Features

The end of childhood - what we lost when we dropped the age of consent

For a society obsessed with paedophilia, we're disturbingly comfortable with sexualising childhood

14 March 2015

9:00 AM

14 March 2015

9:00 AM

In all the sound and fury about historic sex crimes against children, one crucial factor has been generally ignored. Last week, a review of the agencies dealing with the phenomenon of ‘grooming gangs’ in England said that more than 370 young girls in Oxfordshire had fallen victim to them over the past 15 years, and called for an urgent national debate into these ‘indescribably awful’ sex crimes. But the most shocking and overlooked aspect of the review was that, in Oxford, police and care workers dismissed evidence that girls as young as 11, 12 or 13 were being groomed for sex and repeatedly subjected to brutal sex crimes, intimidation and threats of violence, on the grounds that these were ‘very difficult girls making bad choices’.

Bad choices? For heaven’s sake, these were children! Yet men in their thirties targeting girls as young as 13 were described by police and caring agencies as these children’s ‘boyfriends’.

‘Scores of these professionals used language which appeared at least in part to blame these child victims and view them as adults,’ said the review. So how could such professionals not see them as either children or victims?

This pattern has been repeating itself. From Rotherham to Jimmy Savile and other child sex scandals, police and other agencies dismissed complaints by such girls on the grounds that they were ‘little slags’. These agencies were writing off an entire class of people as low-lifes, whose wretched condition was only to be expected from their debauched behaviour. That in itself was awful.

But the Savile scandal exposed something deeper and more sinister: that countless people connived at what they knew he was doing to these girls, even though some were very young teenagers or younger. That was because his victims were not seen as either children or victims. They were instead looked upon indulgently and amusedly as little ravers, part of ‘youth culture’, merely daft girls flinging themselves at such celebrities. That was because this was the post-Pill era, when sex was uncoupled from marriage and babies and was redefined as a recreational sport. ‘Have fun, but do it safely’ was the message. A bit like skiing.

Even those charged with children’s protection have not regarded premature sexual activity as a problem. Children’s homes have regularly shrugged aside the fact that young girls in their care are too often ‘on the game’ outside their walls. You’d hardly think that we have an age of consent.

In her report on Rotherham council’s failure to deal with the sex grooming gangs which abused at least 1,400 children, Louise Casey, the government’s troubled families czar, identified a culture which treated pregnancies, miscarriages and terminations in children under 16 as normal. Accordingly, she felt obliged to set out in her report the terms of the law prohibiting sexual activity with anyone under that age.

Casey was whistling in the wind. In myriad ways, our society tacitly condones and even encourages the sexualisation of underage children, right up to government level.

As the Oxford review noted: ‘A child may be judged mature enough to get contraceptives to have sex with an adult at an age when they are deemed in law unable to give consent to the sex itself. It is no wonder there was confusion and a lack of confidence in taking action.’ This is as devastating as it is obvious. So devastating, in fact, that the response to this crucial observation has so far been silence.

Dishing out contraceptives to children is deemed essential by all governments. It’s obvious isn’t it (goes the thinking) that, well, children will inevitably get up to stuff? And so society must accept that they’ll be having sex at 12, 11, ten, whatever.


All you can do is try to prevent bad outcomes that have an impact on the rest of us. That means babies. So, of course, you dish out condoms to young teenagers. Of course, you offer abortion services to children as young as 11 without informing their parents. And, of course, you give them sex education, telling even primary school children about oral sex and prostitution.

So the idea that children having sex is always a form of child abuse is dismissed. The only people who could possibly object are by definition religious nuts and reactionaries, right?

Well, not so fast. Last November, the Family Education Trust, which campaigns for traditional values, complained to a committee of MPs about an advice manual for professionals on sex and relationships education, which had been welcomed by the Department for Education. Its concerns centred on a ‘Traffic Light Tool’, published by the Brook sexual health charity, which sets out green, amber and red behaviour for children of different ages.

Brook promptly hit the roof. The Traffic Light Tool, it said, had been developed by experts and ‘does not condone or encourage particular behaviours’.

But it does assign ‘green’ status to sexual activity among 13- to 15-year-olds, which is against the law, and some of the behaviour that Brook thinks is age-appropriate under its ‘traffic light’ rubric is deeply questionable.

For example, among nine- to 13-year-olds, ‘use of sexual language, including swear and slang words’ reflects ‘safe and healthy sexual development’. If your nine-year-old was mouthing sexual obscenities, would you feel satisfied that your child was developing in a ‘safe and healthy’ way?

Viewing pornographic material in this age group, moreover, gets an amber light as being only of ‘potential concern’. Surely there should be nothing remotely ‘potential’ about the concern that should be felt if a nine-year-old was looking at porn?

But when children are between 13 and 17 years old, Brook gives their interest in pornography a ‘safe and healthy’ green light, along with ‘consenting oral and/or penetrative sex with others of the same or opposite gender’ and of similar age and development. Accessing violent pornography, or making and sending naked or sexually provocative images of themselves or others, or joining adults-only social networking sites by giving false personal information, are considered to be only of ‘potential’ concern.

Just how does all that square with Brook’s claim that it ‘does not condone or encourage particular behaviours’? Is it not, in fact, encouraging professionals working with children to condone grossly dangerous and highly sexualised behaviour among fairly young children — and with the backing of the Department for Education?

The fact that such material is justified in this way and enjoys official approval shows that our society is no longer able even to acknowledge how far it has sexualised its children. Sex has become a massive commercial weapon aimed at ever younger ages, targeting the very young with sexually explicit pop lyrics, magazine articles, cosmetics and tarty clothes.

In 2002, a BBC documentary looked at children at a Somerset primary school and what made them popular. An 11-year-old boy wanted to go out with girls who were ‘tarty and daring’; he thought it was ‘sad’ when they wanted to take it ‘one step at a time’. One little girl was taunted because she didn’t want to ‘snog’ until she was 12.

Their parents were egging them on, telling their children that such behaviour was ‘cool’. These parents saw their children as adults. One mother said of her daughter: ‘She’s very mature. She’s 11 going on 27.’ Teachers were also going along with it, discussing who was ‘in love’ with whom in class.

For many children, the age of innocence has disappeared and with it the understanding that parents should protect that innocence. Last week, a secondary school excluded an 11-year-old pupil from its World Book Day celebrations after he turned up dressed as the sadomasochistic character Christian Grey from the erotic novel Fifty Shades of Grey. His costume included cable ties and an eye mask. His mother, a primary school teacher, thought that the outfit was funny. The idea that there was anything inappropriate in dressing him up as a sadomasochist was baffling to her.

In 1885, in response to child prostitution scandals, the age of consent was raised from 13 to 16. The motive behind this progressive reform was to protect children from sexual activity which was deemed grossly inappropriate to childhood. We no longer want to protect children from this. We have gone backwards to a less civilised age.

When we desacralised and casualised sex, didn’t we realise that our children would be harmed? Mass family breakdown has left so many children with no model in their heads of what love is and the place of sex within that. They are prey to a culture that has instead sentimentalised love and evacuated both it and sex of meaning.

So girls of 11 or 12 think they have to have sex with their ‘boyfriends’ to show that they love them, and this is condoned by adults who dish out the condoms and abortions. Then they’re called ‘slags’ by an adult world which claims to be horrified by child sexual abuse.

But this is a society that has institutionalised such abuse. The state itself grooms children for sex. Obsessed by paedophilia, this has become a kind of paedophile society.

The boundary between childhood and adult life has become dangerously blurred by moral confusion, selfishness and hypocrisy. Yet we do have a way of demarcating that boundary. It’s called the age of consent. Let’s start using it again.

Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.

You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10


Show comments
  • Graeme Pietersz

    One correction of fact: the victims were approximately 320, girls, not 370 – the other 50 were boys. I think the correction is important as society needs to realise that boys are in danger as well.

    • george

      Do you thing every sexual liaison a boy has with an adult is dangerous? There are many study’s that nuisance that fallacy!

      • David Prentice

        Yes to your first question and the conclusions of studies made by paedophiles for the delectation of paedophiles don’t concern me.

        • george

          Rind 1998 was not a study conducted by paedophiles; It was a meta study that caused widespread condemnation –Not because it was bad,but because it was a sound study.Funny,new research,value neutral,showing that child/adult sex is not always harmful,when consensual should be good news;not bad!

          • David Prentice

            You’ve surfaced in the wrong place. Go back whence you came.

          • george

            This is the perfect place to be; Apart from Heretic TOC website – Not the dominant narrative: Where child sexuality is discussed without media bias and emotion running the show.

          • billy pips

            Seriously man, as the above Prentice says, you’ve surfaced in the wrong place. The age of consent is predicated on the correct assumption that the capacity to make moral decisions develops with age. The established age of sixteen is an imperfect but reasonable guess. Likewise, the ability to make other decisions which imply moral agency – being a soldier, driving, establishing a legal contract, smoking and drinking alcohol. We do not think children capable of making a sensible, reasonable decision about these things, even if they think they can, and so it is illegal. Likewise sex – because sex isn’t neutral. It makes babies or disease, both of which are socially affective.

            Incidentally, the secretive way in which the police across the UK have been acting with regards these near ubiquitous grooming gangs is based on this – that children, when exposed to sex early and with little reference for normality, think that being groomed by paedophiles is normal and healthy. The police and health workers have to work very carefully with them to make them realise that it isn’t, so that they can achieve convictions.

          • Ethan L.

            Ageism is an awful thing. Why can’t we judge people based on their abilities rather than their age? And considering how common such sexual activity between adults and minors is, who in their right mind can call it abnormal?

          • george

            Childhood Innocence itself, Is a post-Victorian creation; Don’t get me wrong, They’re treated better these days — As for as work is concerned; In the west at least!

          • Ethan L.

            Yes, but that applies to pretty much everybody, not just children. I understand that working conditions during the Victorian era were rather harsh in general. If child labor laws were repealed today in first-world countries, children would not be rounded up and forced to work in sweatshops.

          • Dodgy Geezer

            ..Why can’t we judge people based on their abilities rather than their age?..

            That sounds very sensible.

            People gain abilities by experience. So we are going to stop young children having any sexual experience. Then it will be quite right for us to ban it on the grounds that they won’t have the ability to engage in sexual relationships until they are of age.

            Problem solved.

          • Ethan L.

            Except that such a ban violates the rights of those under the arbitrary age by criminalizing behavior which is normal and necessary for them as human beings. It also does not guarantee that they won’t still obtain the requisite experience in spite of the law and then be unjustly censured.

          • billy pips

            It’s not abnormal but it is immoral. There’s a difference. Like greed or envy, rape is indeed quite common, but that doesn’t make it fine and dandy.

          • Ethan L.

            How is sex immoral just because it involves someone who is under an arbitrary age? An age which varies a great deal by place and time, ranging today from 12 in some places to 18 in others. In the USA in 1880 the age ranged from 12 to as low as 7, depending on which state you were in, with the majority being 10. Was having sex with a 10 year old moral in 1880 but immoral today? Is a 12 year old OK in Mexico but immoral in USA?

          • spiritof78

            The age of consent in the UK might be 16. But it was not so in the past, although the ageage of maturity clearly changes over timetime, and it is different in different countries. It is noteworthy that the same people who defend this age limit as sacred, continue to defend the (indefensible) criminal age of responsibility at 10.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            Good point. And keep in mind that while the age of consent is 16, filming the event even by the participating parties is classed as “engaging in the production of child pornography”. Keira Knightley turned 18 the final day of shooting the
            first “Pirates” movie, which is presumably why her dear mama was always on the set. Because had the director said, “Can you get your top off, Luv”, presumably the entire cast and crew would have been looking at “child porn” charges.

          • MountainousIpswich

            Keira Knightley got her top off in The Hole when she was just 16.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            Some doubt about that.

          • mumble

            Perhaps it’s worth noting that, when filming Game of Thrones in Ireland, duplicating a scene from the original book would have involved stripping and beating an under-age actress.

            This is illegal in Ireland, so the scene was not shot, but not before discussion back and forth and directorial agonising.

          • Solage 1386

            I described myself at 10 as an atheist. I described myself at 13 as a homosexual. I described myself at 17 as an atheistic, homosexual, misanthropic nihilist with pronounced tendencies towards bibliophilia and aestheticism…….Oh, what wonders can exist in the mind of a child raised on a Welsh council estate! Now, at 55, I see that I was right all along! Personally, I feel that the age of consent should be 37, which, strangely, is precisely the age at which I became celibate.

          • Damaris Tighe

            Tee hee, I think there’s something to be said for that – many women only start really enjoying sex relatively late in life.

          • george

            Is having sex ‘moral’ decisions? Rape Immoral yes!
            As another bloger mentioned, The age of consent varies throughout the world — Are we in the UK so arrogant,that we assume ‘our’ way is correct? As for a soldier; Have you been to the Congo lately — Cos you may get mugged,Or worse by boy-soldiers. I myself was shooting at 14…I was supposed to be accompanied by adult,But that’s the law – I was good with a gun never the less!

            As for ‘grooming’ gangs; I take issue that they were all subject to coercion and force; When you consider under age sex is called statutory rape — Like many things in the media – They cherry-pick the horror stories,regardless of the rest,and call it horrific abuse of 1,400 girls – Without giving details of all individual cases.

          • justsomeone

            I’m sure many of the instances weren’t forced (although the girls were young and at a disadvantage – and this is not a good thing, particularly (if not only) because of the social stigma involved). Clearly, in many cases, these men did deliberately intimidate, hurt and threaten them. These gangs are dangerous and they preyed on the weak. That they didn’t actually rape each girl is neither here nor there, though it is an interesting topic to debate. Let’s just say that any one of these men would have beaten up or killed any non Muslim man (and indeed, even any Muslim) who would have done to his younger sister what they did to so many girls.

          • george

            Indeed – A handful of men; But are they responsible for the 1,400 because the rest could just be – Statutory rape, In that area,of course,that would be included — Though hardly horrific!

          • justsomeone

            I imagine all these men were aggressive and threatening. None of them people we’d want around us. I imagine all of them were violent or threatening whenever they faced any resistance.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            He’s having the joking. Where’s your senses of humour, Infidels?

          • george
          • Thaddeus lovelock

            well, said.

          • Ethan L.

            Talk about willful ignorance! You’d rather not know (and bury the messenger) than have someone contradict the established dogma. Does nobody desire to seek out and know the truth anymore?

          • Simon de Lancey

            You do realise that the Spectator is a right-wing magazine, with all that that implies?

          • Lensman2

            Good call, George.

            Rind is pretty conclusive – I challenge anyone who is in denial about the existence of child sexuality to read it.

            I’d add that anyone interested in the REAL reason why child-adult sensual relationships can lead to trauma when the child grows up should read Susan Clancy’s “The Trauma Myth” (in short – the stigma around such acts causes the damage not the actual acts themselves – provided they were consensual and pleasurable).

            Also people should read Judith Levine’s “Harmful to Minors” which absolutely destroys the many misconception peddled in this article.

            And for further evidence of the harmlessness, and even beneficial quality, of consensual adult-child sensual relationships look at Allie Kilpatricks “Long Range Effects of Child and adolescent sexual experiences”.

            The bad news for the neo-puritan right is that there’s more and more evidence, from serious science and research, that consensual adult-child sensual relationships are not of themselves harmful. It’s the insane hysteria and stigma that the child experiences when either the relationship is discovered, or when they later internalise society’s evaluation of what happened, that causes the harm.

          • george

            Yes I’ve heard that book mentioned allot; I’ll have to put on my list — Got a few to get through yet though…)

          • Maria

            creep!

      • Jody Taylor

        Name the studies and tell us why your own literacy isn’t much chop, while you’re at it!!

        • george

          Rind study 1998 meta study of 59 collage samples.My literacy is fine,ad-hominem boy! If you want a link, I can provide one.

          • Bonkim

            We don’t want your kind of perversity here.

          • Ethan L.

            What perversity? George merely mentioned a scientific study which shows that a lot of people are wrong and need to reconsider.

          • Jody Taylor

            He who pays the piper calls the tune, “wrong” or not. Ask any employer of any company and he/she will tell you that kids just don’t have the basic skills of communication. Try telling them about your ‘studies’ from Rind et al. They’d laugh right in your face. And then they’d use that all-too-cliched four-letter word for the applicant – NEXT!!

          • george

            Just like the congressmen,whom only about four even bothered to read the study – Ignorance is bliss!

          • Bonkim

            Congressmen are politicians, not specialists and their technical/analytical skills will not convince anyone in a court of law.

          • george

            Here it is, If your interested!

            http://mhamic.org/rind/

          • Bonkim

            Haven’t you got anything better to do?

          • george

            Children enjoy sex – And are not harmed as much as we thought…That’s good news,is it not? Like a new cancer drug for kids: Good news,why do you reject before reading!

          • Bonkim

            Filthy dirty Men will believe anything to justify their perverted habits.

          • Bonkim

            That is real life – not academic nonsense.

          • Bonkim

            Right and wrong depends on who is doing the judging!

          • alfredo

            I think you mean ‘perversion’. And who are ‘we’? I, for one, would like to hear what this gentleman has to say. By your leave, of course.

          • Bonkim

            This is a free country and he has a right to post his views – same as I have a right to comment on his views.

            Perversity is O.K
            noun 1. a deliberate desire to behave in an unreasonable or unacceptable way; contrariness.

            synonyms: contrariness, perverseness, awkwardness, unreasonableness,difficultness, waywardness, capriciousness, wilfulness, refractoriness,stubbornness, obstinacy, obduracy, mulishness, pig-headedness;More

            2. the quality of being contrary to accepted standards or practice; unreasonableness.

            There were many perverts in Victorian times and children -exploited sexually – child prostitutes, etc, servants, etc does not mean it is acceptable today.

            I am sure psychologists can study human behaviour in many forms and write learned papers of the causes and effects, as they can for example on murder, incest, or any other human acts – all strictly speaking natural and worthy of our consideration – however we have decided as a society that certain natural acts are forbidden as they cause harm to society or will result in exploitation/suffering of some others even if gratifying the perpetrators. These acts are illegal – same as incest or as homosexuality was but now made legal. Learned papers will not alter social perceptions. Discussing these acts and classifying them as intellectually acceptable is also not on.

          • alfredo

            Telling someone that his views are not wanted here and that certain discussions are ‘not on’ (whatever that means) seems a very strange way of asserting his right to express his views. And the rest of what you say seems equally confused.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            Normally I’d agree, but when the resident lunatic insists you are of a different race and nationality, patience does wear a little thin. As example, I’ve been told that I’m Japanese, talking of literally hundreds of times over a period of 10 years, plus. While the Spectator sits on its collective hands and whistles “Dixie”, keeping the nutter around for laughs.
            Paranoia coupled with compulsive obsessive disorder, so by providing a forum, the Spectator is effectively mocking the afflicted.
            Jack, the Japan Alps Brit

          • george

            You seem to be contradicting yourself: You believe in free speech,yet you call it ‘not on’ when I provide studies which back up my assertions — Are you one of those ” I believe in free speech,as long as I agree with what’s being said”?

          • Bonkim

            Studies backing up your assertions – surely you are not suggesting that the Spectator Blog-spot is a peer group of learned individuals specialising in the topic reported and that the instant comments/opinions posted are based on evidence-based research and conclusions acceptable to specialists on the topic.

            Whilst it is perfectly acceptable for posting views/comments based on one’s knowledge/experience to then say that is evidence based specialist comment is stretching it too far.

          • george

            Can’t think of anything more ‘evidence based’ than a peer-reviewed – meta study: That is the Rind study 1998 of 59 college samples – reviewed in the psychological journal.

          • Bonkim

            Reject this and not justification for any criminal acts .

          • george

            Homosexuality was once a ‘criminal act’ And in many countries, It still is; doesn’t mean we cant question widely held beliefs when new evidence comes to topic..Sometimes it can be hard to swallow when it contradicts such firmly held beliefs.

          • Lensman2

            ehhh? – George has brought up Rind – a huge meta-analytic study sponsored by congress.

            Rind’s conclusions are nothing to do with personal knowledge. They are the best statistics and best analysis available on this subject.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rind_et_al._controversy

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            “It’s a free country.”
            It used to be a free country.

          • Jody Taylor

            George made some objectionable comments about under-aged females.

          • alfredo

            Then tell him so – and why they were objectionable.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            The heritic in a minority of one deserves special protection, as what he has to say may contain a grain of truth. He should not be silenced as the other debate participants have a right to hear his opinion. So don’t take refuge in the majority.

          • Jody Taylor

            Not more of a thousand or so literacy “studies” which overlook the main point; that literacy is declining and your own attempts are proof positive. Lower the bar in your ‘studies’ and you can draw any conclusions you want. Try teaching to find out just how bad it is. Or, move the goal-posts – which seems to be your own choice.

            And I think you’ll find “collage” is a word associated with art. Did you mean “college” – what’s an “e” between friends??

          • george

            College — I was right the first time,thanks anyway!

          • george

            Nice attempt at the usual ad-hominem; you get used to it discussing this,because emotion overrides reason.

          • Ethan L.

            Nice job ignoring the substance of what george has to say while focusing in on the pedantic. I’ll bet you’ve not read a thing about the 1998 meta analysis by Rind, Tromovitch and Bauserman. I don’t think there was any bar lowering done in that study.

          • Jody Taylor

            I’ve heard about these kinds of studies over and over and over and I’ve never seen a shred of evidence of any of it in my years of teaching. Quite the contrary. I’d like to know what specific criteria was used to measure literacy. That always makes me skeptical.

          • MathMan

            Australia! Now we understand.

      • justsomeone

        I would think that for a boy, having sex with a woman at a very young age is extremely empowering. The sort of thing that would make his friends jealous. I remember when I was 13, lusting after a young female teacher. I don’t for a moment believe it would have somehow corrupted my soul or caused me to need therapy to get over it.
        But I doubt that the same applies to a 13 year old girl with a male teacher. Party because a female is penetrated, whereas a male penetrates and partly because of the social stigma.

        • george

          Indeed early penetration can take some getting used to; but I beg to differ that the age of the person doing the penetrating would be the main causal factor: But to call a boy a victim after having an affair with a teacher is a fallacy — For a start it fails to recognise the difference between males and females; And that from puberty, that is what we’re programmed to do.

          • Bonkim

            Dog in the street mindset.

        • Bonkim

          Males can be penetrated too.

          • justsomeone

            That’s hardly the point. The point is that penetrating is very different from being penetrated.

        • Solage 1386

          And suppose she had responded? What sort of woman would respond to the advances of a 13 year-old boy? Your sense of “empowerment” was a delusion. Social stigma exists for a very good reason.

          • justsomeone

            We’re talking about a 13 year old’s fantasy 🙂 Of course she wouldn’t have responded. Of course I didn’t even dare to declare my interest.
            I didn’t have a sense of “empowerment”. My point was that a 13 year old boy who somehow manages to have sex with a young and very attractive woman would be thrilled and would feel empowered.

          • Bonkim

            The woman if she did such things has corrupted the boy and needs to be sent off to a term in prison. She has used her superior understanding of human behaviour to ensnare and rape a juvenile.

          • justsomeone

            I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Bonkers is your name.

          • Bonkim

            Don’t give a damn what you think!

          • george

            Your last comment highlights your ignorance between males and females!

          • Bonkim

            If both carry out despicable acts – need to be expelled from civilized society.

          • george

            And that social stigma often ruins the lives of the very people they proclaim to protect!

          • Bonkim

            Social stigma – living in the past – criminals need to be exposed and got rid off.

          • george

            Life is messy,what if she just had a divorce,moment of madness — Locking her up,and interrogating him,Is of no benefit to the kid – Have you seen the film – Notes on a scandal?

          • justsomeone

            I think she was 21 years old. Too young for a divorce. And exceedingly healthy and well-built. No chance of a moment of madness. She exuded health. But let’s say I’d been 15 and she’d been 19. Let’s say I would have been athletic, very tall for my age, charismatic. Let’s say she would have wanted it too. How awful to think of the hell the system would have put her through. And as for me, my moment of triumph would have been recast as an awful experience I underwent at the hands of a criminal. Terrible. Now that would have been traumatic.

          • george

            Indeed — Think it would be worse for a male teacher though!

          • justsomeone

            Probably, but a female teacher would be treated almost as badly. I think it would be easier for a boy than for a girl. At least the boy’s friends wouldn’t insist something terrible happened to him.

          • Bonkim

            Sex offender – sent to prison.

          • george
          • Bonkim

            Better castrated or sent to the electric Chair. Bad thing Capital punishment is no longer on the books.

          • Lensman2

            someone nudge the record player – the needle’s stuck again…

          • Bonkim

            There are sound reasons for branding her a rapist and child molester. If it was my son he would have been given 50 lashes.

          • justsomeone

            If it was your son, he’d have run away from home.

          • Bonkim

            Good riddance.

          • Lensman2

            “Social stigma exists for a very good reason.”

            and what exactly is that reason?

          • Bonkim

            because people like that are dangerous to society – and evil will have to be exterminated.

          • Lensman2

            ” and evil will have to be exterminated”

            Oh, well – good luck with that.

        • Pacificweather

          You should read what the author, John Irving, had to say about it. For him it was closer to the female perspective than you might think.

      • Zionist lackey

        george hopes that studies will vindicate his wayward liking for young boys. Sadly this is not the case george. Such academic studies come off the treadmill every day (usually from across the pond), each contradicting the other.

        Like all academic studies, they lead the public by the nose in one direction until another leads them in the opposite one. We see them printed daily in the popular press. For example – a minor one admittedly. For over a decade now, butter has been seen as a major vice causing the blocking of arteries and helping to lead to heart attacks. But now new studies undermine such a claim and there are other numerous contradictory examples covering a whole range of medical subjects including the one we are dealing with here.

        My point is george, never put your faith in such studies because sooner or later the studies will contradict the one that justifies your sexual preferences; and you will be left once more isolated and out on a limb.

        The ‘sexual liaison’ between boys and adult men as you refer to them, are indeed centuries old, dating back to ancient Greece and Roman civilisations (cruel civilisations compared to our modern Western ones by the way). In other words we have sought to protect our children from such adult vices through the application of the law.

        Children are not sexually mature until they reach puberty. But this does not mean they are intellectually mature regarding their sexual impulses and they need the law to protect them from predators whose only motive is their own sexual self-gratification.

        This is why there is a legal age limit put upon sexual activity. This age limit is 16; no matter what it was in the past. The 16 age limit gives young girls the opportunity to decide for themselves. It may be the wrong decision; especially if they end up pregnant – but at least the law will have served a moral purpose.

        As for boys, which seems to preoccupy george’s mind. Then he had better get used to the fact that they will not be available to him until they turn sixteen and are capable of turning down his advances no matter what any particular university study says to the contrary.

        • george

          And yet we took all the feminist pseudoscience at face value! – Satanic-ritual-abuse panic,stranger danger,need I go on – Fact is however; The Rind study was passed on scientific grounds,then after mass condemnation refuted on ‘moral’ grounds — Morality itself is flux!

          As you know the age of consent varies throughout the world: What gives us the arrogance to think our way is superior? I’m not advocating for sexual assaults just sexual self determination – Libertarian ideals for a free society; Self interest,sure, buy if we lived in a more sex positive society,we would have less damaged people. As for Roman times,comparing being thrown to Lions, To being given oral is erroneous..Also nothing wrong with finding boys attractive!

          • Lensman2

            Your posts want to make me cheer, George!

        • george

          Also many don’t appreciate being ‘protected’ because it seems,young people themselves are branded ‘sex offenders’ for consensual sex-play: hows that protection?

          • Bonkim

            Consensual?? criminals exploiting and corrupting young minds – need to bring back capital punishments for perverts.

          • Lensman2

            so for you ‘sex’ is ‘corrupting’?

            What then do you mean by that word ‘corrupting’?

            My experience of sex has always been loving, comforting, caring and pleasurable. I’ve never felt there to be any corruption in it (bully for me, ehh!?)

            Maybe you’re doing it wrong, Bonkin.

          • Bonkim

            Evil criminals like you should go hang yourself! nobody will miss you when you are gone.

          • Lensman2

            That wasn’t a very coherent or rational reply to my post was it, mr Bonking (maybe the cheap quip at the end got your dander up..?)

            I think you need to sit down, have a chamomile tea and calm down my dear, and then, and only then, have another go at answering my question – which seems quite reasonable to me viz –

            “What then do you mean by that word ‘corrupting’?”

        • Bonkim

          Wasting time on a pervert trolling this site. This type of evil has to be rooted out ruthlessly.

      • Bonkim

        Not just dangerous but evil.

    • WTF

      And camels and sheep !

  • Feminister

    “Then they’re called ‘slags’ by an adult world which claims to be horrified by child sexual abuse.”

    Rod Liddle is one of this view’s proponents. But only if the abusers are white. He wrote a whole series of articles condemning operation YewTree on the grounds that the teenage girls he knew fancied pop stars.

    • victor67

      Indeed the Rotherham victims were used by some on the right as it fitted with their anti-muslim agenda.
      Before,this group had little empathy for working class adolescence who had difficult backgrounds, feral and scum wad how they were described.

      • Damaris Tighe

        I have to agree with you here, although muslims themselves have brought on an ‘anti-muslim’ agenda because of the actions of some of them.

        • Pacificweather

          You can take the men out of the village but it is harder to take the village out of the men.

        • albert pike

          “although muslims themselves have brought on an ‘anti-muslim’ agenda because of the actions of some of them.”

          So jews have brought on an ‘anti-jew’ agenda because of the actions of some, have they?

          https://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/2011/05/12/sex-slavery-%E2%80%93-the-growing-trade-in-israel/

          christians have brought on an ‘anti-christian’ agenda because of the actions of some, have they?

          • Damaris Tighe

            I used the word ‘muslim’ because victor67 used it. I don’t usually generalise about people. I should have said ‘anti-Islam agenda’ although in practice that often morphs into anti-muslim. Once we are clear that what is meant is a religious ideology then that can be compared with other religions. Often people fall far short of their own religious teachings. This is very true of Christianity. The problem with Islam is that good & humane muslims are that despite their religion, not because of it.

          • albert pike

            So the “good and humane moslems”, who speak out about the bad and inhumane moslems and accuse them of being unislamic, don’t know what Islam is, and have to wait to be told what Islam is by some ignorant racist lowlife posting on the Spectator, whose real aim is to stir up racial hatred, is it?

          • Damaris Tighe

            I’ve said many times on the Spectator that we can’t know what’s in the hearts & minds of individual muslims although some posters seem to think we can.

          • albert pike

            ” although some posters seem to think we can.”

            you being one of them.

            What I would like an answer to is this:

            The “good and humane moslems”, who speak out about the bad and
            inhumane moslems and accuse them of being unislamic, don’t know what
            Islam is, is that what you want to say?

          • Damaris Tighe

            Unless I have a long conversation & find out exactly what their beliefs are, I have no idea.

          • albert pike

            “Unless I have a long conversation & find out exactly what their beliefs are, I have no idea.”

            Strange because you wrote:
            “The problem with Islam is that good & humane muslims are that despite their religion, not because of it.””

            Therefore that must mean, they are unislamic in your view,,,,,, even though they, unlike you, say that the moslems who are committing atrocities are unislamic.

            So, someone doesn’t know much about Islam. Is it the majority of moslems who speak out about atrocities committed by the western backed deathsquads. Or is it you that says the western backed deathsquads are a result of the religion?

          • WTF

            Any Muslim who shouts out “Allahu Akbar” whilst be-heading someone like Lee Rigby gives a pretty good idea what islam means to these people as non Muslim killers and sociopaths don’t go around today screaming “God is Great” whilst they rape or kill someone. If it walks and squawks like a duck etc

          • albert pike

            “Any Muslim who shouts out “Allahu Akbar” whilst be-heading someone like Lee Rigby”

            He was beheaded by one person who recently converted to Islam. Because of that you think it is ok to blame the religion for the crime. If that were the case, given there are 1.6 billion moslems on the planet 810 million be shouting Allahu Akbar while beheading someone like lee rigby for you to blame the religion?

            Christian Zionist Anders Brevik thought he was on a religious quest when he murdered 90 kids on a Norwegian Island, should we start warning the world to the dangers of zionism?

          • Phil T Tipp

            …should we start warning the world to the dangers of zionism…

            Err, yep. Yes we should.

          • WTF

            One lone wolf Norwegian allegedly on some anti-religious quest does not make it a real threat to every nation in the west, but thousand of Muslims killing and screaming Allahu Akbar around the world most certainly presents a real threat.

          • albert pike

            “One lone wolf Norwegian allegedly on some anti-religious quest does not make it a real threat”

            Bomb blasts, 90 shot – you’re right no threat

          • WTF

            You should learn to contextualize rather than follow the lame PC mantra of the left. Anders Brevikwas wasn’t and never was a threat to all the west in the manner of Charlie Hepdo killers and as terrible the killing of all those children was, he only targeted one group in one country. The number of Muslims across the world carrying out similar killings to Charlie Hepdo is like an AIDs epidemic of the 80’s and more deadly.

          • albert pike

            “Anders Brevikwas wasn’t and never was a threat to all the west”

            He was a nice boy really, like all christian zionists.

            You do not know who carried out the attacks on Charlie Hepdo.

            “The number of Muslims across the world carrying out similar killings to Charlie Hepdo”

            what attacks like Charlie Hepdo?

          • Solage 1386

            Poor misguided Anders considered himself to be aiming for the snake’s head. He was wrong.

          • Damaris Tighe

            As I’ve told you before, it has now been disproved that Brevik was a zionist. Documents uncovered after his conviction showed that he was an antisemite flying under a false flag.

          • albert pike

            “Documents uncovered after his conviction showed that he was an antisemite flying under a false flag.”

            LOL, antisemites attack jews they don’t attack those whose policies favour non jews. Besides which, aren’t we supposed by judge people their actions? Brevik’s action were in line with his 1500 page manifesto in which he declares his allegiance with Israel.

            Perhaps what you are confusing is that he was against non zionist jews and showed little remorse for the fact that during WWII most European non zionist jews perished in the holcaust.
            Which was a great shame, not least because they could have given a better insight into zionism.

          • Solage 1386

            He mentioned Ms Phillips in his manifesto, didn’t he? You’ll be blaming her next!

          • Solage 1386

            If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it’s a swan, according to many. A beautiful white swan!

          • Mark

            Albert, try looking at it this way, read the Koran, combine it with the Hadiths and the descriptions by muslims of the behaviours of Muhammad and his companions whilst developing and expanding the territories and peoples under the control of Islam.

            Then compare those behaviours (which are held to be the behaviours to be emulated by the true believing Muslim) with those behaviours we have seen in areas controlled by IS and with the behaviours we have seen in Rotherham.

            Now explain what is “unislamic” about the behaviours of Muhammad and his companions and what is unislamic about those who use those behaviours as their model for life.

          • albert pike

            “Albert, try looking at it this way, read the Koran,”

            I didn’t realize Leviticus was part of the Koran

            ““Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around
            you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the
            temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in
            your country, and they will become your property. You can will them to
            your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for
            life…..” (Leviticus 25:44-46)”

            “There are an estimated 20,000 female sex slaves forced into prostitution in Tel-Aviv each year.”

            https://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/2011/05/12/sex-slavery-%E2%80%93-the-growing-trade-in-israel/

          • Mark

            Albert, you didn’t even try to answer the question.

          • WTF

            Change the script and refuse to answer the question must be your swansong pikey as you never answer a direct question with a straight answer.

            In any respect what happened at Rotherham is totally different to what is alleged to be happening in trafficking of girls into israel. As the Israeli police stated in that report, “If the girls came forward we could prosecute the traffickers but they wont”.

            In the UK the girls and their parents came forth and plod told them to sod off !

          • albert pike

            “In any respect what happened at Rotherham is totally different to what
            is alleged to be happening in trafficking of girls into israel.”

            You mean what is alleged to have happened in Rotherham, is totally different to what
            is alleged to be happening in trafficking of girls into israel.”

            Why is that? because the number of times they are expected to perform sex is higher in Israel? 20 times a day doesn’t take long for one girl to reach the figure 1400, does it?

            Or perhaps they are not really women or young girls? What is so different about it?

            “In the UK the girls and their parents came forth and plod told them to sod off !”

            they thought they were lying. Obviously you don’t. You must know something plod doesn’t. Were you involved in it?

          • WTF

            Get your head out of your rear end and I’ll try and educate you.

            1/ The underage Rotherham girls were abandoned by the UK police and social services, the Russian were not underage and there is no information regarding Russias social services or police in this matter.

            2/ The Rotherham girls were refused help and ignored by the UK plod whilst the Russian girls refused to seek help from the Israeli police.

            Chalk and cheese, get it !

          • albert pike

            “1/ The underage Rotherham girls were abandoned by the UK police and social services,”

            The police did not believe the accusations. Perhaps they couldn’t keep their stories straight?

            ““At the moment, no official body in Israel has precise figures regarding
            the extent of prostitution of minors.” After so many years, it is
            difficult to explain this lack of data as merely coincidental or a
            mistake.”

            They are not interested in the problem

            http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/1.573209

            This you might find interesting, though I expect you can dismiss it due to its source, even though the facts are correct:

            http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/rania-khalek/israel-defender-alan-dershowitz-has-long-history-attacking-sex-abuse-victims

          • WTF

            So thats your feeble excuse for Rotherham plod, they didn’t believe 1400 underage at risk white girls were being gang raped by Muslim males !

          • albert pike

            the 1400 figure is an estimate. If you want the exact number of cases brought to the police’s attention, you should ask them, and stop trying to pass off unsubstantiated claims as facts that enable you to conduct your war against members of the islamic faith

          • WTF

            Update: Time to add yet another UK city where 12 year old white girls were being gang raped by Muslim men as Sheffield is now alleged to have been an even bigger problem than Rotherham.

            Still in denial are we that these were racially motivated sexual offenses !!!

          • Damaris Tighe

            Most of the forced prostitution in Israel is run by pork-eating ‘Russian mafia’ who wouldn’t know Leviticus from a side of ham. As for Leviticus, rabbis have been re-interpreting it for 2000 years.

          • albert pike

            Most of Israel is run and has been run by pork eating Russians, or are you unaware of the history of Israel and zionism?

          • Damaris Tighe

            I’m very aware of the history of Israel & Zionism. I’m also aware that, like many muslims, you cling to the discredited Khazar theory. However, this thread is not about Israel & Zionism but you, as always, try to make it so.

            I will not be replying any more as you’ve as usual derailed the thread & I’ve been drawn into it, for which I apologise to readers.

          • albert pike

            Sorry you came up with a stupid excuse to excuse the sexual enslavement of women in Israel.

            ” this thread is not about Israel & Zionism”

            It’s about sexual exploitation. Which according to you is an Islamic problem. I am just trying to point out to you that if you consider that the 5 people who may all happen to be moslem make sexual exploitation an Islamic problem, then the numbers of jews and christains involved in the same thing must also make it a ‘ jewish’ and christian problem.

          • WTF

            Sadly I think you’re wasting your time with pikey as he doesn’t do rational cause and effect based on fact .

          • WTF

            You judge people by their actions !

          • Solage 1386

            Read the Koran. The Koran and its precepts are in their minds.

          • Mark

            Albert, you would do well to expand your knowledge of the early actions of Muhammad and his companions before holding forth about the truth of what is and isn’t Islamic.

            And as you will know, Islam is not a race.

          • mohdanga

            What race is Islam again?

          • vieuxceps2

            Are there any “good and humane muslims”? Don’t say much do they? Poor sods, they’d be much better off if they ‘d only shed islam and become normal, thinking beings.

          • WTF

            “good and humane moslems” are about as rare as rocking horse s*** at least when it comes to standing up and condemning those that rape or kill in the name of their god !

          • Solage 1386

            Here’s a generalisation: The next time a “grooming scandal” occurs, the perpetrators will turn out to be Muslim males, and their victims will be white working-class females aged 11-16. How do I know this? Oh, just a hunch…..

          • vieuxceps2

            Alber Pike has brought on an anti-Pike agenda by his insane opinions……

      • global city

        Wow! I saw what you did there!

      • Solage 1386

        Both the left and the right have abandoned the working-classes. They’ll stick them on reservations in the end, and leave them to rot.

  • Zanderz

    I really don’t see why we can’t set the age of consent to 18 for everything and be done with it – voting, fighting (active military service), marriage, smoking, sex, drinking. Having different ages and circumstances just confuses things.

    • Pacificweather

      Teenagers are going to start having sex at 15 or 16 anyway but aren’t going to be allowed into pubs. Do we want to criminalise them? Were you confused by

      • Zanderz

        Harm reduction policies never work. Just because some people do it doesn’t mean it should be morally or socially acceptable.

        • Pacificweather

          It isn’t morally or socially acceptable and it is illegal but, as you say, that isn’t going to eliminate it. The article is trying to pretend that morals have become more lax and that laxity is more accepted than it was sixty years ago. That isn’t true. There are fewer orphans because there are more abortions but still insufficient precautions. In that respect, the moral climate hasn’t changed at all. It’s about time it did.

  • Pacificweather

    “For example, among nine- to 13-year-olds, ‘use of sexual language, including swear and slang words’ reflects ‘safe and healthy sexual development’. If your nine-year-old was mouthing sexual obscenities, would you feel satisfied that your child was developing in a ‘safe and healthy’ way?”

    I did but I had more sense than to do it in front of my parents so they did not know. Let’s see how enraged we can get about things that happen now that are exactly the same as they were 60 years ago or 160 years ago.

  • Damaris Tighe

    This is spot on Melanie. Last week I heard a commenter on the BBC argue that anti-radicalisation programmes in schools make the situation worse by arousing childrens’s curiosity which they follow up on the internet. My immediate thought was – surely this also applies to sex education. There was also a comment on the Spectator a couple of weeks ago which pointed out how the term ‘making love’ has been replaced by ‘having sex’. I’ve noticed that & also the change in pop lyrics. If you listen to songs from the 70s, especially soul, although they brought sex into lyrics for the first time they clearly link sex to being in love, to ‘making love’.

    The expectation that children can be sexually active in their early teens is especially bad for girls, who may well feel pressurised into sex with their boyfriends. Surely this isn’t liberation but encourages girls to become sex objects without giving them any strong defence (such as social disaproval). It also reinforces the message to ‘asian’ grooming gangs that kaffir girls are fair game.

    • Pacificweather

      In the 1960s boys soon learned to ask out girls over 16 but there were still a few who had sex with girls their own age.

      • Damaris Tighe

        Of course, & even in the 50s. But it wasn’t a pattern.

        • Pacificweather

          Depends what you mean by pattern. In my class about 7% of boys had sex for the first time at 15 rising to about 75% by 17. For the majority the girls were a year or two older and went to grammar schools. Are intelligence and early sexual activity linked one wonders?

          • porcelaincheekbones

            personality, openness
            intelligence they start much later

          • Pacificweather

            Later than what and in whom?

          • porcelaincheekbones

            later than average in the high intelligence
            In those who score high on openness, earlier than age of consent

          • Solage 1386

            Males with a low IQ are apparently more “well-endowed” than those who suffer from a high IQ. I find this sad.

          • porcelaincheekbones

            but they don’t know how to use it

          • Solage 1386

            In whom?

          • Pacificweather

            In whom?

          • Solage 1386

            Apparently, intellectuals have a stronger sex-drive than normal people–though you wouldn’t think so to look at ’em, the weedy-looking b’stards!

    • porcelaincheekbones

      blame feminism, they need to catch children because adults have critical thinking

      • Feminister

        Which is why the patriarchs invented educational institutions and are so keen to limit what other knowledge and ideas children are exposed to.

        • La Fold

          So “MEN BASATRDS!!” TM created schools and universities for the sole purpose to promote sexual ignorance and enable abuse? Just think about what you’ve said…

          • Feminister

            I don’t need to think about what I said, you evidently do.

        • porcelaincheekbones

          Treating children like children – shocking.

    • mmac1968

      Demaris I could not agree more. I have noticed we live in a world where you are damned if do and damned if you don’t. The sentiments of so called progressives are infuriating because they encourage underage sex but ignore the outcome, they high five alternative life styles but ignore the destruction wrought upon children. Progressives ignore Islam in the radicalisation of individuals as if they were radicalised in a vacuum. The PC refuse too connect this religion which condones rape and murder of non Muslims or the wrong type of Muslim to anything in its name. I am not aware of any school or institution which actively celebrates Britain as superior because it allows the individual the right to worship as you see fit on the basis you allow others to do the same. The authorities tasked with defending children from grooming gangs failed because they consider the children part of a failed society and so willing victims to an imported religious society superior to our own, If our society has become decadent it is because the PC corrupted it whilst breaking what was not broken.

    • Rhian Waller

      Social disapproval has not been proven to be a particularly effective deterrent let alone a ‘strong defence’.

      • Damaris Tighe

        Au contraire, social approval & disapproval have always been effective deterrents although what is approved & disapproved of changes. In the past one of the reasons girls held onto their virginity for dear life is they didn’t want to be perceived as sluts (& the absence of the pill meant they could easily be caught out & their lives ruined for ever). Nowadays being perceived as a slut is a badge of honour in some circles.

        • Rhian Waller

          And where was the equivalent opprobrium for men? And what about the abuses experienced by unwanted children (when social disapproval failed as a form of contraception)? And what about the disenfranchisement of bastards?

          We can see the end result of “social disapproval” in some societies today. It isn’t particularly pleasant.

          Being regarded as a slut has always been a badge of honour among certain segments of the male population. The difference now is that certain segments of the female population are experiencing the same.

          Moreover, with the existence of the pill and contraception an indisputable fact, isn’t it better to teach people that a) they exist and b) how to use them rather than attempt, belatedly, to impose a worldview which is no longer relevant?

          Being a slut isn’t, in and of itself, a problem. Disease is a problem. Abuse is a problem. Sex education seeks to educate and address these.

          • Damaris Tighe

            Yes, men were held to different standards when it came to sexual activity & it was unfair. They faced social opprobrium for other transgressions.

          • Rhian Waller

            My main argument is that “standards” change. Sometimes they become tighter. For instance, tightening standards of medicine is a good thing. We now have access to different drugs and technologies and our expectation of care has risen accordingly. That’s a good thing.

            The pill and (safe) condoms changed sexual politics when they became part of reality. We have to adapt in accordance to that.

            The only thing that surprises me is that about 50 years on from the introduction of the pill we still have people bemoaning the fact that we have a dialogue around it.

            Studies suggest, and my personal experiences back this up, that kids are talking about sex anyway. I first heard the word ‘fuck’ when I was eight – before I knew what ‘fucking’ was. The person who said it was a classroom monitor. He’d have been about eleven.

            At no point would he have been taught the word ‘fuck’ in a sex ed lesson.

            Youngsters talk, a lot. A lot of what they talk about is only half-understood. It’s gleaned from TV and the internet and hearsay from other youngsters and big siblings and older kids on the street. These are things you can’t censor.

            My next door neighbour, a year younger than me, honestly believed that babies came out of bellybuttons. If she hadn’t been disabused of that impression in a calm, rational setting before she encountered a pushy peer, would she have been equipped to deal with things like consent, reproductive protection and her own bodily autonomy?

            I’d much rather be taught the biology of reproduction, the risks surrounding sex and the benefits of safe practice through education than I would have been to leave my understanding of sex to distorted playground rumour.

            And at no point, after being shown a condom at the age of 12, did I immediately think: Cool, right, I’ve gotta use one of these this weekend!

        • Feminister

          Nowadays women recognise that social stigma applied to one half of the human race by the other for doing something both do is so much arbitrary, controlling bull3h1t used to justify restricted civil liberties and violence.

        • Jody Taylor

          You are so right! When I was teaching I’d say to the girls what my own boys would tell me (and I had 3 of them), “sluts are a dime a dozen; they are thick on the ground and nobody is really interested in them”. Those girls really did get a bit of a shock when I told them that; they puffed and panted and claimed “you can’t say things like that to us”. My reply was, “oh, I think I just did. Now do yourself a favour and think about it”.

          • Solage 1386

            How very true. However, many men, especially young men, puffing and panting all the while, are constantly in search of, and take a great interest in locating, these thick on the ground sluts!

          • Jody Taylor

            How very true; as I said, “a dime a dozen”. Don’t have to look far.

        • Solage 1386

          Who can find a virtuous woman? For her price is above rubies.
          How quaint.

          • Damaris Tighe

            It was very one sided & still is in highly patriarchal societies such as Islamic ones, that place the whole family’s honour on the behaviour of its women.

        • Pacificweather

          If you consider all the children given up for adoption by young women in the 19th and 20th centuries it is hard to say that social pressure was particularly successful.

      • alfredo

        Proved.

    • george

      That then will ensure that they feel shame — With all the stuff teenagers go through its a tall order to think ‘sex’ will ruin them for life – its seen as a negative force in the English speaking countries!

    • St Ignatius

      Speaking of language, it occurred to me recently that it used to be a sign of true love for woman to say she would “have your baby”. I guess having your child dismembered in the womb is less romantic.

  • gerronwithit

    Melanie, you are whistling in the wind, the moral boundaries and brakes went years ago.

    • Jody Taylor

      Spot on. My nephew has a 16 y/o daughter and I was shocked last Christmas to see this girl attired in a very very short black dress, tight-fitting with a decolletage which would be provocative on a much older woman. Don’t tell me this girl isn’t being sexualized!! And enabled by her own mother and father!! Last time I looked, 16 was below the age of consent.

      • Pacificweather

        You looked in the wrong country. Sixteen is the age of consent in Britain.

        • Jody Taylor

          Anyway, 16 is still awfully young for a teenager to look like a provocative woman. So much for “raunch” culture. A 16y/o might look like a mature woman but she is mentally and emotionally anything but!!

          • Pacificweather

            1960s it was the mini skirt and the lace dress with minimal underwear. Nothing much has changed in the last half century.

          • george

            Though in those days you could have sex with a young girl – And nobody would give a s**t wish i was around then – A bit more sanity!

          • Pacificweather

            But 40 years later you get put in prison for 8 years. There is no hiding place.

          • Jody Taylor

            Ask Rolfie what you should do about your feelings.

          • george

            He had same GF into adulthood, sounds consensual to me!

          • Jody Taylor

            You’ve obviously got some “issues” yourself. Again, ask Rolfe.

          • george

            Yes a hysteria witch-hunt of men!

          • Jody Taylor

            Rolfe would agree with you, yes. He’s got all the time in the world behind bars to feel aggrieved. Meanwhile, the rest of us are spared having to listen to him bawling and feeling sorry for himself in that effete, high-pitched, somewhat feminized voice of his. Yuk factor by 1,000. Like you, he wanted his girls young – they don’t argue, you see.

            And I would seriously question your use of the word “men”.

          • Feminister

            It’s natural to eat raw food and die at 30.

          • george

            Why can’t you use evidenced reasoning instead of ad-hominem attacks! If women find me attractive – then kids and adolescents can and do! though society disapproves: A good looking guy can attract girls and women..Girls are taught that sex is dangerous and all men are potential rapists!

          • Solage 1386

            Rolf! Rolf! Rolf! It sounds like somebody stamping on a dog’s tail! Poor old Rolf…..His member, like a boomerang, always comes back to haunt him. Tie me kangaroo down, Sport……Jake the Pake with his, ahem, “extra leg”, two little boys……Rolf’s “woggle board”. The man was a beast!

          • Feminister

            newsflash! an outcome of abuse is lack of self-esteem.

          • Pacificweather

            I think you meant “Ask Rolfie he should have done about his feelings” to which the answer is keep them as feelings and don’t indulge in feeling. That should have been his watchword. My feelings (in case you were in any doubt) were for girls older than me.

          • Jody Taylor

            No, I said specifically what I meant to say. Hit a raw nerve, did it?

          • Pacificweather

            I did think you may be merely foolish but I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt. It would seem my first impression was correct. Was there anything about my answer with which you disagreed?

          • george

            Better people get caught in old days – then they’ve already served their time,with less of a stigma!

          • Pacificweather

            Few would agree they were better people.

          • Jody Taylor

            Where would you like to hide? Under a rock, or something, like a spider?

          • Solage 1386

            George, did I share a cell with you in Ashford Remand Centre in 1976? (Sid Vicious was there, too. Me and Sid were handcuffed together and taken to a hospital to have x-rays done. Ah, memories, memories…….Poor old Sid!)

          • Jody Taylor

            I don’t recall 16y/o girls dressing like that, and the 1960’s was when I was a teenager. Most definitely those under 18 did not dress in such a provocative fashion back then. And very much has changed in the last half century, very much indeed. Now we have raunch fashion for girls under 10, if you’d care to visit any department store which sells ‘children’s clothing’. I was a highschool teacher and girls regularly came to school with their breasts on display, sat up in the classroom with their knees under their chins all in front of the boys in their same class. And these were all kids 16 years and under. So, I think you are living on another planet.

          • Pacificweather

            Whilst I, like you, dislike the way that some mothers (it is mostly mothers) dress or allow their children to dress today, the way that 16 year old girls dressed in the 1960s had no bearing on whether they had sex with their boyfriends. I suspect that that is no different today. Girls dressed less modestly in night clubs then as they do today. Girls today seem less interested in boys today and more interested having fun when they go to nightclubs. That has brought a new set of problems. As for girls teasing boys, I can’t think of a time when that didn’t happen. The youngsters I know behave at least as well, if not better, than my generation.

          • Jody Taylor

            There’s a big difference between “rolling” the waist bands and wearing deep decolletage tops to school, raunch shoes and jewellery and sex-ting on phones. The kids in the 60’s were innocents abroad compared with these kids, who are now competing with internet porn for their boys’ ‘affections’. Get with it, mate.

          • Pacificweather

            In your family they do this?

          • Solage 1386

            Recently perusing old footage of Britain in the ’60s, I’ve noticed that everybody looked strangely innocent, with wide open faces. By the ’70’s, the “rodent look” (as I call it), begins to appear. It has since become more and more pronounced. Has anybody else noticed this, or am I nuts?

          • Solage 1386

            Decolletage? You’re beginning to sound like the elderly Dowager Fuxborough of Scunthorpe, an old drinking pall of mine! By the way, Scunthorpe is the only town in the whole realm with a c–t in it! Lawks! I’m on the pink gin agin, Jody! I apologise profusely.)

          • Feminister

            They’re just discovering their bodies and want to snog boys, not have sex. You’re projecting adult agendas on to teenagers.

          • Solage 1386

            But surely underwear is always of necessity minimal? From bloomers to the thong, minimal. Mind you, I myself have a penchant for long-johns, especially when the nights draw in. Fortunately, Spring is now here!

          • Pacificweather

            My aunt always wore three layers of underwear to keep out the cold and my uncle.

          • george

            I had a 16yo girlfriend when 21 — Nothing wrong with that!

          • Jody Taylor

            There’s a yuk factor in that statement and behaviour.

          • george

            Why?

          • Jody Taylor

            Five years is too great a gap at that age, when a girl is still very much emotionally a child (despite external appearances).

          • george

            Rubbish,was with her over a year,and went on holiday with family,who liked me

          • Jody Taylor

            I’m glad somebody did.

          • Solage 1386

            You’ve hit the nail on the head there, Jody! He’s probably attracted to their innocence–rather like Gilles de Rais!

          • george

            Innocence is a Victorian hangup — Paedophilia is a sexual orientation that is biological in nature – Nothing to do with power and control: Seems you’ve swallowed the usual feminist identity politics.

          • george

            Many teachers run off with their pupils; What does that say about you? The reality is,however; Men are attracted to ripe,fertile,teenage girls — Its normal male sexuality:Enen attraction to younger minors is not that uncommon…link below.http://therealosc.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/Tromovitch

          • Solage 1386

            Double yuk!

          • Solage 1386

            How old are you now, George? And how old is she, the latest one, whoever she may be? Still single, George? Yes, they always grow older, don’t they? Every five years you’ll have to find a new one. How wearisome for you! (I’m just guessing, of course!)

          • george

            What has that got to do with this discussion?

      • george

        There’s no such thing as sexualized – If she is older than ten; she is already ‘sexual’ cos she has in most probabilities entered puberty!

        • Ethan L.

          Even prepubescent children have sexual feelings, as we are born that way.

        • Solage 1386

          George, you are only too obviously attempting, and failing, to rationalize your own sexual proclivities!

          • george

            Its good to have a greater understanding of human sexuality; The more we know the better!

      • Ethan L.

        16 is the age of consent in many places, including Great Britain, Canada and most of America. And even if 16 is under the aoc where you live, should your great-niece be prohibited from dressing attractively?

  • Hippograd

    one crucial factor has been generally ignored…

    It’s not a fact: it’s an excuse. Because the abusers were members of the vibrant community, the bureaucrats let them get on with it. How heartwarming to see barriers between the communities breaking down in such thoroughgoing fashion! And age of consent be damned! But if the abusers had been white, the bureaucrats would have worried about the age of consent.

  • trace9

    Coincidentally enough, in today’s Indy there’s a review of a new book on J.M.Keynes’ sex life, from 1901, which seems to contradict the ‘newness’ of libidinised children – when there Was an age of consent. But the Internet & mass immigration have certainly maddened it all up.

    • albert pike

      “But the Internet & mass immigration have certainly maddened it all up.”

      These immigrants?

      ” The colonists brought with them their social order and notion of
      property, their birth rights and Christianity. With their invisible
      luggage they brought their racial prejudice. Aboriginal men were
      drastically losing their role in society by being used to slave labour. The women were used as domestics and sexual partners for the white
      invaders. Raping and killings continued as a sport. And I quote: “One
      gorges at the Sunday afternoon manhunts of sexual mutilation, of burying
      live Aboriginal babies up to their necks in sand and kicking their heads
      off after tying with a rape [sic] the severed neck of the husband around the
      raped spouse.””

      http://www.ipoaa.com/unrelenting_struggle__of_indigen.htm

      • vieuxceps2

        Even if every word you quoted were true,in what way does that exonerate of the filthy crimes they committed onyoung white girls?iSurely both sets of behavoiur are equally appalling? Or do you think it’s ok for pakistanis to act like that, but Whitey should be castrated? That would be nice, wouldn’t it?

        • albert pike

          No, I think you are being very selective with your outrage. You are not interested in the well being of women only in radicalizing as large a number of people as you can through you desire to tar all moslems with the same brush, while turning a blind eye to jews who are doing the same thing but on an even bigger scale.

      • WTF

        Two wrongs where one of them was ancient history does not make the current wrong acceptable unless your a Jihadist appeaser like those s**mbags at CAGE !

    • george

      Children have always been part of ‘adult’ sexuality through the ages!

      • pyewacket

        So has child beating, but it doesn’t make it appropriate for our current era. A child or young adult in a ‘relationship’ with a so-called mature adult is a gross imbalance of power. The young person is not emotionally equipped to cope with such interaction with an older sexually experienced person. Any such adult indulging in sexual behaviour with a minor is lacking in some way. I would question why the abuser is seeking out youngsters instead of relating in every sense of the word with another mature adult.

        Also, George, if you are a parent then I feel desperately sorry for your children if you think it’s acceptable for them to have sexual relations with adults.

        • george

          So the Ancient Greeks were abusers on an ‘epic’ scale?
          Also teenage boys are always understanding of teenage girls are they? Maybe a more mature adult is what many necessitate? Like many things an adults experience can provide good sexual practice,safe sex and all.Is a homosexual lacking in some way; Lacking to reproduce maybe!

          • pyewacket

            As I implied before, times change. We are living in a different era from ancient Greece, so whatever was the norm at that time and place, is not necessarily the norm in our own cultural time and place.

            Are you a parent? If so, would you be happy to allow a child of your own to be sexually active with an adult? You are also projecting a different meaning into my words. I didn’t say anything about homosexuals lacking in any way solely because of their sexuality. A lack of emotional maturity can occur in any individual, no matter what their sexual orientation.

            As it’s solely sexual activity that you are talking about, not a mature relationship between two mature minds, then the paedophile would be better to leave the rest to the imagination whilst masturbating. At least then, no real person would end up emotionally damaged due to one selfish adult’s inability to form mature relationships with other adults. Instead, preferring to be in an abusive and controlling relationship with a minor.

          • george

            You are assuming the relationships would all be abusive,bcz of power differences – What relations are ever equal? Yes times change,and maybe paedophilia will be accepted in the future – Other countries have a much lower age of consent

            If I was a parent, I would want to know the adult very well; And sure to myself that they understand basic sexuality – many do! I did from around nine.

            sex or sensuality is seen as a negative force in the west,,That’s the problem.a better sex education would be welcome,though I had none,I learned through peers.why should a loving affair between a paedophile and child be damaging? social stigma and shame maybe!

  • goodsoldier

    Excellent, well-written article!

    Adults who accept the sexualisation of children are either predators themselves or weak conformists who want to appear ‘cool’ to their peers. They don’t want to appear uptight; they want to send the message that they love sex and are good lovers. They want their children to be ‘cool’, to be easy about sex and tell them that it is healthy and natural. They want to take the stigma out of casual sex because they relish it. They yearn for their lost youth and project their desires on to their children: youth is wasted on the young, they spout; you only live once; go for it–they resent young people because they are jealous of their physical youth. This has been going on since the 1960’s full force with the support of psychiatrists, the cruel gods of our time. The psychiatrist’s office is a morality free zone. Woody Allen and Mia Farrow both encapsulate in their lives and relationship to children the desperate and evil confusion that ‘good’ liberals indulge in and call ‘progressive’ or artistic freedom. The final part of their agenda is to remove the innocence of children and young people, to stop society sentimentalizing them so they can be used. The job is almost complete.

    • Ethan L.

      You can’t sexualize a child who is born sexual, no more than you can humanize a human being. Innocence is not about sex and ignorance thereof. If you were concerned about morality, you would be promoting marriage rather than denigrating sexuality.

      • Feminister

        Well except most abuse goes on within families.

  • John Cronin

    I have always been an admirer of Melanie Phillips, but why is a journo, even one as courageous as her, deliberately ignoring the effnic elements of the phenomenon?

    Rotherham has about 280,000 inhabitants – or so I am told – with the
    exception of once driving a truck there I have never had the misfortune
    to visit the place – of whom about 10% are Moslems – which means 28,000 –
    which means 14,000 Moslems of the male persuasion, which means about
    7000 -8000 healthy adult males of kiddie raping age. Over the last
    fifteen years, they appear to have raped about 1400 adolescent white
    girls.

    Now you don’t need a PHD in statistics to realise that this sort of
    behaviour is not therefore some sort of aberration among the Followers of The Paedo but a cultural norm – exactly the same patterns of behaviour have occurred in Rochdale, Brum, Leeds, Bradford – you name it – everywhere where we have been so wonderfully culturally enriched. This activity has been assiduously
    covered up by the meeja, and any cop or social worker who actually blew
    any whistles lost their jobs.

    Peter Fahy the Chief Plod of Manchester bleated summat on the radio the other day about “preserving community cohesion” – translation from liberalese: “If we actually have the bad manners to mention this, we risk an uprising among the white working class so we will continue to pretend it is not happening”

    The EDL came into being for a reason. When is the Speccie gonna do a piece on Charlene Downes of Blackpool.

    • littleted

      If we actually have the bad manners to mention this, we risk an uprising among the white working class so we will continue to pretend it is not happening

      They are scared of rioting by the immigrant Moslems, which could spread across the nation.

      The vengeance of aboriginal Brits would then be directed at the traitorous politicos whose malfeasance in office brought it all about.

      This goes to the very top, with politicians sitting with wet trousers on the lid of the powder keg trying to keep it closed and their necks unhung from the nearest lamppost.

    • albert pike

      “Over the last fifteen years, they appear to have raped about 1400 adolescent white girls.”

      Where do you get that figure from?

      • Damaris Tighe

        From the official report on Rotherham. Did you have your eyes & ears closed in August?

        • albert pike

          There was an independent report, nothing official about it.

          Interesting that no one has been charged. The claims do sound incredibly serious, and one would expect the police to investigate, such incidents.

          It is also interesting that the investigation came up with these accusations after reading a few case files. They didn’t interview any children.
          A very strange “official” investigation, don’t you think?

          • La Fold
          • vieuxceps2

            What planet are you from? Muslims have benn tried and jailed for these crimes. The “police”were/are par of the problem.The investigation interviewed dozens of victims .
            Mars? Zog? Krypton?

          • albert pike

            ” Muslims have benn tried and jailed for these crimes.”

            Not for 1400 sexual assaults, they haven’t. 2 cases of assault for 2 of them and 1 case for 3 of them.

            And yes 4 were from Pakistan and one from Nepal. But they are a long way from being in the same league as Jimmy Saville.

            Or this

            http://www.businessinsider.com/a-portrait-of-human-sex-trafficking-in-america-2014-8?IR=T

          • Solage 1386

            There are hundreds, possibly thousands, of perpetrators….Just imagine what would happen if they were all arrested at the same time……Riots, that’s what.

          • albert pike

            “There are hundreds, possibly thousands, of perpetrators”

            You are making it up.

        • Solage 1386

          Another 600 cases in Rotherham have come to light since then……

    • Damaris Tighe

      Melanie isn’t ignoring the ‘effnic elements of the phenomenon’. She’s making the point that there is hypocrisy in our society where there is fury over grooming gangs & historic sex abuse of minors, whilst at the same time there is official sanction of the sexualisation of children.

      • Sean L

        Yeah but I don’t think she’s giving the ethnic dimension its due – in this article anyway. . .

    • george

      We are given cherry-picked horror stories — And it wouldn’t surprise me if most of it was statutory- rape ‘under age’ ‘consensual sex’ where the only ‘harm’ is upon discovery of affair/relationship. but they would throw it all into the mix,and call it the horrific abuse of 1,400 girls!

      • John Cronin

        No they were not cherry picked. They were assiduously covered up for decades by the likes of that ghastly ghastly bitch in charge of Rotherham social services. There was clearly an organised campaign of censorship waged by the meeja and by local Labour politicians dependent on Paedostani voters.

    • milford

      ‘Preserving community cohesion’ is about not upsetting Pakistani Muslims not us. What could we do about anything without getting arrested? Whereas Pakistanis could play the race card and get anyone who mentions it sacked and their pensions confiscated. They would become social pariahs because the population are so hysterical about political correctness and race laws. Nigel Farage is right these laws are no longer fit for purpose and are at the heart of this scandal.
      The communities they protect are now attacking us and we can do diddlysquat about it because of these laws which effectively gag us.

      • MikeHomfray

        I don’t see you being gagged here – you are free to express your racist bigotry.
        What you cant cope with is that it isn’t official policy

        • milford

          I’m not involved in a criminal case regarding a race issue so how/why would I be gagged? This is a free country. Shame on you.

        • Solage 1386

          The Muslim males who deliberately rape white children are the bigots and racists. The left have covered it all up, for ideological reasons, and continue to do so. However, we can all see what’s going on, especially the white working-classes. You can fool some of the people some of the time…..et cetera.

  • albert pike

    And not a single mention of the media role in promoting promiscuity.
    No mention of the use of sex to sell anything from an ice cream to an insurance policy.

  • Sean L

    Sorry but this is totally missing the point: that the men in question, unlike Ken Barlow and Rolf Harris, happen not to be of north European origin. Just as the music that plays in my household would be off the scale ‘sexist’ were it not for the fact that its players tend to be Afro-American or Jamaican and as such immune to political censure. Properly understood the concepts of ‘racism’ and ‘sexism’ are ethnocentric, instruments of political reppression applying to Europeans alone. Of course they’re the only ones who pay any heed to them at all and as such the only ones who can be found culpable.

  • nonsequiturcouk

    Report last week showed that drugs education made the problem worse.

    Same story, different topic.

  • Teacher

    I agree with everything said here. In addition I’d like to point out that, in effect, those who promote liberal vaulues in the children of others are busy hypocritically protecting the innocence of their own offspring. Nice, well brought up, middle class children with liberal parents have boundaries set and are protected from harm by those parents whose curfews, rules and habits of negotiation keep them safe.

  • porcelaincheekbones

    Punish those who break the law. To the fullest extent. Make it clear the law stands.
    These underage children must be called children, there is no “choice” or “decision” whatever they think or ‘feel’. This casual sex nonsense is the sole fault of feminists, who salivate at “empowering” ever-younger girls into paedophilic abusive ‘relationships’. Lay the blame with them.

    • george

      Are you having a laugh: Its mainly the feminists that caused the fear of male sexuality — And called it all ‘abusive’ with their pseudoscience identity-politics! Also must we call adolescents ‘children’ You can put lipstick on a pig, Its still a pig!

      • Feminister

        Or indeed a paedophile.

        • george

          You claim to know all pedos – some agree with the dominant narrative,that adult/child sex is bad — So why such vitriol?

          • Feminister

            Because you need your bubble burst before you hurt someone.

  • pyewacket

    I take your point Melanie, but even if children have become sexualised, which I find deeply disturbing too, we must be very careful not to provide excuses for sexual predators and paedophiles. Paedophiles argue that children enjoy sex and are capable of seducing adults. But a mature adult knows full well that any form of sexual behaviour (misbehaviour) with a child or young teenager is always an abuse of power, no matter how ‘seductively’ the victim appears or behaves.

    • george

      Many kids do seek out adults sexually — Your feminist pseudoscience don’t cut it with me — Rind study 1998 — Look it up, It may surprise you!

      • pyewacket

        You’ve not understood what I said. I’m not denying that some kids seek out adults sexually. I’m saying that a mature adult knows not to reciprocate. There is never any excuse for paedophilia in our culture.

        • george

          We can argue the toss of what’s ‘moral’ but if consensual,and no position of power i.e teacher..Then as long as there’s no force or coercion then there should be no intervention by law.

          • pyewacket

            What age are you talking about? 5 years old, 10 years old? Our current society has decided that 16 is the age of consent for girls. So let’s abide by the law. A line must be drawn somewhere.

          • george

            The age of criminal resopnsibility is ten; Has been for hundreds of years.Also that’s in line with the onset of puberty in girls – though penetration should not start before 12 – though they are capable of enjoying oral before that,according to research and testimonials!

          • Feminister

            Not with you.

  • mmac1968

    Melanie Phillips welcome back. I was concerned you had already left our blighted shores and your sound analysis would no longer be published.

  • La Fold

    When we look at what happened in Oxford we really have to think what our police and social services are thinking when 12 year old girls are being impregnated by much older men and it is described as an “”age appropriate relationship.” Maybe in medieval Europe it might be but in a modern industrialised 21st century nation it is not. The mindset that a 12 year old child is a young adult and she is an agent of her own fate thus she is learning to make decisions by having a physically intimate relationship with a much older man is an enabling one. The social services aided and abetted this abuse, because lets remember, a 12 year old can never consent to her own abuse.

    • george

      But they do consent – the age of consent in Spain only recently was 13 its 14 in Italy – Once they reach the strike of midnight on their 16th birthday; suddenly they can consent – and its suddenly not ‘abuse’ is erroneous!

  • Darryl Harb
  • WTF

    At last someone whose willing to confront and highlight the evils of Rotherham, Oxford and other cities where the authorities were effectively pimps for the Pakistani sexual groomers by looking the other way for 10 years.

    Apart from a brief flurry of interest when the two reports were published its all gone very quiet from the MSM and even at the time of the reports, Cameron, Milliband & Clegg were muted in their condemnation of the police, social services and the Muslim communities who ignored what was happening.

    Contrast this with the 3 weeks or more of relentless PR & Spin over three ‘adult’ and supposedly intelligent Muslim girls who decided that a life as a Jihadists Ho was preferable to living in the UK. Its emerged a close friend left the UK last year for the same reasons and their families have the nerve to blame the authorities for not telling them. Don’t these parents talk to their kids or check to see what they are up to anymore or is it easier to blame others when it all goes pear shaped.

    UK Muslims blame us when they claim the authorities were monitoring our well know Islamic Executioner JJ by saying that caused his conversion to sadistic acts but when we leave them alone, we still get the blame for not telling parents their girls might be off to Syria. UK Muslims need to buckle up and face the harsh realities of what their religion is creating as its their responsibility not ours. Cut out the blame game, grow some and deal with the problems endemic in your communities as its your problem not ours. What ever happens to these girls, I care not as far more attention has been given to 3 dumb Muslim girls exercising free expression as opposed to 2000+ underage white girls being sexually abused by Muslim males.

    In another twist on these girls antics, I note that Bing Crosby & Bob Hope never made a “Road to Syria, Iraq or Libya” movie but perhaps some enterprising film company could do a spoof movie of “Road to Mecca” if they weren’t killed first. Today we hear that a Canadian ‘spy’ has been arrested in Turkey for acting as a travel agent for the girls, you couldn’t make this up if you tried. What a shame there’s only a few Carry On actors still alive as we could make a good spoof “Carry On Spying” movie based on all of this ‘carry on’ as there’s plenty of material. Its got everything a good film needs, action, sex, religion, terrorism, duplicity, incompetence and just for the lefties, loads & loads of blame culture to satiate their souls !

    The real victims are our white underage at risk girls not wooly heady Muslim girls enchanted by the idea of going to Syria whilst the real culprits are social services, the police, the left, the parents and Islam !

    • milford

      Well said WTF! Just one thing: The Pakistani gangs were/are in it for the money as well as for the sex, they were pimping the kids out big time subsidising their incomes very nicely. The police were turning a blind eye because they’d be branded racist and would lose their jobs and pensions if they dared say anything. If the gangs had been British they’d have been apprehended years ago. Although I firmly believe no British guy would do what they did/are doing. The lack of humanity is astounding. One law for them another for us.

      • WTF

        Thanks for adding the financial gain aspect as I had forgotten that.

        • milford

          Yes it’s very organised, lucrative and very safe as the victims aren’t believed.

  • Feminister

    When was this time when children didn’t sexually experiment with themselves and each other, when teenagers didn’t have sex willingly, when adult men didn’t abuse kids?

    Some time between June and July in 1954?

    • La Fold

      This isn’t a case of children”experimenting” with each other though is it? Or a case of teenagers willingly having sex? Its the case of children being systematically gang raped, tortured and trafficked. Your moral equivalence is most worrying for a self identified feminist.

      • Feminister

        You seem to have not read to the end of my sentence.

        And MP is talking about all forms and clearly has s*x education in mind too.

      • Solage 1386

        Feminists don’t particularly care if white working-class children are being abused. They have more important things to worry about. Page 3, for example. Feminists should stick an effing burqua over their heads, to hide their shame.

      • MrJones

        feminists couldn’t care less about working class kids

        • Feminister

          Don’t be ludicrous.

    • george

      If they can willingly have sex with each other — NEXT LOGICAL CONCLUSION they can have sex/sensual fun with adults…not all are in a position of power..Granted there’s been some bad sh*t done in the past,but paedophilia is neither good or bad;Its neutral,just like heterosexuality homosexuality,hebephilia pederasty etc

  • Feminister

    I feel compelled to point out that this is the same Melanie Philips who went on moral maze to declare that women were asking for trouble if they were obviously in possession of a female body or sexuality in public by wearing “a miniskirt and stockings” in lifts.

    One presumes she doesn’t hold the same view of being obviously Jewish on escalators.

    • pyewacket

      Yes I agree with you and this is what I was getting at in my earlier reply to Melanie. I see her point of view, and I take much of it to heart. Even so, we must be very careful not to provide excuses for men who feel compelled to sexually abuse ‘seductive’ children and young teenagers.

      • Feminister

        Or indeed adult women. Nobody should sexually abuse anyone. Too many men, and women don’t seem to know the difference between sex and rape.

        • george

          At last…You display logic…Its not so much the age, its how you conduct yourself..If teenagers are seductive then they must learn what that means..People will take up their offers, And if its consensual what business is it of ours!

          • Feminister

            Yes and having sex with somebody incapable of giving consent freely (e.g very drunk people, financially dependent people, mentally compromised people, scared people, people who depend on your judgement, immature people, children) is rape.

  • Ahobz

    There is no universally accepted age of consent:
    http://uk.ask.com/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe?lang=en

    Be careful of the waiters when you take your daugher to Spain.

  • george

    The age of puberty in girls is around ten, It was 16 when it was raised in the 1880s
    And that was by the puritan feminists; However it was raised from 12 to 16 because of child-prostitution in London — Also the age of criminal responsibility in England is ten — Therefore logically they should be free to express themselves sexually,with whom they choose!

    • Solage 1386

      So long as they don’t choose you, George……

      • george

        I have never invaded other peoples space…its the fear of men that’s the problem — Just cos some do bad things,does not mean we’re all insensitive to a child’s feelings.

        • Feminister

          No child wants to feel you George. You’re deluded.

    • Feminister

      Which Puritan feminists raised the age of consent in 1880, Georgey Porgy?

      • george

        1st wave feminism

        • Feminister

          Which ones?

  • Innit Bruv

    The usual guff from Mad Mel.
    Attention all those plebs (Dan O’Connor,Feminister etc…) who believe that minorities (ie Pakistanis/Muslims) are responsible for all of Britain’s ills!!
    Some NSPCC statistics for you: one child or young adult in four will experience some form of sexual abuse in Britain.
    Even the thickest Speccie reader/EDL or UKIP supporter can’t blame the Pakistanis for that.
    Remember, plebs, we’re talking millions here…….

    • george

      Most abuse is not sexual; Though they ain’t interested in that – It just ain’t sexy!

      • Innit Bruv

        Maybe, but that isn’t relevant to this article.
        I can assure the NSPCC is interested in all types of abuse, you ignorant blockhead !!

    • Feminister

      Eh? Where did I say that? You’ve got me confused with somebody. I believe men are responsible for all the world’s ills. And that Islam is what happens when men reach their patriarchal climax. The Internet comes a close second.

      • Innit Bruv

        I most certainly haven’t got you confused with someone else.
        I am referring to the tenor of some of your previous posts
        (What are we meant to say about grooming rings?).

        • Feminister

          Well I’m sure they don’t deviate from my summary above because that’s what I believe.

          Can you be more specific?

          Doing a back of the envelope calculation, I only hold the masculine cult of Islam responsible for about a sixth of the world’s ills. What with it being a late, plaguerising comer to the patriarchal, misogynistic blight that sprung from the Middle East in the first millenium with a mere 1 billion adherents. Though one has to admit it’s gone the extra mile to make up for lost time.

          The masculine cult of Protestant capitalism around three and a half sixths, because that has the benefit of industrialisation and will ultimately be what does for humanity.

          If I had to name a cause of all the world’s ills, it would be whoever made up the story of Abraham. That was a bad day’s work.

          I think perhaps you’ve been skim reading and forming hasty opinions.

          • Innit Bruv

            There you go again !! Plaguerising ???? No such word, learn how to spell !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You write atrociously.
            Could YOU be a bit more specific? Over what time period?
            How far back do we have to go?
            In recent History (ie since the beginning of the Twentieth Century) the Muslim world hasn’t produced anything to compare with Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Chairman Mao or the Rwandan genocide).
            (Saddam Hussein was a lightweight in comparison as are ISIS).
            If you’re referring to today, just under a quarter of the world’s population are Muslims, they are therefore underachieving in the “world’s ills” league table by about 8% (I’ll leave you to work that one out).
            If, on the other hand, you mean since the advent of Islam
            some 1500 years ago, I really would be most interested to know how your “back of the envelope calculations” have
            led to such a conclusion as it seems to me , judging by previous posts, that neither History nor Geography are, to put it kindly, your areas of expertise.

          • Innit Bruv

            There you go again!! Plaguerising ???? There’s no such word in the English language. Learn how to spell, you write atrociously!!!!
            Could YOU be a bit specific yourself?
            Over what time period? How far back do we have to go?
            In recent History (ie since the beginning of the 20th century),the Muslim world hasn’t produced anything to compare with the likes of Stalin,Hitler,Pol Pot, or Chairman Mao.
            (Saddam Hussein was a lightweight in comparison as are ISIS).
            If you’re referring to today, just under one quarter of the world’s population are Muslims. They are therefore underachieving in the “world’s ills” league table by about 8%.(I’ll leave it to you to work that one out).

            If,on the other hand,you mean since the advent of Islam some 1500 years ago,I really would be most interested to know how your “back of the envelope” calculations could have led to such a conclusion as it seems to me,judging by previous posts,that neither History nor Geography are,to put it kindly, your areas of expertise.

    • balance_and_reason

      sounds like a bogus quango stat to me….does child abuse include telling a kid off for shouting?

      • GraveDave

        He’s a mixed race bruvver with a chip on both shoulders.

      • Innit Bruv

        “Child abuse…. shouting”… Irrelevant to this particular article.
        The NSPCC is registered charity not a quango.

        • balance_and_reason

          was….now it has allowed itself to used politically by ‘resting’ labour activists….my donations move on to other child centric charities without a political axe to grind.

  • justsomeone

    if “In 1885, in response to child prostitution scandals, the age of consent was raised from 13 to 16” then it doesn’t seem that we’ve gone backwards since then. I think the age of consent is still 16. And it appears that prior to 1885 (an age not known for sexual libertarianism) the age of consent was 13, perhaps for quite a long time.
    Obviously, whatever has changed (and a lot evidently has) it isn’t what we think it is. Something else has changed.

    • balance_and_reason

      people grew up more quickly in those days.

      • justsomeone

        Probably. If I’d been working since I was 9 years old, I’d have been a more mature 13 year old. They also died more quickly in those days.
        In which case, the problem might be that we have biologically sexually mature 13 and 14 year olds who are still emotionally immature. Indeed, it seems even our 20 year olds are immature.
        Then again, maybe 13 year olds back then were no different from 13 year olds today, they just had a more difficult childhood.

        • george

          But does one need be ‘informed’ to consent? Before my first time, I was not informed; All I know is that I wanted it to continue — That’s consent how I know it.

          • justsomeone

            I don’t see that ‘informed’ has anything to do with it.
            But the topic has moved to whether in the 1800’s the very young were more mature, more adult, better suited to it.
            I think what this is all really about is that we don’t want our daughters (if we have any) to have sex at a very young age with multiple partners, for various reasons. Though if we don’t want our sons to have sex at a young age, it can only be due to jealousy.
            This is what it’s really about but nobody talks about what it’s really about.

  • milford

    Really good article

    • Damaris Tighe

      Spot on.

  • Marco A.

    I live in Ontario Canada, I have not even read the article – but just looking at that title and picture I can tell what this is about.

    In my province our new lesbian premier has introduced a sex-ed program that introduces gender confusion, homosexuality, homosexual marriage, deviant sexual relationships, consent etc. In grade 1, children must identify testes, vulvas etc.

    Its totally absurd.

    This isn’t progressive left-wing anything. This needs to be called by name and for what it is – its Satanism.

    • milford

      It’s mass grooming of innocent minds.

      • MrJones

        That’s exactly what it is.

      • george

        Until they reach that magical age – Then you can’t use that subjective word any more – Poor little ‘victims’ I had 16yo GF when 21 – she has never to this day regretted it.

        • milford

          We were discussing children . Not 16yr olds.

          • george

            But if it was a day before her 16th birthday; I would be a horrific ‘child abuser’ and on sex offenders register – that’s the black and white arbitrary feminist,man hating laws that must be challenged.

  • Diggery Whiggery

    As a parent I agree totally. There is no reason why we should allow our society’s public space to be so invaded by sex and sexuality that it becomes impossible for kids to grow up without becoming sexualized at a young age. The assumption is that nothing can be done and that parents must just bow down before it, accept it and ‘educate’ their children as early as possible to cope with it.

    I don’t agree with this defeatism. Sex and sexuality is important but it’s not all important and it should remain private between adults. There’s no reason why it should invade every corner of our society and become a collective public obsession.

    And no I’m not a religious nut.

    • Ethan L.

      Apart from morality informed by religious beliefs, why should anybody be opposed to rampant sexuality?

      • Diggery Whiggery

        Within the private sphere no reason at all. Within the public sphere I think children should be able to grow up without it being forced upon them. Generally speaking IMHO the public sphere should remain a pretty neutral place, not just in terms of sexuality other things too.

        • george

          But conformity is forced upon them — All this talk on who has the right to speak for children,conveniently by-passes the idea that maybe they should decide, After all..If they have the right to say NO..Then they should also have the right to say YES !

          • Feminister

            Children don’t have the right to say no. Adults say no on their behalf.

          • george

            Many can and DO consent to all sorts..regardless of parental authority…Netherlands in 1908s granted children over 12 freedom to have relations with paedophiles — Though hebephilia would be more accurate.

          • Feminister

            Not in this country they don’t.

      • Solage 1386

        Because it would result in anarchy. Taboos exist for a reason. Religion, though untrue, also exists for a reason. Human nature has a tendency towards evil, and needs to be controlled.

  • thomasaikenhead

    The age of consent is meaningless if police in Rochdale, after a four year IPCC inquiry, are found not to be responsible for the underage girls who were groomed, raped, beaten and forced into prostitution while they were in office.

    It is time for a little less pontificating by the likes of the metropolitan, chattering classes of which the likes of Melanie Phillips is a prime example, and time for them to name some names and hold people responsible.

    Denis MacShane was MP for Rochdale while 1,400 girls were abused in a similar fashion and yet here he is London being feigned upon at Daunts bookshop as he book about Brexit is published whilst those who suffered so terribly in his former constituency are utterly ignored.

    Why have the media repeatedly refused to hold those responsible for the weak and vulnerable to account?

    • george

      We don’t know if they all were “groomed” In a similar fashion — Could be that the media is focusing on the most malevolent of cases.

  • MikeHomfray

    Try living in the real world – as much as you might like to return to the 50’s its not happening

  • Peter Stroud

    I believe that the age of consent in the USA is still eighteen. What are the statistics there regarding teenage pregnancies and grooming etc? Is sex under the age of 18 still dealt with as statutory rape?

    • developertest03

      Yes. That can be a bit stupid too, we have had 19 year olds with 17 year old girlfriends get 4+ years in prison plus they have to register as sex offenders.

      • Feminister

        Example?

  • developertest03

    Wait a minute, there is no Age of consent in the UK? I am confused.

  • greggf

    “….what we lost when we dropped the age of consent”

    Who’s dropped the age of consent?
    It’s up to the police to enforce the law not progressives nor other PC agencies.

    Perhaps the example in Police department in Ferguson, Missouri applies. A “report from the US Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division on the Ferguson Police Department is a damning indictment of an out-of-control, lawless, and racist police department gone rogue”.
    Police in many British cities appear to have gone rogue too; they seem to be complicit with the events involving under-age sex, trafficking, racism and related lawless activities.

    It’s about time somebody answered for this state of affairs.

  • alfredo

    Much as I usually heartily agree with Melanie Phillips, I think she is attaching more importance to the age of consent than it can bear (particularly when it differs considerably from country to country even in Europe). It is a line drawn by the law because it has to draw the line somewhere. It can’t have any moral (as opposed to legal) authority or provide any but the crudest moral guidance. It’s merely a form of box-ticking and no substitute for a case by case evaluation of instances of sex with minors on clearly thought-out moral criteria.

    • Solage 1386

      Sex with miners is always to be deplored.

      • alfredo

        With ‘miners’?

        • Solage 1386

          Always is always for ever, as long as one is one……..(Charles Manson. He never had sex with miners…….)

      • george

        Though attraction to minors is normal-male-sexuality..

        • Feminister

          Doesn’t make it moral or ethical.

          • george

            There is no objective morality regarding paedophilia..Drugging and raping is wrong regardless of age of victim.

          • Feminister

            Yes there is.

            So is manipulation and giving them nightmares about your hairy mug.

        • Solage 1386

          “Miners” not “minors!”

    • mumble

      Would not the CPS make the case that “case by case” is prohibitively expensive and that we need something to grease the wheels of the sausage-machine?

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    If the girl is “underage” she’s always the victim. No matter how much she provokes, even performing a drunken striptease at a party, she’s the victim.

    • george

      Victimology — feminist identity politics…Reality is often different!

    • Feminister

      Are you saying she shouldn’t be?

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    Note the way aging celebrities are being thrown off the wagon while the really big paedo fish go on their merry way. There has to be a tacit mutual blackmail understanding, “you keep quiet about Cyril and we’ll keep quiet about Ted”, while the MSM go to town on kiddie porn. Like there’s no difference between hands-on child rape and viewing Interney images.
    Jack, Penang

  • MrJones

    I don’t think “we’re” comfortable at all. Seems to me it’s an entirely top-down process. I wonder what a referendum on sex ed. at age 5 would get?

  • MrJones

    It’s paedophiles in government, media and academia who’ve been pushing this sexualization of children under various guises plus a lot of useful idiots like ******* ****** (stressing the idiot part) who’ve been helping them.

    • george

      Most of the ‘paedophiles in government’ is more likely to be a hangup from the ‘little black book’ they used to keep to bribe homosexuals..And most of the allegations regarding teenage boys would come under pederasty or homosexuality — Not paedophilia!

  • balance_and_reason

    legalisation of buggery for 16 year old boys….mmmm suits you sir.

  • approveds

    We do not live in a dictatorship, and children in care cannot be ‘locked up’ in cells at night. Many girls become pregnant at school, often by teenage boys. Are we to start locking them up for breaking the law?

  • Dennis Lessenis

    Perhaps we should return to Victorian Christian values, when the churches were full and the Bible well known! Though of course then the age of consent for girls was 13 – it was only raised after a steadfast campaign of William Thomas Stead – a Spiritualist, not a Christian, last seen alive, helping women and children into life boats as the Titanic sank! In fact in Victorian Britain, despite vocal conservative moral values, the sexual exploitation of children was common. Oddly enough in today’s society, if we look to the more socially and religiously conservative communities in Britain (mainly immigrant communities today) we see it is these communities that have the highest rates of teen pregnancy and (in the case of Africans and Afro-Caribbeans) single parent families and divorce – even though these same groups are three times as likely to go to church and hold conservative religious and moral views.

    A glance across the Atlantic, to the most religiously and morally conservative society in the Western world: Bible Belt America – and we see that it leads the western world in teen pregnancy (not to mention divorce, single parent families, violent crime, murder, ill-health, poor academic attainment in schools, etc.). It would seem vocal conservative moral values have a habit of producing the opposite effect in a society. What seems to work is good and thorough sexual education in school and a greater sense of personal responsibility – as is found in many of our Scandinavian societies – where teen pregnancy rates are low.

    What needs to change in our welfare services is to stop pussy-footing around immigrant communities – multiculturalism has failed because it promotes an unhealthy vanity in minority communities – believing they are special and above such mundane considerations as British law and British values (the irony being many come to Britain because their own culture has failed them – yet then try and promote that same culture as morally and socially superior to British indigenous culture). Moreover politicians – particularly local Labour politicians, have wanted to court favour with their immigrant filled wards and have turned a blind eye to the corruption and hypocrisy that tends to go hand in hand with any (regardless of the religion) conservatively religious community.

    Phillips, as is the wont of the reactionary conservative, looks to a past that didn’t exist – it is only a few generations ago that children were working at 14 – we do tend to romanticise childhood and imbibe it with an innocence that might have been true for a tiny, upper and middle-class section of society in the 19th century, but has never really be true for wider society.

    What children need today is good, honest, sex education – pushing the idea of self-responsibility (the ending of cash benefits to mothers under the age 18 wouldn’t go amiss either!). Alas, sex is here to stay and just bleating ‘Thou Shalt Not…’ doesn’t make the slightest difference; in fact, looking at African and Afro-Caribbean communities in the UK or Bible Belt America – it appears to make things worse!

    • GraveDave

      Brilliantly put.

    • Skyeward

      Except our teen pregnancy rate is falling. One of those uncomfortable truths Progressives like mysef must grapple with – along with cuts to unemployment benefits strongly correlating to increased employment.

      • Feminister

        Pregnancy rate or birth rate?

  • Politically__Incorrect

    Sadly, I suspect we haven’t seen the worst yet. Society is morally confused and directionless. People lives are guided by nothing more than their hormones. That is a recipe for disaster. The next stage is the legitimisationth of incest, bestiality, and any other form of sexual corruption humans can invent. I fear that we will only start looking for a genuine moral compass when we have hit the bottom of the sexual cesspit

    • Feminister

      Or you could say we are making strides towards the light. Teenage prostitution, child marriage, marital rape, date rape are now illegal and the social tide is turning against them. That wasn’t the case until recently. Most of these scandals are historical, the fact that they are coming out now rather than being buried tells you that the moral compass is strengthening not weakening.

  • Old Scrotum

    The age of consent MUST, as a matter of URGENCY, be raised to AT LEAST 18, and the use of CHASTITY BELTS should be made compulsory for all girls between the ages of 6 and 18. Doctors should be REQUIRED to conduct quarterly VIRGINITY TESTS on all their female patients and any underage girl found to have been deprived of her hymen WILL be taken into state care and sent to an INSTITUTION.

  • Dodgy Geezer

    Melanie Phillips had better be kept well away from South Park…!

  • mumble

    The question of agency is an interesting one.

    We nowadays are comfortable with the notion that individuals choose their own partners, but we tend to lose sight of the fact that this is a relatively modern notion.

    In Romeo and Juliet, Juliet is “rising fourteen” and considered comfortably past marriageable age (and we guess Romeo to be 15ish).

    However, Juliet does not have agency: her parents do, cf. British-born men of Pakistani extraction who go back to Pakistan to marry a bride they have never met, but who has been selected for them by their parents.

    In the 1920s, it was reasonably common — e.g, in Italy — for the age of consent to be 12, on the assumption that was when girls typically had their first menses. As they had already finished their education, this was was the sign of a finished product.

    Again, though, the parents then had much more to do with making the match than nowadays.

    • Feminister

      Just to get this clear: you want parents to be able to arrange marriages/s*x for their daughters as soon as they start puberty?

      • mumble

        I’m suggesting the option to be considered: one keeps hearing of the success of arranged marriages; statistics on divorce suggest that young people aren’t very good at choosing a spouse for themselves. If someone else can do a better job of it, why not?

  • Maximus

    Well well well.
    I see Mrs Roland Rat is back and as poisonous as ever.

  • Skyeward

    This is mostly about class and the throwaway attitude towards those left behind in our economy. To prevent more Rotherham’s and Steubenville’s neo-liberalism must end. No more unfettered immigration, free trade, shadow banking, privatization for the sake of it, and subsidized oligopolies. Oh, and we should not coddle religious preference for procreation. We will value lives only when we end viewing humanity as a commodity.

    • Feminister

      No more page 3 then.

  • pobinr

    ‘For a society obsessed with paedophilia, we’re disturbingly comfortable with sexualising childhood’
    Only in the last couple of years since the Saville & other paedo star revelations have come to light indicating we needed to be more concerned or ‘obsessed’ as you say, not less

  • With the greatest of respect, but I think that Melanie Philips should stick to lobbying, clamoring and agitating for our next guerre de jour against Iran, the Damascus Government of Iran, Russia, the al-Sisi Government of Egypt, the Shia-led Sana’a Government of Yemen, the Sudan or whatever other Country which Israel and the Neocons decide to land us in, that we ought to fight. She seems like a woman reverted to a Mary-Whitehousesque of a caricature of a person who had missed the 1960s, once she started getting on a bit. Melanie Philips is certainly no moralist, nor is she entitled to style herself as one, unlike, say, Professor Roger Scruton (Cantab.) of Oxford and also of the Salisbury Review.

    • redpilled

      But Iran are insane zealots who believe in a messianic figure to come when the temple mount is rebuilt and they have uninspected nuclear stockpiles and threaten to use the ‘Samson option’ if the West dares to interfere! We have to stop them! She is right.

      • I am alas not directly addressing the subject of Iran on the board for this article. There is a time and a place for that. This alas is not the right one at the right time.

        • redpilled

          I have, alas,confused Iran with Israel. Forgive me.

    • Feminister

      With the greatest of respect?

  • We’re currently trying to save 20 children from their 60-70 abusers in the ‘Hampstead Scandal’. The ‘Whistleblower Kids’ are still in ‘care’ – effectively to protect the criminal father, even though they lived with their mother all their lives.

    Might you want to take an interest? Look at

    1. the petition on https://www.change.org/p/the-rt-hon-theresa-may-mp-return-whistleblowerkids-and-abusesurvivors-to-their-russian-family

    2. the blog on http://www.whistleblowerkids.wordpress.com

    3. the global publication https://paper.li/BronnyNZ/1426379990#!headlines

    4. the crowdfunding campaign https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/let-s-protect-children-from-violence-and-abuse/x/7305057

  • Zimbalist

    Britain is in terminal decline. That’s why I left, because I didn’t want my daughter growing up in this sea of filth, where life is disposable and the family unit is largely ruined and where little Jimmy has 2 “dads” but no Mum. All effed up.

    In many ways, the now seemingly inevitable, eventual Muslim dominance of Britain will at least yield some decent fruit – the restoration of some form of sexual morality.

  • evad666

    Nationally the total currently stands at in excess of 4323 underage victims spread across 34 English Towns and Cities.

    Why did the authorities turn a blind eye?

    Well awareness of this crime went all the way to Westminster:-

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/crime/article4189116.ece

    and ten years before that

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/aug/30/rotherham-girls-could-have-been-spared-ann-cryer

    Dennis Mcshane suggests no one wished to rock the multicultural boat. (unstated rationale We might loose Votes?)

    The response of the Police also merits attention:-

    http://www.theguardian.com/media/2004/may/20/channel4.broadcasting1

    Note the paragraph:-

    “Bradford was the scene of a serious outbreak of public disorder in July
    2001, when hundreds of police officers fought a nine-hour battle to
    disperse up to 200 rioters, most of them young Asian men.”
    So it appears that Parliament and the Law ceded control to Muslim groups.
    Solution Castration followed by deportation.

  • global city

    Looks like they’re positioning themselves to ‘contextualise’ FGM as something other than what it is….. and justify arresting stupid white women in order to corrupt the stats.

    http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/03/18/women-with-vaginal-piercings-classified-as-fgm-victims-under-new-nhs-rules/

  • Richard Lutz

    Adults who sexually exploit or abuse minors must be brought to account for their crimes.

  • Revd Robert West

    The rape-grooming gangs in Rotherham, at any rate, were very largely Mohammedan. This is because the Prophet laid down that girls as young as 8, in the case of Mohammed’s child-wife, Ayesha, could validly give their consent to sexual intercourse with their ‘husbands’ under the Moslem Sharia. Multi-Cultuarlism is about respecting the diverse values of different cultures, is it not: not that the diverse cultures are mutually compatible. I am not advocating this: I am just stating it. But when values conflct at so basic a level, how do you choose which are to prevail? Some set of values has got to trump the others. Will it be Christian values, pornographic values, Mohammedan values or what. I know what I believe but as a society we have got to work that one out together and, in certain areas, some concessions will have to be made by the Mohammedans. But are they making concessions or are they asking for them. This whole conundrum will not be solved until we deal with the religious generator at the back of them.

  • Genevieve Ferris

    Excellent bit of journalism

  • Ray C

    Most of these laws are confusing and unclear. There are so many different exceptions and clauses it makes no sense. The idea in some places that you have someone in high school going to jail for having sex with another high school student is completely moronic to me. Not to mention that most of these laws were developed in a completely different time. “Kids” have much more developed minds and sometimes devious minds than they did back then. They know exactly what they’re doing at times. Plus, if we’re going to be so focused on age, we have to be consistent. You can’t be a child if you’re a supposed victim, but be an adult at the same age if you turn around and become the perpetrator of something. We can’t trust you to make a decision about sex, but at 16 and 17 we can trust you to make other decisions or engage in other activities that could cause someone hurt or even death. IF you can’t do one thing until 18, you shouldn’t be able to do anything else at 18. IF you’re an adult when you commit a crime at 16. You’re an adult when you have sex at 16. And why do we only target men mostly? Even this hidden camera tv shows only target men. I know there are plenty of lesbians or girls who think they are who are the same ages as some of these guys who have been arrested in high school. And there are plenty of lesbians out there recruiting younger girls into the lifestyle. Why doesn’t these shows and organizations try to catch them?

  • george

    The Author seems to be just as obsessed with child sexuality as the rest of society!

Close