Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6

Original poster

to think we should be really freaked out,by all the arrests for sexual abuse of children????

143 replies

Isiolo · 02/05/2013 15:34

Firstly, I am not a 'paedophile on every corner' type of person. But I am wondering if actually, I should be??

Its a bit old news now, but more and more high profile celebs are being arrested for paedophilia in the 60s and 70s.

SO many people got away with it...for so long...Isnt this a sign that it is very widespread? and that it is pretty institutionalised??

Are celebreties more likely to be paedophiles than the rest of the population????

There doesnt seem to be much freaking out or outrage going on...I feel like there should be more

OP posts:

JamieandtheMagicTorch · 02/05/2013 15:56

I'm also a child of the 70s. It is hard to remember how much society has changed.

I great festering boil has burst open.

And yet it still goes on in the home, mainly.

fromparistoberlin · 02/05/2013 15:57

technically, are they paedophiles? anyway seen someone else has used this

I am NOT minimising what they did, but I do think we need to distinguish

the 70s were fucked up man

I am not worried, as know these days are kids are far safer

But my heart weeps for the victims

meddie · 02/05/2013 15:57

I havent been following the Stuart Hall case, but he was always a bit slimy. Its weird isnt it, both he and JS gave me the creeps as a child and I could never understand why or their apparent media popularity (Rod hull and Emu too)

ReculverTowers · 02/05/2013 15:58

My daughter is 13, she hasn't started her periods. Imo she is a child

Tee2072 · 02/05/2013 16:00

Who said she wasn't, Reculver?

ReculverTowers · 02/05/2013 16:02

sorry that was in response to technically are they paedophiles

madhouse here :)

I just don't think anything should be minimised because these girls were teenagers, all teenage girls below consent age are children imo (some more than others)

Booyhoo · 02/05/2013 16:05

what is the distinction between paedophilia and sex with an underage person? is their a specific age legally?

thebody · 02/05/2013 16:06

Yes I agree. For a much older man to have sex with a 15 year old girl ( even consensual) I would consider him a paedophile.

My lads are 23 and 22 and would be disgusted even thinking of dating a girl under 16..

Original poster

Isiolo · 02/05/2013 16:06

no, not some more than others towers they are all children

OP posts:

Tee2072 · 02/05/2013 16:07

Paedophilia is pre-pubescent so it's not a specific age as people go through puberty at different ages.

But 15 is almost certainly not pre-pubescent, for example, although not 100% guaranteed, would be very unusual.

CashmereHoodlum · 02/05/2013 16:08

It's not minimising, it is using the correct terms. Paedophilia is not the correct term for the abuse of a post-pubescent child.

TigerSwallowTail · 02/05/2013 16:08

Are celebreties more likely to be paedophiles than the rest of the population?

I don't think they are, I think they're more likely to get more media attention though and maybe that's why it seems like they're more likely to be paedophiles.

Tee2072 · 02/05/2013 16:09

Oh and I'm not minimizing anything. It's disgusting along with the 'well, it was the 70s' attitude that's still being bandied about.

My own husband said that the other night and I laid into him.

It was dirty old men (and yes, if you're 30 and fucking a 15 year old, you're a dirty old man) doing whatever the hell they wanted and damn the consequences or the girls feelings or anything else.

ReculverTowers · 02/05/2013 16:09

Yes I do agree Isolo, I was just thinking of those with LDs who are more at risk of abuse. But you are quite right

scaevola · 02/05/2013 16:09

Well, I assume that a 9 year old is prepubescent, which makes paedophile the accurate term for Hall.

meddie · 02/05/2013 16:09

Its a technical point mainly reculver Paedophilia is attraction to pre pubescent children.
Attraction to a child and attraction to a sexually mature but underage girl are slightly different, the former is a recognised psychological disorder. While the latter is slimy and abusive and pretty disgusting, but the motivation for it is different.

Tee2072 · 02/05/2013 16:10

No, not more likely to be paedophiles, but more likely to have young girls around and teenagers 'worshipping' them.

ReculverTowers · 02/05/2013 16:11

wrt to paedophilia, if a girl is 15 and has LDs and has the mental age of a 9 yr old, what is it classed as then?

x2boys · 02/05/2013 16:12

i dont think its specific booyhoo but if a 15 yr old girl is dating a 17 yr old boy[ which happened with my neice ] and they had sex i think its very different to a 15 yr old having sex with a man in his twenties or older i,m not saying i condone underage sex but it can happen with teenagers and i dont think it would/should make the teenage boy a paedophile if you see what i mean.

Tee2072 · 02/05/2013 16:13

Sex with an under-age person, Reculver. It has nothing to do with mental age and everything to do with biological age.

Booyhoo · 02/05/2013 16:14

my mum would have been a teen from 1968-1973. her periods started just before she turned 16 and she told me that was the same for most of her friends. i know i have heard stuff about girls starting puberty earlier with each generation. i was 12 and i have young cousins who started at 8/9 years old. i wonder if legally there neds to be a change in when it stops being paedophilia. at 8/9 they are still definitely children but if periods have started does that mean it's not paedohilia?

Original poster

Isiolo · 02/05/2013 16:16

my 7 year old is showing signs of starting puberty
My friends dd has had pubic hair from the age of 8

I dont know the technicalities of the terms. But it seems irrelevant when you are talking about children

OP posts:

ReculverTowers · 02/05/2013 16:16

is it to do with biological age or puberty? as I said my dd is 13 and hasn't gone through puberty, is she still more of a child (she is btw she has the mental age if a 4 yr old which is why I asked what the law states) I find it frightening how vulnerable she is anyway

Original poster

Isiolo · 02/05/2013 16:18

i was having sex at age 15. I was a late starter compared with my peers. Non of us were having consensual sex with older men

I think you can get all tied up in technicalities; when the reality of what it is is actually blindingly obvious?

OP posts:

phantomnamechanger · 02/05/2013 16:19

Gross and repulsive as all these stories are, I also think celebs are more at risk than joe public of having false allegations made against them, by shunned fans and deluded obsessed people who fantasise. One of the hazards of the job if you like, same as for a teacher or scout leader.

I also think people are silly in thinking they "know" these celebs who have been beamed into our living roms for years on end - they are ALL putting on a persona. and the thing is, you just don't know who else, in the real world, is also putting on an act. They want you to like them, trust them, rely on them, put your guard down. They are very good at laughing off any accusation or questions, or playing the wounded falsely accused.

There is not a random stranger on every corner waiting to abduct your child, however, there are unsavoury characters all over the place in every walk of life who will do whatever they thinik they can get away with. We all know people like this whether we realise it or not, the ones who give us the creeps are easier to keep our kids away from, but the ones who seem genuinely lovely people are even more dangerous.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6