What grinds my gears...

[Zingari]

I don't very often agree with CPF but you know everything he says is his own opinion and not something he's read in a newspaper or heard on the telly, I respect that. We need more original thinkers on here.

Yes indeed , there's a lot to be said for that   

[Captain...]

 

An understandable reaction, but he had met her parents and it was all open, both families were aware of the situation and knew what was going on. They now have 2 great children and are a very close family.

 

@Webbo, I didn't know him that well at the time, first met her when she was 16, but she didn't look it at all, she looked and acted mid twenties like the rest of us.

 

Edit: Also why does my mate get all the stick and not John Peel who was older and he married a 15 year old.

Edited 28 February 2014 by Captain Pancake Face

[Strokes]

An understandable reaction, but he had met her parents and it was all open, both families were aware of the situation and knew what was going on. They now have 2 great children and are a very close family.

@Webbo, I didn't know him that well at the time, first met her when she was 16, but she didn't look it at all, she looked and acted mid twenties like the rest of us.

Edit: Also why does my mate get all the stick and not John Peel who was older and he married a 15 year old.

I don't really want to go over old ground here but personally I find a 25 year old having sexual relations with a 16 year old almost as bad.

In all honesty, in not particularly clued up to who John peel is but the same applies.

[StanSP]

An understandable reaction, but he had met her parents and it was all open, both families were aware of the situation and knew what was going on. They now have 2 great children and are a very close family.

 

@Webbo, I didn't know him that well at the time, first met her when she was 16, but she didn't look it at all, she looked and acted mid twenties like the rest of us.

 

Edit: Also why does my mate get all the stick and not John Peel who was older and he married a 15 year old.

 

It is all well and good that they're a happy family now, but I don't think that can be used as justification for the age difference and the fact that he was having sex with a minor.

[Captain...]

I don't really want to go over old ground here but personally I find a 25 year old having sexual relations with a 16 year old almost as bad.

In all honesty, in not particularly clued up to who John peel is but the same applies.

 

A fair point, in general I would agree, I'm not saying it is always fine, the majority of the times it is probably something very wrong, my only point is that it doesn't necessarily make it sick and disgusting and the same as a paedophile, in my eyes age is largely irrelevant, I see it as much worse for an 18 year old to take advantage of a sexually immature vulnerable 16 year old, than for a 23 year old to have consensual sex with an emotionally and physically mature 15 year old. 

 

When you see 2 people together who look and act the same age, as my friend and his missus did, it all seems a bit arbitrary, when I met her, she wasn't playing with her barbie, she would come out drinking with us and be perfectly at home in older company, but I also understand that she was an exception and not justification for lowering the legal age. I see a difference between my mate who met someone who was a lot younger than she looked, and someone who preys on young vulnerable girls.

 

One made a mistake that didn't cause anyone any harm and brought 2 great children into this world, the other is a sick predator that people should be protected from.

Edited 28 February 2014 by Captain Pancake Face

[Vacamion]

I am afraid i cannot abide his views on underage sex, i know he doesnt have children but they are far to liberal to be real.

 

 

Don't really want to get involved in this particular debate, but this sort of comment from parents, alluding to their superiority to non-parents, really grinds my gears. 

 

What bearing does someone having children or not have on the debate or people's insight into it? 

 

Your suggestion appears to go even further - that someone would be more likely to hold abhorrent views because they don't have kids.  Can't childless people also have a view, or care about what happens to children, too?

 

Some of the vilest beasts of the lot are parents.  In fact many of them prey on their own relatives.

 

Just because you blew your custard up a lass without protection, doesn't necessarily make you philosophically more insightful, you know...

 

[MooseBreath]

If a 24yo bloke has the same level of maturity as a 14yo girl then I reckon it's probably a case of exceptional immaturity on behalf of the bloke rather than the girl being exceptionally mature. If all of CPFs social circle found themselves able to relate the the young girl on her level then well, it's no wonder they like hiding away in cottages.

That said, I agree with him in that there is a massive difference between actual paedophilia, ie attraction to prepubescent children, and some bloke nailing a consenting 14yo. Both acts are wrong but the former is on a completely different scale.

Edited 28 February 2014 by MooseBreath

[Strokes]

Don't really want to get involved in this particular debate, but this sort of comment from parents, alluding to their superiority to non-parents, really grinds my gears.

What bearing does someone having children or not have on the debate or people's insight into it?

Your suggestion appears to go even further - that someone would be more likely to hold abhorrent views because they don't have kids. Can't childless people also have a view, or care about what happens to children, too?

Some of the vilest beasts of the lot are parents. In fact many of them prey on their own relatives.

Just because you blew your custard up a lass without protection, doesn't necessarily make you philosophically more insightful, you know...

Yes childless people can have a view, can you direct me to where I said they couldn't. When you become a parent many of your veiwpoints change, especially those of which concern children, hence the comment.

Whether you like it or not, parents are more likely to speak up for the protection of children.

The fact that out of the discussion taken place, the point you wish to highlight is this, gives me an insight into your position on child abuse.

Edited 28 February 2014 by Strokes

[Finnegan]

To quibble over semantics, doesn't the term paedophile refer to an adult with an attraction to a pre-pubescent? I'm sure there's actually a whole other word for the attraction to teenagers / persons in adolescence?

I'm paraphrasing a bulimic (not that that's relevant) feminist I used to know so not exactly gospel. I can't be bothered to Google this and see if I'm right (that and I don't think I want the results of that search on my phone.)

Basically an altogether pointless post but eh it's Friday afternoon.

[FoxyPV]

Not being able to get out of NI for at least 3years due to StepFoxy3

 

BTW a 25 y/o going out with a 16 year y/o is creeepy in the extreme.

Edited 28 February 2014 by FoxyPV

[The Doctor]

To quibble over semantics, doesn't the term paedophile refer to an adult with an attraction to a pre-pubescent? I'm sure there's actually a whole other word for the attraction to teenagers / persons in adolescence?

I'm paraphrasing a bulimic (not that that's relevant) feminist I used to know so not exactly gospel. I can't be bothered to Google this and see if I'm right (that and I don't think I want the results of that search on my phone.)

Basically an altogether pointless post but eh it's Friday afternoon.

 

Yep - paedophile refers to people with an attraction to pre-pubescent children, attraction to people who've gone through puberty but aren't over the age of consent is an ephebophile (if they're still going through puberty they're a hebephile)

[Finnegan]

Yep - paedophile refers to people with an attraction to pre-pubescent children, attraction to people who've gone through puberty but aren't over the age of consent is an ephebophile (if they're still going through puberty they're a hebephile)

Thank you Google bot. Now delete your search history and get out of the house, the rozzers are en route.

[Guest MattP]

Fair play Captain,

 

Do find your mate disgusting and I have no idea what goes through a guy in his mid 20's head to sleep with a girl that young but hey ho, I don't think married now with kids excuses it, very dangerous territory to go down as we see that justification with child brides. (as I've said before a 25 year old dating a 16 year old is creepy to me let alone 14) Just go and watch a load of year 9's get off a bus, it's easy to forget just young these girls actually are.

 

The 70's just sounds a really fcked up place to be honest, would love to have been there for the music but future generations will look back and think WTF when it came down to the sexual behaviour that went on.

 

Can see how Savile did get away with it now, evil prospers when good men do nothing.

Edited 28 February 2014 by MattP

[Strokes]

Thank you Google bot. Now delete your search history and get out of the house, the rozzers are en route.

[Alf Bentley]

 

Just go and watch a load of year 9's get off a bus, it's easy to forget just young these girls actually are.

 

 

"Tango, Alpha; Rozzer Car 2 en route to bus stop. Confirm suspect resembles Chris Moyles. Willco. Over and out!"

[Finnegan]

go and watch a load of year 9's get off a bus, it's easy to forget just young these girls actually are.

Er, chuck that trench coat in a dumpster and get out of the house, the rozzers are coming.

[The Doctor]

Thank you Google bot. Now delete your search history and get out of the house, the rozzers are en route.

 

- please, my search history is far more interesting and dodgy sounding - mostly panspermia today. 

 

can see how Savile did get away with it now, evil prospers when good men do nothing.

 

And evil can be proliferated by support from a bigger evil... 

 

 

*minors of many descriptions being fucked just out of shot.*

[Webbo]

 

 

The 70's just sounds a really fcked up place to be honest, would love to have been there for the music

Prog rock, The Osmonds, The Bay City Rollers? You didn't miss anything.

[Smudge]

I think Matt and Finnegan's criticism is over the top, but you probably should distinguish between 1970s attitudes to teenage girls and to paedophilia in general (though, as I've said, I don't remember the word "paedophile" ever being used back then).

 

It was a long time ago, but this is how I recall attitudes in the mid/late 70s:

- Like now, there'd be isolated cases of blokes raping and/or murdering children; this would attract the same hostility as today, but they'd be seen as isolated weirdos and criminals who should be banged up, or preferably hanged

- I don't recall any discussion at all of paedophilia as a "sexual preference"  , though obviously it was discussed to some extent given the coverage of this group PIE (what a disgusting acronym, by the way)....lower general awareness, I suppose

- Some men were happy to talk openly about having sex with under-age adolescent girls (though rape or sex with pre-pubescent girls would've been completely unacceptable). One common saying that I recall was something like "if there's grass on the pitch, they're old enough to play!" ("grass" being pubic hair). I found this distasteful even then, but wouldn't have challenged it as it was generally deemed to be an acceptable thing to say - risqué, cheesy, but acceptable. I'd have grinned inanely and silently thought the bloke was a distasteful prat. Many would have done likewise. Others would have laughed, agreed, slapped him on the back and said "good lad!". Very few people (men, anyway) would have challenged him or expressed disgust.

 

Attitudes were very different then in some ways. Homosexuality was widely seen as a disgusting perversion. "A woman's place is in the home" was a commonly-held belief. Words like "wog" and "nigger" were used widely, not just by active racists. Asians were seen by many as pathetic, subservient people and second-class citizens.

 

Some of this was just due to ignorance, the recent arrival of immigrant groups, fear of change etc. I suspect that a lot of what now seem (and were) very dodgy sexual attitudes were a knock-on from all the "liberated thinking" of the 60s/hippy era...it brought some good stuff, but some very bad stuff, too. This probably also explains the willingness of the NCCL to accept a group like PIE, at least until they'd proved themselves disreputable...."gotta support liberation, haven't you?!"

 

I'd welcome the memories of any fellow old gits out there who can confirm or deny what I've said. Obviously, I'm just one bloke, who grew up in a particular place, so my memories might not be typical in some way...

That's an excellent post Alf as much as we have access to history, you can't replicate living it.

 

You and Zingari have related most of what I would have said but I would add that the moral structure of society was quite different before say 1964 when in my view everything changed. 

 

Using foul language in front of women and children was castigated by anyone in earshot. "Dirty" jokes, as they were then called, were not told except in male company.

 

Sex before marriage was shameful and the condemnation that followed was unrelenting, the child was a bastard and treated like one. 

 

Girls or even young women who became pregnant, were sent away if the parents could afford it. This would avoid that person and moreover the family from having a an unmarried family member walking around the neighbourhood. In fact many couples had to get married to avoid that shame.

 

Abortion was illegal. Censorship was rife, so discussion of sex, nudity and the like were kept to the bedroom. If I'd even use a word like "sex" in conversation I would probably have got a slap on my face and told to wash my mouth out. Even sex education wasn't taught at my school.

 

In so saying, a subject like this just would not have been talked about and if discovered would have been such a rare crime, I can't remember anything of the sort.

 

What did go on, I believe, was child abuse from a family friend or member. The very fact that the children talking about the subject and feared the response from the family of such an accusation, fueled the silence, not dissimilar to Catholic boys by priests.

[Zingari]

 

"  I said we should  screw the MINERS  you twat !!

[Finnegan]

" I said we should screw the MINERS you twat !!

lol!!!!

[Alf Bentley]

[...] I would add that the moral structure of society was quite different before say 1964 when in my view everything changed. 

 

 

"Before 1964"? You've trumped me there, Smudge. I was only 2 back then. Well, I did issue a call for fellow old gits....and got an even older git! 

 

Excellent post, though. Although my memory doesn't go back that far, things I know from family certainly confirm much of what you've said.

 

 

 

"  I said we should  screw the MINERS  you twat !!

 

 

I've only just registered the acronym on their medals/placards...  The gall of the bloke is unbelievable (and before all the Tories jump in, I wouldn't blame Thatcher for not knowing...though her advisers should have made it their job to know, seeing as half the world seemed to be in on the secret)

[Bellend Sebastian]

Yep - paedophile refers to people with an attraction to pre-pubescent children, attraction to people who've gone through puberty but aren't over the age of consent is an ephebophile (if they're still going through puberty they're a hebephile)

 

Paedophile, ephepophile, hebephile, let's call the whole thing off.

 

Seriously though, this point about your perception of things changing as a parent is true.  Since the birth of my son, the tragedy of young people getting stabbed, choking on their own sick after a night out, killed in car accidents resonates with me in a way it never did before - although I found that stuff sad, I'm now aware that these victims are someone's son or daughter and how horrible that must be for the parents.  That said, the thought of him being the victim of a predatory paedophile doesn't really cross my mind, if I'm honest.  I've been party to conversations - mercifully few, I'll admit - where people have been so obsessed with the possibility of someone ****ing their kids that it's been quite awkward, and made me wonder where it's coming from

[Smudge]

"Before 1964"? You've trumped me there, Smudge. I was only 2 back then. Well, I did issue a call for fellow old gits....and got an even older git! 

 

Excellent post, though. Although my memory doesn't go back that far, things I know from family certainly confirm much of what you've said.

Yep, soixante huit, can't wait till this time next year 

[Webbo]

"Before 1964"? You've trumped me there, Smudge. I was only 2 back then. Well, I did issue a call for fellow old gits....and got an even older git! 

 

Excellent post, though. Although my memory doesn't go back that far, things I know from family certainly confirm much of what you've said.

 

 

 According to "today's birthdays" your 98 today.