Children and consent in France.

[Humph Warden Bennett]

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.

I think that it is a matter of the daughter wanting to dress like her mum. Nothing more than that.

[Nearly Sane]

Which is a bikini, surely?

No, I think we are talking one piece swimming costume vs bikini. Since both cover up the 'top bit' I'm not sure what the reasoning is on why one is wrong and the other isn't.

[Robbie]

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

Yes, you have a point! One piece bathing costumes cover up the flat chests and I suppose could be construed as drawing attention. So can't win.

To the pure in heart, all is pure. We can't go around seeing perverts in every person and small children on the beach are invariably chaperoned by their parents or family.

LR:- Tesco getting castigated fro selling T shirts for young girls with the slogan, 'I am sexy'. They had to take them off the market.

That's going too far and stupid, I'm glad they were withdrawn from sale.

[Rhiannon]

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.

I heard a Muslim woman the other day saying that she felt that getting young girls to wear the hijab sexualised them. Not my culture so I can't comment beyond that.

I've always taught my kids about sex from as soon as they were able to answer my questions, so I guess that is from my cultural perspective, whatever that might be.

[Humph Warden Bennett]

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.

My understanding is that a woman's "Aura" is supposed to be in her hair. A child has no "Aura" to conceal, so there is no need for the Hijab for prepubescent girls. But, as I mentioned above, perhaps the daughter wants to dress like her mother?

[Rhiannon]

No, I think we are talking one piece swimming costume vs bikini. Since both cover up the 'top bit' I'm not sure what the reasoning is on why one is wrong and the other isn't.

Yes I got that, but neither are 'bras', or 'bra tops'.

[Rhiannon]

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.

It's known that paedophile rings share photos of little children in school uniform, nativity plays etc. Would you ban these too?

[floo]

It's known that paedophile rings share photos of little children in school uniform, nativity plays etc. Would you ban these too?

 

[Rhiannon]

Yes, you have a point! One piece bathing costumes cover up the flat chests and I suppose could be construed as drawing attention. So can't win.

To the pure in heart, all is pure. We can't go around seeing perverts in every person and small children on the beach are invariably chaperoned by their parents or family.

LR:- Tesco getting castigated fro selling T shirts for young girls with the slogan, 'I am sexy'. They had to take them off the market.

That's going too far and stupid, I'm glad they were withdrawn from sale.

I remember one year I couldn't find anything from the Next Directory to buy for my girls when they were both quite little - either the skirts were all way too short or there were slogans over everything - including 'angel' across the backside of jeans and joggers in rhinestones, to match the adult ones - there was this terrible celebrity-driven 'mini me' trend. Mumsnet started a Let Girls be Girls campaign and after that the stuff from Next was great - Boden knock off, mostly. only it washed better.

[Nearly Sane]

Yes I got that, but neither are 'bras', or 'bra tops'.

yes, I am struggling here with what it is amounts to 'wrong' and why. I presume that LR's point is that certain clothing is mimicking what an adult might wear to emphasise sexualky attractive characteristics but I'm not entirely sure what might not qualify in that sense, and even as you have pointed out trying to avoid such things by wearing a hijab might be argued as a form of sexualization.

[Rhiannon]

I'm interested in your reasoning.

[Robbie]

It's known that paedophile rings share photos of little children in school uniform, nativity plays etc. Would you ban these too?

You're so right Rhiannon, it's not the most obvious thing that is sexually attractive. We can only go so far in trying to protect children & can't spend our lives being suspicious of everyone when the vast majority of people aren't sexually interested in children, wouldn't even think of it except in a conversation like this.

[Rhiannon]

yes, I am struggling here with what it is amounts to 'wrong' and why. I presume that LR's point is that certain clothing is mimicking what an adult might wear to emphasise sexualky attractive characteristics but I'm not entirely sure what might not qualify in that sense, and even as you have pointed out trying to avoid such things by wearing a hijab might be argued as a form of sexualization.

If the bikini top is padded that might make sense as to why Floo wasn't impressed. I've seen bikinis for little girls with what amounts to fake boobs sewn in.

[Nearly Sane]

If the bikini top is padded that might make sense as to why Floo wasn't impressed. I've seen bikinis for little girls with what amounts to fake boobs sewn in.

It seems a blanket condemnation surely? As with many things, there are probably a whole set of things we might agree on as 'unacceptable' but a further set where no such easy line can be drawn.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

I heard a Muslim woman the other day saying that she felt that getting young girls to wear the hijab sexualised them. Not my culture so I can't comment beyond that.

Yeah - I can see that argument.

I can also see the argument that young children are learning about sex and healthy relationships from a certain cultural perspective in school plus some of the clothing they see other kids wearing and is available for their age seems to be mini versions of adult sexually attractive clothing, so it's a valid argument to also get them to think about modest clothing and mini versions of other types of adult clothing such as hijab.

I've always taught my kids about sex from as soon as they were able to answer my questions, so I guess that is from my cultural perspective, whatever that might be.

Yes - if my kids asked questions I would answer them. I remember my eldest was 5 and was being given a lift home from an Islamic lesson along with 2 boys aged 8 and 10, by their parents - family friends. Apparently the parents were being told by the 8 year old boy about how the mother is more highly honoured than the father in Islam because the mother did all the work in relation to having a baby. So my 5 year old daughter piped up "but the father is important too - what about the spermatozoa" and then went on to "traumatise" the 8 year old by describing how the sperm swims towards the ovum etc etc. Luckily I had not explained to her the part about how the sperm got anywhere near the ovum.

[Nearly Sane]

You're so right Rhiannon, it's not the most obvious thing that is sexually attractive. We can only go so far in trying to protect children & can't spend our lives being suspicious of everyone when the vast majority of people aren't sexually interested in children, wouldn't even think of it except in a conversation like this.

I think there are two things going on. There is a question about somehow avoiding triggering sexual attraction and I think that's doomed as an easy guideline. There are people who get sexually attracted to car exhausts!

The second though is about obviously sexualizing the child itself and aging a t shirt saying I Am Sexy seems to obviously qualify, as with having a padded bikini top.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

My understanding is that a woman's "Aura" is supposed to be in her hair. A child has no "Aura" to conceal, so there is no need for the Hijab for prepubescent girls. But, as I mentioned above, perhaps the daughter wants to dress like her mother?

Yes - I think that was what some of the parents who encourage their small children to wear hijab are trying to aim for. A bit like children trying on make-up and heels I guess. We used to get the children to wear hijab when they went to mosque when they were small - but they didn't have to. They didn't seem to mind as everyone else was wearing it. 

[Harrowby Hall]

As far as little girls in bikinis is concerned - I agree with Floo. It is sexualising young children.

To get back to the case ....

I wonder whether a factor that we are not considering is the differences in court procedure between England and France (I specifically say England because Scotland has its own legal system). This may cause us to arrive at viewpoints which are not relevant because of fundamental differences between the two jurisdictions.

In English law courts - with the exception of Coroners Courts - operate on the adversarial system. Opposing sides make their cases and a jury determines which side has the stronger case - although there is a bar of "reasonable doubt". The judge's duties are to act as a kind of referee and  to clarify points of law but also to ensure that the case is properly examined.

French courts operate on the inquisitorial system in which the facts of the case are closely investigated, with the judge taking an active part in the investigatory process. (This is the method for English Coroners Courts.) I suspect that in the case in question the motives and understanding of the girl involved would have been examined and determined.

[Nearly Sane]

As far as little girls in bikinis is concerned - I agree with Floo. It is sexualising young children.

To get back to the case ....

I wonder whether a factor that we are not considering is the differences in court procedure between England and France (I specifically say England because Scotland has its own legal system). This may cause us to arrive at viewpoints which are not relevant because of fundamental differences between the two jurisdictions.

In English law courts - with the exception of Coroners Courts - operate on the adversarial system. Opposing sides make their cases and a jury determines which side has the stronger case - although there is a bar of "reasonable doubt". The judge's duties are to act as a kind of referee and  to clarify points of law but also to ensure that the case is properly examined.

French courts operate on the inquisitorial system in which the facts of the case are closely investigated, with the judge taking an active part in the investigatory process. (This is the method for English Coroners Courts.) I suspect that in the case in question the motives and understanding of the girl involved would have been examined and determined.

Not really seeing the relevance to the statements of the lawyers here, HH which seem I would suggest more adversarial than anything else.

[Harrowby Hall]

I may be mistaken - but I thought that the substances of this thread was more about how it was possible for a child, in France, to be considered to be capable of giving consent than the specific circumstances of this particular case.

[Nearly Sane]

I may be mistaken - but I thought that the substances of this thread was more about how it was possible for a child, in France, to be considered to be capable of giving consent than the specific circumstances of this particular case.

Is that in reply to my post to you? Because it reads like a non sequitur.

[Humph Warden Bennett]

I may be mistaken - but I thought that the substances of this thread was more about how it was possible for a child, in France, to be considered to be capable of giving consent than the specific circumstances of this particular case.

Because their law is different. So was ours until I think 2005. I do vaguely recall a case in the late nineties where a man was given a suspended sentence for illegal sexual intercourse, the Judge imposed the same because the defendant was a mentally retarded man who had been blackmailed into having sex with a manipulative fourteen year female. By her.

[jeremyp]

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.

The defence lawyer is duty bound to defend the client to the best of their ability. I think this particular defence shows signs of desperation and will hopefully fail but you can't blame the defence lawyer for doing their job.

I know it's impossible, but I'd like to see what the victim looks like because I am finding it really hard to believe that any grown man could mistake an eleven year old for a sixteen year old.

[Robbie]

Yeah, me too.

Because their law is different. So was ours until I think 2005. I do vaguely recall a case in the late nineties where a man was given a suspended sentence for illegal sexual intercourse, the Judge imposed the same because the defendant was a mentally retarded man who had been blackmailed into having sex with a manipulative fourteen year female. By her.

If he was mentally retarded he was vulnerable.

I can remember many years ago a case of a nine year old girl who had sexual intercourse with a grown man and the judge letting him off saying she was no better than she should be. That was really shocking.

[Harrowby Hall]

Is that in reply to my post to you? Because it reads like a non sequitur.

I'm sorry if this appears to be the case. The French and English legal systems do work in very different ways - this is all that I am saying. In the French system all the legal officers of the court are concerned with establishing the facts and then whether the actions established contravene any article of the Criminal Code.

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.”

Who knows what "facts" the inquisition trial uncovered? We don't - but it does seem surprising to read of an eleven year old girl being spoken of in such terms.