

She gets off on the power imbalance, she gets off on manipulating and exploiting those who don't and can't reasonably be expected to know better.

She either wouldn't prefer to be or just couldn't be in a relationship with someone on an equal playing field.

She's a sexual predator, the kind you'd stereotypically call Chris Hansen to investigate.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Spacehooks@reddthat.com 15 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

The TRA panel said that they found no evidence that Joynes’ qualities as a teacher outweighed the serious nature of the conviction

Wut? There was a invistgation on this? what evidence would outweigh???

[–] hperrin@lemmy.ca 15 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

“When she’s not busy raping her students, she’s actually a pretty decent teacher.”

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] WanderWisley@lemmy.world 12 points 6 hours ago

I would like to welcome Rebecca Joyner to her future career in the Trump administration.

[–] Mihies@programming.dev 5 points 7 hours ago

She is an amateur. She should just say that she didn't know them and it's certainly a democrats conspiracy.

load more comments
view more: next ›