Prince Andrew Can't Sweat

Oh and it's nothing to do with girls and men. It's to do with age. So if the girls connected with Epstein had been boys I would feel exactly the same. And I think Maxwell was predatory and abusive so nothing to do with the sex of the offender.

You see Galaxy, I don’t think I was to young at 17 to make my decisions. I certainly believe that my liaison with an older man was one of the best things that ever happened to me.

And an experience with a 17 year old one if the worst.

16 is the legal age of consent here, though I dislike the term ‘consent’ as if it’s all one sided. I would always abide by the law. But there seems to be an awful lot of judgemental imposing of personal morals and tastes on people who are legally free to make their own decisions.

I am not judging the 17 year old in the slightest.

Peasblossom your positive experience isn’t being disputed or criticised. No laws were broken, no one was exploited or hurt
Maxwell snd Epstein we’re convicted of offences relating to the sexual exploitation of children
No comparison

And there are variations with regard to the age of consent in the UK, it is 18 for some activities. A man locally to me was charged because of his activities with a 17 year old. And the law is very different with regard to trafficking.

A trafficked individual is not deemed able to give informed consent

Was the 19 year old who lived with Giuffrie whilst she was allegedly exploited by Epstein and who paid regular visits to
Epstein’s house guilty of sex with an underage girl ?

I agree there’s no comparison and I know I’m diverting the thread a bit. But there is an awful lot of judgement of relationship s in general on this post.

It’s the age difference that matters
Any middle aged man that has sex with a teenager is sleazy
Seven year olds can’t make decisions about their own lives.

And weirdly, it can legally be regarded as less coercive if the male is seventeen than if he’s thirty seven. Regardless of what happens.
?

Seventeen year olds obviously

Ok Peasblossom , I can agree with what you have stated,
However IMO it is without doubt all about the arrogant behaviour of men who cannot connect their behaviour with young girls as being beyond the pale when they themselves may have daughters themselves.
They would either be ok with their daughters being a part of this culture or they would be horrified….. if they found it horrific then we can assume that they believe themselves to entitled to do what they like because these girls are up for it & just don’t matter. That is what makes it so shameful.

But arrogant, exploitative attitudes to women have nothing to do with age per se. That’s people making judgemental assertions.

Is it that you think the experience of having a daughter should make them see things differently?

I think it’s quite wrong (and immoral) for anyone to condemn a whole group (middle aged men) and a whole set of relationships (age difference) based on their own particular taste rather than on the facts of what happened in one case.

I wouldn’t like to think of them on jury euthanasia those kind of unjustified prejudices.

Now that would be wrong.

How with turned into euthanasia I have no idea.

It is everything isn’t it? Age , Vulnerability , exploitation. Etc
This should not become insignificant to the behaviour of humans.

No one is doing that though are we. As I have clearly stated I feel Maxwell is predatory etc so its nothing to do with sex. I would feel the same if these had been young boys.
I have been in an age gap relationship so you are jumping to all sorts of conclusions.

If it had been Anne rather than Andrew I would feel the same.

No I’m not jumping to conclusions. I’m going on what some people have posted.

I wasn’t really interested in thread till I got to those statements.

Peaseblossom just as you are entitled to think your experience was positive others are entitled to think most such relationships are not. Just as anyone is entitled to regard one night stands as either OK or not advisable. Personal morality is just that personal. However because some relationships are harmful the law provides protection for some people. These are based on age, the position of the individuals involved and the degree of coercion, violence or other factors such as financial incentives which might be involved. The fact is that many of these sort of relationshps involve young girls and older men. In this case an older woman was involved as well.
Just as it would be wrong to argue all such relationships are harmful it is equally wrong to argue they are never harmful. In this case the older man (Epstein) was convicted of crime to do with under age girls and the conviction was regarded as being an easy option. The charge could have been much more serious and have carried a long jail sentence.

?. Thanks trisher

Yes, anybody is entitled to their moral viewpoint. Even that all men who have sex with a teenage girl are “an unpleasant sleaze”.

What they’re not entitled to is to take that personal viewpoint and se it to pass judgement regardless of the facts of the case.

I was trying to explain that it doesn’t apply to all. That it’s a prejudicial judgement and that to condemn all, on the basis of some is not moral either.

But I guess morality will always stem from opinion and people’s personal tastes.

What strikes me on this thread is that there are people who sympathise with the girls in Rochdale who were sexually abused by Asian men, but seem to think because the girls involved in this abuse were the victims of rich men, so comfortably housed and given an extravagant lifestyle, they were not abused. Which means basically that rich people are different and above the law and can buy anything.

I also wonder if a girl has been abused since the age of 13 is her consenting to having sex at 17 actually an informed choice or just a perpetuation of the abuse.

Don’t you think there’s a difference in the way the girls were treated trisher? I have said so many times that there has been no suggestion that VG et al were treated with or threatened with violence for instance or in any way forced to have sex against their will. A very big difference. They had a freedom of choice which the Rochdale girls didn’t.
And no I don’t agree that a girl suffering abuse at age 13 would necessarily become unable of making an informed choice at 17. I assume you refer to VG, who had decided to live with a man at 13. Her choice to do that. Mentally capable girls of 13 understand what we used to call the fact of life and many choose to be sexually active, knowing exactly what they are doing. I wish you would stop making these constant references to abuse and victims. I don’t view a young teenager who decides to sleep with a man of any age, without threats or force, as either being abused or a victim.

German shepherdsmum, Just because you disagree with trisher, doesn’t mean she’s wrong. There were differences in the way the Rochdale and Epstein/Maxwell girls were exploited and abused.
They were targeted, seduced into sexual activity with adults.
Epstein and Maxwell pleaded not guilty. Juries found them guilty.

I feel the same for the girls with Epstein and the girls in
Rochdale.

I do not believe Giuffrie

Anniebach

I feel the same for the girls with Epstein and the girls in
Rochdale.

I do not believe Giuffrie

Because it’s Prince Andrew ?