Oh Prince Andrew is getting SUED by Virginia Robert's

[LaurieFairyCake]

That will be interesting

I would also add that powerful rich men can easily get grown mature adults to give them "happy ending" massages and sexual favours for a sum of money. I'm not condoning this either, by the way.

But no, they wanted teenagers from as young as 14 to provide these services. Says a lot about these men, don't you think? Still want to stand up and support them?

Using the term "sexual shenanigans" to describe sex with trafficked women is pretty grim.

@RecallRecall

That's the only evidence some people will accept. Unless you're dishevelled and with ripped clothing and a black eye, you haven't been sexually assaulted.

Of course it’s not and that wasn’t the point that’s being made.

Are rich men ( or women)m having sex with under 18’s sexual assaulting them by the very nature of imbalance? If so how rich do they have to be before they have overstepped the mark. Only millionaires or any man with money they can spend on a girl?

How old before they fall into “ older” man?
What if they marry later marry them ?

It really needs a better discussion than the one on here.

Are rich men ( or women)m having sex with under 18’s sexual assaulting them by the very nature of imbalance?

Under NYS legislation, yes
It's pretty clear.

@RecallRecall

That's the only evidence some people will accept. Unless you're dishevelled and with ripped clothing and a black eye, you haven't been sexually assaulted.

Of course it’s not and that wasn’t the point that’s being made.

Are rich men ( or women)m having sex with under 18’s sexual assaulting them by the very nature of imbalance? If so how rich do they have to be before they have overstepped the mark. Only millionaires or any man with money they can spend on a girl?

How old before they fall into “ older” man?
What if they marry later marry them ?

It really needs a better discussion than the one on here.

Perhaps you can start "a better discussion" then

We know we've mentioned it before but as we are still having to make deletions here we think it's worth flagging again: here is the link to our We Believe You campaign.

If you are unfamiliar with the issues at stake then please do read through. If after having a read you feel unable to get on board with the the key messages in the We Believe You campaign, it could well be that Mumsnet is not the place for you.

Do continue to report anything that you feel crosses a line and we'll remove anything that is not in the spirit of the site.

Thank you, @CarolineMumsnet.
You've posted at a very appropriate moment and I hope that the points are taken on board by some posters.

@CarolineMumsnet

We know we've mentioned it before but as we are still having to make deletions here we think it's worth flagging again: here is the link to our We Believe You campaign.

If you are unfamiliar with the issues at stake then please do read through. If after having a read you feel unable to get on board with the the key messages in the We Believe You campaign, it could well be that Mumsnet is not the place for you.

Do continue to report anything that you feel crosses a line and we'll remove anything that is not in the spirit of the site.

@PurpleOkapi @Plumtree391 @Pixxie7 @StapMe

I have to add it wasnt just learning about becoming a masseuse. Some were promised payment of college fees, some were promised modelling contracts, acting jobs, they were groomed.

Have a read of this, and just look at the photo of this 14 year old. She looks about 12. Read her story. It's horrifying.

www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/new-jeffrey-epstein-accuser-he-raped-me-when-i-was-n1028011

Are rich men ( or women)m having sex with under 18’s sexual assaulting them by the very nature of imbalance? If so how rich do they have to be before they have overstepped the mark. Only millionaires or any man with money they can spend on a girl?
Adults don't need to have sex with minors.

If you really do believe that a discussion needs to be had and you're posting in good faith then there are lots of material out there that explains Child Sexual Exploitation:

www.nspcc.org.uk/what-is-child-abuse/types-of-abuse/child-sexual-exploitation/

www.gov.uk/government/publications/child-sexual-exploitation-definition-and-guide-for-practitioners

For the poster who said Vs failure to ask for help shows she was happy to be there to some extent - are you new to Mumsnet? Depressingly EVERY.SINGLE.DAY women post about their shitty relationships on here - often they've put up with DV, coercion, rape, etc for years and not told a soul. Should we not believe their stories because they've 'willingly' stayed?

Unbelievable,sad, sad thread.

There's a lot of rape apologists on here - or paedophiles

Adults don't need to have sex with minors.
Stupid statements like this don’t help.

Of course a 20 /21/22 year old can have sex with a 17 year old. They could have been friends for years.
Maybe not so much a tech millionaire 20 year old and a 17 year old who works in MacDonalds.

This is why the law needs revision. It’s too blunt and therefore misogyny slips through the gaps.

There's a lot of rape apologists on here - or paedophiless

Seriously?

Don’t you think if the law was robust and fit for purpose they would have all been convicted or even bought to trial. They haven’t.
It’s not because people are rape apologists or paedophiles but because there’s very little legally they can currently do about it.

Clearly Henry VIII was a murderer but only under current law. You want women protected you need to make sure it’s backed by law.

Just stop with the whataboutism posts.
Virginia and the other girls/women were groomed and sex trafficked, not having consensual sex with peers

It's not stupid at all. It's entirely appropriate when after 23 pages, lots of deletions, and 2 posts from MNHQ, people are still trying argue that rich, powerful men grooming minors and flying them round the world for their mates to abuse them is some grey area that needs unpicking, that there's some magic bank balance that makes the difference between it being OK and not ok.

We've already had but 17 year olds can consent to sex! from other posters up thread in an attempt to minimise the victims' experiences. Now the whataboutery is but whatabout a 22 year old who has been friends with a 17 year old for ages. To be honest if they've been friends for ages then they've been friends when the 22 year old was an adult and the 17 year old was barely in their teens. Why an adult would want to sleep with a minor they've know for ages is beyond me.

@LolaSmiles

Setting aside the VRG case, do you not think PA's reputation was shot when he admitted to repeatedly engaging with and forming a longterm close friendship with a convicted paedophile? Could you imagine a MN thread:

AIBU to think that most people would stop being friends with a man who has pleaded guilty to procuring a child for prostitution. The man in question is continuing his friendship with this convicted sex offerder. He has two daughters and doesn't seem to think the friendship is inappropriate. I don't understand why anyone would be so invested in remaining friends with a man who wants wants prostitute children.

And "he's invited the guy to his own daughters 18th birthday..."

Doubt she'll get a penny!
She's bringing a civil case but she's repeatedly given different accounts on her meeting/meetings with Prince Andrew.
Originally she said they'd only been one meeting with the prince & that she was the one to lead him into a bathroom at a party she attended in London. She also made another claim that she was paid £10.000 for sex with him www.independent.co.uk/news/people/teenage-sex-slave-virginia-roberts-claims-she-was-paid-ps10-000-jeffrey-epstein-have-sex-prince-andrew-london-home-9956338.html?amp
Now she's claiming rape & multiple meetings with him but it's literally only her word & no actual evidence.
If she slept with him willing on British soil at 17 ( paid or not ) he has no case to answer.
Britain isn't like the USA it's 16 to consent across the whole country, it doesn't change city to city ( state to state )

Just stop with the whataboutism posts.
Virginia and the other girls/women were groomed and sex trafficked, not having consensual sex with peers
This thread has it all.
We've had victim blaming.
We've had minimising
We've had that there's mitigating circumstances, that older powerful men grooming girls for sex isn't black and white
We've had trying to discredit women who've come forward about abuse they experienced as children
We've had I'm not defending Andrew but...
We've had Epstein wasn't technically guilty because he died before going to court
We've had that Jimmy Saville is technically innocent
We've had but whatabout teenagers in consenting peer relationships
We've had but whatabout a different thread where a step parent wanted to give a teenager contraception so they had the means to be safe
Now we've got but whatabout the money, is there a magic bank balance where it becomes unacceptable

So many people seem to want to find a way to minimise and excuse adults wanting to have sex with minors. It's worrying.

Don't forget "some teenagers enjoy it" and comparisons with Love Island...

Now that I see I've had posts removed, can I please assure you that I believe wholeheartedly with the I Believe You campaign, and, despite it appearing so, none of my posts were to meant to defend anything that Andrew/Maxwell/Epstein have been accused of, nor was I trying to victim shame. I was caught up in the thought that there are two sides to every story, and that a person is innocent until proven guilty. And I'm still wondering about how they will prove to the satisfaction of the law who is lying.

And the latest, what about Henry VIII

I forgot those Maireas DuncinToffee. The whataboutery is embarrassing.

@CarolineMumsnet

We know we've mentioned it before but as we are still having to make deletions here we think it's worth flagging again: here is the link to our We Believe You campaign.

If you are unfamiliar with the issues at stake then please do read through. If after having a read you feel unable to get on board with the the key messages in the We Believe You campaign, it could well be that Mumsnet is not the place for you.

Do continue to report anything that you feel crosses a line and we'll remove anything that is not in the spirit of the site.

Thank you, @CarolineMumsnet.

I agree a few posters on this thread need to head for the door.

I wonder, is MNHQ moving towards a point where you will be looking at warnings, strikes and bans with regard to rape apologists? As you intimate, it's not really In The Spirit for these posters to be loose on the boards while MN is simultaneously supporting the excellent #WeBelieveHer campaign.

I think the rape apologist types just think, 'Oh well I'll get the thread deleted and move on to a new one'.

I'd prefer a few of them to be shown the door, most definitely.

,

About time too.
There is a lot more we don’t know about that should be made public. Mumsy won’t be pleased with her son.
As for the Maxwell creature……….

How is Henry VIII whataboutry? It’s an example of needing changes in law not an excuse for powerful men to get away with murdering their wives. FFS

Virginia first raised this in 2015. So we’re six years on and only just getting to court. Many years after the actual offences. Does that say women are getting justice or being heard?
Shout people down for raising points that make convictions hard but unless there’s change more will slip through the net.

If you can’t define trafficking, grooming or consent you’re not going to get anywhere.