A shift of sexual mores | 92 comments (92 topical, editorial, 0 hidden)

Re: A shift of sexual mores (4.00 / 2)

I'd say Peter and Christine are two kids being kids. Hopefully they've been raised to be smart about what they do. Teenagers having sex with each other has gone on as long as there have been teenagers. That's radically different from this:

So who or what was protected by this collection of absurdities? Peter or Christine? Hardly. Some sexual mores that require marriage and the wish to procreate, but these mores had become controversial. That's why their defenders tried to claim they were protecting children. These mores were challenged by the concept of self-determination. This is what DCB argues when he writes about children touching him: they wanted it, and they were free. All sexual mores necessarily had to be questioned. Only after self-determination became (at least ostensibly) the criteria for banning sexual behaviour, could the debate move on to limiting this self-determination, but that happened later. DCB wrote exactly in the time when one set of sexual mores had lost all credibility, but wasn't yet replaced by the new consensus.

The bits about self-determination are, I'm sure, all very interesting if one wishes to engage is deep philosophical discussion of sexual evolution. More often than not, much of the talk of "they wanted it," "they were free," "self-determination," etc, simply strikes me as adults rationalizing their own or others behavior.

Also, writing of five-year-olds "wanting it" -- and I'll grant the assumption of the account being fictional -- and defending such a statement as merely a means of being provocative strikes me as (1) not very provocative and (2) sick.

Also, too, Roman Polanski should be in jail and the French elite have no taste in film.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Wed Jun 12th, 2013 at 06:42:25 PM EST

Re: A shift of sexual mores (none / 0)

Drew J Jones:

Also, writing of five-year-olds "wanting it" -- and I'll grant the assumption of the account being fictional -- and defending such a statement as merely a means of being provocative strikes me as (1) not very provocative and (2) sick.

You sum up why conservatives are harping on this matter. By contemporary standards... but we are going into repetitions. And no, Roman Polanski shouldn't go to jail. He should have gone to jail 40 years ago. The remark about the "French elite" distracts from the question why he wasn't jailed then.

Intriguing which parts of this thread are seen as provocative. I've also written "this topic had to be debated. Nowadays it is taboo." To be honest, I expected someone would jump at this and say the current campaign was not about enforcing a taboo on debate.

by Katrin on Thu Jun 13th, 2013 at 04:36:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I dunno, the French "elite" certainly (none / 1)

didn't cover itself in glory (Frédéric Mitterand, Bernard Kouchner, Bernard Henri-Levy, Jack Lang, Alain Finkielkraut, Pascal Bruckner...this is quite the spectrum) back when the Swiss were holding Polanski.

So, I'm not sure how pointing this out is a distraction. It's more just a fact. There were some (Onfray comes to mind, but he is really more an outsider when it comes to the elite) who were right in their expressions of disgust towards this Polanski character, but in the main you saw a french elite which was circling its wagons in contemptible fashion. And these clowns are still influential, which says a lot about how long it takes and how much it takes for the elite here to utterly discredit themselves (if that is indeed possible).

As for Polanski needing to do time way back when instead of now, surely you are correct, but he didn't, and this is in large part because he was being defended by those same french elite (and those in some other European countries), which is why the "distraction" is still relevant.

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

by r------ on Thu Jun 13th, 2013 at 05:04:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I dunno, the French "elite" (none / 0)

Fascinating. The reasons for Polanski being set free and the deal in the making are shifted to the other side of the Atlantic. Wow. The judge who set him free and who wasn't opposed to the deal was a Yank.

by Katrin on Thu Jun 13th, 2013 at 05:35:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm confused. A judge didn't set him free, (none / 0)

he hadn't yet been sentenced. And he fled when he realised he might have to do some time.

Next thing we know, he's living and working in France. Never to return to the US.

Saying he had been "set free" betrays a misunderstanding of how the US justice system works.

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

by r------ on Thu Jun 13th, 2013 at 05:44:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm confused. A judge didn't set him free, (none / 0)

He would have awaited his sentencing in jail, if the case had been treated as either I would like to have it treated OR as it would have been treated by the US nowadays.

by Katrin on Thu Jun 13th, 2013 at 05:55:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Things haven't changed that much... (4.00 / 2)

these days, he would have been held with a high bail amount, which he certainly would have been able to make, what with all the help of his friends in high places (if memory serves, the President of the Republic Nicholas Sarkozy even interceded on his behalf with the Swiss authorities...)

And these people have more than enough money to avoid accountability, as we live in the times of the accountability-free generation, of which all the elite figures I mention are proud members.

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

by r------ on Thu Jun 13th, 2013 at 06:05:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Things haven't changed that much... (none / 0)

redstar:

these days, he would have been held with a high bail amount

I doubt that. Have you read the girl's evidence?

redstar:

we live in the times of the accountability-free generation

You surely can substantiate that a bit, can't you? The rich and powerful have better chances to escape accountability than the rest of us. This isn't new. And as to an "accountability-free generation": The nazi crimes come to mind... Or the war crimes of other wars...

Waiting for your reply. I must fetch some pop corn in the meantime.

by Katrin on Thu Jun 13th, 2013 at 06:32:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

There are many actual cases of (4.00 / 2)

paedophilia in the United States where bail (ignoring whether it can be posted or not) is granted. Jerry Sandusky was out on bail pending his trial (and google it, you'll see just how accountable the powerful were in his case). The crime really needs to be heinous in order for no bail to be set. It may be set at a very high level (say, a half million in the case of former wrestler Buck Zumhofe) but that's entirely my point...if you're extremely wealthy, a half million is a trifle. If you're not, not so much.

And, if you are European and a famous film director, you can count on dozens of member of the french cultural and political elite to have your back.

As for whether or not we live in an accountability free era, I have to wonder if we live in the same society. The one I live in has elites virtually everywhere being wrong about everything. Economics, fiscal and monetary policy, fear of inflation, fear of Saddam's weapons of mass destruction, the sovereign debt crisis is due to state over-spending, I could go on. And all of the powerful people, in the media, in government, at the heads of banks (which nearly destroyed us all, not that that will mean jail time for any of them outside of Iceland)...are still where they always were, in positions of power, with no accountability. Can you name me one significant figure of the elite who has paid the price for being so wrong over the past 12 years?

Your own country is going to re-elect a powerful person with 70+% approval ratings who has been wrong about most all of what ails Europe today and you are going to ridicule my assertion that we live in an accountability-free world? (And not coincidentally, when the accountability-free generation has been in their prime...)

I think that's a bit rich.

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

by r------ on Thu Jun 13th, 2013 at 07:50:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: There are many actual cases of (none / 0)

So no evidence for this generation (or rather the rich and powerful of this generation) enjoying more protection from being held accountable than previous ones. Thought as much. But on the point of bail being possible even in cases of child abuse you are right and was wrong.

by Katrin on Thu Jun 13th, 2013 at 08:07:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

You yourself alluded to Nuremberg. (none / 0)

That was serious accountability.

Prior to that there are many other examples from that generation. In the US, a number of wall street financiers went to jail and forfeited fortunes (head of NYSE, head of what would become Citibank, et c.). Chamberlain was booted from power for his stupid foreign policy.

Their kid's generation? Not much.

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

by r------ on Thu Jun 13th, 2013 at 08:46:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You yourself alluded to Nuremberg. (4.00 / 2)

Umm, no, I didn't. I pointed at the majority of nazi criminals, those that got away. Your claim that this generation of rich&powerful gets away with more criminal behaviour than previous ones is far-fetched and you didn't back it up.

by Katrin on Thu Jun 13th, 2013 at 10:52:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You yourself alluded to Nuremberg. (4.00 / 2)

Not really. We don't know what they're getting away with, by definition because they're - you know - not getting hauled up in court for it.

We do know that UK judges consistently pass down ludicrously lenient sentences on paedophiles and abusers who have establishment links, and that many investigations are actively prevented on establishment orders.

We also know from cases in Europe and the US (e.g. Franklin and Dutroux) there seems to be clear evidence of judicial, political and police protection of sadistic paedophiles.

And we know from the UK that someone like Jimmy Savile can make a career out of abuse, and will be allowed to do so, no matter how many victims complain. (And there were many.)

So - no evidence? Really?

If you're wilfully blind to the facts - or worse, are trying to sweep them under the carpet - you might think that.

But no one familiar with the evidence is going to agree with you.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Jun 13th, 2013 at 11:11:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

And what are you alluding to? (none / 1)

ThatBritGuy:

Not really. We don't know what they're getting away with...

Exactly: we don't know and can't make the comparison Redstar made.

You point at cases where rich and powerful people got lenient sentences. I am not disputing that being rich and powerful helps enormously to get away with crimes. I am disputing that the present generation has better chances to get away than previous ones. And I am disputing that getting away with sexual abuse of children has become easier than in previous generations.

ThatBritGuy:

If you're wilfully blind to the facts - or worse, are trying to sweep them under the carpet - you might think that.

My, what a rhetorical flourish. Am I meant to clap?

ThatBritGuy:

But no one familiar with the evidence is going to agree with you.

If that is so, why don't you supply that evidence?

by Katrin on Thu Jun 13th, 2013 at 01:07:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You yourself alluded to Nuremberg. (4.00 / 7)

Katrin isn't arguing that the present elites gets away with little, she says that they don't get away with more then other generations elites.

I guess if studied (invent some metrics, find sources) the current crop would in comparision probably come in high in getting away with looting their core population, low in getting away with murders against their core population, low in getting away with murders against colonial populations, but high in getting away with destroying the biosphere upon which the civilization rests. Or something like that.

But really, the important thing is that they are getting away with too much. And as long as that holds I don't really think it is all that relevant wheter that is more or less then 19th century politicians or medival barons got away with.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Thu Jun 13th, 2013 at 01:36:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You bought up the Nazis. There were (none / 0)

trials. Not just in Germany, but elsewhere, in the aftermath of the war. People were hung, shamed, jailed, stripped of their companies, stripped of their positions.

Prior to the war, in the United States, a great commission investigating the financial sector resulted in jail sentences as well, not to mention loss of position and stature or confiscatory taxation of the wealthy, with high marginal tax rates continuing until the 1960's.

Nothing like that of any sort is happening today.

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

by r------ on Thu Jun 13th, 2013 at 04:24:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: There are many actual cases of (none / 0)

Jerry Sandusky was out on bail pending his trial (and google it, you'll see just how accountable the powerful were in his case).

Pffffffft. I am informed to this day by no less an authority than Penn State fans (collectively) that it's all just a big conspiracy between ESPN and the NCAA to ruin Paterno's good name.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jun 13th, 2013 at 05:17:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A shift of sexual mores (4.00 / 3)

The UK has no statute of limitations on these kinds of crimes.

Putting Polanski in jail now would suggest there's at least some interest in accountability.

Of course there isn't, especially not among the 'elites', who have a long and vile history of being involved in these kinds of things - a history which is continuing today.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Jun 13th, 2013 at 05:34:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A shift of sexual mores (none / 0)

ThatBritGuy:

The UK has no statute of limitations on these kinds of crimes.

Interesting. Can you give a more precise version to"these kind of crimes", please? Child abuse in general, or rape (the girl in the Polanski case being under the age of consent distracts from the fact that she didn't consent anyway), and are there many crimes without statute of limitations in the UK?

by Katrin on Thu Jun 13th, 2013 at 06:03:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A shift of sexual mores (4.00 / 2)

You may not be aware that quite a few ageing celebrities and TV personalities have been arrested here recently for sexual crimes of all kinds that took place decades ago.

Civil cases have something like a statute of limitations. E.g. unpaid financial debts are considered 'statute barred' after six years, and remedies cannot be enforced by court action.

But so far as I know there is no statute of limitations in UK criminal law.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Jun 13th, 2013 at 11:16:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

A shift of sexual mores | 92 comments (92 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Top Diaries

Muslim Hatred Expressed In US Congress

Ireland and the 6 Nations Rugby Championship

The seven deadly sins of the DUP

A Cordon Sanitaire

The importance of being England

The cost of doing business

British Anglicanism, Disinformation and Harry

City Agriculture - January 19, 2023

Recent Diaries

Muslim Hatred Expressed In US Congress

Ukrainians Are NATO Mercenaries

Ireland and the 6 Nations Rugby Championship

Februari 2023

CIA's Research in Behavioral Modification

A Cordon Sanitaire

Energy (and Other) Events Monthly - February 2023

We Are All From Mars Now

The seven deadly sins of the DUP

The cost of doing business

The importance of being England

US War Powers, Regime Change and Third Option

US War Powers, Regime Change -- Part 2

US War Powers, Regime Change -- Part 1

City Agriculture - January 19, 2023

War In Ukraine A Failed Process by NATO

No Peace In Sight

Another Execution

The Protocol and the Founding Principles of the EU

Judeo-Fascism Arises - Kahane

Occasional Series