Katie Hopkins labels sex abuse victim 'a slag'!

[Alfred R Jones]

Another week, another Katie controversy - her article labelling the victim of a paedophile footballer a slag has received one comment "well said Katie" which has received nearly 11,000 green arrows, what are we to make of this? 

[Mr Gray]

Another week, another Katie controversy - her article labelling the victim of a paedophile footballer a slag has received one comment "well said Katie" which has received nearly 11,000 green arrows, what are we to make of this?

Probably the same people who green arrowed all the antimccann comments

[Lace]

Disgusting woman,  a fifteen year old is a child he was an adult,  he should have been the one to have stopped anything happening.

Katie Hopkins again shows that she is just an ignorant person just out to get attention for money.   This young girl is going to be targeted more so now because of her.

[G-Unit]

Disgusting woman,  a fifteen year old is a child he was an adult,  he should have been the one to have stopped anything happening.

Katie Hopkins again shows that she is just an ignorant person just out to get attention for money.   This young girl is going to be targeted more so now because of her.

Once again I find myself in reluctant agreement with Katie Hopkins. Is a girl of fifteen a child unable to decide whether she should take part in sexual activity? What if she's sixteen tomorrow? Does she develop the ability overnight to decide something which she was too young to make a decision on today? That's clearly ridiculous. There is a legal age of consent because there has to be a line drawn somewhere, but girls develop at different rates both physically and mentally. Some start chasing boys at thirteen, some are still not too interested at seventeen.

This guy was a complete and utter fool to get involved with this girl, but he doesn't fit my definition of a paedophile.

Years ago women were blamed for everything. If their husband beat them they must have deserved it. If they got raped they had dressed provocatively or 'led the man on' or, in one case I knew of, gone into an army barracks at night and got 'what you would expect' as a result.

The pendulum has now swung the other way and women are seen as completely blameless; it's all the man's fault. I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. Real paedophiles prey on real children, not fifteen year olds who look and act older. Sensible women don't get themselves into dodgy situations. Sensible men steer well clear of besotted, drunken or unstable women, because they understand the fury of 'a woman scorned'.

[Alfred R Jones]

Once again I find myself in reluctant agreement with Katie Hopkins. Is a girl of fifteen a child unable to decide whether she should take part in sexual activity? What if she's sixteen tomorrow? Does she develop the ability overnight to decide something which she was too young to make a decision on today? That's clearly ridiculous. There is a legal age of consent because there has to be a line drawn somewhere, but girls develop at different rates both physically and mentally. Some start chasing boys at thirteen, some are still not too interested at seventeen.

This guy was a complete and utter fool to get involved with this girl, but he doesn't fit my definition of a paedophile.

Years ago women were blamed for everything. If their husband beat them they must have deserved it. If they got raped they had dressed provocatively or 'led the man on' or, in one case I knew of, gone into an army barracks at night and got 'what you would expect' as a result.

The pendulum has now swung the other way and women are seen as completely blameless; it's all the man's fault. I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. Real paedophiles prey on real children, not fifteen year olds who look and act older. Sensible women don't get themselves into dodgy situations. Sensible men steer well clear of besotted, drunken or unstable women, because they understand the fury of 'a woman scorned'.

So this 15 year old should have been considered a woman in your view?

[G-Unit]

So this 15 year old should have been considered a woman in your view?

Fifteen year olds are not women nor are they children. What I'm saying is that this stupid man isn't what I would describe as a paedophile. It's clearly ridiculous when the age of consent can be as low as twelve and as high as nineteen in different countries. So a 'paedophile' in the UK would not be a paedophile in France/ 

Pedophilia or paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children, generally age 11 years or younger
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia

My last paragraph was about the way our society has changed from blaming women for being the victims of crimes to blaming men for everything. The law is black and white but in real life relationships there are grey areas.

[Alfred R Jones]

Fifteen year olds are not women nor are they children. What I'm saying is that this stupid man isn't what I would describe as a paedophile. It's clearly ridiculous when the age of consent can be as low as twelve and as high as nineteen in different countries. So a 'paedophile' in the UK would not be a paedophile in France/ 

Pedophilia or paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children, generally age 11 years or younger
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia

My last paragraph was about the way our society has changed from blaming women for being the victims of crimes to blaming men for everything. The law is black and white but in real life relationships there are grey areas.

The point is Katie Hopkins has labelled this "not yet a woman" a slag, and you seem to be agreeing with her - victim blaming again, a favourite British pastime it seems.

[Alice Purjorick]

The legal age of consent for sexual activity is 16.
The legal age at which one ceases to be a child is 18.
Ponder on that one  for a while
There are  places in the world it is best for a man to steer clear of women until they are 21.

[Lace]

Once again I find myself in reluctant agreement with Katie Hopkins. Is a girl of fifteen a child unable to decide whether she should take part in sexual activity? What if she's sixteen tomorrow? Does she develop the ability overnight to decide something which she was too young to make a decision on today? That's clearly ridiculous. There is a legal age of consent because there has to be a line drawn somewhere, but girls develop at different rates both physically and mentally. Some start chasing boys at thirteen, some are still not too interested at seventeen.

This guy was a complete and utter fool to get involved with this girl, but he doesn't fit my definition of a paedophile.

Years ago women were blamed for everything. If their husband beat them they must have deserved it. If they got raped they had dressed provocatively or 'led the man on' or, in one case I knew of, gone into an army barracks at night and got 'what you would expect' as a result.

The pendulum has now swung the other way and women are seen as completely blameless; it's all the man's fault. I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. Real paedophiles prey on real children, not fifteen year olds who look and act older. Sensible women don't get themselves into dodgy situations. Sensible men steer well clear of besotted, drunken or unstable women, because they understand the fury of 'a woman scorned'.

Did I call him a paedophile?

What I said was,  there is a law for a reason,   anyone who breaks the law have only themselves to blame.

This girl was fifteen,  infatuated with a man who was close to 30,   she was a child he was an adult,  he should have stopped what happened.

To call this girl a slut to me is disgusting,   she was vulnerable,  out of her depth.

[Mr Gray]

Once again I find myself in reluctant agreement with Katie Hopkins. Is a girl of fifteen a child unable to decide whether she should take part in sexual activity? What if she's sixteen tomorrow? Does she develop the ability overnight to decide something which she was too young to make a decision on today? That's clearly ridiculous. There is a legal age of consent because there has to be a line drawn somewhere, but girls develop at different rates both physically and mentally. Some start chasing boys at thirteen, some are still not too interested at seventeen.

This guy was a complete and utter fool to get involved with this girl, but he doesn't fit my definition of a paedophile.

Years ago women were blamed for everything. If their husband beat them they must have deserved it. If they got raped they had dressed provocatively or 'led the man on' or, in one case I knew of, gone into an army barracks at night and got 'what you would expect' as a result.

The pendulum has now swung the other way and women are seen as completely blameless; it's all the man's fault. I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. Real paedophiles prey on real children, not fifteen year olds who look and act older. Sensible women don't get themselves into dodgy situations. Sensible men steer well clear of besotted, drunken or unstable women, because they understand the fury of 'a woman scorned'.

If 15 is ok...whats wrong with 14...or 13...or 12...there are some places in the world where 12 is OK so I suppose you support that too....what a warped world you condemn the mccanns but support a convicted paedophile...speaks volumes about you

[Alice Purjorick]

This is interesting if somewhat bizarre:

Age of Consent in Louisiana

In Louisiana, age of consent laws are more complicated than those of most other states.

There is no definite age of when a minor may consent to sex in Louisiana. Instead, it varies depending on a few factors, such as the age of both parties, and the age difference, if any, between them.

In regards to the age difference, Louisiana is unique because it allows a larger age gap between younger minors than older minors. A person between the ages of 13 and 15 can consent to have sex with someone who is up to 3 years older than them, but a person between the ages of 15 and 17 may consent to sex only if the other person is 2 years older or less. For example, in terms of a 3 years age difference, a 13 year old can consent to sex with a person who is 16 years old, but a 15 year old may not consent to sex with a 18 year old.

However, a person 17 or older can consent to have sex with a person of any age.

[misty]

If only the police had made an example of Bill Wyman back in the day, cases like this wouldn't be happening now.

[Alice Purjorick]

If only the police had made an example of Bill Wyman back in the day, cases like this wouldn't be happening now.

The most common age of consent in Europe is 15 so it would not have raised eyebrows in any of the following countries unless it were proven to be done for reasons of exploitation:
14:Albania, Austria, Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Estonia, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Montenegro, Portugal, San Marino, Serbia.
15: Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Greece, Iceland, Monaco, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden.

The guy broke a statutory law in the United Kingdom and a pseudo journo made a comment for effect that about sums it up. Were Hopkins not hostile to the McCanns I doubt anyone would be getting in a muck sweat over it.
The morality bit is a movable feast depending on where one is geographically. I suppose the Vatican City, Malta & Turkey, all with ages of consent of 18 look down their noses at the rest of Europe.

[Alfred R Jones]

The most common age of consent in Europe is 15 so it would not have raised eyebrows in any of the following countries unless it were proven to be done for reasons of exploitation:
14:Albania, Austria, Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Estonia, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Montenegro, Portugal, San Marino, Serbia.
15: Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Greece, Iceland, Monaco, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden.

The guy broke a statutory law in the United Kingdom and a pseudo journo made a comment for effect that about sums it up. Were Hopkins not hostile to the McCanns I doubt anyone would be getting in a muck sweat over it.
The morality bit is a movable feast depending on where one is geographically. I suppose the Vatican City, Malta & Turkey, all with ages of consent of 18 look down their noses at the rest of Europe.

Actually my point for raising it today was to challenge the assumption that simply because a comment in the Daily Mail attracts 10,000+ positive green arrows it's not necessarily indicative of the national mood. 

[misty]

The most common age of consent in Europe is 15 so it would not have raised eyebrows in any of the following countries unless it were proven to be done for reasons of exploitation:
14:Albania, Austria, Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Estonia, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Montenegro, Portugal, San Marino, Serbia.
15: Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Greece, Iceland, Monaco, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden.

The guy broke a statutory law in the United Kingdom and a pseudo journo made a comment for effect that about sums it up. Were Hopkins not hostile to the McCanns I doubt anyone would be getting in a muck sweat over it.
The morality bit is a movable feast depending on where one is geographically. I suppose the Vatican City, Malta & Turkey, all with ages of consent of 18 look down their noses at the rest of Europe.

The age of consent in Spain was 13 until recently, now raised to 16.
There have been several comments elsewhere online, mostly condemning KH for what she said. Given her history, calling the girl a derogatory name is more than a little hypocritical.
 It would be more useful for KH to address the real issue - that a woman's role is to be a sexual plaything for a man & a man's role is to be a bottomless cash pit for a woman.