advertisement


Prince Andrew allegations not going away...

Woodface said:
A mod, like Paul Weller?
Click to expand...
You are taking the piss, so I'll write no further explanation on the subject itself.

But:

- I am not a fan of Internet pillories (or any other pillories, for that matter), whatever the cause. There is justice for that, and if legislation is incomplete, improve that.

- I am no moral authority. Neither are you. And you can't expect the whole world to live along your own moral standards, and don't forget that there are a whole lot of people around whose standards are even better than yours, imagine.

gavreid said:
Let's cut to the chase, we need to abolish the monarchy they're a complete disgrace.
Click to expand...
So let's grind every available weapon for that purpose, and **** the fact that we're a minority.
 
Tony L said:
Sadly I think the UK is too backward and tribal to reject monarchy and take steps towards becoming a proper constitutional democracy, but it would be nice if this represented a small step on that path...
Click to expand...

I don`t think we`ll see any improvement in the situation in the lifetime of anyone now alive.
 
Tony L said:
Sadly I think the UK is too backward and tribal to reject monarchy and take steps towards becoming a proper constitutional democracy
Click to expand...
Maybe, but this also requires a respectable and functioning political culture in the UK. I don't want to be rude but, at the moment, I still see some potential there.

Tony L said:
but it would be nice if this represented a small step on that path...
Click to expand...
An Internet pillory to create any justice ? Expecting things to work that way would move the above-mentioned political culture even further away.
 
Cheese said:
You are taking the piss, so I'll write no further explanation on the subject itself.

But:

- I am not a fan of Internet pillories (or any other pillories, for that matter), whatever the cause. There is justice for that, and if legislation is incomplete, improve that.

- I am no moral authority. Neither are you. And you can't expect the whole world to live along your own moral standards, and don't forget that there are a whole lot of people around whose standards are even better than yours, imagine.

So let's grind every available weapon for that purpose, and **** the fact that we're a minority.
Click to expand...
You don't need to be a moral authority to understand that a 40-50 something man exploiting a much younger barely legal girl is wrong. It is all about abuse of power, how would you feel if a teacher did a similar thing to a 17 year old A-level student?

I'm no great moralist but this is pretty basic stuff. I have a teenage daughter & would be very wary about her hanging around with significantly older males.

So I'm the bad the guy in this?
 
If anyone is interested in how imbalances of power can be used to exploit female subordinates then I highly recommend the following podcast: https://slate.com/slow-burn

May be a little too 'woke' for some on here but shows how Monica Lewinski was betrayed & had her life ruined by POTUS.
 
Woodface said:
You don't need to be a moral authority to understand that a 40-50 something man exploiting a much younger barely legal girl is wrong. It is all about abuse of power, how would you feel if a teacher did a similar thing to a 17 year old A-level student?

I'm no great moralist but this is pretty basic stuff. I have a teenage daughter & would be very wary about her hanging around with significantly older males.

So I'm the bad the guy in this?
Click to expand...

In the case of a teacher it would be a criminal offence.
 
Bob McC said:
In the case of a teacher it would be a criminal offence.
Click to expand...
Not 100% sure that is correct, but I bow to your greater knowledge, if they are over 16 but I was just using it as an illustration of an abuse of power. I think most of us would concede that even if the girl was at a university & was being 'seen by' one of her lecturer's it would be a little dodgy to say the least.

17 year old girls don't suddenly become 'masseurs', they will have been groomed for a while before that.
 
Woodface said:
Not 100% sure that is correct, but I bow to your greater knowledge, if they are over 16 but I was just using it as an illustration of an abuse of power. I think most of us would concede that even if the girl was at a university & was being 'seen by' one of her lecturer's it would be a little dodgy to say the least.

17 year old girls don't suddenly become 'masseurs', they will have been groomed for a while before that.
Click to expand...

Sexual Offences Act 2003
It is illegal for a teacher to have sexual relations with anyone under 18.

Interesting article here

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/sep/28/relationship-with-teacher-not-my-fault
 
Cheese said:
As long as he/she is one of his students, I guess ?
Click to expand...

Nope.
Sexual Offences Act 2003 makes it a criminal offence for anyone in a position of trust to have sex with anyone under the age of 18.

Interestingly if the legislation had been on statute In 1976 not only would the late Chris Woodhead not have become head of OFSTED, he’d have been in prison.
 
Any teacher with the energy to have sex with anyone isn’t working hard enough and should face capability
 
Andrew has never been a teacher as far as I know, what he did is therefore not a criminal offense. Now of course everyone can think what he wants of his behaviour, this is not my business.
Nevertheless, if I were the editor in chief of a British newspaper, I would currently know very well what topics to write about on my precious front page. Andrew’s stories with his groupies would, at best, appear under ‘people’.
 
Not just teachers.
It covers social workers, doctors, foster carers and police officers.
There was also a recommendation that all sports clubs should fall under its remit too but I am not sure if that was enacted.

And I know Andrew wasn’t a teacher. I am just helping you with the law you seemed unaware of.
 
gavreid said:
Let's cut to the chase, we need to abolish the monarchy they're a complete disgrace.
Click to expand...
To be fair, Andrew has always been a disgrace. A tad unfair to abolish the monarchy because one of its number (who will never get near the throne unless Ebola strikes in Berkshire) is a wrong-un. Brenda has been an effective head of state for decades, and may yet have a role to play in this whole Brexit debacle if there’s a VONC, so I’d hesitate to bin the monarchy until we’re absolutely certain what we’re replacing it with is a properly robust and democratic replacement. Not sure I’m convinced that an elected president is all it’s cracked up to be nowadays...
 
I was responding to Cheese’s post 69.
He was not aware of the conditions of the 2003 Act.
His Andrew retort was irrelevant in context.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top