Rich Toff let off for child porn

Ummm, where did I say you were?

 

So semantics it is then.

 

In the context ... you appeared to be implying.

 

He is a *****phile. You don't need to be a "baying mob" to see that.

 

Yes, it's you using an extremely toxic word which isn't relevant, and which isn't in fact applicable.

 

You believe he's sexually attracted to children ?

That is his sexual preference ?

 

You are one pitchfork short of a baying mob.

 

Appeared to be? I could turn that around and say you appeared to be defending Johnson, but I won't.

 

OK.
You never addressed Graham Rix, your thoughts?

 

He might not be, but I wouldn't be offended if I was accused of defending him.

And I could at least partially defend him with a clean conscience.

Because whilst I recognise that what he's done is wrong, and he's been an idiot, I don't think what he did merits ruining his life, losing his daughter, ending his career, and many years in prison.

Nothing like it.

 

A "toxic" word? An overreaction possibly?

How would you describe Johnson? You think he's being hard done by because people including me are calling him a *****phile?

It's fully applicable and wholly relevant whether you agree or not, so is "nonce", "beast" and "child molester". If Johnson does not like it he can sue me.

 

I suspect the victim and her family would disagree, as would many others.

 

Would I want him anywhere near my club? Not a chance.

 

I don't know how long till the girl's 16th birthday and legality when the gobble took place, a month, eleven months, somewhere in between? A few months difference and you'd be saying "that's fine, perfectly acceptable"?

 

I prefer not to live (solely) by whether I am safe from being sued, acting by the latest culturally accepted values etc.

I prefer to consider others and how my actions might affect them, and what I think is reasobale, fair, right and wrong.

I use my own brain to make moral judgements, not solely whether my actions are protected by the law and public sentiment.

So in labelling someone a *****phile, when that word is perhaps the most hateful thing to be called in our society, I would consider not only whether it might be the popular view, and whether or not someone could sue me, but whether it is helpful and reasonable.

As I have pointed out above, it does not appear to be an appropriate word. Whether he could sue me or not for using it, would not be determinative of whether I used it.

As I've pointed out above though - wheher you think he could sue you for using it or not - it does not appear to be the right word. So I'm not sure what point you think there is on insisting on using it.

And if you are suggesting btw that peadophile is not a toxic word, then I really don't see how you can think anyone could think you are being honest in your arguments.

 

A lot of history there, I can see why you wouldn't welcome him.

 

At least you admitted it Dev.

 

And I suspect (although I'm only speculating) that (as controversial as it sounds), the actions of whoever decided that charges wouldnbe pressed (whether that was he father or whoever), probably caused the girl more harm and far more distress than Johnson's actions did by themself. As ai've stated above, I am not sayin that Johnson was innocent. Clearly he wasn't, and without his actions none of his would have happened. But I suspect that the vast majority of distress caused to the girl, if not all of it, occured not in reaction to the consensual incident, but upon its discovery and subsequent examination by others.

With regards to "victim", the biggest victim in all of this, in reality, isn't a girl who had a consensual heavy petting encounter with her idol (however inappropriate that might have been), it's Johnson.

He might be at least in part a victim of his own actions, but victim nonetheless he is. He's the one whose life has been utterly shattered and who faces years in prison.

And I suspect that many others think exactly the same, but aren't stupid enough to say it.

(I'm assuming btw that johnson didnt pressure the girl into anything btw. If he did hen i happily take it all back, and change my view markedly. But that's not the impression i get of what happened.)

 

I'm assuming btw that johnson didnt pressure the girl into anything btw. If he did hen i happily take it all back, and change my view markedly. But that's not the impression i get of what happened.

 

I don't seem to be in prison yet, so i'll make another comment.

I've just googled, "adult looking 15 year old".

The first image was this :

Now then.

Am I physically attracted to that image ? Not really.

Could I imagine a situation could exist where very many heterosexual men could find themself sexually attracted to that girl, or an older looking and more attractive girl of the same age, if she made concerted advances upon them ? And if they didnt know how old she was ?

Yes, I could.

Would I regard those men, as morally or criminally reprehensible.

No.

What if the girl came on to them, inviting their sexual advances ?

Well, I think there's probably a difference in whether the guy knew how old the girl was (as Johnson did), or not.

And certainly, regardless of whether the guy was aroused by the girl's advances, if he knew how old she was or suspected she was hat age, then simply should refuse those advances. If for no other reason, then because not to do so would be against the law.

Do I think the guy should face some kind of consequence if he is not strong enouh to do that, and gives into his urge ?

Probably.

Do I think it should be the ruin of his life, if he partially fails to do that ? Do I think he should be deprived of his liberty for the rest of his youth, permanantly cut off from his family and deprived of an income, and treated like the scum of humanity ?

No I don't. Personally, I think it's too much. Far too much.