Jimmy Savile (aka: paedo speculation megathread)

[Mental Kenny]

A paedo by definition is somebody who is attracted to children. Teenagers are not children. In Spain the age of consent is 12, I'm sure it's the same in other countries.

 

[BlindHelperMonkey]

that headstone is vulgar just by itself. im sure a man of god could put it better and of course its moot if these allegations (as seems likely) turn out to be true.. but a cemetary headstone is no place for a list of acchievements such as that. you can be sure there is someone buried nearby with a bigger list - and smaller stone - than yourself

 

[Ceres]

Is the headstone a list of places he committted his crimes?

 

[Ceres]

Technically he wasn't a paedo even if the allegations are true, not that it matters.

If the sun insinuates that he was a paedo that's good enough for me and my lynch mob.

 

[BlindHelperMonkey]

that reminds of the time an angry mob congregated outside a 'peados' house in their neighbourhood..












he was a paedeotrician

 

[Myshkin]

A paedo by definition is somebody who is attracted to children. Teenagers are not children. In Spain the age of consent is 12, I'm sure it's the same in other countries.

Hate to get involved in this thread as it's such an emotionally-loaded one but here goes:

I've pointed this out at least once - sexual attraction to children (paedophilia) is a very different phenomenon to hebophilia (attraction to pubescents), which in turn is a very different phenomenon to ephebophilia (sexual attraction to post-pubescent mid-to-late adolescents).

Which is not to say that any of them are more 'right' than the others, but some degree of ephebophilia is natural (and extremely common) among adults. Most don't end up in situations where they can act upon those urges, or they suppress them deliberately, but those urges are still there - it's biological fact.

By this I'm not excusing guys who sleep with 13-14-15 year old girls (or indeed women who do the same with adolescent boys - it happens more than you think); of course it's totally possible that the relationship is still nasty and exploitative, regardless of the physical maturity of the younger party.

I do, however, think people should be more careful about bandying around the word 'paedo' when it's not strictly applicable. Especially those who'd not hesitate to get indignant over some drug-related misinformation in the press.

 

[charlie clean]

Really to throw the emotional cat among the personal pigeons, how many EADD girls had some kind of sexual relationship with an overage guy before their 16th birthday? Were you capable of giving informed consent? Does the guy belong in gaol anyway?

My own take is, while women mature at vastly differing rates, one rule for all is hard to apply. But I'm open to correction. As it stands, I thank my lucky chromosomes I'm not attracted to teenagers, must be a minefield for those who are.

 

[knock]

Really to throw the emotional cat among the personal pigeons, how many EADD girls had some kind of sexual relationship with an overage guy before their 16th birthday? Were you capable of giving informed consent? Does the guy belong in gaol anyway?

My own take is, while women mature at vastly differing rates, one rule for all is hard to apply. But I'm open to correction. As it stands, I thank my lucky chromosomes I'm not attracted to teenagers, must be a minefield for those who are.

Hehe. Maybe you're right, Charlie, maybe we do have time to consider every case on it's own merits, or rather we could have time if we weren't spending it on other things.

But it surely can't be right that one rule for everybody is hard to apply. One rule is simplicity itself to apply. Check their birth certificate. Born too late? Sorry, he's not getting in.

It's a symptom of our existing social structures that we currently have not allocated the resources to determine, and enforce, as a society, individual moments of sexual maturity. It seems to be more important for us to get everyone who is willing and able in the driver's seat of a car, than to get the sexually mature and willing in bed with Sir Jimmy Saville (before he died). Well, it's deemed less important, or more difficult, or a bit of both. *

Yes, individuals vary. How much effort do we want to put into getting people shagging ASAP?



* Reading that back I remembered that, in the UK anyway, we get to have sex before we get to drive a car (some of us/you anyway)! So maybe not the best example, but my point is that we have a driving test and a drivers license, and sliding scales of cost (for insurance). Yet we have no test or license or insurance for having sex.** Probably because we've been having sex since the start of time, so a simple rule based on age has had the chance to become established, while cars were developed in an era where testing, measuring and licensing were all the rage. All that remains is to ask, why have we not revisited our rules for sex and fully applied our new found sophistication?


Sorry, I can't help adding more, the topic is too engaging. We have become less, not more sophisticated in judging sexual maturity down the ages. In tight knit communities, everyone knows, more or less, who's having it off with who and who's thinking of it having it off with who. People's characters are well-known and individual judgements can be made.

In industrial society it goes on behind closed doors, in the golden age of television it went on in the dressing rooms and in the Internet age it goes on in front of a computer screen, between strangers, increasingly out of sight and out of mind (To Catch a Predator aside). No wonder there's a moral panic.


** I suppose the marriage certificate is a kind of sexual license and the arranged marriage could be a kind of individually tailored process for ensuring sexual and emotional maturity and compatibility. Don't think most people who've had their tasted of freedom want to go down that road though, do they?

Right I think I've used my pixel ration in this thread for the day

 

[Mental Kenny]

I blame Mangas and Anime entirely for being attracted to girls in school uniform. It's not my fault, they're just so yummie.

 

[parttime crackhead]

A paedo by definition is somebody who is attracted to children.

This was all I meant by my earlier post. I was just being pedantic. I use peado as a catch all term for a cunt that fucks (or wants to fuck) kids. I know it's not technically true but I can't be fucked learning all the other terms & most people wouldn't know what I meant.


Anyway, Savile was a sex offender. So was John Peel. Game over.

 

[Myshkin]

I use peado as a catch all term for a cunt that fucks (or wants to fuck) kids.

And presumably (by definition) that means you use 'kids' as a catch-all term for all people under sixteen?

Fair enough if you do, but to me there's a hell of a lot of difference between someone who preys on primary school children and somebody who might innocently check out a sexually-developed teenager, who might well appear older than they actually are.

 

[parttime crackhead]

And presumably that means you use 'kids' as a catch-all term for all people under sixteen?

Yes.

 

[rockstar 69]

Were they not talking about lowering the law to 14 a while ago?

I had a bit of an argument with my mam about that John Peel this morning. I'm sorry but anyone who marries a 15 year old at the age of 30 and shags 13 year olds likes young girls. He is a paedophile.

 

[Myshkin]

Yes.

So (purely for example's sake) offering a can of beer to your five-year-old cousin at a family do is the same as offering one to your fifteen-year-old cousin?

He is a paedophile.

I think I'll leave this thread alone from now on.

Apologies for trying to interject some actual facts inbetween the emotionally-charged hysteria. 8)

 

[knock]

And presumably (by definition) that means you use 'kids' as a catch-all term for all people under sixteen?

Fair enough if you do, but to me there's a hell of a lot of difference between someone who preys on primary school children and somebody who might innocently check out a sexually-developed teenager, who might well appear older than they actually are.

PT is a native of a harsh post-industrial wasteland where time and sophistication are scarce and simple rules must apply.

 

[parttime crackhead]

So (purely for example's sake) offering a can of beer to your five-year-old cousin at a family do is the same as offering one to your fifteen-year-old cousin?

Yes. Remember where I come from. My 5 year old cousin would probably reject it as he'd already have had a half bottle of vodka.

When I said I use it as a catch all term I was actually putting myself down slightly Sam (ie, saying that I was wrong but it's just easier & very rare that the exact technicalities of that word have to be discussed), I wasn't arguing that the way I was using that word was 100% correct.

I also wasn't saying that the guy who fucks a 2 year old is as bad as the guy who fucks a 15 year old. Although they are both bad. I was just saying that I would still use the same term. Simplicity of language.

 

[brimz]

Were they not talking about lowering the law to 14 a while ago?

I had a bit of an argument with my mam about that John Peel this morning. I'm sorry but anyone who marries a 15 year old at the age of 30 and shags 13 year olds likes young girls. He is a paedophile.

So The Spanish are a nation of Paedos by your logic. The age of consent is 13 In Spain . Oh n The Portuguese bunch of Paedos as well well not quite as bad at least they wait till 14.

 

[knock]

Were they not talking about lowering the law to 14 a while ago?

I had a bit of an argument with my mam about that John Peel this morning. I'm sorry but anyone who marries a 15 year old at the age of 30 and shags 13 year olds likes young girls. He is a paedophile.

What was your mam's opinion?

Nevermind I'll ask her myself. And John Peel is dead


I am interested in what your mother had to say though.

 

[parttime crackhead]

If 40 year old Spanish guys are happily fucking 13 year olds then technically, no, they are not peados. But they are not right. Fuck the law. That is morally wrong imo.

The law isn't so much the issue. I break the law every day.

Some laws are stupid. Such as the law in Spain that says it's OK for a grown man to have sex with a 13 year old.

If you had a 13 year old daughter would you be happy with a man your age shagging her because it's legal? Or would you apply the law of the baseball bat?

I would apply the law of the baseball bat to a friend if I knew they were shagging some random 13 year old, never mind one that was related to me.

Law or no law, age of consent or no age of consent. It is not OK. Not in my opinion anyway.

 

[Ceres]

Older men who have relationships with young girls are just losers, not paedophiles.