Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Wrexasaur wrote:

BluntmanDC wrote:its statistics, the more men in a room the more likely at least one will be or could go on to be a rapist.

Okay...

in the secondary debate on the girl, if you are male or female, in a strangers house and you get pass-out drunk you make yourself a target.

She did not go to a strangers house, from the sounds of it, she knew these men. They were only three years older than her, so their age really lacks any meaning in this context. The substantial equivalent of this situation, were it to happen in the U.S., would be a 21 year old girl, hanging out with 24 year old guys. I have no doubts whatsoever, that many people would not think twice about this situation occurring.

If I am not mistaken, you can marry at the age of 16 in the U.K..

gang rapists (there are multiple types of rapist) are follow a predatory pack mentality, they go for the weak and vulnerable. As every anti-crime campaign, at least in the UK, says don't make yourself a target

I get it, all men in groups of 4 or more, are predators. In fact, all men are predators unless you met them through your Grandma...

You performed the prosecutors fallacy here somehow, I was not saying all men in group are rapists, i was describing the behavoir patterns of gang rapists and that one of the groups they target are drunk women/girls, I did not imply, lean to or state that 'all men in groups of four will rape'.
The minimum age of marrage is 17 with permission, but the point holds no valadity in this debate.
Transfering the age difference to different age groupings doesn't work as as you age you mature (on average), thats why age gaps of up to a decade don't matter after 40, but would if one was 18 and the other was 8, age can be very important up to a certain point and in the post i never mentioned the age of victim or attackers

BluntmanDC wrote:Transfering the age difference to different age groupings doesn't work as as you age you mature (on average), thats why age gaps of up to a decade don't matter after 40, but would if one was 18 and the other was 8, age can be very important up to a certain point and in the post i never mentioned the age of victim or attackers

I think he was referring to the legal drinking age in the US. A 16-year old drinking gets looked down harder upon over here, simply because it's 5 years before the legal age.

And did anyone ever establish the men were strangers?

No. I did not pick that up in the article. It doesn't really say.

I wonder who here that truly believes that the girl is partially at fault would say it to there face?

I don't think anyone has said that she is partially at fault; no one has said that the responsibility of the rapists is diminished by the girl's poor choices, and many have said the opposite.

Rather, they are simply saying that being preyed upon was a likely consequence of her actions. This is a different thing entirely from saying that it should be so, or that crime is any less heinous when perpetrated in situations where it is common.

garret wrote:I wonder who here that truly believes that the girl is partially at fault would say it to there face?

I don't think that would do any good.

There are two viewpoints on this issue.

One is that engaging in behaviour which carries an extra risk of something bad, enhances the risk of something bad happening. That is simple logic and undeniable.

The other is that the person engaging in such behaviour caused something bad to happen. That wrong because it ignores the agency of the criminals in the case.

The girl has been 'punished' enough and makes an example to other teenagers to avoid risky behaviour. Which they won't, of course.

Nurgleboy77 wrote:Bullets would be too good for them.

No, they really wouldn't.

Did the girl engage in risky behavior? Yes, unequivocally. Does that in any way mitigate the actions of the men? Not even a little bit. There's no law or even human nature that mandates that if a girl is incapacitated in front of you that you and your buddies are obligated to gang rape her. The men are completely at fault for making that decision.

The judge is at fault for giving them such a ridiculously short sentence.

Given the number of girls under the ages of 16 who are already mothers in the UK, it is entirely possible that one of the older guys already knew her and perhaps was even a sexual partner (I can't read any of the articles about it as I am at work, so feel free to ignore me if I am wrong).

There are a lot of things it seems that no one here seems to know, and there is wild speculation to all different extremes.

It is certainly the case from my experience during my school years that 16 year old girls who "hang around with" older men know what they are getting into, or at least the pressures and dangers (if one can call them dangers? I suppose it depends on your point of view) they will face.

I am sure we have all known our fair share of these girls in our times at school, or perhaps even later in life, having seen them with our peers.

They often want to play at being grown up and will often do things they would not normally want to do in order to fit in with the older people around them, even if those things are very wrong and are being suggested and egged on by those "adults" they are attempting to emulate and please.

Perhaps some of this has been reflected in the sentences passed - I have no idea as I was not at the hearings nor do I have the articles etc to look at.

Please tell me that there's going to be an appeal for longer sentences.