This thread has a:

*I am shortly going to have to explain why I was googling 'pedo bear' to our IT team after what else the search threw up!

And anyone who thinks that any 15 year old is emotionally mature enough to have a meaningful emotional or physical relationship with someone else (of any age) really does need their head looking into.

I think you underestimate some 15 year olds wwaswas.

Sure a line in the sand has to be drawn somewhere. I think 16 is too high and Spain's 13 perhaps a little low. The German concept of looking at each 14-16 case on it's merits rather than making sex automaticaly illegal is a pragmatic approach I like.

"Edit: watch "Noce Blanche" Mitch."
Why? So I'll agree with you? You keep hammering on about what I see as an argument designed to question the (legal) age of consent. As I've already said, it's not just a question of legality.

13 and 15 are TOO YOUNG to be classed as legal. They are still MINORS. The keyword there is minors. Emotionally immature for a start.

Why? You get older men (predators) cohering the impressionable.

In addition, a 14 having sex isnt the end of the world- as long as it is with someone of the same age.

25 with a 15yr old is disgusting. Serves him right.

I don't expect you to agree with me Mitch but I think 15 year old need a degree of self-determination and the ability to express themselves. The film shows that. There's a transition into the adult world that is determined by a collection of experiences rather than a date.

If you think back to the female music teacher that got 2 years the law in no way protected the interests of the willing minor. Both were consenting and the so-called victim only really a victim of the legal system and media which did far more damage to her life than the law intended to protect her. In any other European country there would have been no more than a professional sanction against the teacher. But no, the British system is based on revenge and spite rather than pragmatism. The Australian one too it would appear.

It's the unfortunate things with laws, that on a Monday it's morally and legally wrong to have sex with a girl, but a day later when she turns 16 it's then fine as she's now an emotionally mature women deemed capable of making these decisions.
Time locked chastity belts are the future 🙂

But no, the British system is based on revenge and spite rather than pragmatism.

The British system is based on protecting young girls from the attentions of older, predatory, immoral men.

If any of these emotionally mature and capable young women that you think we are penalising actually are, then they are emotionally mature and capable enough to wait a little while to have sex, No?

Ian Munro I dont think the lad in question wanted someone 'of age'.

All,

If we were talking about two 15 year olds that would still be thin ice and teen hormones could rage in equality, but we aren't. We're talking about a 15 year old girl an adult male having sex. Be it accidental in his case or not, it's awfully wrong on a moral and legal level. I'm sure many on the forums here have children around that age – I doubt they'd be happy to find their own friends screwing their daughter, regardless of physical maturity. It's just plain wrong.

To my mind, the age of consent has never really prevented 15 year olds sleeping with each other but if it stops one predatory bloke (or woman) taking advantage of impressionable minors then it's doing its job. Unless you have some magic test that will tell you if people are mature enough, you have to pick an age. We've picked 16 in the UK. Most of us managed to reach adulthood without falling afoul of the law in that area, not too much to expect that others do the same

Predatory = rape whatever the age. You are making the assumption the there is a prey and predator which in this case I doubt.

Read any magazine aimed at 14 year old girls (bear in mind magazines are really targetting a much younger audience than the cover suggests, which 14 year old would be seen dead reading a magazine for 14 year olds?) and you'll find much of the stuff is about being seductive. Not only dressing to seduce but also how to be seductive. Girls practice it, with their fathers to get what they want and with any men they meet to influence. They use new found sensuality as a plaything, a tool and a even a weapon.

Fortunately most men resist, I resist but have to admire how well some young women (you'd call them school children) play the seduction game. Dealing with it requires tact: hostility is best avoided (we all know hell hath no fury like a woman scorned) so it's a question of letting the girl know her efforts are not in vain but that I can't/won't.

"some young women (you'd call them school children)"

I think you'd find pretty much everyone calsl them school children (because they are). People who don't are often trying to delude themselves that the girls in question are more than school chilren and therefore 'fair game' sexually.

barnsleymitch – Member
It's not just about legality, it's also about morality – As someone who works with paedophiles on a day to day basis, I'm used to hearing comments made to excuse behaviour all too regularly, and while I'm at work, I have to deal with it professionally. I'm not at work today, so I feel justified in saying that having read some of the remarks made so far, one or two of you have got some serious f***ing issues.

How is this anything to do with paedophilia? Is that not about kids…that look like kids?

In Britain the school unifiorm does a good job of desexing school girls (Unless you're into that kind of thing). Take away the uniform and you'll fInd it harder to judge. My sister used to get me into over 18 nightclubs when I was 17 because she was obviously old enough. She was 15.

"How is this anything to do with paedophilia? Is that not about kids…that look like kids?"
Okay then, I've obviously got it wrong and am overreacting, so I'll just let you chaps get on with it.

If you're 25 odd years old you need to be going with girls your age not predating on under 18's like some kind of sick merv. There is no grey here a guy over 20 shouldn't be going with young girls, frankly I'd be a bit concerned if the girl was 17 or so, legal but very, very iffy..

Shows a distinct slant toward pervdom but that is the way now, I expect that's why fluff doesn't sell in porn…

Ah, that's better Mitch, thought I was was dealing with a psychorigid psychiatric nurse for a minute. (why isn't there a smiley wink?)

There isnt a smiley wink cos I'm not feeling f***ing smiley. Happy now?

In Britain the school uniform does a good job of desexing school girls

Eh? read that again and tell me you really believe it!

From St. Trinians through to the school style night clubs and restaurants, school girls have been used in an overtly sexual way since the 1950s.

Mature women dressing as schoolgirls is almost a norm in portrayals of sexuality, and to suggest otherwise is at best disingenuous..

The law may well be arbitrary, but it is there for a very good reason, to protect young girls from older men.

The law may well be arbitrary, but it is there for a very good reason, to protect young girls from older men.

How sexist of you crikey! Do some research and you'll find the law is often used to protect young men from older men and even young women from older women. Older man younger girl cases rarely get as far as court as you'll find if you compare teen pregnancy stats against under age sex convictions.

I'll venture the cyclist's main crime is being famous. Would it have gone as far as it has if the families of the victims had no chance of financial gain? Think Michael Jackson cases, and yes, Jacko was off his rocker.

If you're 25 odd years old you need to be going with girls your age not predating on under 18's like some kind of sick merv.

My grandfather was 8 years older than my nan – ie when she was 17, he was 25. Not exactly the same but not far off. You'd have been hard pushed to find a more loving and devoted couple over 50 years of marriage.

I'm deliberately not saying anything about right or wrong in this, it's a fairly neutral article with very little in the way of detail.

The sweeping generalisations on this thread make me LOL – even more than Barnsleymitch's apparent "I work with paeds therefore I know it all" attitude.

It's like you can't have a grown-up conversation on the topic, or even ask reasonable questions.

At uni and the girls at 18-21 look like little kids to me.

"The sweeping generalisations on this thread make me LOL – even more than Barnsleymitch's apparent "I work with paeds therefore I know it all" attitude."
I dont claim to know it all, I was commenting on the fact that a lot of the remarks posted (age of consent too high, provocatively dressed, etc) have an all too familiar ring to them. If by sweeping generalisations you mean the fact that people have assumed that after reading the link at the start of this thread the guy concerned was / is a paedophile, then the fact that he's been charged with having sex with underage girls is a bit of a f***ing giveaway!

I'll venture the cyclist's main crime is being famous

No, his main crime is sleeping with girls under the age of consent, something which seems not to concern you over much.

the guy concerned was / is a paedophile, then the fact that he's been charged with having sex with underage girls

OK techncally he's a paedophile, but surely there's a distinction between sexual activity with kids of say 8 and 15, and perps ought to be treated differently?

That's not for me to say – you're the legal expert, you tell me…

If he was a premiership footballer there wouldn't be half as many understanding STWers

That's not for me to say – you're the legal expert, you tell me…

I don't know the first thing about any aspect of paedophilia, I'm asking you because you claim to do so.

If they are both 15 and consenting as implied then it really doesn't concern me over much. Much less than the "hang him high" reaction to it.

He is 22, an international athlete which implies a certain amount of life experience. For him to have a couple of incidents of sexual activity with underage girls again suggests that he has made choices regarding the ages of the girls he has sex with. Choices which are against the law.
Again, as above, if these girls are old enough to make sensible choices regarding sexual activity, then they are old enough to wait.
I suspect that the choice was not theirs, but his, and therefore he is at fault.

"OK techncally he's a paedophile, but surely there's a distinction between sexual activity with kids of say 8 and 15, and perps ought to be treated differently?"
There's no technically about it, as a lawyer you know that perfectly well. Morally, I fail to see the difference – girls at 15 may well be physically developed, but do we therefore assume that they're capable of making adult choices and decisions? Remember, this isnt about two teenage kids sha**ing, the guy is an adult, the girl(s) he had sex with were minors.

girls at 15 may well be physically developed, but do we therefore assume that they're capable of making adult choices and decisions?

I dunno tbh, but we do with 16 yr old girls.

"I dunno tbh, but we do with 16 yr old girls." And that's where it becomes more of a moral issue. Is it still right for say, a 30 year old bloke to have sex with a 16 year old?

What a bunch of hypocrites -especially Ton!

You wanted to hang paedophiles on another thread.

We've already established that the age limit is arbitrary, but, like speeding, everyone knows it and ignorance is not an excuse, especially when he's done it before.
It's wrong, morally and legally, and he's been caught.

crikey hes 25, not 22 so that makes him at least ten years older than the girls!

this is all getting a bit brass eye for me

people happy to denounce someone and burn him at the stake before seeing evidence and others saying, mleh they probably dress like slappers they deserve it

OK, compare it with speeding. The radar device has error limits and the law takes those into account so if the radar can't be sure it's 15 or 16 you don't get done. A little bit over the limit and you get a few points and a fine. Lot's over the limit and they confiscate your car and ban you.

I fail to see the difference between 8 and 15. Now even I can be sure an 8 year old is a child and not a young adult.

No idea about Aus, but in UK legislation there would be a distinction between an 8 yr old and a 15 yr old.

Sex with a child not yet 13 is rape. Regardless of any other circumstance such as consent, how old they look, whatever, it is rape.

Sex with a child of 13 to 15 is not necessarily rape (dependant of course on the individual circumstances), but is still an offence, USI being the most common term for it. There are some defences in law to this second offence, to do with the believed age of the child and the difference in ages.

It's all on the opsi website if you need more.

When i met my wife she had not long turned 16 i was 21 so was that wrong by STW mob status? BTW we are now 33/27 and have been married for almost 8 years. 15/16/17 year old females are sexual active normall with people around their own age but some times with those older than that. I know people that have been investigated for it but have been let off as they met the person in a night club that had strict over 18 policy. If young people can fool person asking for id then how does an normal person stand a chance. I would comment on the cyclist but don't know enough of the facts.