Forum menu
Which presumably is part of the attraction for someone like Russell Brand.
I rather suspect that the attraction for someone like Russell Brand would be that she had a fanny and a pulse. And I'm not entirely convinced he was that choosy.
My old man was born in 1955, not much older than some of the old sods on here (if he was still alive). Anyway, he left school at 15 and joined the Navy.
Joining the navy (forces) is not being sent to the trenches.
Anyway, back to Brand.
A sixteen year old child is considered sufficiently mature to hold a full time job.
You can't work full time in England until you're eighteen.
You can, sort of - if you're in an apprenticeship or traineeship. And England is distinct from rUK
England
You can leave school on the last Friday in June if you’ll be 16 by the end of the summer holidays.You must then do one of the following until you’re 18:
stay in full-time education, for example at a college
start an apprenticeship or traineeship
spend 20 hours or more a week working or volunteering, while in part-time education or training
Yes you can.
Anyway, back to Brand.
I see, to the surprise of hopefully no one, he has gone the everyone is being nasty to him and trying to silence his words of truth.
I rather suspect that the attraction for someone like Russell Brand would be that she had a fanny and a pulse. And I’m not entirely convinced he was that choosy.
And he had trouble finding an adult woman with a fanny and a pulse, as you delightfully put it?
You can, sort of – if you’re in an apprenticeship or traineeship. And England is distinct from rUK
I specifically referred to England. An apprenticeship has a minimum 20% education element.
specifically referred to England.
If you’ve left school you can work full time at 16.
Joining the navy (forces) is not being sent to the trenches.
Since we're pointing out the obvious my point was that a 16 year old is still considered sufficiently mature to sign up for the forces and find themselves on front line service 2 years later.
Ah! Got you.
a valid line of defence that could be used to argue for a cessation of media reporting should it get to court.
You're going from a concern that the jury would be tainted to a concern that the trial would be reported under restrictions? That's a weird shift from somone supposedly worried about the mEdIa CiRcUs.
this isn’t an opinion or observation I just pulled out of my ass.
It is, though.
If you’ve left school you can work full time at 16.
If you choose to count an apprenticeship as full time. I don't, for the reason I gave.
But at what age would it go from morally acceptable to unacceptable? This is the third time I’ve asked this now and no-one’s offered a suggestion beyond “yeah but adult.”
TBH I’m always wary of ‘morals’ as who is the arbitrator of them ?
We also hear a lot about them but tbh I’m not sure I ever received the handbook 🙂
Where does this bizarre notion that because a sixteen year old child is mature enough to do certain things they are therefore as mature as any adult come from?
Are we going to start sending convicted sixteen year olds to adult prisons? After all they sufficiently mature to sign up for the forces, and pay taxes!
Anyway, back to Brand.
The audio recording in this link is damning, to say the least:
https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-66882644
I am amazed that it still exists all these years later.
Edit: I am referring to the second audio recording btw
After all they sufficiently mature to sign up for the forces,
I thought they needed their parents consent to sign up at 16?
An apprenticeship has a minimum 20% education element.
But you're paid for the whole thing, including the education bit, it's 'full time employment' and you're not a schoolkid anymore. Anyway, we only got onto this as a distinction of whether 16 year olds are adults or kids rather than a deep analysis of employment law in the UK.
For me whether adults or kids, the abuse of power and position over someone else, but particularly a younger person is morally if not actually provably legally wrong. Even if they were 19, 20, 25, whatever, the abuse of power is the problem compounded by the age in this case.
But it's hard to turn into law and to police; if the 16, 18 or 25 year old knows what they are doing and willingly enters that relationship.... how much freedom or constraint can we expect to have over an individual's own life choices.
For avoidance of doubt - not advocating a free for all once you reach 16 and from what I've read I'm very uneasy.
I thought they needed their parents consent to sign up at 16?
Correct. And the safeguards I know that get put in place and the reason behind them make it even more distasteful that some think him having sex with a 16yo is okay.
Legal/illegal, either way he's morally bankrupt.
There is a train of thought which suggests that his current persona may have been created for just that reason, so that he can scream about being cancelled for his views and get all the useful idiots to rally around him along with the Tucker Carlson, Muskrat etc types rushing to support him in his hour of injustice.
TBH I was surprised when he didn’t get picked up on when Metoo started.
IMHO I think it’s just the next step when work dries up(once you’ve hit your sell by date),the next available bandwagon was that,covid opened the floodgate on it.
This thread is a disgrace and needs closing well before it inevitably crosses the boundary that moderators have oversight of. IMO it’s already gone too far with some people spouting claims and making assumptions that have literally zero basis on any fact. Not to mention quite frankly disappointing insights into the way some people on here view the world. I gather there have been several bans/post deletions already and that ought to be enough of an alarm bell.
And before you start, yes I know I don’t have to read it etc etc but there is no warning that it may contain distasteful/disturbing content, the graphic description of the alleged assault on that poor girl is not something that should be copied and pasted for public viewing without some kind of warning.
I think we've found the driver.
I gather there have been several bans/post deletions already
Have there? (Serious question - I have read this thread in real time and didn't notice any)
IMHO I think it’s just the next step when work dries up(once you’ve hit your sell by date),the next available bandwagon was that,covid opened the floodgate on it.
It's profitable for sure. The money some similar mouthpieces make is bonkers.
DracFull Member
"How do you have claim to have an inclusive and welcoming sport and then a thread like this is allowed to run on STW?"
The victim blames have been rightfully lambasted by a majority on here. The judging on appearance I’d have to wade through to find them, of course they can also be reported. We’ve deleted posts, warned users and issued bans due to this thread. It’s something that needs discussed in the hope some see the wrong he has been accused of.
EDIT The stupid formatting on here attributed that whole text to Drac but the first paragraph was a quote from another poster.
oceanskipper
Full Member
This thread is a disgrace and needs closing well before it inevitably crosses the boundary that moderators have oversight of. IMO it’s already gone too far
I agree.
TBH if it was closed another one would be opened when he gets to court or not.
I don’t think any RB thread was going to be a bed of roses and was always going to be a complete car crash.
Where does this bizarre notion that because a sixteen year old child is mature enough to do certain things they are therefore as mature as any adult come from?
Correct. And the safeguards I know that get put in place and the reason behind them make it even more distasteful that some think him having sex with a 16yo is okay.
I'm arguing the opposite, for clarity. I'm not really in favour of 16 year old being allowed to enter a marriage either, parental permission or not.
My point, once again, is that we let 16 year olds be adults when it suits us. This is wrong IMO.
Oh and for the too lazy to do a simple Google search:
Full-time work
Children can only start full-time work once they’ve reached the minimum school leaving age - they can then work up to a maximum of 40 hours a week.Once someone reaches 16, you may need to pay them through PAYE.
Once someone reaches 18, adult employment rights and rules then apply.
https://www.gov.uk/child-employment
So they can leave school, leave home, take full-time work but don't have the same employment rights or wages as adults. Like I said...
All that said, the fact he slept with a 16 year old is still legal despite any cultural misgivings. Whilst we focus on that we're giving barely any thought towards the alleged emotional abuse involved in the relationship. That's the real problem here.
^ from your link:
England
You can leave school on the last Friday in June if you’ll be 16 by the end of the summer holidays.
You must then do one of the following until you’re 18:
stay in full-time education, for example at a college
start an apprenticeship or traineeship
spend 20 hours or more a week working or volunteering, while in part-time education or training
My wife works for the NHS, dealing with mental health in school age children.
She told me a tale this week of one of her kids (F)who had a run in with a drunken male in the park. He asked how old she was, and when told 16 he dropped his keks and wave his junk at her, saying they should 'have some fun'
The police were called and (to my surprise) attended, pulled the guy in and took a statement from the girl. Other folk in the park corroborated her story.
During this, the lead plod asked her why this incident had "got her so triggered"!
Clearly he didn't think this was such a big deal.
With this sort of response ingrained with the authorities, it's no wonder going to the mediums is considered a more sympathetic audience.
^ from your link:
Bollocks.
Hoisted by my own petard.
TBH I had no idea employment law was a devolved matter.
😂 I work with young people coming out of care, it's a real frustration for some of them that they can't go into full time work!
@Oceanskipper the thread is being watch and monitored as much as we can. As always we also rely on people reporting posts. It’s been remarkably Ok despite the subject. You nay disagree of course, but it’s a topic that can be discussed as it’s based on allegations that have come to light.
I have no idea why the focus is on the age of a legally (but morally wrong relationship).
What has been alleged that went on within that relationship should be the focus. Arguing about whether a 16 year old can buy cigarettes, pay tax or go to war is diluting what has been alleged to have occurred.
Shouldn’t the focus be on the how does this happen?
In Boomerlives example of how the Police treat victims of sexually assaults or predatory behaviour, can we not focus on that? When that occurred, with it being a school aged child, I presume there was adults present, did they not pick up on this comment? Has a formal complaint been made back to the force? If this event did occur as explained, then that person needs to be removed from that line of service and re-trained.
Well he is going all in on that YouTube vid.
His fans love him according to the comments it's all the misinformation from main stream media apparently.
Asshat
Where's that link from Drac? Not England I presume?
We have to report our figures to the government, and have to adhere to the English rules on the gov.uk link that oceanskipper added.
Ooops! You’re right it not. A bit embarrassing.
ACAS however says.
https://www.acas.org.uk/young-workers-apprentices-and-work-experience
I have no idea why the focus is on the age of a legally (but morally wrong relationship).
I think it is because everyone appears to agree that the rape/nonconsensual sex allegations made against Russell Brand are unacceptable, so obviously not much to argue over. But some people appear to be struggling with the "a thirty-one year man had a sexual relationship with a sixteen year old schoolgirl" angle to the story.
Apparently the fact that she could join the armed forces and pay tax is significant to this particular news story.
So obviously plenty to argue over.
And he had trouble finding an adult woman with a fanny and a pulse, as you delightfully put it?
As according to some witnesses he was getting through five a night, seemingly not.
For me whether adults or kids, the abuse of power and position over someone else, but particularly a younger person is morally if not actually provably legally wrong.
There is a legal clause which covers this to an extent, though the word they use is "trust" IIRC. We spoke about this a couple of pages back. Personally I don't think it goes far enough.
IMHO the fact that Brand was a 'star' is as problematic as his age. She went to visit him because of who he was, she wouldn't have got in a car to visit 31-year old Geoffrey from Accounts.
Legal/illegal, either way he’s morally bankrupt.
No arguments here.
As according to some witnesses he was getting through five a night, seemingly not.
That's what puts him in wrong un category for me, I have no doubt there was/are plenty of celebrity shaggers that would have happily indulged him.
But he chose a 16yo.
But some people appear to be struggling with the “a thirty-one year man had a sexual relationship with a sixteen year old schoolgirl” angle to the story.
Because it's morally dubious but legally valid. If we don't like that, we should look to fix the law.
Still waiting for you to tell us all where you personally would draw the line. How would you feel if he was 25? 20? 18? Because, if you can't define that then you'll never be able to protect against it.
What do you mean "tell us"? You appear to be the only person asking the question.
I am not talking about changing law, I couldn't give a monkeys whether it is legal or not, in the context of whether it is morally acceptable.
However this story pans out, whether Brand is convicted or not, his sexual relationship with a schoolgirl almost half his age, which he fully admits, should be condemned.
And all the more so as Brand chooses not to be a private person but celebrity in the public eye and seeks to influence public opinion.