Allow legal sex at 13 to stop 'old men abuse persecutions', says barrister

A senior Barrister of Hardwicke Chambers in London has called for the age of consent to be lowered to '13' ' To end the persecution of old men'

She has also called for an end to anonymity for complainants.

In a controversial intervention, Barbara Hewson, a senior barrister at Hardwicke chambers in London, also called for the end of anonymity for complainants. The lawyer, who specialises in reproductive rights also claimed crimes committed by disgraced broadcaster Stuart Hall were ''low level misdemeanours''.

I think this woman must be sick in the head! How could she justify this?

But amid the storm of comdenation, she stood by her comments today as she quoted François-Marie Arouet, the 18th century philosopher, in her bid to defend her "opinion".

s ource

One of the things that surprises me the most about this is that it came from a woman. Generally speaking female lawyers are in the business of demonising male sexuality

She has to be friggin kidding???? There is entirely too much molestation of kids by old men, so the solution is to decriminalize the molestation of kids by old men?? Oh what a brilliant move! Why not just eliminate the whole crime and issue of murder ..by making IT legal too! Funny how we could be a crime free society, overnight, if we simply change some language in the 'ol criminal code, huh?

I think the person SAYING a thing like this needs some hard core looking after by authorities who know what to be looking for. Something stinks in this one like corruption and evil on steroids. What a perfectly obscene and filthy thing to suggest!

(* Not you, OP... It's important to share such stories ..so we can see how far any sense of basic decency has fallen among some people)

reply to post by Lady_Tuatha


I wonder when the consensual age laws began in this country, because back in the day you could marry/sleep with young children and it wasn't even frowned upon. Regardless, this person obviously has no children to say something like that...

Originally posted by jhn7537
reply to post by Lady_Tuatha

 

I wonder when the consensual age laws began in this country, because back in the day you could marry/sleep with young children and it wasn't even frowned upon. Regardless, this person obviously has no children to say something like that... [/quot




In the Victorian era the age of consent for females was raised from thirteen to sixteen.

edit on 9-5-2013 by hotel1 because: (no reason given)

Ms Hewson argued that ''touching a 17-year-old's breast, kissing a 13-year-old, or putting one's hand up a 16-year-old's skirt'' are not comparable to cases such as the Ealing Vicarage rape or Fordingbridge gang rape and murders from 1986. She added: ''Anyone suggesting otherwise has lost touch with reality.''

I honestly cant believe she is serious!

Lowering the age of consent would put more young people at risk from sexual predators surely!

i'm actually surprised the age of consent is 16 and is accepted by many countries, they are still retarded at that age. Still needs holding hand, still needs money from parents but damn it to hell if they get involved in their sex life!

Mid-Teen kids are not matured like 100 yrs ago.

reply to post by Lady_Tuatha


I'd say it is her, who has lost touch with reality. When she can honestly make the case for setting levels of wrong to rape or molestation of kids by adults? Well.... The only distinction I see is the possible one for length of prison term. It sure isn't a question of right or wrong. Ouch... She needs some professional help....and perhaps a look into her own past. Was she the product of molestation? I hear that can warp a person's whole future life in how they view such things ..even make them prone to become ones who perpetuate the cycle. Certainly not in ALL cases ...but her statements make me wonder more than most.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I agree. Seems to me that she must have some sort of issues on the subject to be so forthright. Something does not ring right there at all. To have such a view. Strange.

found her article from spiked online magazine.

What is strikingly different today is how Britain’s law-enforcement apparatus has been infiltrated by moral crusaders, like the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) and the National Association for People Abused in Childhood (NAPAC). Both groups take part in Operation Yewtree, which looks into alleged offences both by and not by Savile.

These pressure groups have a vested interest in universalising the notion of abuse, making it almost as prevalent as original sin, but with the modern complication that it carries no possibility of redemption, only ‘survival’. The problem with this approach is that it makes abuse banal, and reduces the sympathy that we should feel for victims of really serious assaults

Spiked

It's a sad world where laws are attempted to be set in place - to benefit the predator.

Predators are the human beings that deserve a ticket to death. They are dangerous, and see themselves somehow as more important, or better than everyone else. More entitled. The laws somehow don't apply to them in their minds... Yet, we're just going to lower the age of legal consent so we can redefine the predators... and give them more rope to tie up their prey! These are children! Those old farts will target - legally - if that act would be sent through! (I can't believe they would send it through though).

To think that this woman thinks a 13 year old has learned enough in life to have an emotional maturity equal to that of an adult! How in the world did she get her position? And here I thought American politics had all the whack a doodles. They're found the world over... I swear it has to be the power. It corrupts... I can't believe they all started that way - instead I have to believe, their swayed once they enter the viper pit... The minds a soft thing, easily changed and bended...

Cirque

Young people today are dealing with bullying/violence at home/school/internet, drugs/alcohol, teenage pregnancy, and STDs. The number of children diagnosed with ADD etc. is also on the rise yet this moron addresses the need of disgusting old men???

I agree with luciddream young teens today aren't mature enough to handle what they've already got on their plate.

Unless she's 13 it's not her call. She needs to ask 13 year old kids what they think about creepy old men feeling them up at will. She might like it but she really shouldn't be speaking for 13 year old children.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Well said Wrabbit; the first thing I thought of (warped mind?) to much radiation change the acceptable levels. To much of anything harmful, but money making, change the law so it will be acceptable. To many old powerful men diddling little girls change the age of consent!! The Georgia Guide stone may be correct with such thinking being rampant today?

reply to post by 727Sky

Indeed... In some ways, we're becoming the modern version of Sodom and Gomorrah. Let's hope that doesn't carry clear into the true sense of a couple unwanted visitors to correct matters. I don't recall the story being all that discriminating about who got corrected in the end.

That was back before even that text got it's P.C. Part II, where everything was warm and fuzzy and consequence came with 'get outta hell free' cards, eh?

Wow that is the very definition of insanity, 13 year olds are still baby's they aren't even fully grown, must be sick in the head.

I get that a lot of sucky situations arise because a 19 year old loves a 17 year old or even 18 and 16 but 13 is too young for anyone but other 13 year olds and then it shouldn't be anything other than hand holding and pg-13 romance movies. Old men have no business putting their hands on anyone under eighteen period.

if some old man trys to put their hand on my daughter when she is thirteen, i'll freaking chop their hand off.


Jeez get that lady a shrink please.

reply to post by Lady_Tuatha


If there is any justice in the world,that crazy bint will be unemployed before the week is out-she has no place in the British judicial system with views like that IMO.

I wonder if she would hold the same views if she had been abused as a child?

i predict that if we let our world succumb to pedophelia that the occurances of voices will rise with it.

i posted this on the other thread but....


In the Vatican the age of consent is 12…..


Just saying..

I would argue that there are two key components to establishing the age of sexual consent, firstly I think it should be based on the age of the full development of sexual organs, that is to say when girls have their period and boys, well balls drops. So we average out what ever age that is and that should be factored in to establishing the age of consent, right now that might put it at 14 ( I don’t know the exact stats). In other words the age at which a individual is able to take part in the act of sex and conceive a child should be a factor in establishing the age of consent.

Now before you all start calling me a monster I would point out that there is perhaps even more important factor and that is the mental ability to comprehend the act itself and have the sexual maturity to understand the act. I Don’t think that 14 year olds have that maturity and I don’t even think that 16 year olds have it either, I know I didn’t. As such I believe the age of consent should be 18, but even that is pushing it, this factor creates quite a interesting argument.

So what do I think of what this barrister has to say about lowering the age of consent to 13, quite frankly I think she should be stripped of her right to practice law for such stupidity. You will note above I have stressed the importance of sexual maturity but more so than that we need to enforce a higher age of consent to protect children from dangerous individuals. Any attempt to lower the age of sexual consent should be challenged in the strongest possible way.

We need to keep our kids safe from these old men this barrister is protecting!

I think we need make the laws against those who seek to harm our kids even harsher, I would not be opposed to chemical castration and forced hard labour for anyone who harms a child.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


www.google.com... ,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.46340616,d.aWc&biw=1024&bih=704&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=FeiLUdSrM5KPyAGPzYHwCg