UK Barrister - "Age of Consent Should Be 13 - To End The Persecution Of Old Men"

Wow, i had to double check i read that correctly!

Barbara Hewson told online magazine Spiked that the move was necessary in the wake of the Jimmy Savile scandal to end the "persecution of old men". She also said that complainants should no longer receive anonymity.

Among those to have been convicted is former BBC broadcaster Stuart Hall, who admitted 14 charges of indecently assaulting girls, including one aged nine, between 1967 and 1985. Ms Hewson described Hall's crimes as "low-level misdemeanours" which "ordinarily... would not be prosecuted".

She said 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 crimes comparable to gang rapes and murders and "anyone suggesting otherwise has lost touch with reality".

BBC Source

I strongly recommend posters read this article, There is a lot to take issue with hence my 3 Ex-texts (Sorry mods) For anyone outside of the UK, we've been plagued with a lot of nationally famous people being uncovered as sexual predators, committing crimes against children as young as 9. The Jimmy Saville case seemed to only scratch the surface of what's been going on over the last 5-6 decades.

The age of consent for the UK is currently 16 years old and i think that's fine. It isnt a law that people really take notice of but i believe it to be needed to stop ADULTS from sleeping with CHILDREN. In the eyes of the law you are not an adult until the age of 18 and so until that point you need a legal guardian for a few things.

Im actually sickened that a barrister would insinuate that we need to protect these people who have committed crimes in the eyes of the current law. Who really wants to live in a world where its LEGAL for an adult to sleep with a 13 year old? Seriously? I hope this isnt the beginning of trying to "sympathise" with child molesters. I dont encourage murder and accept that it is a problem not easily solved, but never in my life will i ever agree that your average teenager is mature enough to enter into a sexual relationship with an adult. Never.

Any comments?

If you lower it to half a month old, you'll put an end to pedophilia too.

Brilliant.

Sixteen is the age of consent in the U.K. now, and that is young enough. Ah, to be 15 and illegal again.

Originally posted by FraternitasSaturni
If you lower it to half a month old, you'll put an end to pedophilia too.

Brilliant.

Dark humour haha

Its just crazy that anyone would even think of lowering the age of consent so that we stop prosecuting sexual predators

Alan Watt and I are not shocked by this news.

Angry, but not shocked.

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.

I had to read that twice too.
s&f

Nasty stuff. 13 is too young. Even if they did lower it to that age a man who goes with a 13yr old is still a dirty old man in my eyes. I wonder if this barrister has kids?

We should raise it if anything.

Slightly off topic but to me it seems like the bbc is some sort of pedo ring with all these scandals lately...

Many years ago (and still the case in some regions) age was no big deal as long as the female was old enough to bear children.
Society has made it a big deal now. Its ridiculous when a 20 year old man is sent to prison for having consensual sex with a 15 year old girl.
Doesnt matter if they loved each other or not, the mans life gets ruined while the prosecutors high five each other for getting another dangerous "pedophile" off the streets

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin

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

That's Religion for you....!!

God the world is going to hell in a hand cart today.........

That Barrister should be ashamed and made to work in some form of re-habiiatation

PDUK

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
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.

I think that was a very thoughtful post, dont agree with you so much on the physical aspect side of age but the emotional mentality is where it really matters. I dont really have a problem with young adults getting intimate with each other - So long as they're educated about protection and so forth. But you're absolutely right that the age of consent is there to protect these children/teens from individuals with malicious intentions. I honestly never thought i would ever come across something like that, a barrister wanting to protect old men who have abused under-age people over a period of decades. Makes me wonder just how deep rooted this problem is. Who else has been getting away with breaking the law due to their status in society? *Shakes head*

Originally posted by Berzerked
Many years ago (and still the case in some regions) age was no big deal as long as the female was old enough to bear children.
Society has made it a big deal now. Its ridiculous when a 20 year old man is sent to prison for having consensual sex with a 15 year old girl.
Doesnt matter if they loved each other or not, the mans life gets ruined while the prosecutors high five each other for getting another dangerous "pedophile" off the streets

If he knowingly broke the law then who is at fault here?

Teenagers need time to develop emotionally and letting them get into relationships with people who have a few years on them could be irresponsible to say the least. A 20 year old drug dealer could be grooming someone for the life of prostitution. Offer the teen some heroin - They trust you so they take it, suddenly their hooked and need to pay for their addiction, they're now at the mercy of the dealer and the drug.

We have laws for reasons.

reply to post by SearchLightsInc


I agree I think that the emotional and psychological capability to comprehend all aspects of sex is just as important as the physical ability to engage in the act. Most 14 year olds are able to engage in the act but they lack the sexual maturity to really understand the possible consequences of what they are doing, they do it because its “cool” and don’t want a “virgin” label rather than because they are in love or even because they want to. That’s why I think 18 is a fair age of consent.

It's worth remembering why the age of consent stands at sixteen.
As late as 1885 it was raised from thirteen to sixteen, largely because of a campaign run by the journalist W.T, Stead. He exposed the fact that girls under that age were being sold to brothels on the Continent. One of the rewards for his journalistic work was being sent to prison, because he had to arrange for a thirteen year-old girl to be "purchased" in order to obtain his evidence.

The age-limit was raised to protect girls from exploitation.
The implication is that reducing the limit would make them vulnerable to exploitation all over again.

There is nothing too wrong with a fourteen year old girl going out with a sixteen year old boy. There is nothing wrong with a seventeen year old girl going out with a twenty year old guy. Or vise versa.

I do have a problem with a lot older men dating a younger school girl though. Lets keep things sensible. I know more than a few people who got married young, having a child when the girl was sixteen and the boy was over eighteen but less than twenty one. Many of our grandparents followed this trend, we are here now. I do not care for old guys chasing young girls though. I know of a few that do that.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


I'm inclined to agree even though the subject makes me uncomfortable simpl because in the history of humanity people didn't used to live as long so people were considered adults around age 13-14 for the very reason you just gave, because they could have children. There were also arranged marrages were it was not uncommon for older accomplished men to be paired with a much youger girl. There was even a time when waiting into your twenties to have children as a woman was considered old. Just some things to think about when considering the subject.

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by SearchLightsInc

 

That’s why I think 18 is a fair age of consent.

That's what I think it should be.

I can't go and buy a packet of fags if I look under 21, I can't go get some beer if I look under 25 but I can legally create life at the immature age of 16... it just doesn't add up...

UK Barrister - "Age of Consent Should Be 13 - To End The Persecution Of Old Men",

Make that, 'dirty old men'.

reply to post by SearchLightsInc


So it looks like we have a Pedophile making laws for Pedophiles.

How disgusting. It is PATHETIC.

There is no child mentally capable of making that kind decision for consent.

Children are easily influenced. It would not be hard for some Dirty Old Man to hand over a bag of candy and talk a child into it.

All I can say is .. "Watch After your Children Parents because it won't be much longer that they won't have the protection of the laws that were created to PROTECT them".

reply to post by ShadellacZumbrum

So it looks like we have a Pedophile making laws for Pedophiles.

There is nothing to say that she is a paedophile, yes what she has to say is disgusting and I couldn’t disagree with her anymore but her words don’t make her a paedophile.

Also she is a barrister, she is not making the laws.

i disagree 100% with your above statement

My first time ever was with a 13 year old girl...when I was 15!

13 is just too young for a grown man, I agree some do have womanly curves at 13 but it's far from the norm.
I think 16 is still a bit young in some case but the majority can consent and understand the implications of their actions.

I still wouldn't qualify it like pedophilia because 13 is nothing like 9-10 years old.

Maybe a new term is needed for the teenager age range.