Missing White Woman Syndrome.
And so the lithe and luscious Megan Stammers has been returned to her rightful owners – she was after all, taken ‘without their permission’. Or ‘abducted’ as our hysterical press prefer to claim.
It has been a miracle wrought by the attentive media, without whose help little Megan would still have been wandering along the Rue Sainte Catherine happily window shopping – en route to a job interview to gain useful employment.
I am well aware of the law – she was less than 16, so could not legally give permission for sexual intercourse, if that is what she has indeed done. I do hope so, for otherwise Jeremy Forest will have been labelled a ‘sexual predator’ for nothing. I am well aware that he is in a ‘position of trust and authority’ – and it may surprise British readers who have been given the impression by the British media that ‘the French couldn’t care less, because the age of consent is 15 in France’ – aye, it is, excluding sexual intercourse with ‘apparent’ consent obtained by abusing a postion of authority. So let’s nail that one on the head.
Let’s hope that there is more to this story than meets the eye; let’s hope that the Sussex police were in possession of unrevealed information giving rise to a belief that she might have been in danger of some extreme physical harm – for if not, I’ll wager there will be many exceptionally angry parents in the UK today.
We can start with those parents in Rochdale, who were told that their 10, 11, and 12 year old daughters were ‘exercising their choice’ in having sexual intercourse with men twice their age. Then move onto those parents who have discovered to their horror that Social Services were actually financially supporting their under age daughters in separate accommodation, the better to continue their relationship with petty thieves, car thieves, joy riders, drug addicts and all the other wholly unsuitable young men that girls can set their eye upon. We can include all those parents who have reported their daughters missing, only to find that they are not ‘officially’ missing until several days after they have last been seen on account of ‘they might just be staying with a friend’.
There is no evidence published so far that Megan and Jeremy’s relationship had changed from the unwise one which was already being investigated by the local authority, albeit slowly. Perhaps, just perhaps, they were genuinely fond of each other, which is not as yet a crime. Perhaps once the investigation commenced, they lived in fear that being fond of each other would lead to phrases like ‘grooming’, ‘paedophile’, not to mention my particular favourite – ‘lured away to Europe’, a ‘luring’ which was achieved by producing her passport showing that she was already a citizen of that same Europe…
You could sense the desperation of the Police as they tried to think of something that would allow them to issue a European arrest warrant; no evidence of sexual activity, no evidence that she had been taken against her will – indeed it was she who (and before you jump up and down, I am well aware that she was legally vulnerable and impressionable) suggested that running away to France was a sensible option; of course he should have refused, but perhaps fearing the institutional panic that was about to envelope them, he unwisely didn’t. Finally the Police settled on removing her parent’s property ‘without their permission’.
I am not railing against the age of consent, nor advocating that teachers be allowed to pillage young pupils virginity with impunity; I do wonder quite what it was about Megan Stammers or Jeremy Forrest that escalated a situation which happens in homes up and down the country without comment into an ‘international man hunt’ with child protection officers being flown hither and thither, counselling for fellow pupils and the full paraphernalia of paedophile hysteria?
Because I am sure there are a lot of parents out there who fear their daughters are in far more danger than running off with the maths teacher, who would dearly love to know. If any such parent is reading this, contact me. I will happily campaign for you to receive precisely the same attention to mass publicity, especially if your daughter happens not to be white, middle class, and photogenic.
If something emerges in the next few days showing that Jeremy Forrest posed a particular danger, above and beyond the legion of unwise choices made by young girls whose parents only want to have them back home unsullied, then I shall gladly eat my own Raccoon tail.
October 2, 2012 at 16:27
-
One reason the media might have made so much of this was because they were
making the most of it while they could.
At from yesterday (Monday, October
1), it has become unlawful to name or otherwise give details likely to
identify a teacher who has been accused of an offence against a child at his
or her school if that teacher has not yet been charged with a criminal offence
– even if the accusation is referred to in public, for example at an
Employment Tribunal hearing at which the teacher claims unfair dismissal. The
restriction relates to any criminal offence (not just sex offences) involving
a child who is a pupil at the teacher’s school. This is under Section 13 of
the Education Act 2011.
http://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/news/gwentnews/9960524.COMMENT__Teacher_law_a_danger/
http://www.holdthefrontpage.co.uk/2012/news/satchwell-anonymity-law-would-have-protected-forrest/
-
October 2, 2012 at 16:17
-
I would like to see someone try to inflict a Sexual Examination on Megan if
she didn’t want one. That would indeed be Child Abuse. And it wouldn’t “Prove”
anything anyway.
- October 1, 2012 at 19:37
-
I blame birthdays. Two 15 year olds doing it do so without let or
hindrance, but when one turns 16 the doing it they did before is suddenly
illegal, because it is now adult and pixie (or something) doing it. However,
when little pixie reaches 16 too it’s safely back to doing it*
Lesson for all 15 year olds: choose your pixie partner as having a birthday
near your own to minimise Bonkingus Interruptus.
*Noddies** advised
** Condoms, not Enid Blyton character
-
October 1, 2012 at 16:37
-
This kind of thing has been going on for years of course. What makes this
case stand out above all the others and makes the media go into hyperbole
mode? Who knows? But then the media does have to compete with blogs nowadays.
Anyway, my reasons for posting is thus: A PE teacher (married) at my school
got a 16 year old girl pregnant and eventually he did leave his wife for the
girl. Eventually it was found out that their affair had been going on for at
least a year which meant the girl was 15 when it began. I have no idea how
things turned out between them because this was in 1977, the year I left
school. I do however, remember that although the teacher lost his job, I do
not think there was an investigation or the media going into overdrive about
it. Just saying.
- October 1, 2012 at 11:02
-
“MTG September 29, 2012 at 19:30
As reprehensible as it may be for anyone to use and exploit a situation
over which they have almost complete control, this human weakness is one which
Megan probably inherited.”
Cynical maybe but this is the truest comment
I`ve read on this affair.The man is obviously a complete and utter fool and I
would`nt trust him to go to France without a minder.
- October 1, 2012 at 10:12
-
No Megan didn’t produce her own passport, she took her Mother’s to use, (so
she would seem older?).
Maybe I am being insensitive and politically incorrect but it all sounds
like a real adventure. I do hope she scores well in maths.
It is interesting to contrast the authorities different reactions… Rochdale
vs Megan and the Teacher
- September 30, 2012 at 21:05
-
Anna, you are not alone in your views. Fleet Street Fox made the same
points as you on her blog the other day.
- September 30, 2012 at 19:37
-
When I graduated the other 2 guys I hung out with went off to become
teachers. I took the view back than that I could never be trusted with 6th
year girls, and took a different path. I think I did the right thing.
The lurid press stories allege that the perp had previous. He should have
found alternative employment – maybe he could have taught at an all boys
school if teaching was his calling. Its all about individual responsibility is
it not. How old do you have to be to know yourself?
-
September 30, 2012 at 05:53
-
XX I am well aware of the law – she was less than 16, so could not legally
give permission for sexual intercourse,XX
She was in France. She COULD.
- September 30, 2012 at
07:46
-
Not to a person in a position of authority over her she couldn’t. Sorry,
you are wrong.
- September 30, 2012 at 08:53
-
XX She COULD. XX only suggests it was possible. Mine Furor never
studied ‘Franzmann’s’ law nor, come to think of it, any Law whatsover.
- September 30, 2012 at 00:17
-
“We have learned lessons” – almost as terrifying as – “I’m from the
Government, and am here to help.”
- September 30, 2012 at 00:42
-
Whenever I hear public officials say “Lessons have been learned” I have
an almost irresistible urge to seek to acquire an AK-47…
-
September 29, 2012 at 21:57
-
I think you have hit the nail on the head here. Girls of the underclass can
be screwed and abused and the ‘soch’ won’t give a toss. How can a girl of 13
be classed as a prostitute with a shrug of the shoulders. This ain’t a life
choice, it’s abuse.
And what did Rochdale Council say? ‘ We have learned lessons’. Sorry? I
thought social workers had to have a degree? Haven’t they had enough lessons
in social care already then? Obviously, they missed the one on common
sense.
-
September 29, 2012 at 22:07
-
The phrase “We have learned lessons” absolves all sins, it seems. It is a
form of magic.
- September 29, 2012 at 21:22
-
‘Missing White Woman Syndrome’ at it’s best, 2 words: MADELINE MCCAN
- September 29, 2012 at 20:39
- September 29, 2012 at 19:30
-
As reprehensible as it may be for anyone to use and exploit a situation
over which they have almost complete control, this human weakness is one which
Megan probably inherited.
- September 29, 2012 at 17:50
-
As someone has said “Having a pair of balls is like being chained to the
village idiot”
Testosterone rules OK?
- September 29, 2012 at 15:37
-
I think I can understand how an impressionable young girl full of hormones,
inexperience and curiosity might mislead herself that such an adventure might
be a good idea, but I’m afraid that I just cannot understand the teacher’s
actions at all.
By the way, in Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, the latter was thirteen
(though the former was nowhere near thirty). Just thought I’d mention it,
perhaps as an indication of how social norms have changed over the
centuries.
-
September 29, 2012 at 16:50
-
In a past life long ago, I had a measure of ‘authority’ within the Baden
Powell movement. An illegally-young girl asked me for a lift home one
evening, which I was happy to give her. On arriving there and still in my
car, she ‘came on’ to me in a most dramatically physical manner. I was 18 at
the time and my hormones were generally bursting at a level rarely matched
by any opportunities to address them – it took a profound level of
self-control to recognise, in that heated moment, that the likely outcome
was not good for all concerned, so I ‘made my excuses and left’ (albeit with
what seemed to be an extra gear-stick in the car).
I’m not defending Jeremy Forrest, at 30 and being a teacher he should
have achieved somewhat greater control over these natural drivers, but I can
understand how a male in such a position, caught at a vulnerable moment for
whatever reason, could disregard all those internal voices of logic,
choosing to sample the temptingly fresh goods on offer – it’s a tricky call
at the time. Far less in Forrest’s defence is that it appears to have been a
long-running relationship – he had plenty of time to realign his
thought-processes.
-
September 30, 2012 at 00:25
-
Parliament raised the age of consent to 13 in 1875 under the Offences
against the Person Act 1875.
Not all that long ago, really.
- September 29, 2012 at 14:51
-
So, I’m trying to understand this latest newspaper-induced outrage. As I
understand it.
Carol Voordeman ran off to France with a maths teacher toy-boy, (after
advising the photographers). She stayed at a private chateau and was
photographed topless from the adjacent road. Whilst making her complaint to
the gendarmes she also casually mentioned she had been assaulted by Jimmy
Saville as a teenager. In addition the toy-boy may have racially insulted a
footballer. The families are obviously gutted, but they will feel better when
they find out their cel-phones were hacked by the journos and they are inline
for a big payday. There is also a hint that the police were slow off the mark,
possibly related to them being involved in a worldwide cheese-smuggling
operation.
Do I have it correct! It’s so hard to sort the real news from the dross
these days.
- September 29, 2012 at
14:58
- September 29, 2012 at
15:00
-
Cascadian, sorry, you missed out that 25% of those with degrees in media
studies living in Newcastle have failed to find employment owing to the Tory
government cuts….
- September 29, 2012 at 17:19
-
Which, according to the BBC, is all Maggie’s fault.
-
September 29, 2012 at 18:36
-
Indeed I did, and I thank you for pointing it out, tomorrows headline
in the Daily cascadian will be- It was the brutal Tory cuts that made em
dunnit.
One feels sorry for the 25%, however it has to be said that the 75%
have an awful lot of media(lets not call it news) to study.
- September 29, 2012 at 14:18
-
I was helping out at a scout camp the other week, and some young lady from
the government was there pretty much foisting condoms, packs of lube and jazzy
literature on 13-16 year olds. They are then surprised when kids ‘grow up too
fast?!?’
-
September 29, 2012 at 14:28
-
Ha! Well said!
- September 29, 2012 at 15:04
-
Michael, spare a thought for those of us required to sit in the classroom
in a supervisory capacity while someone discusses ‘sexual health’ with a
bunch of sniggering, leering adolescents – or, worse, called upon to conduct
these discussions ourselves with the same pupils we will later be trying to
instruct in the finer points of interrogative pronouns or longshore
drift.
Bringing PSHE into the classroom makes a host of unfortunate associations
in the minds of susceptible pupils as well as making things decidedly
uncomfortable for staff. It’s one of those ideas that probably looks great
on paper to a certain type of mind – ‘Let’s all be adult and matter-of-fact
about it’ – but takes on a completely different complexion when subjected to
a group of real live teenagers.
- September 29, 2012 at
15:23
-
Whilst completely forgetting that a teenage generation knows more about
sex than we ever did…do you learn a lot from pupils Macheath?
- September 29, 2012 at 16:14
-
I’ve certainly learnt to pass the buck and make sure someone else
does all the PSHE lessons in future.
- September 29, 2012 at 13:55
-
Undoubtedly, Anna, in an ideal world, you would be right but… I fear in
this instance the police and social services’ response in Rochdale has been to
tar the whole family unit (including the children) with the same brush.
Inexcuseable, however, it is not the first time it has happened and, sadly, I
fear it won’t be the last. How many times do the social services need to learn
the same basic lesson?
-
September 29, 2012 at 14:02
-
Good points, Frankie
I refer you to my meandering comments above
- September 29, 2012 at 13:28
-
The teacher in this situation was in a position of trust. He abused that
trust. He deserted his family to run off with a minor. He will now face
conviction and punishment. I have no idea what he was thinking of, but he will
pay for his mistaken choices heavily. Any parent of such a teenager would
undoubtedly like (privately) to ‘string him up’ by his privates.
The pupil is 15 going on 25. She is no ‘bread and buttter miss’ I am sure,
as so many of our ‘yoof’ are. They are old before their years. Innocence, it
seems is a concept forgotten by the age of 12. I have no time for the theory
that it is entirely his fault; no force was used. Quite the reverse, it seems.
She has destroyed him. She will, however, be ‘supported and counselled’. No
degree of culpability will attach to her because she is 15.
There is, I would submit, a massive difference between Ms. Stammers and
those young ladies in Rochdale (and others). I do not seek to excuse the
behaviour of the men involved in these cases in any regard but the quote: “…We
can start with those parents in Rochdale, who were told that their 10, 11, and
12 year old daughters were ‘exercising their choice’ in having sexual
intercourse with men twice their age” appears to leave out the fact that the
parents in Rochdale were entirely oblivious to what was going on with their
children, which is either entirely negligent on their part or, more likely,
because they are the type of parents who just could not care less about their
children and what they are up to. Are we seriously suggesting that these
parents were not glad their offspring weren’t hanging about the house, under
their feet. We are not talking about prospective ‘Parents of the Year’
competition winners here, but the type of people who should never perhaps have
entered into parenthood in the first place, if what has emerged about the
family units involved is to be believed. These children had no example
whatsoever to emulate.
I do not excuse the behaviour of the police and social workers in this case
as clearly there was massive negligence on the part of the caring services and
how can it be that a 13year old be labelled as a prostitute, exercising a
lifestyle choice but, these matters are not two sides of the same coin. Ms.
Stammers appears to have had every advantage given to her, and has led a
pampered typical teenaged lifestyle. The victims of the Rochdale paedophile
ring were abandoned literally by everyone, including their families.
- September 29, 2012 at
13:40
-
September 29, 2012 at 13:24
-
Some most interesting observations, John. We can only wait and see.
- September 29, 2012 at 13:06
-
I have also wondered what will happen if the statements from Stammers and
Forest don’t do along with the narrative that the Police and Press and been
encouraging so far. For example :
– What happens if they both deny sexual
activity? Will the state force the girl to undergo a medical examination?
–
What happens if the girl isn’t exactly enamoured with the idea of returning to
her parents?
– Will the state force stammers to testify against Forest?
Will they declare her an “impressionable young child” if her version conflicts
with what is expected?
– Will the Police charge Forest with peadophile
offences even if they cannot prove sexual activity?
The article raises some interesting points, not least pointing out that
Megan Stammers planned to go abroad, took her mother’s passport for the
purpose and made her way to school without either mentioning it to anyone who
would be able to stop her or being “abducted”. For his point Forest is clearly
an idiot of the first order and does not deserve to be a teacher, but will
justice be done, or will he have the book thrown at him just to make an
example of him? As you indicate, for all the “public anger” which is being fed
by the press how many parents have 14 and 15 year old daughters who are in
sexual relationships and are being given contraception by the state because of
their ‘uman rites?
- September
29, 2012 at 14:09
-
I’ve been wondering about this, too. Normally it would all be done under
wraps on account of the law which forbids the naming of juveniles in Court.
But in the case, the pupil’s name and that of the school are already in the
public domain.
– According to one report I’ve read, she’s already been given a “check”
in a Bordeaux hospital, ostensibly to make sure she’s OK, but presumably
that would have included looking for signs of recent sexual activity.
–
I’m fairly certain she’s not exactly over the moon about her enforced return
to the parental fold, and I imagine the stepfather’s plea for media privacy
to “allow the family to bond” is an attempt to paper over the cracks as best
they can.
– An adult can be subpoenad and forced to testify in Court, if
necessary being treated as a hostile witness: I’m not sure about a juvenile.
Her testimony would presumably be treated in accordance with whether a jury
found her a credible witness. It would also depend on whether he pleads
guilty or not.
– My guess is that police will go for abuse of the teacher
relationship and maybe abduction of a minor, for which the “victim’s”
consent or willing participation isn’t legally relevant. The straightforward
underage sex issue would be more complicated by virtue of the age of consent
in France being only 15, unless there was any proof that it had taken place
in the UK as well.
- September 29, 2012 at
14:39
-
“The straightforward underage sex issue would be more complicated by
virtue of the age of consent in France being only 15, unless there was any
proof that it had taken place in the UK as well.”
Nope, as I explained, it is NOT a straightforward ‘age of consent is 15
in France’. That doesn’t apply in a teacher/pupil relationship.
I agree that the police will probably go for the abuse of relationship
angle. Which doesn’t explain why all the ‘sexual innuendo’ has been
allowed in the papers with as you correctly point out – names being named,
though I accept that they had to be in this case. Given that it was
necessary to name the parties concerned, I would have expected a much less
hysterical response from the press.
If you wanted to ensure that this girl writes to him in prison,
promises tearfully to wait for him – and probably does…since other ‘decent
boys’ will know her history, and generally sees him as a martyr for her
cause, you couldn’t have arranged it better.
‘Jailed for loving me’, short of ‘gave up his throne for me’, it is
probably second in the teenage dream list….
- September 30, 2012 at
00:10
-
May I also point out that ‘sex crimes’, and particularly those
involving minors, can now be prosecuted in this country even when the
offence took place abroad… even if the offence is not illegal in the
foreign country.
- September 30, 2012 at 09:52
-
Oh – Thank you for the clarification there.
However, a successful prosecution would be dependent on medical
evidence (which they may or may not have), plus I would assume a
measure of co-operation from the alleged “victim” as to when and where
the event took place. Even though she is legally unable to to have
given consent as such, is not willing participation a mitigating
factor? I don’t know.
The police have so far been refusing to give details of what their
investigations into the relationship at the school had turned up, but
I would suspect that’s the more likely of the two to pass the
“realistic prospect of a conviction” test.
-
September 29, 2012 at 12:26
-
I thought ‘The Police’ already had the Stammers/Forrest scenario sussed
with the song ‘Don’t Stand So Close To Me’
- September 29, 2012 at 13:35
-
Excellent!
- September 29, 2012 at 16:10
-
A good reminder, if it were needed, that it’s nothing new.
The year after that song came out, a group of my classmates were devoting
their attention to tormenting the only male teacher in the school. His
patience finally snapped on the day that one of the girls turned 16; her
best friend leered at the teacher and said, with heavy innuendo, “Sharon’s
legal now, sir”. He lifted his head from his textbook, looked at the girl
for a moment, then shook his head and said; “No, she’d still need a dog
licence”.
A year later, he left to teach in a prison; he said it would be a good
rest cure. I don’t think there was ever any repercussion from the ‘dog
licence’ incident – certainly Sharon and her friends didn’t take it further
– but it’s interesting to contemplate what would be the result of making
such a remark today.
- September 29, 2012 at
16:19
- September 29, 2012 at 12:02
-
That Mr Forrest behaved badly and will, one way and another, pay a high
price is beyond doubt. Miss Stammers, however, is a grown woman and I have
seen no suggestion that she is any more “vulnerable” (i.e. not at all) than
any other 15-year-old. Our wonderful (free) press has created a prurient saga
of “will the police find them before he has his wicked way with her or is it
already too late?”
It is not unknown for women to enter relationships they later regret. This
is, if Miss Stammers comes to regret it, another such case: it just happens to
have the titillating factor of a teacher/pupil relationship. There are, as has
been observed, far more serious matters to concern us.
- September 29, 2012 at 12:19
-
She’s not a grown woman. She’s a minor.
-
September 29, 2012 at 19:28
-
But if a twenty year old pikey local had knocked her up would it have
got one inch of press?
- September 29, 2012 at
22:50
-
But it wasn’t and the cases are not comparable precisely because this
was an adult in a position of authority over a minor.
If a 20 year old youth had sex with her, it would have been s.6 of
the Sexual Offences Act 1956, which is what the CPS are urged to use
when people have unlawful intercourse with, specifically, girls under
the age of 16. Although the CPS think very carefully before applying
this piece of legislation – see their own charging manual – there is
pressure to consider using it a lot more often in order to dispel much
of the confusion which, as people have pointed out, makes social
workers, police, child abusers in Rochdale think this is alright.
- October 2, 2012 at 10:57
-
Apparently she used her mum’s passport to get into France so she must
have looked like a ‘grown woman’. Her mum was only 38 but looked much
older in that teevee interview. God knows what home life is like if that’s
what it did to her. Her step dad said ‘come back and we’ll go on that trip
we promised’ or words to that effect. Hmmm choices , choices. A trip with
hated step dad ( they’re all hated and get the ‘you’re not my dad etc…at
some time) or a trip to Bordo’ with creepy dopey shit luvver boy.
Decisions decisions.
- September 29, 2012 at 11:21
-
While the police and social services handling in Rochdale (and other
places) needs a lot of looking at, the Rochdale cases did not involve adults
in positions of trust so are not directly comparable with the Stammers
case.
The legal – and professional – position is absolutely clear. Forrest was
completely in the wrong to engage in the relationship on any level. The level
of legal penalty for this has changed in recent years. It needed to when it
became apparent that we had appointed moral imbeciles to positions of
authority, who seemed to think that having sex with the pupils was a perk of
the job. Good summary:
http://www.teachingexpertise.com/articles/sexual-relations-pupils-over-16-5634
it is a criminal offence for a person in a position of trust to engage
in any sexual activity with a person aged under 18 with whom they have
a relationship of trust, irrespective of the age of consent, even if the basis
for their relationship is consensual. A relationship of trust exists where a
member of staff or volunteer is in a position of power or influence over a
pupil or student by virtue of the work or nature of the activity being
undertaken. Sexual activity is given a broad definition….
It is important to avoid the mistake which baffled the police and social
workers in Rochdale: the children are not complicit. What is at issue here is
the behaviour of an adult in a position of authority and the possible abuse of
that authority. Conditions of Gillick competence, the age of consent, her de
facto consent, what precisely they did, are all irrelevant. It was because
Forrest was her teacher and she is under 18 that makes him liable to face
charges under s.16 (and possibly others) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003.
- September 29, 2012 at
12:01
-
I understand all that WOAR. I don’t understand that whilst he was a
teacher, and thus a tad more respectable than others that young girls go off
with, the incident has generated hours of police time whilst others who have
missing daughters barely get the time of day…
- September 30, 2012 at
22:52
-
I suspect that what we’re seeing here is an example of the Adler Superstar. Economist Moshe Adler argued that people
can become superstars not because they are vastly more talented than their
rivals, but because they become a focal point of attention. People talk
about them so their perceived importance becomes inflated which means they
can charge more for their services and come to be seen as even more
important, which means that people talk about them even more. It’s a
feedback loop. I’ve linked to an article on Chris Dillow’s blog which uses
David Beckham as an example. I’d suggest that an even better example is
the way that Russell Brand’s career took off after his stint as a Big
Brother presenter, as it is much harder to see anything in Brand that
stands out from the thousands of other modestly talented comics who never
quite made it. The key point is that the creation of an Adler Superstar is
arbitrary, as it depends on which individual within a group happens to get
the lucky break that makes them a focus of attention.
But what works for fame should work just as well for infamy. If the
newspapers notice a particular story, and decide that it has the features
they are looking for, and if it is not eclipsed by something else, then
the story might have legs. It might become a focal point. It might trigger
the feedback loop of public attention that turns the participants into
Adler Superstars of Crime.
- September 29, 2012 at 10:56
-
The big question is how much has this been blown up out of all proportion
by the MSM because it conveniently happened about the time a scathing report
came out about gangs of men of no appearance that follow a religion that
cannot be named and live in countries north of India. Said report saying that
the social services, police and MSM all suffered from PCism in covering up the
grooming and rape of white girls younger than Megan.
- September 29, 2012 at 10:18
-
The wicked world of Twitter has, as ever, had its two pennies worth to say.
One acerbic tweet simply said
“I bet Megan Stammers’ “This is what I did in
my summer holiday” essay makes for more interesting reading than normal”
- September
29, 2012 at 11:29
-
Another waspishly observed that she’d be sure to pass her French oral
now..!
-
September 29, 2012 at 13:20
-
*inappropriate snigger!”
-
October 1, 2012 at 13:18
-
I b-bet Megan stammers.
-
September 29, 2012 at 10:12
-
An interesting and genuinely difficult topic. As you say madam, no one is
advocating the pillaging of possibly or probably impressionable young maidens
by those entrusted with their care. These are broad policy and social norms,
and I think there are good reason to keep them in place with the force of the
law. But as ever putting my medievalist hat on, I did whimsically wonder
whether the parents of a beautiful 15 year princess or noblewoman might not be
in modern footballars terms, “over the moon” rather than “sick as a parrot” if
their offspring were to elope with the handsome and wealthy 29 year old heir
to the throne or Baron. And whether that might be a perfectly sensible and
acceptable marriage. It might even be rather romantic.
But then it is a
whimsy,
I also listened to a moving interview with a now grown up and
married woman who described the abusive behavioir/relationship with a she was
lured and coerced into with a teacher when she was 14 or so, and her account
of what struck me as quite plainly rape. She has never reported it for fear of
the hurt it would cause her adoring father. On the other hand she did not run
off to France with him….
Nor can one really know the ins and outs. However,
there is a matter which is quite disturbing, and that is the context in which
this manhunt takes place, against the recent reports into goings on in
Rochdale and other places, including South Yorkshire. In these cases girls
under the age of 16 receieve and suffer and report what can only be systematic
abuse by groups of predatory men, generally of Pakistani and sometimes Afghan
background. I was listening to an interview with one such girl this week.
There was an incident at a kebab shop and the girl damaged the counter. The
police were called. One can imagine, in passing, that even in Rochdale a 15
year old girl might show signs of disturbed behaviour if she had been, for
want of a better word, repeatedly “gang banged” by a group of much older, even
middle aged men. This she reports to the police, and the police no action.
Social services take no action, taking the view that the 15 year old girl is a
“prostitute”. When she falls pregnant the “SS” do helpfully point out that
they will take her child away when it comes to be born, but that is about
it.
A sharp contrast to the hue and cry over Megan, then. It is hard to
fathom what on earth is going on in the Police and Social Services – and
families. It is a topic which I often ponder. I ponder the families, because I
can’t fathom how they could let their offspring be exposed in this way. I
ponder the institutions, but here I see a simpler and clearer explanation; a
political agenda in which sections of the white working, or not so working
class, or as one might say underclass, are abandoned and given no worth. And
in which sensitivity to “cultural issues” is the primary concern.
A strange
imbalanced world.
No wonder I retreat from it and read my history. I fear a
new Dark Age is coming…
*wanders off muttering”
- September
29, 2012 at 12:13
-
“It is hard to fathom what on earth is going on in the Police and
Social Services…”
Actually, it’s pretty easy to tell what’s going on – years and years of
politically correct indoctrination!
-
September 29, 2012 at 12:27
-
What happened in Rochdale could be partly attributed to the Law of
Unintended Consequences and the MacPherson Report could it not?
-
September 29, 2012 at 19:25
-
For me, the Rochdale situation illustrates the fundamental intellectual
bullshit and the most jaw-dropping manifestation of newspeak, that is the
progressives interpretation of “Equality” – i.e. it means absolutely the
opposite.
The reality is the creation of a hierachy of power.
I.e. Womens rights are paramount except when they rub up against the
muslims – muslims win… (FGM, Forced Marriage, Honoiur Killings, the black
sack etc.)
I.e. Children’s rights are paramount except when they rub up
against the muslims – muslims win… (Rochdale, Telford, Oxford and I
suspect more to come…)
It’s also the fundamnetal abondment of the concept that wqe are all
equal in the eys of the law…
And if they could follow the Iranian
example, gays would be swinging form lamposts…
- October 1, 2012 at 09:08
-
“And if they could follow the Iranian example, gays would be swinging
form lamposts”
And if I could follow the example of Vlad the Impaler,
muslims would be going around with those stupid little party hats nailed
to their skulls.
The ‘slims got away with this under the noses of our
emasculated and politicised police for so long precisely because they
were able to play two cards at once; that of being muslim and that of
being somewhat brown.
- September 29, 2012 at 19:43
-
What happened at Rochdale was plain old prejudice: those girls were
taking alcohol and drugs, mouthing off and generally not ‘good girls’
therefor they were culpable in their own treatment. That particular preudice
has been around since the dark ages and I am untterably depressed and
absolutely furious that it still so rife. That SS only response to a girl
pregnant is ‘we’ll take it away cos you’ll be unfit’ beggars belief.
Whatever they dressed that prejudice up as it just comes donw to those girls
being regarded as white trash not just by their abusers but by the
authorities whose job it is to punish criminal behaviour.
This teacher is
an idiot who most certainly should have known better – he is an adult, he is
in a position of authority. And however physically mature and apparantly
worldy wise teenagers appear to be, they are still children. I remember
thinking I was an adult and knew far far more than my silly parents when I
was a callow 16 year old. Boy, did I think I knew it all. That’s true for
teenagers of every generation. the argument some make that this particular
generation as somehow different, that the worldy wise pose more genuine is,
in my opinion, flawed. At the same time I am not sure this kind of publicity
will help anyone, especially Megan. I imagine she will be furious and
embarrassed and probably more determined than ever to be with this idiot
man-boy teacher. I await with weariness the almost inevitable Sunday Mail
special pull-out feature where the family tell their story across pages
1,3-7 and with an opinion piece on page 14.
- September 29, 2012 at 09:59
-
Agreed Anna, there is an awful lot of hysteria around these cases that are
borderline due to actual age in terms of years… Some children are not children
from as little as twelve years old and some adults are still children to the
end of their days. (Not naming any names.)
A famous example of the former, would be the arrangement between Chris
Woodhead and his now wife, he the Chief Inspector of Schools, she a pupil at a
school, (actually she may have been more than 16 when the story broke), but
his career was more or less ended as a teacher, academic and civil servant,
when he “ran off” with this young lady…
I sat and watched Chris Woodhead 10 years later, giving a speech to the
UKIP conference from his wheelchair (he has motor neurone disease), and very
good it was too. His ex-schoolgirl wife was standing beside him on the stage,
ready to wipe his chin and help in any way she could… An example of LOVE, if
ever there was one, it was very touching.
In respite homes and other such places, professional people look after
severely needy (special needs, disabled whatever the current PC phrase is)
people, and many of them are highly sexually charged, whether they are capable
of producing so-called normal offspring is really neither here nor there, they
certainly would not be able to care for them. Their needs have to be taken
care of in some other way, and a delicate pathway is trodden by the
professionals that look after such people.
In neither situation is the law as currently configured, capable of ruling
with any sense.
- September
29, 2012 at 09:52
-
As I posted myself a few days ago, the Stammers/Forrest relationship is
just one of many pupil/teacher relationships to have occurred down the years…
and it won’t be the last. Many of them, I suspect, are the result of school
girl crushes pushed beyond the ‘dreaming about’ stage and teachers who
(foolishly) didn’t do something to get themselves out the situation. They
don’t usually result in elopement and mass media coverage though.
- September 29, 2012 at
09:55
-
Apologies Clarissa, I missed your post – off to read it now!
-
September 29, 2012 at 10:13
-
Me too
- September 29, 2012 at 12:18
-
Between you – great post, btw – and the inimitable Mme Raccoon, you’ve
said pretty much everything there is to be said.
At the chalkface, the attitude, at least among old-timers, is that this
kind of thing is much akin to the odd shepherd or herdsman caught out in a
spot of bestiality; we all know it happens from time to time, but eugh –
how could they!
Forrest is a prime example of the facebook generation of kidults,
complete with electric guitar, dodgy tattoos and a need to express his
innermost thoughts to the world via twitter. I should not be at all
surprised to learn that he was initially recruited with one of those
government subsidies to train as a teacher in a shortage subject (6K, if I
remember rightly) – a sure-fire recipe for bringing in people
temperamentally unsuited to the demands of the classroom who would not
otherwise have considered it as a career.
-
September 29, 2012 at 13:19
-
“Forrest is a prime example of the facebook generation of kidults,
complete with electric guitar, dodgy tattoos and a need to express his
innermost thoughts to the world via twitter.”
Wow!
{ 71 comments }