I think this thread shows the difficulties around subjects like this and why it's so hard to have a discussion without descending into name-calling.
It's so emotive, logic often goes out of the window with wild statements being made.
The problem is that being understandably angry at the perpetrators of CSA means it's difficult to have a rationed and reasonable discussion. Some of the comments just get a bit wild.
For example, as some knowledgeable PP pointed out - this is actually a fairly tough sentence compared to what others get. It's also been pointed out that the judge has their hands tied to some extent due to sentencing guidelines. And yet, there are PP who are accusing the judge of being a latent paedophile, and that's why Edwards got off so lightly. It's just ridiculous and unhelpful.
I think the vast majority of us here agree that there's a problem with sentencing guidelines, and an overhaul of the law would be helpful. That's an entirely separate issue but it's not what some PP are saying. There's no acknowledgement that actually, there wasn't much the judge could do because there are sentencing guidelines in place. Slating those who are implementing the current laws is unfair.
The law clearly needs radical change especially with such prevalence of CSA, which is truly shocking. Some of the figures posted here in terms of how many cases there are every year is sickening. It IS mainly men, just like other sexual crimes, and that's where the focus needs to be. However, comments about letting out all the women or making men pay more tax are just infuriating as they're ideological and also unfair.
The real question is, how DO we reform this? I don't know enough about the efficacy of deterrent custodial sentences but the fact is there's not enough prison spaces. So what crimes do we go lighter on to make spaces for CSA cases?
People on this thread are talking about not bothering to imprison for non-violent crimes. And yet, on countless other threads, MN posters are furious about benefit fraud and think people need to be locked up for it. We can't have it all.
The system needs radical reform but I don't know what that looks like, or how it could be funded. But there needs to be real appetite for huge change - and the difficulty with that is that the public won't agree on what's OK and what's not. Look at the furore about Labour releasing some prisoners early - and that's now bitten them on the arse. People are outraged about early releases while simultaneously wanting extra magical spaces for CSA.
I don't think pointing out the practicalities or underlining the difficulties means you don't care. It's possible to have been personally affected by CSA and still want a rational and fact-driven resolution that protects our children in the most effective way.
And also, that means enabling paedophiles to come forward without shame for treatment/help. I'm not referring to people who are doing harm - I'm talking about (probably young) men who realise they have unhealthy attraction to children. BEFORE they access images of children, BEFORE they touch a child......let's get these people help. There will be some that don't want help and glory in their sick tastes - but there will be some that are disgusted with themselves. Right now, there's no easy way to seek help - there needs to be a pathway that can be offered to men to prevent them continuing, to prevent them doing harm to children. People don't like to talk about this because it's dismissed as being a "paedo sympathiser" but nothing can be further from the truth. Prevention is so, so important because only by throwing resources at early prevention together with deterrents and restrictions for offenders, will we actually achieve anything. It's how we protect our children.
I'm 48 and I'm absolutely sick to the back teeth of men and their sexual crimes, our patriarchal society, and misogynism. But at the same time I recognise that we need practical, achievable goals that are actually effective and don't just service an emotional demand.
(Ps - @WinterMorn, thank you, I've found your responses to be balanced and informative, even though it's perhaps not great reading in terms of what's expected and normal in these cases).