Prince Andrew settlement allows royals to keep calm and carry on

[Pro.crasti.nation]

I'm surprised it was just her. Andrew, in the clutches of Epstein-Maxwell, only ended up compromised by _one_ 17yr old? I'd have expected some seriously awful chain of (much younger) victims, enough for the ghouls to blackmail the Queen and the Royals as an institution. Enough to get some leverage over the British establishment.

As it stands, "17yrs old" doesn't really engender the kind of shrieking and howling that Americans do online, in Britain. We've had Ginger genius Chris Evens, tie the knot with Billie (sp?) when she was barely over 16. And of course Mandy Smith (14) marrying Bill Wyman ('stones).

Basically, he screwed a girl who was young enough to have been his daughter, who was probably younger than his daughter! It's tacky, cringe, immoral ... just not criminal or that shocking.

The Sex trafficking angle is the real moral evil, here. He was exploiting someone who was being sex trafficked. That's the evil. That would probably have carried a prison term, in England.
Even here, Virginia seems to have gotten past whatever ordeals she suffered. And given the conditions on the settlement, probably has some informal agreements with those that trafficked her.

[Pro.crasti.nation]

dp.

[Mopi Licinius Crassus]

the comments from the women on this thread saying 17 yr olds are not mature mentally. ok, that's fair comment

biologically they are mature though, and not children

point that I and Colonel Grimes are making is that paedophilia is a perversion were the person is sexually attracted to pre-pubescents ...who are not yet biologically ready for sex

If, as seems likely, Prince Andrew banged Virginia Guffre, when she was 17, then he is clearly a despicable man, especially as she was a victim of trafficking

Is is not a paedophile though. You have to make the distinction

If she was , say 8 years old, and he had sex with her, then that would be a far far worse crime

[Mopi Licinius Crassus]

the comments from the women on this thread saying 17 yr olds are not mature mentally. ok, that's fair comment

biologically they are mature though, and not children

point that I and Colonel Grimes are making is that paedophilia is a perversion were the person is sexually attracted to pre-pubescents ...who are not yet biologically ready for sex

If, as seems likely, Prince Andrew banged Virginia Guffre, when she was 17, then he is clearly a despicable man, especially as she was a victim of trafficking

He is not a paedophile though. You have to make the distinction

If she was , say 8 years old, and he had sex with her, then that would be a far far worse crime

[Colonel Frank Grimes]

A lot of things that happened a century ago are frowned upon today. At 17 all girls think they're mature, know it alls but matter of fact is that they're still naive little girls who are not ready to make the right choices and rely on ADULTS to protect them.

What's the difference between a 17 year old and an 18 year old that would turn them from a 'little girl' at 17 to an adult at 18?

With a parent's signature 17 year old - both male and female - can be in boot camp learning how to kill people. I find it odd referring to them as little girls or little boys.

[frankhammer]

A lot of things that happened a century ago are frowned upon today. At 17 all girls think they're mature, know it alls but matter of fact is that they're still naive little girls who are not ready to make the right choices and rely on ADULTS to protect them.

Naive young women, yes. And dads need to be stepping up instead of stepping back.

[Colonel Frank Grimes]

Naive young women, yes. And dads need to be stepping up instead of stepping back.

By 17 both girls and boys should be trained killers. There is no excuse in this day and age not to have an assassin as a son or daughter. Anything less is negligence.

[SouthDutch7991]

Wait... 17? I thought this guy was supposed to be some kind of kiddie diddler. My Granddad was blowing the tops off of slopes in Korea at 17. It's for sure a creepy age gap, and must require some sociopathy due to the social contexts of modern times, but damn I actually thought this guy was fucking kids. Was there some evidence that he was doing shit to younger girls in a sex trafficking ring?

[Aldaris]

Also interesting is that none of the men involved in this are behind bars. So far only a woman has been convicted. Not saying she shouldn't be where she is but what about all the men involved?

Such processes involving people with very high status usually take years, in some cases more than a decade. With all their ties and top-level lawyers, it's not realistic to assume they'd be convicted or even accused right away. The heads will roll, so to say, but it's gonna take time. How long you think Epstein was under the investigation before the actual accusation? With people like that, the persecutors are severly limited and won't take any chances unless they are absolutely sure.

His daughters were of the the same age when this all happened. Imagine you as father abuse girls who could be your daughters. Disgusting, abusing underage person is something which destroys every social convention of civilized structures, not only national law. The Queen should punish him publicly.

+

[lei.talk]

By 17 both girls and boys should be trained killers.
There is no excuse in this day and age not to have an assassin as a son or daughter.

Anything less is negligence.

next-level dadding




and to your right
a display of musashi's mushin-mind