Halifax prof quits after sexual relationship with student revealed


spaminator
#1
Halifax prof quits after sexual relationship with student revealed
By Sheena Goodyear , QMI Agency
First posted: Thursday, January 08, 2015 02:00 PM EST | Updated: Thursday, January 08, 2015 05:41 PM EST
A professor from Mount Saint Vincent University in Halifax quit his job Thursday after Rehtaeh Parsons' father tweeted a censored version of a ***** picture the teacher had sent a student.
Michael Kydd stepped down from his part-time business teaching gig and apologized to his wife and kids for what he says was a "consensual" relationship with a 38-year-old woman in his class.
He told reporters during an impromptu press conference on Thursday that he was "intimate" with the student twice in October while he and his wife were separated. Glen Canning told QMI Agency that the relationship between the professor and the student began "amicably."
Canning is the father of Rehtaeh Parsons, the Nova Scotia teen who killed herself after a picture of her alleged gang rape was shared among her peers.
Canning, who says the single mother approached him for advice in December.
He said the woman reached out to him and asked if he knew anyone who could "give her legal advice regarding a situation she was involved in with a professor at her university."
He said they later met in person and she showed him a series of text messages from the professor, including one that promised better grades in exchange for oral sex.
QMI Agency has not seen the texts in question or spoken to the student. Kydd has not responded to requests for comment.
Canning said he posted the tweet with the woman's permission after she expressed concern the university wasn't taking her complaint seriously.
The university then issued a statement that the part-time prof had been suspended for a code of conduct violation involving a student.
University policy prohibits relationships between professors and students.
"We are taking this matter very seriously and are responding accordingly, including notifying students and letting them know that the instructor is not currently in the classroom, pending an investigation," university president Ramona Lumpkin said in a press release.
Shortly after, Kydd came forward and apologized.
He told reporters he made a serious error in judgment and expects his career will be ruined.
Kydd said the relationship was consensual and the pair exchanged explicit pictures. He denied it was "a sex-for-grades" scenario.
"I breached the code of conduct. I got involved in a consensual relationship at a time in my life where I was very uncomfortable and seeking, I think, some level of comfort," he said.
Kydd is also the president of Merit Nova Scotia, an open-shop contractors union. Merit's website describes Kydd as "a proud father and 10-year cancer survivor" who "takes great pride in building positive relationships with contractors, workers and students."
Halifax prof quits after sexual relationship with student revealed | Canada | Ne
 
Tecumsehsbones
+1
#2  Top Rated Post
Generally, sex with a student in your own class should be grounds for dismissal. Keep it in your drawers until she's not in your class anymore.

But this is the kicker:

"He said they later met in person and she showed him a series of text messages from the professor, including one that promised better grades in exchange for oral sex."

If he was serious, he should be fired for cause and never employed as a teacher again.

If he was joking, he should be fired for terminal cluelessness.
 
Angstrom
#3
Apparently these things happen all the time. If this is a normal human behaviour.
Then it's the circumstances that make our natural behaviour wrong that are
Unnatural.

It's the school/student/teachers environment thats obviously not compatible with
Our natural human behaviour.
 
Tecumsehsbones
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by Angstrom View Post

Apparently these things happen all the time. If this is a normal human behaviour.
Then it's the circumstances that make our natural behaviour wrong that are
Unnatural.

It's the school/student/teachers environment thats obviously not compatible with
Our natural human behaviour.

I strongly encourage you to keep yourself and your kids out of school. Out of society entirely, preferably. Wouldn't want you to be all stressed out by "unnatural" stuff like wearing clothes and living in houses.
 
Angstrom
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by Tecumsehsbones View Post

I strongly encourage you to keep yourself and your kids out of school. Out of society entirely, preferably. Wouldn't want you to be all stressed out by "unnatural" stuff like wearing clothes and living in houses.

lol ,

Just covering angles no one pays attention too
 
Tecumsehsbones
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by Angstrom View Post

lol ,

Just covering angles no one pays attention too

I do hope the irony of propounding "natural good, unnatural bad" on the internet hasn't escaped you.
 
SLM
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by Angstrom View Post

Apparently these things happen all the time. If this is a normal human behaviour.
Then it's the circumstances that make our natural behaviour wrong that are
Unnatural.

It's the school/student/teachers environment thats obviously not compatible with
Our natural human behaviour.

Blackmail is natural human behaviour? That's so weird, here I always thought that was criminal behaviour.
 
Angstrom
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by SLM View Post

Blackmail is natural human behaviour? That's so weird, here I always thought that was criminal behaviour.

Are you saying sexual behaviour is not a natural animal behaviour? Is that what you're trying to say?
 
SLM
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by Angstrom View Post

Are you saying sexual behaviour is not a natural animal behaviour? Is that what you're trying to say?

Blackmail isn't sexual behaviour.
 
Angstrom
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by SLM View Post

Blackmail isn't sexual behaviour.

I wasn't talking about blackmail obviously. Strangely you are.

I know reading comprehension is not easy.
Do you need me to clarify something for you?
 
SLM
+1
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by Angstrom View Post

I wasn't talking about blackmail obviously. Strangely you are.

Coercion then, whatever.

Quote:

she showed him a series of text messages from the professor, including one that promised better grades in exchange for oral sex.

That isn't normal sexual behaviour. Are you suggesting it is?
 
Angstrom
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by SLM View Post

That isn't normal sexual behaviour. Are you suggesting it is?

It's not normal behaviour. And let's look at what is the cause.

The cause is:

The unnatural circumstances of a school/teacher/students environment.

And as long as you have this environment. You're going to get unnatural blackmail sexual behaviour as a result.


So just like i said in my original post in this thread.
As long as we have this education format in place we will have these things happen.
 
SLM
+1
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by Angstrom View Post

It's not normal behaviour. And let's look at what is the cause.

The cause is:

The unnatural circumstances of a school/teacher/students environment.

And as long as you have this environment. You're going to get unnatural blackmail sexual behaviour as a result.


So just like i said in my original post in this thread.
As long as we have this education format in place we will have these things happen.

And yet thousands of teachers daily do not solicit sexual favours for grades. It's not the environment, it's the individual and they need to be accountable for their actions.
 
Angstrom
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by SLM View Post

And yet thousands of teachers daily do not solicit sexual favours for grades. It's not the environment, it's the individual and they need to be accountable for their actions.

Thats what we been doing forever. And it's still happening
And it won't stop it from happening in the future.

Humans will be humans
 
SLM
+1
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by Angstrom View Post

Thats what we been doing forever. And it's still happening
And it won't stop it from happening in the future.

Humans will be humans

So what you're essentially saying is that because this has occurred before and likely will again, we give it a pass, it's just normal human behaviour. Is that right?

One could say the same thing about murder then.
 
Angstrom
#16
The angle I'm looking at it from, I'd find a way to change the system so that normal human behaviour can't get into conflict with school/teacher/students environment.

Quote: Originally Posted by SLM View Post

So what you're essentially saying is that because this has occurred before and likely will again, we give it a pass, it's just normal human behaviour. Is that right?

One could say the same thing about murder then.

I don't find it difficult to analyze and identify what natural behaviour is in conflict. And then eliminate those circumstances.
Adopt new formats
 
SLM
+1
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by Angstrom View Post

The angle I'm looking at it from, I'd find a way to change the system so that normal human behaviour can't get into conflict with school/teacher/students environment.

Unless you want to segregate everything by gender, that's just not going to be possible. Millions of people interact daily without harming one another, that's the standard we need to strive for, not giving in to the lowest common denominator.
 
Angstrom
#18
And this way you wouldn't have this happen anymore.

Quote: Originally Posted by SLM View Post

Unless you want to segregate everything by gender, that's just not going to be possible. Millions of people interact daily without harming one another, that's the standard we need to strive for, not giving in to the lowest common denominator.

If that's the only solution you have you lack imagination.

It's a standard we will never reach. But I think you're willing to live with that.

Here is a example.

If a Unknown identity is in charge of grades.
You have just eliminated our problem in this situation.
How can you blackmail someone you're not grading?

Problem fixed

This will never have the potential to happen again.
I've bypassed human imperfect behaviour.

By simple analysis I've identified the conflict
between human behaviour and the system and have
Changed the format to eliminate it at the cause of
The conflict.

I've eliminated the potential for a conflict to happen

Quote: Originally Posted by Tecumsehsbones View Post

I strongly encourage you to keep yourself and your kids out of school. Out of society entirely, preferably. Wouldn't want you to be all stressed out by "unnatural" stuff like wearing clothes and living in houses.

No. I wish to adapt things in our life to make them more user friendly."natural"

Like I just explained above.

Quote: Originally Posted by SLM View Post

Unless you want to segregate everything by gender, that's just not going to be possible. Millions of people interact daily without harming one another, that's the standard we need to strive for, not giving in to the lowest common denominator.

Millions of people walk every day, that's a standard.
Let's not give in to the lowest denomination that can't walk.

Screw them! If they can't walk too bad?

Is that what you think?

We spend billions in constructing accessible buildings.
But the morally handicapped , screw them!
Last edited by Angstrom; Jan 9th, 2015 at 10:32 AM..
 
Tecumsehsbones
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by Angstrom View Post


No. I wish to adapt things in our life to make them more user friendly."natural"

Like I just explained above.

Yes, it's the logical fallacy of argumentum ad naturam. It comes in two parts:

1. The unsupported assertion that "natural" is superior to "unnatural," and

2. Cherry-picking what is "natural" to support your argument for doing this or that.
 
SLM
+1
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by Angstrom View Post



Millions of people walk every day, that's a standard.
Let's not give in to the lowest denomination that can't walk.

Screw them! If they can't walk too bad?

Is that what you think?

We spend billions in constructing accessible buildings.
But the morally handicapped , screw them!

Behaviour is a choice, the inability to walk is not. What kind of fu*cked up freaking analogy is that???

And yes the morally handicapped can go screw themselves, I will not cater to them. Nobody should.
 
Tecumsehsbones
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by SLM View Post

Behaviour is a choice, the inability to walk is not. What kind of fu*cked up freaking analogy is that???

You answered your own question. It's a "fu*cked up freaking" analogy.

Quote:

And yes the morally handicapped can go screw themselves, I will not cater to them. Nobody should.

Wimp. Compromiser. Collaborator.

What we need to do is deliberately build barriers to the handicapped into every street, sidewalk, and building!

Damn cripples.
 
SLM
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by Tecumsehsbones View Post

You answered your own question. It's a "fu*cked up freaking" analogy.

Yes, I know. I should know better to engage, I really should. But do you ever have a "WTF" moment and you just run with it?

Quote:

Wimp. Compromiser. Collaborator.

What we need to do is deliberately build barriers to the handicapped into every street, sidewalk, and building!

Damn cripples.

I know you're being facetious but that's almost a better alternative to me than redefining society standards for every turd that can't keep his di*ck in his pants. Almost.
 
Tecumsehsbones
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by SLM View Post

Yes, I know. I should know better to engage, I really should. But do you ever have a "WTF" moment and you just run with it?

I know you're being facetious but that's almost a better alternative to me than redefining society standards for every turd that can't keep his di*ck in his pants. Almost.

Well, as a turd who likes to have his d*ck out of his pants whenever possible, I can't really agree with you there.

But I still have enough self-respect to jerk off rather than using my authority to coerce a woman to blow me.

Must be coz I'm unnatural.
 
Colpy
#24
"Never trust a woman or an automatic pistol"

John Dillinger, who was betrayed by a woman, and who died with an Colt auto in his hand.

(BTW, I trust both a woman and some automatic pistols)
 
Tecumsehsbones
+1
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by Colpy View Post

"Never trust a woman or an automatic pistol"

John Dillinger, who was betrayed by a woman, and who died with an Colt auto in his hand.

(BTW, I trust both a woman and some automatic pistols)

I trust some women and an automatic pistol.
 
SLM
+1
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by Colpy View Post

"Never trust a woman or an automatic pistol"

John Dillinger, who was betrayed by a woman, and who died with an Colt auto in his hand.

(BTW, I trust both a woman and some automatic pistols)

Oh Colpy! Women can be dangerous!
 
Angstrom
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by SLM View Post

Behaviour is a choice, the inability to walk is not. What kind of fu*cked up freaking analogy is that???

And yes the morally handicapped can go screw themselves, I will not cater to them. Nobody should.

Unlike you I accept that humans are not perfect and I'd like to still include them in our society.
Even the morally handicapped.

Cause just like people that can't walk
Morally handicapped people wouldn't act that way if they had control over it.
And people who can't walk would walk if they could.

Like you said. Millions do it every day without a problem.

Quote: Originally Posted by Tecumsehsbones View Post

Yes, it's the logical fallacy of argumentum ad naturam. It comes in two parts:

1. The unsupported assertion that "natural" is superior to "unnatural," and

2. Cherry-picking what is "natural" to support your argument for doing this or that.

Better to base it on nature then to base it on opinions

Let's analys this:



So you're saying any arguments based on the assumption we are natural is wrong?

So if we ain't natural what are we?
Created in gods image?

Oh! I get it. You're arguing based on you're beliefs in creationism.


Well that would explains why we don't agree!
 
SLM
#28
Wow. Talk about making sh*it up to argue against.
 
Angstrom
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by SLM View Post

Wow. Talk about making sh*it up to argue against.

If it's mak **** up to you, you obviously don't have the intellectual ability to understand it.

It's ok you're only human SLM
 
Tecumsehsbones
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by Angstrom View Post

So you're saying any arguments based on the assumption we are natural is wrong?

So if we ain't natural what are we?
Created in gods image?

Oh! I get it. You're arguing based on you're beliefs in creationism.


Well that would explains why we don't agree!

And that's the strawman fallacy. Make up an argument you think you can beat, ascribe it to your interlocutor, and argue against it.

Essentially it's talking to yourself (well, that and lying). Both very natural, I'm sure. For you.