Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 78

Thread: Can a 12 year old consent to sex?

  1. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,475

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eatmywords View Post
    Objectivity is not being neutral. I rest my case!
    Perhaps not, but it is similar in the sense of not taking a moral position either way. Regardless, being rigorously objective to EVERYTHING is certainly not the virtue which you make it out to be. There are some things which a decent moral human being should never be objective about. Child abuse and the sexual exploitation of minors is one of those things.

  2. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,475

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skinny View Post
    What about my second question?
    Unfortunately, answering a straight question like that is "beneath" Eatmy (a bit like asking him whether he condemns the murder of Lee Rigby, which he has still refused to answer). If you press him on it he will tell you that you are too stupid to deserve an answer.

    All we have to go on, therefore, are Eatmy's words and arguments both in this thread and in others (particularly the one discussing Asian paedophile gangs). It is very clear to me that indeed he does believe that it is acceptable for an adult to accept an invitation from a minor who is supposedly "willing" to have sex. Just don't expect Eatmy to admit this directly.

  3. #23
    Super Moderator eatmywords's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Kingston upon Hull
    Posts
    2,473

    Default

    I think it's clear the law states an adult cannot have sex with a minor, but I think it's equally clear the sexualisation of society acts as a contradiction to the law; such as teaching sexual education to 13 year olds, younger in the US, in our schools. A child is bombarded with sexuality pretty much throughout the day; advertising, television, music, friends. If you think 11-15 year olds are not having "consensual" sex then that's pretty naive. Of course a moral and law-abiding citizen should say no to any minor offering sex, for whatever reason, but we are not composed of a society that abides by moral and legal values. What should be examined, rather than the minds of men, is why a child as "asking for it".

    I did read an interesting article by Jemima Lewis regarding Benny Hill, and his fall from the hearts of the comedy-loving public. It was mainly down to those scantily-clad women he would often promote on his show. Feminism and political-correctness put an end to Benny and he was found rotting in his flat; bitterly ironic somewhat. However, no one bats an eyelid to the barely-clad women that adorn music videos and are consumed by a far greater worldwide audience than those who enjoyed Benny Hill.


    And yet again you show your stupidity Northumbrian, in that I did condemn the "heinous crime". What I think you wanted me to condemn is the racial/religious element of the crime, which I won't do. So please go back to your racially-fuelled imagination until you find another racially-fueled media piece to crow about.
    Last edited by eatmywords; 06-10-2013 at 11:56 PM.
    Faced with certain disaster, defiance is the only answer.

  4. #24
    Have you got a link? skinny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,801

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eatmywords View Post
    I think it's clear the law states an adult cannot have sex with a minor, but I think it's equally clear the sexualisation of society acts as a contradiction to the law; such as teaching sexual education to 13 year olds, younger in the US, in our schools. A child is bombarded with sexuality pretty much throughout the day; advertising, television, music, friends. If you think 11-15 year olds are not having "consensual" sex then that's pretty naive. Of course a moral and law-abiding citizen should say no to any minor offering sex, for whatever reason, but we are not composed of a society that abides by moral and legal values. What should be examined, rather than the minds of men, is why a child as "asking for it"..
    Me personally when answering a question, and most people in general I would think, would answer it and then follow up with an explanation to explain my answer. You seem to explain an outlook and ultimately answered a question with a question?

  5. 06-11-2013, 06:37 AM

    Reason
    duplicate post

  6. #25
    Super Moderator eatmywords's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Kingston upon Hull
    Posts
    2,473

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skinny View Post
    Me personally when answering a question, and most people in general I would think, would answer it and then follow up with an explanation to explain my answer. You seem to explain an outlook and ultimately answered a question with a question?
    I try not to generalise. Most people usually respond to the reply and not try to make it about the replier, but whatever. No comment on my reply?

    I can't seem to see where I've answered your questions with questions, but if that's the only thing you can be so critical of me for, then I fully accept it

    And personally, I don't demand people to feel or think a certain way, especially when people are trying to have fun and enjoy and create debate on a forum.

    Can we get back to the topic now perhaps?
    Faced with certain disaster, defiance is the only answer.

  7. #26
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    10

    Default

    There seem to be a number of issues being thrown up in the replies on this thread. One of those issues is availability of up-to-date research answers. Some info on the net does imply different "ages of consent" but dont always show the conditions applied. A large number specify a young age of consent but apply a rolling age gap between consenter and sexual partner though there is often a higher age of consent for homosexual sex.

    Research on the net shows the lowest a.o.c. for girls in europe to be 12 years old, and this is in the Vatican State !!!!!!!!!!! (subject to net info being correct of course)

    Historically, age of consent is a relatively new concept and the history of our own monarchy will show young teenaged queens to have given birth to the heir to the throne, one being as young as 12. When Jerry Lee Lewis came over to UK on a tour with his (legal) wife, the hotel he had booked refused to give him a double room as his wife was below the british a.o.c. even though she was of legal age in most states in USA. So another question is should any country apply its own a.o.c. on a national of another country if that age is legal in that country. In reverse, should we expect any country to apply our own a.o.c. to any british national who happened to be on holiday in a country with a lower a.o.c than ours. ?

    Yet another issue , and one that raises its head in third world countries, particularly the continent of Africa. If you assume the expected life expectancy in UK is on average 75 then the age of consent represents a figure of 21% of the expected life span. Therefore, if, as is the case in many poverty rife contries the life expectancy might be as low as 50, then the various "stages of life" need to be achieved within that life span The same arguement can be made about child soldiers. A boy of 12/13 is probably a third or a quarter of his way through his life span and is the equivalent of a 19/20 year old in UK and as we all sadly know, there are 19 and 20 yo's getting killed in the british army as we sit here.

  8. #27
    Super Moderator eatmywords's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Kingston upon Hull
    Posts
    2,473

    Default

    Now, would you believe it, a white English public-sector worker evades sex with a minor, despite his admission to it. How do you think he escaped that charge?

    I'm sure double-standards enters this debate somewhere. So, is it now okay for the public-sector to have sex with children, if the only charge they end up with is abduction? Would you accept, then, that Forrest (apologies for getting his name wrong previously) and the prosecution entered into a plea bargain to avoid the child from testifying if the teacher accepted the lesser charge and so avoided the charge of sex with a minor and all the stigma that entails? Therefore, is this morally right? It's a rocky road we are travelling here.
    Last edited by eatmywords; 06-21-2013 at 01:08 AM.
    Faced with certain disaster, defiance is the only answer.

  9. #28
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,475

    Default

    Is he not already pleading guilty to sex with a minor, given that there is I believe concrete evidence of this from mobile phone records? The jury verdict then was just based on the charge of child abduction, which he pleaded not guilty to. Alternatively, perhaps the CPS decided not to pursue the underage sex charge to avoid having to bring the girl into the witness box, given that he was already being charged with child abduction (which carries a prison sentence of up to 7 years). I doubt he would have avoided an underage sex charge if he hadn't been on the child abduction charge.

    I can't understand why you think he's been treated lightly because he is a "public-sector worker". In fact, these sorts of things are taken much more seriously for a teacher (or any other adult responsible for children) than anyone else. As I said previously, a teacher can actually be prosecuted for having consentual sex with a person under the age of 19 (never mind 16!). It turns out that the odious Forrest had begun sleeping with the girl when she was just 14, and I'm glad the prosecution have described Forrest for what he is - a predatory paedophile who abused his position of trust. I just wish the media would stop referring to him as a "teacher" - he has lost all rights to that title.

    It is very inconsistent Eatmy the way that you sympathise with Muslim paedophile gangs who rape and torture 11 year old white girls, yet are outraged by what you see as "lenient" treatment for a "white public-sector worker". Another example perhaps of your racism against your own people.
    Last edited by Northumbrian; 06-21-2013 at 02:52 AM.

  10. #29
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,475

    Default

    5 and a half years for Forrest. I'm impressed for once with the common sense of the judge. This is an appropriate sentence for the crime, unlike the wholly inadequate sentence given to the vile paedophile Stuart Hall. Hopefully it will act as a deterent to others.

  11. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Northumbrian View Post
    5 and a half years for Forrest. I'm impressed for once with the common sense of the judge. This is an appropriate sentence for the crime, unlike the wholly inadequate sentence given to the vile paedophile Stuart Hall. Hopefully it will act as a deterent to others.
    As a female I think the whole thing is a farce..Forrest just fell into the age-old trap..young male teacher in a classroom full of nubile young predatory girls...remember ''Don't stand so close to me'' by the Police...

    15 yr old girls today have no comparison to 15 yr old girls say 30 years ago....

    Stuart Hall is 83..his crimes were a kiss..a fondle...things were different then..If I bought to court all the men who had ''abused'' me according to the law now...the courts would be full for the next 5 years..Can't could the number of times a guy flashed his todger to me in the allotments..

    Hey..I went scrumping when I was 10...Think I will turn myself in!!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •