man who cannot understand the issue of consent must be allowed to pursue sexual relationships

Would he say that about a driver applying for a licence without the ability to make the judgement of when to drive and when not to? Can you imagine? “This driver is entitled to make the same mistakes as other drivers can and do.”

The judgement is made because the potential harm to women - of rape - has been dismissed as unimportant.

Who are these judges suggesting that sex is a fundamental right? It fucking isn't. End of.

This is the wrong decision both for society and for the very vulnerable man in question.

The local authority is correct, they have a duty to protect him from being criminalised and a duty to protect women, especially those who may be similarly vulnerable from him.

The court and confused about the evolutionary drive to have sex. It is an innate desire to have sex, not an innate decision. In any species there are members who are not 'permitted' to have sex despite their desire because reproduction is not at the control of the individual, we all have to 'persuade' other group members of our 'worthiness'.

WTF
NO-one has a right to sex FFS.
It's that simple.
He cannot understand consent so absolutely needs to be supervised for everyone's sake.

I was just about to post about this. I find this decision disturbing, especially the idea that when men rape women it is simply a “mistake” akin to any other that people make in their life.

I don’t think this decision is in the individual’s interest, either, as it puts him at risk of being convicted of a sexual assault/rape and going to prison where he would be very vulnerable.

His right to a “private and family life” should not outweigh women’s right to safety, and to be protected (as far as possible) from sexual assault/rape.

This kind of decision is also unhelpful fodder for those who would tear up the Human Rights Act