Barrister Barbara Hewson came under some vicious attacks yesterday
for her comments that consideration should be given to lowering the age of
sexual consent. In a world where every real or imagined transgression toward
any individual on any grounds – race, age, sex, religion – is immediately
elevated to the same bogeyman status as that of an indiscriminate cannibal serial chainsaw
killer, her words prompted the sort of threats that are themselves now
actionable in law.
For the crime of exercising her free speech Miss Hewson
was pilloried and dragged through the e-streets in the online version of
tarring and feathering that 'Trial by Twitter' has become. Because that’s all she
did; she spoke some words, based on her knowledge and experience of the issues,
to which she is much closer than most.
Her monstrous utterances? In an online article in Spiked
magazine, she wrote, “Touching a 17-year-old’s breast, kissing a 13-year-old,
or putting one’s hand up a 16-year-old’s skirt, are not remotely comparable to
the horrors of the Ealing Vicarage assaults and gang rape, or the Fordingbridge
gang rape and murders, both dating from 1986. Anyone suggesting otherwise has
lost touch with reality.” She’s a witch! Burn her! But wait. Is the mob about
to go and torch a paediatrician all over again?
So, while the idiot Daily Mirror is calling for the voices of
experience to be ignored and for the young to decide on an entire nation’s future and Alex Salmond cynically wants the vote to be given to sixteen-year-olds, it
appears that lowering the age of responsibility is fine when there’s a
political prize to be played for, but it’s hysterical and dangerous nonsense
when it’s the opinion of somebody with whom you disagree.
Oh, of course! It’s the socialist incarceration-of-speech
agenda all over again. The simple fact is that Lolitas and Humbert Humberts
exist and have always existed. Hebephilia is by no means unusual and there are
examples throughout history. Indeed as one unhinged caller to Iain Lee’s radio
show [audioboo] suggested – bravely, but unhinged, I thought – it might
even lie at the roots of some religions. What is different these days is the
absolute sense of entitlement to an unfettered life of joy backed up by the claiming culture
that exists to brutally extract compensation for the smallest slight,
regardless of the disproportionate misery it might cause to those thus pursued.
Me? First and foremost, I am a white, middle-aged bloke,
so that automatically means any thoughts I might have either way on this or any
associated issue are irrelevant. The socially engineered changes of the last few decades have
effectively ruled against the validity of any opinion I might have. So I don’t
have one. Don’t assume I have one, don’t assume you know what it is and please address
your hate mail towards a target who is more likely to care what you think.
As Douglas Murray recently wrote in the Spectator: “…no
difference between men and women can be commented upon without being accused of
being ‘sexist’. No difference between transsexuals and non-transsexuals can be
referred to without committing ‘transphobia’. No difference between different
cultures can be commented upon without being deemed ‘racist’. And no difference
between gay people and straight people can be mentioned without being accused
of ‘homophobia’. “
And as with sex-crime, so with Europe. For many years
debate has been shut down because any dissenting voice has been labelled that
of a racist, a fruitcake or a clown. Anybody speaking common sense has been
howled down, not for their words – for they are never listened to - but because
they have not submitted to the politically acceptable agenda. So it was
refreshing last night on BBC’s Question Time to see an audience eager for some
responses other than ad hominem insults toward Eurosceptics.
Now that THAT debate is finally out in the open, can somebody direct me to a French, Dutch, German Albanian, hermaphrodite, under-age, nappy-wearing, tall dwarf BDSM brothel? After all, it IS the weekend!
