A Facebook campaign is calling for people to boycott a shopping centre after claims a man was questioned by police for taking photographs of his own four-year-old daughter.
Chris White took a picture of Hazel eating an ice cream in the Braehead shopping centre, near Glasgow.
A security guard told him it was illegal to take pictures in the centre.
A spokesperson for Braehead said it wanted to “maintain a safe and enjoyable environment” for shoppers.
Mr White told BBC Scotland he was approached by a security guard after photographing his daughter “looking cute on the back of a vespa seat at an ice cream bar” at about 16:00 on Friday.
He said the security guard asked him to delete any photos he had taken from his mobile phone.
Mr White explained that he had already posted two photos, in which his daughter was the only person in the shot, to Facebook.
The police were called and Mr White was told there were “clear signs” saying no photographs were allowed.
Chris White took this picture of his daughter in Braehead
Mr White said that one officer claimed that under the Prevention of Terrorism Act he was within in his rights to confiscate the mobile phone on which the photos were taken.
He said the police officers took his details and he was eventually allowed to leave.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-15236758
In this case we have the two twin hysterias of recent times carefully being manipulated by the state to demonise men – paedohysteria AND fear of terrorism.
Whatever people might assume, it is not illegal in the UK to take photos of children in public places, whether they are your own children or not. So what does the feminist state do when it has a clear opportunity to create some paedohysteric havoc but doesn’t have the laws to justify it in this particular case? Well they simply fall back on legislation that they have created through one of their other hysterias – terrorism.
This relationship can work in the other direction too. When several British muslims were arrested on suspicion of plotting terrorism a couple of years ago, the police found that they didn’t have enough evidence to charge them with the offenses. So what they did do? They arrested them on possession of child pornography. We know that muslims are amongst the biggest users of porn, especially muslim radicals, so it was hardly unlikely that the recovered trace of one single picture of a young looking small breasted 21 year old woman wasn’t to be found somewhere on their harddrive. And that’s all that is needed for a charge of possession of child porn.
British men have been criminalised to such an extent over the last couple of decades, that if the police want you, they can get you, even if what they want you for isn’t (yet) illegal.
I think the real problem is the “anything can happen” mentality many parents, but not just parents seem to have these days. Regardless of crime statistics which tell you that in the Western world, violent crime, particularly crimes against children, has almost invariably gone down in the past three decades or so. Children nowadays are indeed safer than they ever were before.
What has changed however is that in our global 24-hour news media world, each and every single case of child kidnapping, child molestation, etc. is deemed newsworthy and gets an incredible amount of media attention. Not that these aren’t horrific crimes against the weakest members of society. The problem is that these crimes are being overreported, overbroadcast and oversensationalized. If you put yourself to it, and read the tabloids every day, you can go almost the entire 365 days of a given year with at least one child abuse story each and every day. Again, these are horrible, inexcusable crimes. But the “if it bleeds it leads” mentality of the news media is hardly conducive to the betterment of society at large. The effects it produces are not limited to raising awareness, which would arguably even be a good thing. No, what happens is that fear and hysteria are being spread. That, and certain groups in society use this hysteria to serve their own hidden agendas. For one thing, it’s the obvious man-hating feminist lobby. To them, all this news hysteria is a godsend because it yet again gives them an opportunity to denigrate men as baby-snatching, child-abusing, all-around violent defective elements of society. But also involved is the surveillance and nanny state, which seeks to spread fear and panic in order to implement ever-tougher, ever-more erosive laws in terms of citizens’ freedoms, civil liberties, and privacy.
And all this can cumulate in events like this one here, where all hell breaks loose just because a loving, caring father has taken pictures on a day out, of his pride and joy, the apple of his eye, his little daughter. A very troublinig example of how sick, how perverted society has become. Anybody, anywhere, anytime can be, and is being suspected of anything.
Completely agree Inclinedreader. I also think mainstream news oversimplifies the details behind the stories by stereotyping people down to the level of an old cowboy movie. Thus, any man accused of child abuse is represented by a middle aged balding actor in a raincoat with a bag of lollies. The child is always about 3 and clutching a teddy bear and the cop who arrests him is always as wholesome as superman.
The reality might be an 18 year old guy who is pursued by a 15 year old that looks 19 and tells him she is. The cop might just be a thug who uses “dishing out some rough justice to a peddo” as an excuse to bash someone he is jealous of. But all those facts make such a boring news story.
That whole angle seems to be gaining ground in many countries as well. Not to get too far off topic, but I fear for our young people. I was a little bit of a late bloomer myself, and well into my early 20s, I had girlfriends well below 18. I just felt like mentally and emotionally, I was on the same level as them, and I found it hard to spark interest in young women who were closer to my own age. Mind you, I stayed well within the boundaries of German penal law at the time. And among my friends, I was definitely far from being the only one with a younger girlfriend. To tell you the truth, I would have trouble even naming two or more of my old friends who didn’t at some point have a girlfriend who was still under 18. And therefore, I feel the ratcheting-up of age of consent laws nowadays does not only brand men in their late 20s to early (or even late) 30s inappropriately as “child molesters” (sic!) for being with somebody who is just about under 18, but it also puts men much younger than that needlessly at risk of committing a “sex crime” according to the letter of the law. Their only crime being that they commit acts which not even 20 years ago were seen as perfectly normal and age-appropriate. And so that is another way feminazism hurts men. Not a thought is spared for young men just above the age of majority who are just like I used to be – a little bit late in their emotional and sexual development, whose only wish is to have consensual sexual relations with somebody who is on the same developmental level as them. Again, nowadays, I personally couldn’t imagine getting it on with somebody who isn’t at least in her early 20s… but that’s how I used to be, and I see no reason why young men nowadays shouldn’t be allowed to have under-18 girlfriends.
It would be interesting if the increasing accuracy and interpretation of neurological scans revealed that the brains of ephebophiles (assuming that such a category of men exists) are in some way similar to those of adolescents. I wonder why that would not count as a reason to look more humanely at such men’s sexual tastes and behaviour. After all, it’s a mark of a progressive civilisation to accept transgendered people and the idea that one gender can be trapped inside the body of another. Why shouldn’t we also accept the concept of an adult who is actually a chld, to whatever extent, trapped inside the body of an adult (Michael Jackson is an obvious example)?
BTW, I don’t place that much weight on the idea at all that sex is only consensual if the participants are developmentally equal etc. Once you abandon feminist nonsense about all imbalances in relationships being inherently exploititive then I can’t see how you can maintain that equality (in age or development) is the crucial factor. If you hold that it’s o.k. for 16 year olds (or 15 year olds or whatever) to fuck other 16 year olds, then why is it intrinsically wrong for them to fuck a 20 year old, a 40 year old, or a 50 year old? We’re moving away from the simple issue – can a person x years old consent to sex?
I can see that it can be consistant to hold that teenagers below a certain age shouldn’t really be having sex, but they will anyway, so we won’t prosecute them when it is with each other – but we will prosecute an older man who has sex with them (because he should know better). But if you hold that 15 year olds can consent to sex with each other and it’s not necessarily a bad thing at all (as most people who call themselves liberal do believe) then I don’t see how you can then say it’s suddenly wrong if the sexual partner is older (unless you follow radical feminist thinking).
I was also very much a late developer, due to an unhappy adolescence (not sexual abuse). I can say categorically that when I was in my mid twenties I was still as much an adolescent as the average teenager, and that I had far more in common with even a 14 year old than I did with the average 30 year old (reinforced by the fact that I attended university in my twenties). I’m around 40 now, quite a bit more mature and ‘grown up’ if you like, as well as having far more sexual experience. I still don’t see how myself having sex with a 17 year old now would be wrong (because I’m ‘mature’), but it would have been o.k 15 years ago when I had probably the same mind (at 25) as the teenager. To be honest, I can give 17 year old girls a much more rewarding experience (emotionally and sexually) now than I ever could when I was a clumsy, insecure teen and twenty something.
sorry, maybe I kinda juggled around too many thoughts at once in my previous post.
I personally see nothing wrong with adults, and that includes people who are already notably outside the “young adult” age bracket, having consensual relations with teenagers, and at least still today, many countries in Europe, according to their respective penal codes, don’t draw a strict and forbidding line between “over 18″ and “under 18″. Nor do I think that sex can only be consensual when two partners are on the same developmental level, give or take. After all, what does that say about all those older men with their young “trophy” wives… or Doug Hutchinson and his 16-year-old bride (I know the latter in particular has many feminazis in a state of apoplexy and foaming at the mouth). Oh, and what would it indeed say about all those “sexually liberated” middle-aged cougars who are smitten with virile young men who are basically still wet behind the ears and could well be their youngest son…
I think ideally, it should not be the government’s or feminists’ business (or society’s business in general) at all when two people fall in love, or even when they don’t fall in love, and decide to have sex together. And likewise, age shouldn’t matter. Only when abuse comes into play should safeguards apply. If somebody wants to have sex with a 16-year-old who could be his daughter, well, I personally don’t care, as long as there is mutual respect between the two.
And I was only stating personal preference when I said that I personally couldn’t imagine getting it on with somebody who isn’t at least in her early 20s. That doesn’t mean I would have a problem with other men my age dating somebody who is considerably younger than that. But I feel that I have progressed (just a little bit) emotionally to a level where I just wasn’t when I was 20, 22 maybe, and although I still definitely strongly favor younger women over women of my own age group, I probably just wouldn’t know what to do with, say, a 16-year-old… besides merely jumping her bones. Again, just my personal preference. Very unlike all those feminazis and moral conservatives out there, I don’t give a toot if somebody feels drawn to 15-, 16- or 17-year-olds or whatever. None of my business, and as I said above, it should be nobody else’s business either.
One possible objection to including teenage girls in the free sexual market is that it would displace and retard the sexual development of teenage boys – for example if many men were chasing the nubile teenage girls, and given that they have higher status and wealth than teenage boys, the boys might lose out to the older men. Of course, teenage boys would be free to have older female partners, but I’m pretty sure that older women don’t generally find younger males attractive to the same extent as older men find young girls attractive.
oh btw while we’re on the subject of middle-aged cougars… I don’t know how good your German is, but google the case of Renata Juras, a 44-year-old Austrian woman who had sex with her now 15-year-old boyfriend from when he was just 13… she received a 22-month suspended (!!) sentence for “sexual abuse of a minor under the age of consent”, the latter being 14 in Austria as you probably know, and now she has made her life story into an autobiography which she now peddles around German TV talk shows… can you imagine the outrage if that had been a 44-year-old man with a 13-year-old girl? He would have had a snowball’s chance in hell of getting off with a 22-month suspended sentence. His autobiography would probably be deemed potential kiddie porn, and no talk show host would even remotely consider inviting him.
Thanks for the info IR, and that is indeed shocking. I can remember reading in ‘Bild’ last year of an underage teenage boy who had an older woman as a lover and who gave numerous interviews saying that he was not a victim and that she should not be prosecuted. I don’t know if this is the same case or a different one.
QUOTE”One possible objection to including teenage girls in the free sexual market is that it would displace and retard the sexual development of teenage boys”
Here are some counter-arguments to such a hypothetical objection:
1) This would be tantamount to sexual trade unionism and could be used as a precedent for all sorts of other restrictions on people’s sexuality.
2) You are in a situation where someone will go to jail for a victimless crime and that is an abomination…whether it is done in the name of protecting the sexual interests of older females or adolescent males.
3) In a true sexual free market adolescent boys should have more options available to them than just dating and hook-ups: teenaged girls (at least those aged 16 to 17) should be free to work as sex care workers and boys should be allowed to patron them (and older sex care workers too of course). A true sexual free market should also lead to greater tolerance for things such as polyamory which would give teenage girls the ability to enjoy the company of an older man and a young boy her age simultaneously instead of being in and either/or dilemma.
4) Building on the themes discussed in The Case Against Adolescence (which discusses unfair labour market restrictions on teenagers) and The Affirmative Action Hoax (which argues that in the push to make everyone graduate from high school, secondary education has been made too easy to the point where it is of little value which then forces everyone to stay in school for longer periods in order to obtain a post secondary education) it is evident that the wealth and status of teenage boys is kept artificially low. Yes even if these restrictions are removed older men would still have the wealth/status advantage but the gap could at least be closed somewhat and rising incomes for young men could allow them to afford to patron sex care workers.
5) The culture of extended childhood works both ways and also artificially reduces the chances of older females finding younger males attractive. Yes older women will never be as attracted to young boys as older men are to young girls…but that does not mean that their interest could not be raised at least somewhat especially if the restrictions on the wealth and status of younger men were also removed.
6) IMHO keeping older males away from adolescent females causes more harm than good. When teens are only allowed to date other teens of similar age this leads (based on the observations of many) to a domination of the youth sexual market by “bad boys” with many “nice guys” being shut out of the market completely. When older “nice guy” beta males are allowed acces to young girls then can then use thier increased attractiveness (due to wealth/status) to cockblock many of the assholes. Instead with the system we have now many nice guy beta males who may have been sexually shut out during thier teen years then go on to early adulthood with a severe disadvantage in terms of competing for females of their own age group (due to lack of experience) and are unable to remedy this situation by dating younger females.
Great points Highwayman. I was really playing the Devil’s Advocate and trying to rescue something from the ‘equal developmental stage’ argument against adults having sex with teens. That does seem to me the only possible way it could be justified, and you’ve pretty much demolished it. I’m going to start collating all the various ‘arguments’ for high age of consent laws soon, and debunking them of course – hopefully with your help and that of other readers. I’m just not sure whether for the purposes of Search Engine Optimisation and for discussion it would be best to do it all on a single page or in a series of articles (i.e. one article for each argument).
@Highwayman:
Some good points… I think ultimately, the decision whether or not a teenage girl should (or would want to) have sex with a more mature man should lie with that girl. Think about it, teenagers these days have to/are forced to think about college, employment, and career choices long before they reach majority, many EU countries have lowered the minimum age to get a drivers license to 17, numerous countries have a voting age of 16 0r 17 (in Austria, they can vote in national elections from age 14 if I remember correctly), and let us also not forget that the age of criminal responsibility, from which teenage shenanigans can have sometimes severe legal repercussions, is as low as 14 or even lower in Europe and elsewhere. Teenagers have so many important life-changing decisions thrust upon them, for which they are made to bear responsibility. But it shouldn’t be up to them to decide if they want to have sex with somebody who is (sometimes considerably) older? Why is society putting sex on such a pedestal?
And, not to rain on anybody’s parade or dash hopes of any middle-aged men of getting it on with a teenager… even before feminazism started indoctrinating teenage girls to think of (slightly) older men as kiddie fiddlers, some 20 years ago when I was a late teen myself, most girls I knew only had an eye for guys who were maybe five years older, but not much more than that. Therefore, since I believe that that still applies today: whether or not sexual relations between a 16-year-old and a 36-year-old should be allowed or not, and what it means for 20-year-olds if they are upstaged by a mature, experienced, financially stable (and sometimes wealthy) older man is a moot point, they are obsolete considerations, because such relationships are in fact pretty rare in relation to the general population. But again, just because most people don’t do it (and this is where tolerance and enlightened liberal values that we should pride ourselves in come in), doesn’t mean it should be made illegal. Much in the same way a 16-year-old girl is still (and increasingly even!) trusted with making life-determining career choices, and the same way that she is allowed to vote in some countries if she has an interest in politics at a young age, she should be free to decide for herself if she wants to get in the sack with a man twice her age.
Well, I tend to agree to a large extent IR – we actually had a discussion of this in the comments section here a little while back. Highwayman also answered the question as to why you see so few young girl/older man relationships even where the age of consent is lower than 18 : http://theantifeminist.com/do-40-year-old-men-really-want-relationships-with-16-year-old-girls/ (and a couple of the points he makes applies also to why teen girls might not be attracted to older men in the present artificial environment – for example the extension of childhood).
I would disagree with your statement that ‘late teens have an eye on men 5 years older max’. Are you sure the reason for that is not that most people in your/their social circle were no more than 5 or so years older than yourselves? If you look at who teenage girls (and I’m talking young teenage girls here) have on their bedroom walls, then for the most part it is usually men in their early to mid twenties – the Justin Bieber teen hearthrobs of this world are actually not the norm. The twenty something Eminems, Tupacs, Kurt Cobains are (Eminem was actually a teen girl lust object in his mid 30′s). I can tell you that when I first started visiting Germany about 10 years ago (when I was around 30) I couldn’t sit in a restaurant like a McDonalds alone without 14 year old girls coming and sitting next me and expecting to me to chat to them (and on more than one occasion threatening to make false accusations when I didn’t).
There’s also the fact to consider that even granted that teen girls prefer boys similar to their own age, the number of men aged 20 to 60 greatly is vastly greater than the number of teenage boys. Of course, even in a truly free sexual market with a low age of consent, not all of them will be chasing the teenage girls, but a large number would be. Furthermore, in a truly free sexual market, you would have a comparable situation to that which existed in Japan only a few years ago – most teenage girls hooking up with much older men in order to be financially ‘compensated’ etc. Even in the UK, just before the sexual offences act of 2003, in the relatively early days of the internet, a phenomenon was emerging of teenage girls flashing and talking dirty to men on their webcams who in return would pay for their mobile top up or their Amazon wish list. This was when most people had 56K internet connections and low resolution webcams. Imagine the situation in a free sexual market without legislation in another 10 years from now, when many homes will have skype webcam chat on ultra high definition 60″ TVs with gb ultra fast broadband connections!
Of course, as Highwayman pointed out, in a truly free sexual market, teenage boys would have access to female prostitutes and the like – including teenage sex workers. In fact, in a really free sexual market that had divorced sexual morality from Christianity/sexual trade unionism, society would probably consider it civilised to encourage teenagers to have their first sexual experiences with adults who knew what they were doing – either sex workers or mature men/women, rather than fumbling around with somebody equally inexperienced and/or emotionally vulnerable.
@ InclinedReader
QUOTE: “even before feminazism started indoctrinating teenage girls to think of (slightly) older men as kiddie fiddlers, some 20 years ago when I was a late teen myself, most girls I knew only had an eye for guys who were maybe five years older, but not much more than that.”
You may not have had as much pedohysteria back then but you would still have had a very high level of age segregation (structure of the education system, labour laws, legal drinking ages, minimum ages for entry at social clbus…etc). It is only natural that teenage girls would have had a eye for males close to their own age when teeenage girls and teenage boys were thrown together in the same social context. The internet is a tool that can potentially break down the age segregation barriers between older men and young girls as it allows the opportunity to create online “meet markets” for the two groups. The fact the rise in pedohysteria and demand for increased AOC laws and Grooming laws (especially internet grooming) has coincided with the rise in the use of the internet is IMHO not a coincidence.
@ Shopenbecq
QUOTE: “Great points Highwayman. I was really playing the Devil’s Advocate”
I figured as much.
QUOTE: “I’m going to start collating all the various ‘arguments’ for high age of consent laws soon, and debunking them of course”
LOL! You have a lot of planned articles on the backburner: 1) a chapter by chapter review of The Woman Racket 2) an article on sex negativity within the MRM 3) additional articles on developing technologies and how the will effect the sexual marketplace 4) an article on ephebophilia and it’s possible implications for the MRM 5) a more detailed review of The Case Against Adooescence for In Mala Fide…and probably a few more that I can’t remember of the top of my head. I in know way mention this as a criticism, I realise that you must be a very busy man as am I but I can’t wait for many of your ideas for articles come to fruition.
Yes indeed Highwayman, you forgot to mention the chapter by chapter analysis of Neil Lyndon’s ‘No More Sex War’ (BTW, try to get hold of it – I’d put it on the same level as Moxon’s book), the best place to live in the world for a male ex-pat, and the top 10 greatest anti-feminist music videos.
Since I got hacked my search engine traffic has plummetted. I’ve been trying to post a (short) article each day to get back up in the rankings. Given that I’ve limited time to spend on this blog, I guess I have to make the choice between updating regularly with small news links (like today’s), or writing longer more in depth articles.
BTW, you’d be very interested in a story that’s currently generating a bit of heat in Argentina. A 14 year old girl danced sexily, thong showing etc, on a national tv talent show – a bit like the X factor. The studio audience and panel lapped it up, but predictably, jealous bitches, feminists, manginas, conservatives, child protection etc are building up a rage and want the television studio punished.
How times have changed since that Rebelde Way dance was screened at teatime without causing a raised eyebrow.
Think about it, in case of terrorism (or child abduction) in a shopping mall, the police will want the public to come forward with private pics and footage. How more self-defeating can one get?