A Place of Safety
I expect simple behaviours here. Friendship, and love.
Any advice should be from the perspective of the person asking, not the person giving!
We have had to make new membership moderated to combat the huge number of spammers who register
















You are here: Home > Forum > A Place of Safety > General Talk > Equality??
Equality??  [message #70350] Sat, 17 October 2015 17:58 Go to next message
Kitzyma is currently offline  Kitzyma

Likes it here

Registered: March 2012
Messages: 215



"Woman who groomed and abused her friend's 15-year-old son walks free from court"
< https://uk.news.yahoo.com/woman-groomed-abused-her-friends-1 53952050.htm>

If it had been
"man who groomed and abused his friend's 15-year-old son",
or
"man who groomed and abused his friend's 15-year-old daughter",
do you think there would have been prison time involved?
Re: Equality??  [message #70351 is a reply to message #70350] Sat, 17 October 2015 18:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
The Gay Deceiver is currently offline  The Gay Deceiver

Really getting into it
Location: Canada
Registered: December 2003
Messages: 869




Without question.

Warren C. E. Austin
The Gay Deceiver
Toronto, Canada



"... comme recherché qu'un délice callipygian"
Re: Equality??  [message #70354 is a reply to message #70351] Sat, 17 October 2015 18:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Smokr is currently offline  Smokr

Likes it here
Location: the burning former USofA
Registered: July 2010
Messages: 399



A 'he' would have spent his time in prison while waiting for a trial, then spent another couple of decades in there.
No doubts.
What equality?



raysstories.com
Re: Equality??  [message #70355 is a reply to message #70350] Sat, 17 October 2015 19:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
timmy

Has no life at all
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13739



Quote:
Kitzyma wrote on Sat, 17 October 2015 18:58"Woman who groomed and abused her friend's 15-year-old son walks free from court"
< https://uk.news.yahoo.com/woman-groomed-abused-her-friends-1 53952050.htm>

If it had been
"man who groomed and abused his friend's 15-year-old son",
or
"man who groomed and abused his friend's 15-year-old daughter",
do you think there would have been prison time involved?

--
Assuredly, on the face of it, there is discrimination here, positive discrimination for the heterosexual.

When a judge makes an unusual call at sentencing, often there is more to it than meets the eye, so I shall withhold my concern for the moment.

There are some odd things about all of this. Why would a heterosexual man storm out of court? Why would he have suffered for 29 years?

There are also some very weird things about the current need for a PaedoFinder General globally. Deal with those who abuse those who are truly children, yes. But the almost at age of consent teenager? She was 31 at the time, he was 15, but, unless she was grossly ugly, isn't that a heterosexual teenage boy's wet dream?

This sounds like a game of revenge, a feud, a vendetta.

Right, I'm off to lob a brick through a paediatrician's window.



Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
Re: Equality??  [message #70356 is a reply to message #70355] Sat, 17 October 2015 20:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kitzyma is currently offline  Kitzyma

Likes it here

Registered: March 2012
Messages: 215



To me, it seems more like male/female perpetrator bias rather than homo/hetero bias.

Currently ancient and retired pop starts and DJs are being pursued for having sex with (or even just 'inappropriately touching') 15-year-old girls, possibly some 30-40 years ago. At that time, the perpetrators were probably only in their 30s and the girls were probably screaming fans who were dying have intimate contact with the famous stars or DJs. If convicted, I doubt that those men would get away without doing prison time.

Now, of course, we could debate whether or not a 30-year-old having sex with a consenting 15-year-old should be a crime at all, regardless of the genders and sexualities of those involved. However, if society decides that it is a crime, it seems it seems grossly unfair to punish a male perpetrator so much more harshly than a female.
Re: Equality??  [message #70357 is a reply to message #70356] Sat, 17 October 2015 20:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
timmy

Has no life at all
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13739



Quote:
Kitzyma wrote on Sat, 17 October 2015 21:27To me, it seems more like male/female perpetrator bias rather than homo/hetero bias.

Currently ancient and retired pop starts and DJs are being pursued for having sex with (or even just 'inappropriately touching') 15-year-old girls, possibly some 30-40 years ago. At that time, the perpetrators were probably only in their 30s and the girls were probably screaming fans who were dying have intimate contact with the famous stars or DJs. If convicted, I doubt that those men would get away without doing prison time.

Now, of course, we could debate whether or not a 30-year-old having sex with a consenting 15-year-old should be a crime at all, regardless of the genders and sexualities of those involved. However, if society decides that it is a crime, it seems it seems grossly unfair to punish a male perpetrator so much more harshly than a female.

--
My apologies. I should also have noted the male vs female thing. That was a careless reply while watching France get a record score in the rugby, though against themselves!



Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
Re: Equality??  [message #70362 is a reply to message #70357] Sun, 18 October 2015 17:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
larkin is currently offline  larkin

Toe is in the water
Location: Massachusetts
Registered: June 2015
Messages: 58



With all the economic worries and malfeasance, robbing people's pension funds and manipulation of the markets, you would wonder why the International Business Times out of New York would worry itself with a low key scandal out of Liverpool, UK!  
 
The story opens up with the inflammatory term, "sexual plaything"  Then explains that injured party was a 15 year old boy,  who is today, 44 which the article doesn't mention...I had to do the math.
 
The accused is a 62 year old woman but the incident took place 29 years ago which meant that I had to do some math to discover that she was 33 at the time. . 
 
At first glance it gives the impression that the 62 year old woman accosted a 15 year old boy.  It is not exactly dishonesty but it is deceptive and all in all bad reporting.
 
Further along it describes the situation as shameful and grotesque.   
 
Where did this take place? Was it at home where his mother or partner could prohibit the woman from coming over?  If it was the woman's apartment why did the boy continue to go there?  I doubt that the boy have his own apartment at 15?  At 15 was it really that hard to avoid this woman?

I think that the boy's parents just didn't have the guts to tell the woman to get lost and instead, looked the other way.. .  
 
I can only think that he is preparing for a civil law suit.  Issues like this are not that uncommon and are rightfully family matters and not police matters. 
 
You guys are basically right.  If this had been a queer encounter they would be saying things like, "The evil man murdered the boy's soul"  and stuff like that.  The man might get 20 years but the in the US, sex offender registry is almost as Draconian as the 1935 Nuremberg, Jewish exclusionary laws.
 
A mentor inclined homosexual, seeking an acolyte is equated with horrible mutilation or murder in the public's eyes today and there isn't much that can be done about it.

Personally, I always enjoyed being regarded as a sexual plaything.  Who wouldn't?

[Updated on: Sun, 18 October 2015 17:22]

Re: Equality??  [message #70366 is a reply to message #70362] Mon, 19 October 2015 02:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ChrisR is currently offline  ChrisR

Likes it here
Location: Western US
Registered: October 2014
Messages: 136



"larkin wrote on Sun, 18 October 2015 17:15"
Personally, I always enjoyed being regarded as a sexual plaything.  Who wouldn't?

--
I wouldn't.

With peers and friends, sure. Their older bothers? Could be. Older sisters? Meh. Sort of depends. But that's about the limit for it. Beyond that, they're no longer fellow travelers along the exciting path to adulthood. They're perverts.

I've often wished I was an attorney. I'd check out these mass accusations of child molestation, or adult molestation for that matter, as in the whole Bill Cosby charade. I'd find who in the group of claimants was the last one molested, and sue all the rest of them for being unindicted co-conspirators whose silence allowed my client to be yet another victim. I'd skip those who might not yet be say, up to 25 years old; perhaps they could still have trauma from their tween/teen experience. But beyond that, they need to grow up long before there's cash on the barrelhead involved.

And this case, where the man waits a quarter of a century plus to say a word? Should be tossed out on his ass.
Re: Equality??  [message #70370 is a reply to message #70366] Mon, 19 October 2015 23:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mark

Likes it here
Location: Earth
Registered: April 2013
Messages: 275



I read once that the reason that men in man/girl relationships tend to get so much more punishment than women in woman/boy relationships (at least in the U.S.) is where the pregnancy (if one happened) would occur - with a woman/boy, it would occur with the adult, who would (at least in theory) be in a better position to deal with a pregnancy and all (physically, mentally, and emotionally) that went along with it, while in a man/girl relationship it would occur with the youth, who may or may not be in as good a position to deal with a pregnancy.

At least that's the theory anyway, as it was explained to me.
Re: Equality??  [message #70371 is a reply to message #70370] Tue, 20 October 2015 00:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
James Matthews is currently offline  James Matthews

Toe is in the water
Location: United Kingdom
Registered: May 2015
Messages: 93



Whilst I am not sure what gratification a 31 year old woman could gain sexually from a 15 year old boy I do have to ask - Where were the parents? I think we (or the judge more importantly) need to look at that aspect because as far as I could read both the boy's mother and father knew this woman was pushing the boundaries of what is acceptable behavior when messing with their son. I think they should have been handed suspended sentences for not putting a stop to it all those years ago.

As for the subject of abuse, I have to agree with Timmy. I clearly remember being 15 myself and damn well knew what was right and wrong, even sexually, so I am struggling to buy the I didn't know what was happening attitude this (now) man seems to have taken. 

It seems ever since the Jimmy Saville case in the UK the Justice system seems to want to make an example out of everyone. Its even got to the point that people can make accusations against innocent people, ruin their lives, careers and family with no consequences just to get in the paper and make a few quid! Now don't get me wrong, an adult interfering with a child is coherently wrong and I do stand by the police for pursuing these historical crimes as were the seriousness of some of them... and yes most of them were true and shocking to read, however it does feel like we have lost the measured approach judging by the article in this thread. The boy was 15, this we know. But say in todays law, if this woman had had sex with him on his 16th birthday this would never have even got to court right? I realize the age of consent in 1986 was NOT 16 but still, for god sake let common sense prevail since we are supposed to be an intelligent species!  
Re: Equality??  [message #70372 is a reply to message #70370] Tue, 20 October 2015 00:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ChrisR is currently offline  ChrisR

Likes it here
Location: Western US
Registered: October 2014
Messages: 136



I think that is indeed a great part of it, yeah. From the logical perspective it makes sense. But I believe that at least in part the justification is that "guys really want it" so it's not such a big deal.

Junior year chemistry (age 16-17) I'll wager half of the guys were thinking more about 'biology' with our blonde bombshell of a teacher. Come to think of it, the other half was probably thinking about what was happening to that first half at that moment! Not a lot of chemistry was learned that year.
Re: Equality??  [message #70373 is a reply to message #70370] Tue, 20 October 2015 00:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ChrisR is currently offline  ChrisR

Likes it here
Location: Western US
Registered: October 2014
Messages: 136



I think that is indeed a great part of it, yeah. From the logical perspective it makes sense. But I believe that at least in part the justification is that "guys really want it" so it's not such a big deal.

Junior year chemistry (age 16-17) I'll wager half of the guys were thinking more about 'biology' with our blonde bombshell of a teacher. Come to think of it, the other half was probably thinking about what was happening to that first half at that moment! Not a lot of chemistry was learned that year.
Re: Equality??  [message #70375 is a reply to message #70370] Tue, 20 October 2015 00:44 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ChrisR is currently offline  ChrisR

Likes it here
Location: Western US
Registered: October 2014
Messages: 136



I think that is indeed a great part of it, yeah. From the logical perspective it makes sense. But I believe that at least in part the justification is that "guys really want it" so it's not such a big deal.

Junior year chemistry (age 16-17) I'll wager half of the guys were thinking more about 'biology' with our blonde bombshell of a teacher. Come to think of it, the other half was probably thinking about what was happening to that first half at that moment! Not a lot of chemistry was learned that year.
Re: Equality??  [message #70376 is a reply to message #70370] Tue, 20 October 2015 00:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ChrisR is currently offline  ChrisR

Likes it here
Location: Western US
Registered: October 2014
Messages: 136



I think that is indeed a great part of it, yeah. From the logical perspective it makes sense. But I believe that at least in part the justification is that "guys really want it" so it's not such a big deal.

Junior year chemistry (age 16-17) I'll wager half of the guys were thinking more about 'biology' with our blonde bombshell of a teacher. Come to think of it, the other half was probably thinking about what was happening to that first half at that moment! Not a lot of chemistry was learned that year.
Re: Equality??  [message #70377 is a reply to message #70373] Tue, 20 October 2015 00:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mark

Likes it here
Location: Earth
Registered: April 2013
Messages: 275



Back in high school, we studied the novel "Ethan Frome" (a novel in which the titular character falls in love with his wife's much younger cousin) in English class one year, and as part of the lesson, expanded a bit into discussing the movie "The Graduate" (Dustin Hoffman's first major role, in which he plays a recent college graduate who moves home and winds up in a sexual relationship with a much older woman who's a friend of his parents and who has a daughter his age).  The idea, as the teacher presented it, that both had was that sometimes older individuals have a relationship with a much younger individual because it makes the older individual feel young again.

One thing I've learned is that, for supposedly being the dominant species on this planet, we're not very logical sometimes.  At age 15, you're right - we do tend to have a pretty good idea of what's right and wrong (and if we don't, then someone dropped the ball big time).  Heck, once upon a time it was perfectly acceptable (both legally and socially) for a 15 year old to be married and starting their own family (I've heard that if Shakespeare's "Romeo and Juliet" were to portrayed in full historical accuracy, the titular characters would have been about 13 years of age!).  Somewhere along the line it became less and less acceptable (first socially, then legally) for teenagers to be making out.
Re: Equality??  [message #70379 is a reply to message #70362] Tue, 20 October 2015 18:40 Go to previous message
The Gay Deceiver is currently offline  The Gay Deceiver

Really getting into it
Location: Canada
Registered: December 2003
Messages: 869




>At first glance it gives the impression that the 62 year old woman accosted a 15 year old boy. It is not exactly dishonesty but it is deceptive and all in all bad reporting.<

I too wonder why the International Business Times out of New York would worry itself with a low key scandal out of Liverpool, UK!.

25-years ago, or thereabouts, here in Toronto we suffered through what would become known as the "Tricks for Tix" scandal at Maple Leaf Gardens, wherein a middle-aged man came forward to the Toronto Police claiming all manner of sexual abuse and interference when he was 16-years old.

The substance of the claim was that as a youth he wanted tickets for various concerts and sports events at the Gardens and was able to obtain them free-of-cost by performing a variety of sexual favours for the purveyor of the tickets, who aged-21 at the time was employed by the Gardens as a Ticket Agent.

Procter & Gamble, much to its' shame, championed the youth's (then a 47-years old adult) cause and threatened all media in Canada with a complete withdrawal of their commercial dollars unless the story was slammed home as being a 52-year old man diddling a 16-year old kid. Of course the truth was decidedly different, that of course being a kid of 16 doing whatever it took him to get his tickets free from another aged-21.

This went on for some months until the case was about to be heard by our Courts, when the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, the State-owned  publicly funded Television Network) blew the whistle on Procter & Gamble, saying they wouldn't play ball and began reporting the stories true facts. During the trial it emerged that aside from the one youngster, apparently there were dozens of others that took advantage of the free tickets, which further complicated things, and it's now been in Court on and off for much of these intervening 25-years, with no end in sight unless the accused should expire.

Double this up with the "Married With Children" advertising debacle which occurred just around the same time, and Procter & Gamble were not popular with a good many people including the then fledgling LGBTQ special interest groups. It would be another 20-years before Procter & Gamble would emerge as the sweetheart of LGBTQ causes that it is today.

So I have to ask who is pressing the International Business Times to feature this item?

Warren C. E. Austin
The Gay Deceiver
Toronto, Canada

[Updated on: Wed, 21 October 2015 09:13]




"... comme recherché qu'un délice callipygian"
Previous Topic: Milkboys and the thought police
Next Topic: Ronny and I
Goto Forum: