Forum menu
Rusty: Sadly, I've never been a rock god with easy access to nubile women so I don't know. Post-puberty, adolescent, young adult?
Moses - MemberThe differences between JS and many of the rockstars were that on the whole, the musicians didn't coerce young women into sex, it was offered.
As long as those 'young women' were over 16 I can't see a problem.
Otherwise, they were children.
And just because consensual sex with children was seen as an acceptable subject by Robert Crumb and The Stones doesn't make it right, then or now.
Someone alluded to it on the previous page, it is Ian Watkins of Lostprophets who has been charged (and denied bail) on some horrendous charges of child abuse.
http://www.nme.com/news/lostprophets/68120
A bit of googling turns up lots of grim stories about him.
Lori Maddox is an interesting one - perhaps 13 when Bowie introduced part of himself to her. Then Paige when she was 14 and carried on for a few years. I suppose she could cause some trouble if she fancied it but presumably doesn't see herself as a victim.
Edit for legal porpoises - this is all alleged rumour and may not be true...!
I suppose she could cause some trouble if she fancied it but presumably doesn't see herself as a victim.
No. Adults can be very clever in that respect when dealing with children.
To be fair, there is a difference between consensual sex and rape. Not saying that this means that it's OK - just that there is often a difference.
Well, the 'moral outrage' of the media is an inevitable by-product of exposing & attempting to stop the abuse of children by those in a position of power and trust.
I remember The Sun (I think) running a campaign maybe late 80s / early 90s featuring a skimpily clad, well endowed teenage girl who was going to be a Page 3 model, to the tune of "only a week to go till she's legal, folks" before she featured topless on her birthday. The 'moral outrage of the media' is somewhat hypocritical, I fear.
It was the sport, I remember it I was at school at the time and we used to get the sport from the corner shop. the girl was older than us it didn't seem too bad as teenagers and we didn't really understand exploitation back then (yes she was exploited FWICR her step father was promoting the charade) however I expected the target audience could have been more sinister than a bunch of us school kids.
mightymule - MemberTo be fair, there is a difference between consensual sex and rape. Not saying that this means that it's OK - just that there is often a difference.
Yes, but to consent you must be an adult.
Children cannot consent - which is why consensual sex between adults and children is illegal now and was illegal in the 60's and 70's as well.
Yes it is, and for good reason. However, there is still a difference between fully consensual sex and rape, which is recognised by the courts, and reflected in the sentencing guidelines for sexual offences.
The 'moral outrage of the media' is somewhat hypocritical, I fear.
Aye they also did a countdown for Charlotte church being legal and the girl from harry Potter probably on page Three
mightymule - MemberYes it is, and for good reason. However, there is still a difference between fully consensual sex and rape, which is recognised by the courts, and reflected in the sentencing guidelines for sexual offences.
Consent is an issue only if the girl is over 13, according to the law.
If she is under 13, consent is immaterial.
Sentencing reflects individual circumstances, ie age of the other party etc.
I thought the law was if they were under 14 it was an absolute offence- ie no discretion you must be charged
from 14- turning 16 the police and prosecution can decide.
The age of the offender of also an issue in deciding
14 year old with 15 year old or 14 year old with a 54 year old
Not sure Junky, tbh. You are probably right, things may have changed.
Irrelevant though tbh.
Any adult attempting to justify, fully or partially, sex with a child, whether consent was given or not, is on very dodgy ground indeed.
Indeed.
Its a strange one we can all see how consent alters it sort of and we can see why its worse to rape someone bit i do tens to agree that neither is defendable in terms of morality.
Its worth noting perhaps 100 years ago at 14 you may well have been married though and I suspect we can still find places where this is the norm.
Its worth noting perhaps 100 years ago at 14 you may well have been married though and I suspect we can still find places where this is the norm.
True.
There are still places where slavery is practiced too.
Doesn't make it any less abhorrent.
I was more getting at how morals change over time but yes you have indeed proved some are absolute for all time
You think it's abhorrent because that's our society's norm.
In some US states the age of consent is 18, so would you consider sex with a 17-year old abhorrent, too? If not, why not?
Similarly, in Spain (I think) the age of consent is 13. Is it abhorrent for 14 year olds to have consensual sex?
So why do you think that 16 is right? Biologically, the age of menarche is dropping across the western world, yet if anything the age of legal consent is rising.
Coercion is wrong, sex isn't.
Sorry Junky, I was agreeing with you 🙂
Some morals are indeed absolute, or as near as damn it makes no difference.
If these allegations regarding rock stars prove to be true, will be very interesting to see what the excuses are if prosecutions aren't brought.
Similarly, in Spain (I think) the age of consent is 13. Is it abhorrent for 14 year olds to have consensual sex?
Well, each country must set the age limit as it sees fit, according to how children are viewed and valued as members of society.
A 13 year old is still a child however, whatever other attributes of adulthood they may posess.
Biologically, the age of menarche is dropping across the western world, yet if anything the age of legal consent is rising
Just because a child is able to reproduce doesn't make them any less of a child.
In some US states the age of consent is 18, so would you consider sex with a 17-year old abhorrent, too? If not, why not?
I think we've got it about right in the UK at the moment.
I'd class a 15 year old as child and a 17 year old as an adult.
Obviously there are many exceptions, but on the whole, this seems fair.
What do you think?
Coercion is wrong, sex isn't.
So consensual sex is always fine, regardless of the age of either party?
WEll, again, that's a bit tricky isn't it - I mean some victims of abuse have been groomed to the point where they do "consent".
on how morales have changed, remember the film 'Rita, sue and Bob too'. That still gets shown nowadays and the theme of it is an adult fornicating with 2 schoolgirls. Dont think many films like that would be made today. Britain definately has weird age defines.
Driving is 16 and over
NI number and getting a job is 16 and over
sex is 16 and over
smoking is 18
alcohol is 18 and over.
So you can make a huge deision to be an adult, to have sex, go out buy and drive a car to your place of work, but you cant have a cigarette on the way or a pint after work
Simple line should be child - young adult (16-17?)( meaning either nothing or everything is legal) - adult
Driving is 16 and over
17
radoggair - MemberSo you can make a huge deision to be an adult, to have sex, go out buy and drive a car to your place of work, but you cant have a cigarette on the way or a pint after work
As a mate of mine pointed out the other day, at 16 you can have sex but you can't buy a video of someone else having sex. Let them join the army, but whatever you do don't let them vote.
It's really not a simple issue and I have no useful answers. Legally I was raped as a 15 year old, suffice it to say I told my mates but not the police. But reverse the positions, make it a 15 year old girl and a 19 year old man and the assumption goes from willing participant to victim.
Actually, driving is 16, moped<50cc,
drinking is 5, not 18, 16 in a restaurant with a meal
smoking no lower limit, the limits are on purchase, not use.
midlifecrashes - Member
Actually, driving is 16, moped<50cc,
radoggair - MemberDriving is 16 and over...
...go out buy and drive a car to your place of work
It's all about the context, baby... 8)
Legally I was raped as a 15 year old
Legally a female cannot rape a man.
It requires a penis to rape and it needs to be placed in an orifice.
Aye, you're right enough, the UK definition is restrictive isn't it. Sexual or indecent assault, would it be? Sex without legal consent, in any case.
It requires a penis to rape and it needs to be placed in an orifice.
Well a woman was convicted of rape for being part of a gang that raped a woman.
http://www.****/news/article-31150/18-year-old-woman-convicted-rape.html
Is anyone a member of NAMBLA?
Scarily NAMBLA actually exists.
Anyone see Ali G in Saviles shellsuit?
Those Marlon Brando look-a-likes are eeeeeevillllllllllllll.
I'm surprised so many people have misunderstood what the purpose of having a minimum age of consent is. It's for protection of the minor, not the criminalization of the minor.
Konabunny, the vast majority of the responses on this thread are quite disturbing.