13 year old girl described as 'predatory' in court...

[stonerblue]

Maybe I will be glad when all forms of porn are removed from the net and society and I see no more pairs of bare breasts in my newspaper because I think we may have gone more than beyond the lowest level when we start queuing up to defend child molesters.

I see women sexualised all the time, it's normal now and we are seen as objects for men to ogle and we are never good enough for you if we haven't had our breasts enlarged to an abnormally overstuffed size. Every stretchmark, follicle of hair or blemish removed and even then we aren't good enough for you. We're too sexy, not sexy enough, too thin too fat. Is it any fooking wonder our little girls are so confused ? Too bent out trying to please men and a society where all you have to do is be perfect.

Men want sexy but then it's your fault for trying to be to too sexy and you asked for it. So I'd like all this stopped now so we can get back to a decent moral society when we know what wrong is. I'll happily take some responsibility for having a dress too short if you like, I'm a big girl i can take it but I won't ever ever accept a child being told she deserved it because she acted to sexy or older than she was.

Wobble your heads please !

That is such a sweeping statement about men. As if somehow women overlook sexy. And never coo over muscle men and have expectations. Face it. we all sexualise each other.
Our girls are confused by the womens magazines telling them they are fine the way they are until you turn the page and they are told how they can lose weight, change themselves, look like Rihanna or Amy Childs.

But I do agree that the 41 yo has the ultimate responsibility. She more than likely was willing in some way but I can't understand a 41 yo thinking that makes it ok unless they have some mental illness which stops them thinking straight.

nail on head.

 

[andyhinch]

I've not read the whole thread yet, I assume this joke of a sentence, is being reviewed.

 

[I'm With Stupid]

She's 13 and he's 41 that's all I need to know in this case. I don't care how sexy she may or may not have looked she's a child barely out of primary school and vulnerable

A very blinkered view. I totally accept that its wrong having sex with a minor, but in this case the facts are that she was sexually active. That is a point that needed making available to the Jury.

What counts as sexually active though? I've seen a teenage mother described as "sexually active" because she was raped by her mother's boyfriend. It's entirely possible that a 13 year-old girl might be particularly developed and has maturely come to the decision that she wants to have sex with no outside pressure. It's also entirely possible that she's a vulnerable girl from a troubled background with very low self-esteem who sees attention from men as a way to make herself feel better and who a certain type of older man see as an easy target. The latter is a very different type of "sexually active" than the former, which is why people have a problem with it being brought up as evidence. And let's face it, that's exactly why we have an age of consent in the first place.

 

[PJMCC1UK]

It's no less a sweeping statement than all 13 year old are tarts and whores. The industry and society are sick and a lot needs to be done to restore the innocence of youth and respectable values IMO

I didn't see any sweeping statements that they all were. I did see that some realise some young girls and boys aren't as naive as their counterparts. It's not a generalisation like the one you wrote though. And it isn't just lads mags etc. Womens mags have as much to answer for. As the newspapers do. Charlotte Church at 15 was objectified in the sun next to an article bemoaning the sexualisation of kids.

Porn on the net is far too accessible. I find it worrying that you need a licence for a sex shop but anyone can start a porn site. And the ease at which they are found is bad. But that feminist who wants lads mags covered should also be calling for most other mags to be covered if we want to keep kids innocent.

 

[2sheikhs]

It's no less a sweeping statement than all 13 year old are tarts and whores. The industry and society are sick and a lot needs to be done to restore the innocence of youth and respectable values IMO

I didn't see any sweeping statements that they all were. I did see that some realise some young girls and boys aren't as naive as their counterparts. It's not a generalisation like the one you wrote though. And it isn't just lads mags etc. Womens mags have as much to answer for. As the newspapers do. Charlotte Church at 15 was objectified in the sun next to an article bemoaning the sexualisation of kids.

Porn on the net is far too accessible. I find it worrying that you need a licence for a sex shop but anyone can start a porn site. And the ease at which they are found is bad. But that feminist who wants lads mags covered should also be calling for most other mags to be covered if we want to keep kids innocent.

You can ban whatever you want but you'll not stop peer pressure between girls. That's the reason they're becoming sexually active at a younger age. Girls in particular are obsessed with what people of their own age group think of them and how they are perceived.

 

[Chris in London]

They offer you a picture of stockings and suspenders
Next to calls for stiffer penalties for sex offenders

Billy Bragg, 'it says here' (1984)

 

[Aphex]

They offer you a picture of stockings and suspenders
Next to calls for stiffer penalties for sex offenders

Billy Bragg, 'it says here' (1984)

Billy Bragg has it nailed. Unfortunately, the world wasn't ready then, let alone now.

 

[sir baconface]

A guy I know fosters teenagers. One 13-year old asked him if he'd like her to wank him off.

Was he right to refuse? Or should he just have said "Ah fuck it, this girl's sexually active, let's have some of that"?

Make your own minds up.

 

[mackenzie]

Whether the girl was a 'sexual predator' or not she is still a 13 year old girl.
Whilst I understand that some youngsters are more sexually experienced these days that doesn't make it right and nor, in my opinion anyway, make it acceptable for it to be used as a defence or a mitigating factor for a man of 41 years of age to have sex with her.
The barrister concerned should be effin ashamed.

 

[rickmcfc]

A guy I know fosters teenagers. One 13-year old asked him if he'd like her to wank him off.

Was he right to refuse? Or should he just have said "Ah fuck it, this girl's sexually active, let's have some of that"?

Make your own minds up.

Nobody is saying option 1 is even slightly acceptable, it simply isn't and he shouldn't have done it. But there is nothing wrong with what has been said in court.