11 into 20 goes - but no jail for her (20 year old)

[Rude-boy]

TTwiggy said:

xjay1337 said:

This equality bullst really does make you wonder...

It must make a lot of women wonder too - wonder when it might become something other than a theory.

Women are subject to inequality in almost every aspect of life. They earn less than men, have less opportunities, are overwhelmingly found in the 'victim' status in domestic violence... I could go on.

I don't see many threads on here decrying these – and other – inequalities, so I'm always intrigued by the outpourings when, very occaisionally, this inequality works in a woman's favour. You might almost think that a lot of people on here don't like women very much.

You really need to get out more mate.

You will see thousands of posts where people are in favour of equality. 100% equality. None of this 'quota' or 'positive discrimination' BS

[TTwiggy]

Rude-boy said:

You really need to get out more mate.

You will see thousands of posts where people are in favour of equality. 100% equality. None of this 'quota' or 'positive discrimination' BS

You must be reading them a very different way to me then 'mate'. I see plenty of posts demanding equality where it seems that a woman has received some sort of preferential treatment, but I don't see many (any?) about the inequalities that women suffer.

In this apparently civilised and equal country, on average two women die every week as a result of domestic violence. I've yet to see this make the NP&E frontpage.

[AyBee]

TTwiggy said:

You must be reading them a very different way to me then 'mate'. I see plenty of posts demanding equality where it seems that a woman has received some sort of preferential treatment, but I don't see many (any?) about the inequalities that women suffer.

In this apparently civilised and equal country, on average two women die every week as a result of domestic violence. I've yet to see this make the NP&E frontpage.

And if you head over to mumsnet, you'll probably find the complete opposite of here because the demographic here is mainly male and the demographic over there is mainly female. The problem I have with gender equality is that equality should mean equal in all respects, not just equal in those respects to which we feel we might like them. You can't honestly tell me, that if the genders were turned on their head in this scenario, that the result would be the same...

[TTwiggy]

AyBee said:

And if you head over to mumsnet, you'll probably find the complete opposite of here because the demographic here is mainly male and the demographic over there is mainly female. The problem I have with gender equality is that equality should mean equal in all respects, not just equal in those respects to which we feel we might like them. You can't honestly tell me, that if the genders were turned on their head in this scenario, that the result would be the same...

This particular scenario can't be 'turned on its head' as, unless you're incredibly naive about the mechanics of sex, you must realise that the boy was at least 'keen' on the act occuring.

She has been convicted of a sex offence - rightly - and will be on the register for seven years - rightly. Sentencing is a complicated 'art' and without all the facts that the judge will have had access to it's pointless speculating on the whys anf wheres of what she was handed.

We will never, sadly, have full gender equality. We have a long history of patriarchal societal systems that aren't about to be torn down in a hurry. Women are usually the victims of this, very occasionally the system conspires to make them 'winners'.

[ATG]

Equality in all respects even though there are some pretty obvious innate differences in our biology and psychology, particularly when it comes to our sexuality ... which should hardly be a shocking idea given that we choose to class ourselves as men or women because the differences are so bloody obvious. You might want to rethink what complete equality actually means.

[TTwiggy]

ATG said:

Equality in all respects even though there are some pretty obvious innate differences in our biology and psychology, particularly when it comes to our sexuality ... which should hardly be a shocking idea given that we choose to class ourselves as men or women because the differences are so bloody obvious. You might want to rethink what complete equality actually means.

I wouldn't disgree with any of that, but if you accept that women will never be 'equal' to men (and, as a result, will generally suffer, but sometimes win), then you have to also accept that men will never be 'equal' to women (and, as a result, will generally win, but sometimes suffer).

[Rude-boy]

TTwiggy said:

This particular scenario can't be 'turned on its head' as, unless you're incredibly naive about the mechanics of sex, you must realise that the boy was at least 'keen' on the act occuring.

You do realise just how close that is to those that say that if a woman orgasms whilst she is being raped it isn't rape don't you? I am not 100% sure if you are male or female but if you are male you should know a whole lot better that men, especially highly charged young ones around puberty, can't help but get an errection at the worst times possible.

[TTwiggy]

Rude-boy said:

You do realise just how close that is to those that say that if a woman orgasms whilst she is being raped it isn't rape don't you? I am not 100% sure if you are male or female but if you are male you should know a whole lot better that men, especially highly charged young ones around puberty, can't help but get an errection at the worst times possible.

I think you need to read up on how the law defines rape.

Are you seriously suggesting that he got some sort of 'fear stiffy'?

[anonymous-user]

AyBee said:

otolith said:

Another twenty year old Swindon paedophile abusing an 11 year old - this time, genders reversed, no physical contact, just sexting.

18 month suspended sentence.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/not-particula...

So 18 months suspended for sexting vs 6 months suspended for 45 seconds of fun...seems fair...

Four charges vs one.

[FredClogs]

TTwiggy said:

Rude-boy said:

You do realise just how close that is to those that say that if a woman orgasms whilst she is being raped it isn't rape don't you? I am not 100% sure if you are male or female but if you are male you should know a whole lot better that men, especially highly charged young ones around puberty, can't help but get an errection at the worst times possible.

I think you need to read up on how the law defines rape.

Are you seriously suggesting that he got some sort of 'fear stiffy'?

I've got one now - I feel violated.

[otolith]

TTwiggy said:

I think you need to read up on how the law defines rape.

Are you seriously suggesting that he got some sort of 'fear stiffy'?

Are you seriously suggesting that fking children is less serious if you manage to seduce them?

[TTwiggy]

otolith said:

TTwiggy said:

I think you need to read up on how the law defines rape.

Are you seriously suggesting that he got some sort of 'fear stiffy'?

Are you seriously suggesting that fking children is less serious if you manage to seduce them?

I'm not aware that 'seduction' has been mentioned by anyone, let alone me. She took her clothes off and they had sex. One has to presume that he was capable of the act and therefore it's fair to assume that it was her getting undressed that made him capable. I don't see any 'seduction' occuring there, more simple biology.

Edited to add - at no point have I said this was 'ok'. I'm glad she was prosecuted and glad she is on the register. The question was about perceived inequality.

[Rude-boy]

TTwiggy said:

I think you need to read up on how the law defines rape.

Are you seriously suggesting that he got some sort of 'fear stiffy'?

Please read my posts again and tell me where i have said that a woman can be guilty of rape. I learnt the correct legal definition of rape some time ago, even if i disagree with it as IMO when a man is forced to insert his penis into something against his will it is insufficent to call it 'sexual assault' as that places it on a par with a woman grabbing a man's nuts on the dace floor of a nightclub, or a man doing similar with a woman's breasts. I will leave it for you to ponder on the equality of that.

As for your 'fear stiffy' I am coming to the idea that you are not a hetrosexual man. I may be way out there but seriously? At 11 years old I could get a stiffy if I looked at a pert female arse on a TV advert. Put a naked 20 yearold girl on top of me (regardless of how pleasing or not she is on the eye) and it would likely have burst.

If it helps I have sat there with a mates ex naked and pinning me to the sofa demanding a seeing to. I had to be very careful removing her from me so as not to injure her and had a raging stiffy as she was damn fine. Intention of giving her said seeing to? Zero. Nil. Not a fking chance. Still had a boner that could lift the Severn Bridge though.

[TTwiggy]

Rude-boy said:

Please read my posts again and tell me where i have said that a woman can be guilty of rape. I learnt the correct legal definition of rape some time ago, even if i disagree with it as IMO when a man is forced to insert his penis into something against his will it is insufficent to call it 'sexual assault' as that places it on a par with a woman grabbing a man's nuts on the dace floor of a nightclub, or a man doing similar with a woman's breasts. I will leave it for you to ponder on the equality of that.

As for your 'fear stiffy' I am coming to the idea that you are not a hetrosexual man. I may be way out there but seriously? At 11 years old I could get a stiffy if I looked at a pert female arse on a TV advert. Put a naked 20 yearold girl on top of me (regardless of how pleasing or not she is on the eye) and it would likely have burst.

If it helps I have sat there with a mates ex naked and pinning me to the sofa demanding a seeing to. I had to be very careful removing her from me so as not to injure her and had a raging stiffy as she was damn fine. Intention of giving her said seeing to? Zero. Nil. Not a fking chance. Still had a boner that could lift the Severn Bridge though.

Ok - you're sharing far too much now so I'm going to bow out before there's a mental image I can't shake off.

I'll repeat what I said above. I am glad she was prosecuted. I am glad she is on the register. What I don't agree with is this being 'another case of a woman getting away with it.'

[otolith]

TTwiggy said:

I'm not aware that 'seduction' has been mentioned by anyone, let alone me. She took her clothes off and they had sex. One has to presume that he was capable of the act and therefore it's fair to assume that it was her getting undressed that made him capable. I don't see any 'seduction' occuring there, more simple biology.

And you are inferring his "keenness" from simple biology, and implying that somehow reduced her crime? I think it's completely irrelevant, and don't understand why you think it is. She wasn't charged with rape, because of the way that the law defines it, however a man could have been charged with the same crime that she was charged with.

[TTwiggy]

otolith said:

TTwiggy said:

I'm not aware that 'seduction' has been mentioned by anyone, let alone me. She took her clothes off and they had sex. One has to presume that he was capable of the act and therefore it's fair to assume that it was her getting undressed that made him capable. I don't see any 'seduction' occuring there, more simple biology.

And you are inferring his "keenness" from simple biology, and implying that somehow reduced her crime? I think it's completely irrelevant, and don't understand why you think it is. She wasn't charged with rape, because of the way that the law defines it, however a man could have been charged with the same crime that she was charged with.

The question was one of perceived inequality and what 'might have happened if things were reversed'. I was simply pointing out that a)equality doesn't exist (and that it usually works against women) and b)there is no 'turning it around' as the mechanism isn't the same.

But, you know, feel free to continue a crusade for the poor downtrodden men.

[ATG]

TTwiggy said:

I wouldn't disgree with any of that, but if you accept that women will never be 'equal' to men (and, as a result, will generally suffer, but sometimes win), then you have to also accept that men will never be 'equal' to women (and, as a result, will generally win, but sometimes suffer).

Absolutely.

[Rude-boy]

TTwiggy said:

Ok - you're sharing far too much now so I'm going to bow out before there's a mental image I can't shake off.

Just incase you are a man, please don't shake too hard, I'm not that sort of boy.

TTwiggy said:

I'll repeat what I said above. I am glad she was prosecuted. I am glad she is on the register. What I don't agree with is this being 'another case of a woman getting away with it.'

I am glad that you feel that way. I am just a little surprised that in today's World she recieved what appears such a light sentance compared to if it had been a man raping an 11 yearold girl. I say todays World because back when I was 11, so long as I omitted the bit about 45 seconds, I'd have been (and felt) a fking hero for porking the 20 yearold babysitter.

[otolith]

TTwiggy said:

The question was one of perceived inequality and what 'might have happened if things were reversed'. I was simply pointing out that a)equality doesn't exist (and that it usually works against women) and b)there is no 'turning it around' as the mechanism isn't the same.

The crime she was convicted of was "sexual activity with a child". A man can commit that offence too.

TTwiggy said:

But, you know, feel free to continue a crusade for the poor downtrodden men.

Continue to cheerlead for injustice on the basis of gender - I'm sure your patriarchal attitude to female criminals will persist for some time.

[Mr GrimNasty]

The offender is clearly what in the old days would have been called a 'simpleton', justice would not have been served with a 'proper' sentence.
It's got nothing to do with the gender of the offender (in this case).