British barrister Barbara Hewson caused a bit of a stir last week when she called for the age of consent in Britain to be lowered to 13 so as to end the alleged “persecution of old men” like those arrested in the wake of the recent Jimmy Savile scandal, which revealed a widespread culture of sexual exploitation of underage girls (and some boys) at the BBC in the 1970s.
Now one female Men’s Rights Activist connected to hate site A Voice for Men has done Hewson one better, arguing that the real culprits in these scandals weren’t the predatory adult men but the girls they victimized.
Janet Bloomfield, a fairly regular contributor to terrorist-manifesto-posting AVFM who is better known as JudgyBitch, writes on her blog that:
[B]asically, the girls were groupies. They wanted all the benefits of hanging out with a big star and they understood it came with a price and they paid it, perhaps reluctantly, but with full knowledge that the trips to London and the fags and the sweet weren’t free. …
And now they are claiming the MEN abused THEM? Looks to me like it was the other way around.
Yes, Bloomfield apparently feels that these poor little rich men were robbed of cigarettes and candy and trips to London by predatory teenage girls. She continues:
It’s a story as old as bloody time. Young women with nothing to offer but their youth and sexuality chase after powerful men in exchange for favors. If we are going to arrest every powerful man who has ever availed himself of willing women, we are gonna need to build a whole lot of jails.
Uh, Judgy, in case you missed the point of the whole debate here, we’re not talking about women. We’re talking about girls. In the case of BBC broadcaster Stuart Hall, one of the victims that he has admitted to assaulting was nine years old at the time. Nine. Savile’s youngest alleged victim was an eight-year-old boy, and dozens of his alleged assaults were upon children in hospitals.
In the end, Bloomfield kind of, sort of, admits that the men may have behaved badly in these cases. But she still wants them to face zero legal repercussions.
Powerful men always have and always will delight in young women hunting them. Young women always have and always will hunt for powerful men. Both sides are equally culpable. Both sides are engaging in abuse. Both sides are behaving shamefully. Both side are being idiots.
But only one side is being held criminally responsible? Bullshit. If the girls are not going to be strung up on charges of solicitation and prostitution, and I absolutely do NOT think they should be, then fairness and equality under the law dictates the men get a pass, too.
Again, you may notice, Bloomfield cannot seem to decide whether or not these girls are in fact girls or “young women,” and in the two consecutive paragraphs right above you’ll notice she slides effortlessly between the two. Perhaps her desire to tag these girls “women” is an admission that, at least on some unconscious level, she knows what she’s arguing is beyond the moral pale.
Elsewhere in her post, she puts up pictures of underage girls whom she seems to think would be impossible to distinguish from adults. Here’s one, of a twelve-year-old model. (She also includes a creepily sexualized picture of the same model at age ten.)
Anyone unable to tell that this is a picture of a child, not an adult, shouldn’t be having sex with anyone.
And anyone as morally deficient as JudgyBitch shouldn’t be judging anyone.
Hi, Pell. The Statute of Limitations doesn’t apply in the UK, it being a different country and all.
Hellkell, she absolutely would assume her daughters were sluts at age 13 if a powerful man molested them (She seems to think that the “power” is important. So – Castro in Cinncinati – totally a pedophile. Savile – totally not! Because Savile had MONEY!)
PeterVanPell: Fags? Really? Abuse is trivial? What prize pig you are.
Indeed I am chastened by that stinging retort! American laws now apply in the UK, because trolly wants them to.
PV: you have it backwards. You’re the idiot would should buzz off.
@KathleenB
Holy shit, I had the exact same experience at 13, this old perv just grabbed me in a park! Except that I hit him with a clarinet case. In MRA world, that was probably women’s violence against men.
Right, wanting to keep children safe is a ‘wacky feminist 2013’ concept. Is this a totally new idea for this year? If not, when were these crazy ideas brought about? I’m thinking before 1990, at least in Michigan, because attempting to kidnap a kid and indecent exposure were both crimes when they happened to me.
Aged 9. Backpack with books in it. Wish it had only happened once.
@Pell
Yeah, they should quit putting Savile in jail.
Peter, baby, if you want to call feminists “wacky” it helps to not reinforce their points in every way possible by being the most disgusting human being you possibly can be.
Me too.
Definitely. I mean, can you imagine the logistics of it? Most prison floors are made out of hard rock, digging a grave there to move the coffin to is going to be a lot of work. I guess they’ll save on guard man hours, though.
Maude: This guy tried to lure me into his car – he was a persistent ass, too. Tried three times, then pulled his willy out. I still shudder to think of what he would have done, and have panic attacks when there are stories about this sort of thing on the local news. A lifetime of worry for a transient wank, what a bargain.
So basically her argument is that adult men’s ability to act morally and responsibly is roughly equal to that of a 13 year old girl, and this should be acknowledged and reflected in the legal system.
Well no 13 year old in the world is allowed to be emancipated specifically because of their inability to act rationally and responsibly. They are all subject to the guardianship of responsible legal adults. Now that we are legally establishing that men are the moral and rational equivalent of pubescent children and cannot be expected to have any more accountability than they do, which women should the government appoint as their legal guardians? Their mothers, sisters, or nearest adult female relative? And what should their curfew be? How much TV and video game time should they be allowed per day? Should spanking them be legal if they act up?
Shame he can’t find a picture of her with Uncle Monty, isn’t it?
Bullshit, PeterVanPell. Those pics caused quite a stir.
How is Uncle Monty, Pell?
Pell, did you even read your link?
PV: Lots and lots of people did more than raise eyebrows at many of the pictures taken of Shields when she was young. Those are particularly disgusting – sexualizing a young person like that is horrible and the photographer should have been prosecuted.
Bravo ashley. Bravo.
It stuns me that whatever argument misogynists use (Women like sex more! Men like sex more! Women cannot control themselves! Men cannot control themselves!) they always use it to argue for men being on top.
I read JudgeyBitch’s thing. This is the closest I’ve ever gotten to being physically ill after reading something.
It wasn’t just the huge list of sexualized photos (photoshopped, of course) of 12-13 year olds as part of some attempt to demonstrate just how hard it is to tell how old a girl is…
It wasn’t just her huge discourse on how the girls were totally culpable for being offered candy and cigarettes by adult figures (for which a suitable payment is apparently rape… for fucks sake)…
It wasn’t just the godawful long list of studies on when exactly young girls of different racial and socio-economic backgrounds first start having sex (I don’t know, maybe her argument is “it happens, so it must be a good thing”) that attempts to normalize sex with minors…
It honestly wan’t even her equating of “young women” (in their 20s) marrying older men for the money (and for fucks sake, this line: “It’s a story as old as bloody time. Young women with nothing to offer but their youth and sexuality chase after powerful men in exchange for favors.” The context… gag)…
The huge fucking kicker was this.
What in the fuckity fuck fucking fuck. How can she not see the blatant exploitation and abuse of fucking 12-13 year olds! It’s freaking right there, and she scoffs at it! Gah!
Well said, ashley!
What the fuck is wrong with these people???
No one raised a brow. Reading comprehension, look into it.
Living in a normal world. Savile’s youngest victim was 8.
FUCK YOU.
Ugh, just, no, none of this. I mean, leaving aside all her disgusting stuff about how the sex was really a transaction, or some form of prostitution or whatever, she doesn’t even seem to understand how a lot of this abuse worked.
Saville exploited his fame to get to kids in hospitals, and then exploited his fame to cover up his actions. He, and many of the other implicated celebrities, groomed children. Do you appreciate what grooming is Bloomfield? If you want to talk with any authority on child abuse, you need to understand what it is and see how it relates to this.
But even the sex that was a “transaction”, it wasn’t the children going, “Oh man, I can get free stuff”, it’s people like Saville going, “Hey, y’know, I could make you a star/let you see a famous person you like/whatever if you do this for me” which is not a transaction, it’s exploitation of kids who don’t know any better and who put implicit trust in the celebrities society seems to trust.
So your “normal world” is a world in which adults are having sex with children. Got it.