I was watching the BBC site. Crap broadband speed, so always check on the board as the guys post stuff before the Beeb. Saw the JS posts and responded. Get a kebab and chilllllll.......!
multi-tasking and trying not to jinx the score by paying too much attention. the number of times i've turned the radio on and a goal has been conceded i would need lots of hands to count on.
Seriously, you can't see the difference between a bloke who 40 people claim were raped by him and a bloke that nobody claims was ever raped by him?
This is a very hard moral debate (I think?). Lots of accusations against Saville, investigation promised, but apologies already being issued - horse and cart comes to mind. Stout defender of children says she knew, so why . . . . It seems 13/14+ year olds are the age group he preferred, like many say this is not unusal around the world; but it is illegal here - so why no hulabulloo at the time . . . Our schools give birth control advice/products to girls within this age range (and younger) - the system seems to accept it . . . JS raised much money for charity, he also raised his own profile; it now seems he raised something for his young fanbase - the guy was always a very strange case - would you have left your young daughter alone with him? I think the collective conscience of this country needs to take a pace back and examine itself a little. If it happened then it was very wrong, but for all of this indignation to be taking place now is somehow just as bad.
No that makes Saville a *****. (the trick is to read the line 'UNDER AGED girls if you're struggling to understand)
Spot on, mate. I hope I haven't given you the kiss of death by the way, because as soon as people see that I share the same view they'll think you're a real ****! I've sat for the past two weeks listening to people go on about that teacher who ran off with that 15-year-old, saying he's a ***** (wrong use of that word anyway, as it only refers to pre-pubescent children) who should be hung, drawn and quartered, and that he's taken advantage of a minor who doesn't know what she's doing. Why do people find it so hard to accept that love - even sexual feelings - can transcend the arbitrary and government-imposed age of consent? Girls can start their periods as young as eight. Now, where an 8-year-old girl is concerned, I certainly don't agree with Mother Nature's view that she's ready to 'mate' and bear a child. Why? Who knows. Maybe it's just those pesky 'morals' again. But a 14 or 15-year-old who throws herself at someone who's too busy enjoying his position as the object of her affection to question if she's of legal age? Nah. I'm not going to demonise him. Savile is a different matter entirely, of course.
There is quite a bit of merit in what you say (a new experience for me in reading your posts generally) but I haven't seen too many posts on any boards actually demonizing the teacher ... and Saville's case is very different .. not entirely, because fundamentally both knew that the objects of their desire were below the legal age of consent in the UK - the difference lies in the fact that the girl seems to have willingly run-off with the teacher. I completely agree with your point that teenagers have thoughts, feelings, indeed needs that render a prescribed age limit, in some circumstances, looking daft i.e you can't stop two 15 year olds consensually 'making out' ... but then again you do have to have some mechanism for protecting children and stoping mature adults taking advantage ... and that has been done by setting a legal age limit of 16 .. if you don't agree, try and get it changed constitutionally.. there is no 'right answer' to that, as far as I can see, because kids mature vastly differently. Now if the teacher really loved her he would have a) quit his job in that school and b) waited until she was 16 and then he could have gone to France with her, had she still wanted to, and nobody could have complained - least not on legal grounds ...
I haven't seen anyone on this board do so either, I was talking more about family and friends. Teachers can't have relationships with pupils under the age of 18, so if the girl had stayed at the same school into 6th form (which she may have planned to do) they would have had to wait 3 years before they could get together openly. Maybe they felt they couldn't wait. It's not for us to say. Regarding the two 15-year-olds, that's something that both interests and bemuses me. If a girl of that age sleeps with a boy who's no older, it's considered to be just a part of growing up. After all, a large percentage of people do lose their virginity before the age of consent. BUT, if she sleeps with, say, a 30-year-old man, she instantly becomes an innocent, vulnerable minor, whilst the man is deemed to be a morally-warped and perverted predator. It's utterly bizarre. Consensual sex between an adult and someone who is under-age is surely nowhere near as bad as abuse/rape of another adult?
i for one am not condemning the teacher. some people are more mature at 15 than some are at 30. i feel it's sad rather than reprehensible. i was thinking more of john peel when i made the other comment, but generally as well. peel would have been in his 20s when all that stuff went on and a product of a britain where sex was not talked about and ignorance was rife. some of the things people believed in those days are laughable. in many countries the age of consent laws are qualified by allowing certain things where one or both parties are some degree under age but where their ages are similar. this gets round the problem of e.g. a 16 year old lad sleeping with his 15 year old girlfriend, etc.
Debates like this can separate the views of parents from those who have little knowledge of bringing up kids. Young girls can mature physically but they are rarely emotionally mature up to around 16. So what you sometimes have is an impressionable child in a woman's body. They might try to act like adults and there's a lot of peer pressure about losing their virginity etc, but they are still kids and they can be damaged for life by this kind of abuse. Parents understand this. I think all blokes know it's morally wrong to have underage sex, but some still take advantage of vulnerable little kids. They try to justify this abuse by citing the girl's physical maturity or immature flirting, but iin reality as adults they know it's just sick and these excuses don't fool anyone. The law states that underage sex is illegal. It makes no distinction about physical maturity because up to 16 they are still children.
Ask yourself what the law thinks of it and why? No-one is disputing that children are capable of having sex, the question is whether they can deal with it emotionally. Also a pair of kids diving into bed in no way justifies adult men trying to abuse underage girls.
I'm not really arguing with you, I just wondered what you thought based on your previous post. Are you saying you think it's wrong? Should the guy be treated like a criminal? And what if the lad is 15 and the girl is 16? Bit of an interrogation but I think that situation shows how it can be very ambiguous.
No pal. The trick is to expand your reading material beyond The Sun. You may learn something. Is this you in the cap? please log in to view this image
