AnnaKarpik
Queen of all she surveys
It's me too. I remember being 17.
BBC presenter Huw Edwards suspended over paying for sexual pics.
- Thread starter Calamity1971
- Start date
kebabking
Not a Girly Swot, but I like them....
To be fair, the child/adult distinction in this country is a bit fucked up - you can have a job, pay tax, and live away from 'home' at 16, but not vote until 18 - you can be married at 16 to another 16yo, and have children and a house with them, but if they send you an underwear shot from the dressing room at bravissimo you could be sent to prison for possessing sexual images of a child.
It's hardly conducive to everyone knowing where the boundaries are.
Thora
Differently Ethical
Who is struggling to know where the boundaries are? Most people seem to manage, it's only really a certain type of sleazy older men who find the whole thing terribly confusing.
ElizabethofYork
Old Crone
Not sure that's fair. There IS a grey area between 16 and 18.
kebabking
Not a Girly Swot, but I like them....
It wasn't about sleazy old men, it was a response to a wider discussion with bimble about not feeling that you were a child at the age of 17. I didn't feel that I was a child at 17.
I personally think that the bizarre disparities about child/adult status act, in a way, to justify the actions of sleazy old men to themselves, and to others.
I don't think they are the driver of such behaviour, or that such behaviour is predicated on them, but I think they are an enabler of such behaviour,and that they are used to hide/excuse/whatever such behaviour.
So, you know, my point was the exact opposite of the one you thought I was making.
Thora
Differently Ethical
Maybe if you're 20 but not if you're 30.
Even when I was in school, if a 6th former starting dating a Year 9 they'd be called a paedo pretty quickly, even if he was lower 6th and she was older for her year. So actually, not having sexual contact with someone a lot younger than you/where there's a big imbalance in maturity/power is a pretty embedded cultural norm.
I can see the argument that in the 80s maybe every powerful older man was fucking a teenager and 16 year olds were legal and on page 3. But that really doesn't hold up anymore.
No one is really confused now about whether it is ok for older men to have sexual contact with teenagers.
Aladdin
Well-Known Member
17 yr olds now are that bit different to back in the 70s or 80s...even the early 90s. Wr grew up relatively free to roam and come home by 10.30. Or whatever.. many 17 yr olds now are growing up via phone apps. Are rarely off outdoors with their buddies
The only reason someone would pay for photos is if they are incriminating. Maybe the BBC person is also in the photos.
ElizabethofYork
Old Crone
Bimble was talking about the possible confusion of a 17 year old not feeling that they are a "child".
bimble
floofy
We've done this conversation a few times, and i know i'm out of step with general opinion not just on here but more widely. I think its largely because of my personal life history stuff, in that I had a big relationship with a ridiculously much older man when i was that sort of age and we're still very good friends now, decades later. I think that colours my view. I mean, I wasn't taken advantage of. But only saying it to explain why i might have this view, and know that this isn't anything more than one anecdote.
This story, about some radio man (who i'm sure i wont know who it is even when the name is revealed) maybe something will come out to change what it looks like but i find it yucky that the mother is running around telling this story and there's no sign the 20 yr old wanted that. That seems a serious boundary crossing, to me.
This story, about some radio man (who i'm sure i wont know who it is even when the name is revealed) maybe something will come out to change what it looks like but i find it yucky that the mother is running around telling this story and there's no sign the 20 yr old wanted that. That seems a serious boundary crossing, to me.
Aladdin
Well-Known Member
Most kids when they get to 15 / 16 feel they are not children
The age of majority is 18 years in all EU Member States except for Scotland, where children are considered to have full legal capacity from the age of 16 years.
If a child becomes a parent or gets married before reaching the age of majority, in some Member States the child gains full legal capacity. In other Member States, married children will only gain partial legal capacity. For example, they are no longer subject to parental control and can act with regard to their personal needs, but may not be allowed to dispose of immovable property or borrow money. Some Member States also provide for a guardian for children who become parents.
In the UK this recommendation was accepted and on January 1, 1970, the age of majority was reduced from 21 to 18 years. (See Family Law Reform Act 1969, for England and Wales, the Age of Majority (Scotland) Act 1969, for Scotland, and the Age of Majority Act (NI) 1969, for Northern Ireland.)
So the 17 yr old had not reached the age of majority.
Feelings about 17 yr olds being more adult than not are actually irrelevant.
The age of majority is 18 years in all EU Member States except for Scotland, where children are considered to have full legal capacity from the age of 16 years.
If a child becomes a parent or gets married before reaching the age of majority, in some Member States the child gains full legal capacity. In other Member States, married children will only gain partial legal capacity. For example, they are no longer subject to parental control and can act with regard to their personal needs, but may not be allowed to dispose of immovable property or borrow money. Some Member States also provide for a guardian for children who become parents.
In the UK this recommendation was accepted and on January 1, 1970, the age of majority was reduced from 21 to 18 years. (See Family Law Reform Act 1969, for England and Wales, the Age of Majority (Scotland) Act 1969, for Scotland, and the Age of Majority Act (NI) 1969, for Northern Ireland.)
So the 17 yr old had not reached the age of majority.
Feelings about 17 yr olds being more adult than not are actually irrelevant.
You'll definitely know who this person is. Not just from radio but his mainly his TV work (i didnt even know he had a radio show tbh)
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
Powder, dry.
It sounds like one of those porn sites where you can pay someone to perform on camera. Both performer and viewer can be on cam. Could be a screen grab.
bimble
floofy
so, if this story was in Scotland (where you point out that 16 = adult citizen in the law) you'd have no issue with it?
If that's not the case - and i just assume it's not, because theres no suggestion that any crime has been committed here- can you explain how the legislation for age of majority is actually relevant?
kenny g
Sheeple Awake!
When I was 17 I probably felt more grown up than I have ever done. Dangerous age.
Indeed. The whole thing is bizarre. Guess he just thought he was above the law given his position.
Meanwhile loads of the BBC's other top stars are being hounded and threatened on social media. This has been handled so so badly - and if the law is that you can't distribute or make pics of someone under 18 (and personally I don't think a 17yo can be considered a 'child') then why is it the BBC investigating and not the cops?
kenny g
Sheeple Awake!
It may come as a shock, but you do know Scotland as well as the rest of the UK left the EU a while back?
andysays
Love and solidarity
Although there is an important legal difference between 17 and 18, this would, IMO, still be a seriously problematic situation for the presenter and the BBC even if the young person was 18 when it began
friedaweed
Me and me girl named Jane
20 pages, 2 thread bans, 1 self enforced holiday.
Get yer popcorn
£2 a tub.
Get yer popcorn
£2 a tub.
Plumdaff
joy in people
Elsewhere there's a suggestion that the relationship started on Only Fans. There'd be an expectation that anyone on there would be over 18, no? I mean there's then the question of how and why it continued once it was clear the person was 17 but if true, it does make it slightly less grim for me. Still sleazy and grim obs.
lazythursday
Well-Known Member
There's the possibility of blackmail / coercion, especially if drug addiction is also involved.
It is right to recognise that adolescents are at a different developmental stage than children and that older adolescents are at a different stage than younger adolescents and that young adults are different again. There's no need to ignore this and patronise young people and children but under the law one is a child until 18 and has rights and protections that recognise that they're still developing.
Culture has shifted since the 80s and it is no longer ok for there to be such age differences, its seen as weird and exploitative by the youth.
Culture has shifted since the 80s and it is no longer ok for there to be such age differences, its seen as weird and exploitative by the youth.
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
The SNP dropped the age of majority prior to the independence referendum to try and benefit from the naivety of children. It didn't work, they still lost.
bimble
floofy
i just learned that the marriage age in the uk changed just a couple of months ago (from 16 up to 18). How did i miss that. This does make sense to me, as in its more coherent - if you're too young to have an only fans account you're too young to say i do.
1927
Funnier than he thinks he is.
In that scenario do we know that it continued after it was known they were 17? Did they know they were 17 when it started? Sleazy as fuck, but shouldn't jump to conclusions about the legality. If it turns out there was nothing illegal in what they did dies the BBC as employer have any duty or rights to intervene?
But old enough to be enlisted in the army.
Similar threads
