Children and consent in France.

[Rhiannon]

Staggering.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/feb/14/french-girl-11-not-a-child-say-lawyers-for-man-29-accused-of-sexual-abuse

[Nearly Sane]

As the report makes clear this is a long known issue with French law - but yes I find it bizarre that there is such a split on the laws in countries on this issue.

[Rhiannon]

It’s the defence lawyer’s comments that stagger me the most. That it’s not a new issue doesn’t detract from how appalling it is.

[Nearly Sane]

I suppose that they see it as necessary in the context of trying to avoid the rape charge, but yes, I find the attitude that it seems to show sickening

[floo]

I was shocked and appalled when I read this story.

[Rhiannon]

I suppose that they see it as necessary in the context of trying to avoid the rape charge, but yes, I find the attitude that it seems to show sickening

This isn’t necessary even when doing the best for their client:

“His colleague Sandrine Parise-Heideiger went further, saying: “We are not dealing with a sexual predator on a poor little faultless goose.”

[Nearly Sane]

This isn’t necessary even when doing the best for their client:

“His colleague Sandrine Parise-Heideiger went further, saying: “We are not dealing with a sexual predator on a poor little faultless goose.”

That seems to imply that you think they don't either see it as necessary, or that even though they might you know they are wrong. I'm not sure that there is enough information in a report like this to determine either of those,

[Rhiannon]

That seems to imply that you think they don't either see it as necessary, or that even though they might you know they are wrong. I'm not sure that there is enough information in a report like this to determine either of those,

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect lawyers to show restraint when discussing an 11 year old child. The notion that it is reasonable for lawyers to do all that is necessary to win actually enables further abuse through the court process, in criminal and family courts.

[Nearly Sane]

I think's it problematic to avoid doing what is necessary to defend a client, if that is the case here, which I don't know if it is. Portraying something purely as winning is making it about the lawyers not the duty they have to the defendant, and yes that is problematic when lined up with the rights of an 11 year old but that's already introduced by the law as it stands

[floo]

As a young man my husband had considered studying law and becoming a barrister, however he realised he could never defend a person he thought was probably guilty.

[Robbie]

I remember the other case mentioned in the article, I think we talked about it at the time:

'A similar case caused disbelief and outrage. In November a French criminal court in November acquitted a 30-year-old man accused of raping an 11-year-old girl in 2009. The jury in the Paris region of Seine-et-Marne found he had not used violence or coercion.'

It's very unpleasant. I've read and heard the odd remark about kids in France, only last week I think, on a TV drama, where a thirteen year old girl was involved in something sexual and someone said with a shrug, "She's French!", as if that explained everything. Makes me feel uneasy.

Even if a young girl is sexually aware, there's something very wrong about a grown man taking advantage.

[floo]

I was in Tesco yesterday and saw bra tops for very young children! If their parents were stupid enough to dress them in totally inappropriate clothes like that, they would become sexually aware well before their time.

[Humph Warden Bennett]

I was in Tesco yesterday and saw bra tops for very young children! If their parents were stupid enough to dress them in totally inappropriate clothes like that, they would become sexually aware well before their time.

Totally irrelevant. Miss Bennett needed a bra whilst still in Year 5. It was not a matter of being "sexually aware before (her) time" it was a matter of explaining to her what was happening to her body.

[floo]

Totally irrelevant. Miss Bennett needed a bra whilst still in Year 5. It was not a matter of being "sexually aware before (her) time" it was a matter of explaining to her what was happening to her body.

I am NOT talking about a year five child, I am talking about those aimed at much younger children who certainly don't need them.

[Humph Warden Bennett]

I am NOT talking about a year five child, I am talking about those aimed at much younger children who certainly don't need them.

So you want to tell children that babies are found under mulberry bushes, and are fed with bottles?

[floo]

So you want to tell children that babies are found under mulberry bushes, and are fed with bottles?

What are you on about now? I am talking about dressing children in inappropriate clothing.

[Robbie]

I looked at the Tesco clothing range online and all I could see in the way of 'bra tops' for kids - from babies up to age nine - were bikinis. They were quite pretty. Is it wrong for a small girl to wear a bikini? I did and my girls did as children.

Maybe you were thinking of cropped tops and they aren't necessarily sexually alluring. Some kids' clothes are inappropriate but I couldn't see any in Tesco online.

[floo]

I looked at the Tesco clothing range online and all I could see in the way of 'bra tops' for kids - from babies up to age nine - were bikinis. They were quite pretty. Is it wrong for a small girl to wear a bikini? I did and my girls did as children.

Maybe you were thinking of cropped tops and they aren't necessarily sexually alluring. Some kids' clothes are inappropriate but I couldn't see any in Tesco online.

I think it wrong to dress a very small child in a bikini.

[Aruntraveller]

I think it wrong to dress a very small child in a bikini.

Why?

I ask this because I am assuming you have no objection to young boys wearing swimming trunks and I am struggling to see the difference.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

I was in Tesco yesterday and saw bra tops for very young children! If their parents were stupid enough to dress them in totally inappropriate clothes like that, they would become sexually aware well before their time.

Depends what you mean by becoming sexually aware? Exposure to different clothes and fashions is just one way of becoming sexually aware.

Children in primary school are given sex education - though parents have a right to withdraw their children from these classes. The government announced plans to make it compulsory from about Year 5, which is about age 10 or 11, for schools to teach them about building healthy relationships, sex and staying safe. They will be introduced to the concepts in an "age appropriate" way from younger than 10.

I think some Muslims parents have also started teaching their primary school children in an "age appropriate" way about sex from their own cultural perspective - at least I see a lot more of the primary school girls wearing hijab - apparently so they get used to wearing it from a young age and don't see it as weird and also so they develop an awareness about sexually modesty, given they are going to be learning about sex in the school playground and in lessons. Interesting times.

[floo]

Why?

I ask this because I am assuming you have no objection to young boys wearing swimming trunks and I am struggling to see the difference.

I think putting a small girl in a bra top is inappropriate. My girls wore swimming costumes, the boys worse those swimming shorts,

[Robbie]

I think I can see where LR is coming from. Covering up the top bit on young children when they have no boobs is sort of drawing attention to their 'littleness'; so does just wearing bathing pants  - but not everyone is a predatory pervert! They are only worn on the beach on holiday, if kids are taken to the swimming baths an ordinary little one piece bathing costume is the norm.

Perverts have an eye for anything, even little kids in white vests and pants. I read somewhere that they actually prefer that and peruse things like Mothercare catalogues. Yeuch.

[Nearly Sane]

Isn't LR talking about using swimming costumes that cover up the 'top bit' as well?

[Rhiannon]

Isn't LR talking about using swimming costumes that cover up the 'top bit' as well?

Which is a bikini, surely?

[floo]

I think I can see where LR is coming from. Covering up the top bit on young children when they have no boobs is sort of drawing attention to their 'littleness'; so does just wearing bathing pants  - but not everyone is a predatory pervert! They are only worn on the beach on holiday, if kids are taken to the swimming baths an ordinary little one piece bathing costume is the norm.

Perverts have an eye for anything, even little kids in white vests and pants. I read somewhere that they actually prefer that and peruse things like Mothercare catalogues. Yeuch.

Thanks!

It doesn't take much to get perverts interested in children, so there is no need to have them salivating by putting kids in sexually inappropriate clothes. I remember Tesco getting castigated fro selling T shirts for young girls with the slogan, 'I am sexy'. They had to take them off the market.  What parent in their right mind would dress their little girl in a Tshirt like that?