Just what are the parents (of the 13 and 15 yr old) thinking! There the ones that need to be punished, these children don’t have the mental and physical capacity to become parents. Teen pregnanicy and underage sex is a serious concern that the government have failed to address, this lad should be out playin football with friends!
I didn’t realise social services were able to monitor the actions of every under 16 in the country.
Perhaps if they had this power this situation could have been avoided.
However, I think that might be NANNY STATE GONE MAD, NOW WE CAN’T EVEN GO TO BED WITHOUT PERMISSION etc etc.
What about some personal responsibility, the child taking into account his actions, what led him to make those choices, what education did his parents provide him with, what access to sex education did he have? etc
The media should also question their own role in sexualising youngsters (such as the Mail article on young girl called a slapper by a teacher for wearing a short skirt, along with big photos and close ups of the offending and under-16 girl) and their own role in preventing the proper mature discussion of sex education taking place with all their knee-jerk articles on how sex education is part of the problem, rather than part of the solution.
Jeremy Vine (who should rename his show Radio Daily Mail) was talking about the Bad Memories Pill when previewing the programme with Aled Jones. AJ, in an attempt at jolly banter, said he’d like to forget the tragic hairstyles he had in the 80s. JV said ‘oh no, the 80s were great, especially when you, er, compare them to today.’
I can’t believe he said that to someone from Wales.
Of course, if social workers did get involved the Mail would be spitting blood. Damned if you do and damned if you don’t And while we’re on the subject, it was Baby P’s mother, her partner and lodger that killed him, not social workers. Not that you would know that if you read a tabloid newspaper.
Of course the bit they never like to point out in these lurid tales is that “teenage births” also includes young women between the ages of 16 – 19 having children.
Although very young I have yet to see anyone trying to claim that is ‘wrong’ yet.
Then there is the little matter that the number of girls having children under 16yrs of age has barely moved up or down in 50yrs.
There’s always been a tiny fringe number who experience this, it’s simply a human trait.
But that spoils the ‘hell in a handcart’ story somewhat.
The truth is that the writers and editors (largely the editing staff who decide the direction etc) at thing like the DM are twisted sour vicious evil c*nts who make it their daily mission to try and make the rest of us just like them with their stupid & laughably exaggerated tales.
lurid and exaggerated tales about the very low birth rate in the UK and what it means regarding ‘us’ and the foreign hoardes taking over. Blah blah blah etc etc
For fun replace ’social services’ with ‘PC brigade’ (after all, they are one and the same thing in the DM’s eyes). Don’t think Paul Dacre would approve that somehow.
This memory erasing pill is old news. The possibility of such a drug was discussed in The Telegraph on 22nd October 2008. Congratulations with your recycling effort Mr Dacre.
Meh. I’d take the memory pill to erase a few bad drunken nights.
I think uptonothing sumarised it perfectly in the case of the 13 year old. The mail have been foaming at the mouth the past few days over this story and blaming it on the liberals (nothing like summing up an entire complex issue into one word)
the girl whose teacher called her a slapper is a friend of a friend of mine, and people had been saying she looks tarty for ages before that happened. it still seems like a really inappropriate thing for a teacher to say though.
i think the main headline might be even older news than 2008, i’m pretty sure i read something about it (or something very similar) a couple of years ago, although it was just in the context of giving it to soldiers and people with severe PTSD instead of using it for general bad memories.
Fucked if you do and fucked if you don’t (damned isn’t a strong enough word)
Basically social services should stick their nanny state up their arses, except where the working classes/darkies/queers/heathens are involved, in which case they should be armed with tasers and chemical sterilisation kits and monitor them 24/7 and dictate every aspect of their godless lives.
Amazingly there are actually legal criteria that have to be met before a child can be taken away from his parents. “The Daily Mail doesn’t like some attribute about the parents” is not one of the criteria.
>Just what are the parents (of the 13 and 15 yr old) thinking!
>There the ones that need to be punished, these children don’t have the mental and physical capacity to become parents.
They clearly do have the physical capacity to be parents (well, the fifteen year old girl does, there’s some question-marks hanging over whether the boy is actually the father although a DNA test should sort that one out). The simple fact is that when “kids” hit puberty they start becoming interested in sex because they’re genetically hard-wired to do so. Most of them won’t have sex for a while, some of them will; of those some a few will actually get pregnant. As has been pointed out this has happened for a long time regardless of the political and social fashions of the day: sex is a constant.
>Teen pregnanicy and underage sex is a serious concern that the government have failed to address, this lad should be out playin football with friends!
Yes, they’re concerns but demanding the government “do something about it” is pretending government can somehow regulate peoples’ social lives: it can’t. Government can do precious little to stop teenagers doing something they’re hard-wired to do. I remember all the feeble “warnings” at sex education classes when I was at school about why you shouldn’t have sex until you’re “ready” and even back then I knew it was a waste of time.
And beware of romanticising children and childhood as a time of carefree innocence, for a lot of kids its nothing of the sort and for a lot of people becoming an adult is a blessing. Whenever children have sex or take drugs or kill each other or get involved in racist violence there’s always someone who’ll bring up the myth of childhood “innocence” and wonder what “happened to it”. Simple fact is it’s always been like this; that doesn’t make it right and it doesn’t mean that the correct response is to shrug and ignore it but it’s foolish and sentimental for adults to romanticise childhood.
Zagrebo – I agree. For me childhood was filled with daily attempts at violence, humiliation, bigotry and intimidation from other children at school (though I did kick ass back – I was never a victim), something I have never experienced as an adult. Childhood is not romantic and is not innocent. It’s nasty and cruel for most people outside the family, and for a lot even worse inside it.
it’s the same way they romanticise the past. I remember a music obsessive at work saying how much better it’d be to live in the 50s, to which I said I agreed, as long as you weren’t black, gay, female, young, poor, disabled or lived in a non-western country.
My late Grandma refused to romanticise the past, saying tales of how you could leave your door unlocked were lies, and people would regularly steal your washing off your line and beat each other half to death in pubs with rape especially being an unavoidable part of life for a lot of women with forensics and surveillance being non-existent.
People are essentially animals. Violent from birth and sexualised from puberty and we’re genetically hardwired for both. The notion that either is the fault of governments or the current times is so stupid as to be beyond contempt.
Agreed, Steven. My grandparents always said things along similar lines. And childhood’s not all it’s cracked up to be for a lot of kids- a student I worked with in my previous job once came up with a brilliant way of putting it- ”
“With the possible exceptions of prison or the army (which obviously not everybody experiences), school is the the most blatantly hostile and scary place anybody will ever go in their lives.”
I suspect that most contributors to this site believe more sex education to be the answer. Well here’s a quote from Peter Hitchens last Sunday which sums up my opinion: ‘Alfie Patten, four feet tall, is a father at 13. What I very much want to know is how much sex education he (and 15-year-old mother Chantelle Steadman) had. My guess is lots and lots.’
Well put! Sex education makes matters worse, not better. Childhood innocence, and yes there is such a thing, should be preserved for as long as possible. Remember the words of the old music hall song:
‘Don’t get flirty until you’re thirty. And don’t be naughty until you’re forty!’
Yeah, I’ll tell the missus we’re leaving off the shagging for the next fifteen years.
As to Potty Pete, why haven’t all the other 4 foot 13- year olds who’ve had “Too much” sex education started knocking out babies yet?
The idea you that you could keep sex a secret from 13- year olds is preposterous and most people would rather they knew the potential consequences of their actions than not.
Trying to “Keep them innocent” through not educating them seems pretty silly to me. Maybe we shouldn’t bother teaching children road safety either and just hope they won’t fancy crossing one til they’re 17!
In this particular case the lad was probably just exceptionally stupid. You do get them- just look at all the Littlejohn and Mad Mel apologists we get on here!
Haha! Spectacular example above you there Jeff. Where do we get these loons? (Although personally I suspect he’s probably just having a laugh).
Anyway, yeah, I’ve been at it (not uninterruptedly) since I was 15 and have managed never to make any babies, on purpose or otherwise (our school was a bit late with the old sex education- we quite comically didn’t get any til we were 16).
Personally, I don’t think it’s a case of “This 13- year old obviously didn’t know what he was doing!” or “Too much education made him do it!” either.
In his own silly little mind having a baby was probably a cool thing to do, like getting an ASBO, certainly some evidence for having got some!
At least if all teenagers are educated ignorance is no excuse. As it isn’t in this case. Which would be why the vast majority don’t end up pregnant, funnily enough.
Having just come out of the evil state education system, we were quite clearly told every couple of months that sex can actually equal kids. You can’t blame Social Services (who were part of a controlling nanny state last time I remember) for the actions of two silly kids.
The only thing I coud thing of in terms of government intervention would be to forcibly sterilise everyone under the age of 18, and I’m sure the Daily Mail would just ~love~ that.
You are joking aren’t you? Have you not realised that it is our purpose to reproduce and to do so once we hit puberty. Society has dictated that we should not have children until we are at least 16. Nature dictates that we should start reproducing when we reach puberty. The average life span of homsapien is 30-35 years, society with drugs and health care has increased that.
Sex education is needed to stop unwanted pregnancies. It is there to teach that if you do have sex under age (about 95% of the human race) then use protection, not to stop teenagers doing what nature intended.
These tablets should be made available to all Mail readers!
Just what are the parents (of the 13 and 15 yr old) thinking! There the ones that need to be punished, these children don’t have the mental and physical capacity to become parents. Teen pregnanicy and underage sex is a serious concern that the government have failed to address, this lad should be out playin football with friends!
I didn’t realise social services were able to monitor the actions of every under 16 in the country.
Perhaps if they had this power this situation could have been avoided.
However, I think that might be NANNY STATE GONE MAD, NOW WE CAN’T EVEN GO TO BED WITHOUT PERMISSION etc etc.
What about some personal responsibility, the child taking into account his actions, what led him to make those choices, what education did his parents provide him with, what access to sex education did he have? etc
The media should also question their own role in sexualising youngsters (such as the Mail article on young girl called a slapper by a teacher for wearing a short skirt, along with big photos and close ups of the offending and under-16 girl) and their own role in preventing the proper mature discussion of sex education taking place with all their knee-jerk articles on how sex education is part of the problem, rather than part of the solution.
No greed on the part of the Mail et al exploiting this story though??
Jeremy Vine (who should rename his show Radio Daily Mail) was talking about the Bad Memories Pill when previewing the programme with Aled Jones. AJ, in an attempt at jolly banter, said he’d like to forget the tragic hairstyles he had in the 80s. JV said ‘oh no, the 80s were great, especially when you, er, compare them to today.’
I can’t believe he said that to someone from Wales.
If nobody had any bad memories anymore, the Mail can soon invent them for people.
I know where Social Services are! They’re in hiding following the Baby P witch hunt.
Anyway, they would doubtlessly be determined to place the kids with those homosexualists, so perhaps it is a good thing they are not involved…
The pill will be called ‘Alcohol’
Of course, if social workers did get involved the Mail would be spitting blood. Damned if you do and damned if you don’t And while we’re on the subject, it was Baby P’s mother, her partner and lodger that killed him, not social workers. Not that you would know that if you read a tabloid newspaper.
Of course the bit they never like to point out in these lurid tales is that “teenage births” also includes young women between the ages of 16 – 19 having children.
Although very young I have yet to see anyone trying to claim that is ‘wrong’ yet.
Then there is the little matter that the number of girls having children under 16yrs of age has barely moved up or down in 50yrs.
There’s always been a tiny fringe number who experience this, it’s simply a human trait.
But that spoils the ‘hell in a handcart’ story somewhat.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teenage_pregnancy_and_sexual_health_in_the_United_Kingdom#Statistics
The truth is that the writers and editors (largely the editing staff who decide the direction etc) at thing like the DM are twisted sour vicious evil c*nts who make it their daily mission to try and make the rest of us just like them with their stupid & laughably exaggerated tales.
Next week –
lurid and exaggerated tales about the very low birth rate in the UK and what it means regarding ‘us’ and the foreign hoardes taking over. Blah blah blah etc etc
Have you felt the fear today?
For fun replace ’social services’ with ‘PC brigade’ (after all, they are one and the same thing in the DM’s eyes). Don’t think Paul Dacre would approve that somehow.
This memory erasing pill is old news. The possibility of such a drug was discussed in The Telegraph on 22nd October 2008. Congratulations with your recycling effort Mr Dacre.
Meh. I’d take the memory pill to erase a few bad drunken nights.
I think uptonothing sumarised it perfectly in the case of the 13 year old. The mail have been foaming at the mouth the past few days over this story and blaming it on the liberals (nothing like summing up an entire complex issue into one word)
the girl whose teacher called her a slapper is a friend of a friend of mine, and people had been saying she looks tarty for ages before that happened. it still seems like a really inappropriate thing for a teacher to say though.
i think the main headline might be even older news than 2008, i’m pretty sure i read something about it (or something very similar) a couple of years ago, although it was just in the context of giving it to soldiers and people with severe PTSD instead of using it for general bad memories.
Fucked if you do and fucked if you don’t (damned isn’t a strong enough word)
Basically social services should stick their nanny state up their arses, except where the working classes/darkies/queers/heathens are involved, in which case they should be armed with tasers and chemical sterilisation kits and monitor them 24/7 and dictate every aspect of their godless lives.
>>Where are social services?
Amazingly there are actually legal criteria that have to be met before a child can be taken away from his parents. “The Daily Mail doesn’t like some attribute about the parents” is not one of the criteria.
>Just what are the parents (of the 13 and 15 yr old) thinking!
>There the ones that need to be punished, these children don’t have the mental and physical capacity to become parents.
They clearly do have the physical capacity to be parents (well, the fifteen year old girl does, there’s some question-marks hanging over whether the boy is actually the father although a DNA test should sort that one out). The simple fact is that when “kids” hit puberty they start becoming interested in sex because they’re genetically hard-wired to do so. Most of them won’t have sex for a while, some of them will; of those some a few will actually get pregnant. As has been pointed out this has happened for a long time regardless of the political and social fashions of the day: sex is a constant.
>Teen pregnanicy and underage sex is a serious concern that the government have failed to address, this lad should be out playin football with friends!
Yes, they’re concerns but demanding the government “do something about it” is pretending government can somehow regulate peoples’ social lives: it can’t. Government can do precious little to stop teenagers doing something they’re hard-wired to do. I remember all the feeble “warnings” at sex education classes when I was at school about why you shouldn’t have sex until you’re “ready” and even back then I knew it was a waste of time.
And beware of romanticising children and childhood as a time of carefree innocence, for a lot of kids its nothing of the sort and for a lot of people becoming an adult is a blessing. Whenever children have sex or take drugs or kill each other or get involved in racist violence there’s always someone who’ll bring up the myth of childhood “innocence” and wonder what “happened to it”. Simple fact is it’s always been like this; that doesn’t make it right and it doesn’t mean that the correct response is to shrug and ignore it but it’s foolish and sentimental for adults to romanticise childhood.
Zagrebo – I agree. For me childhood was filled with daily attempts at violence, humiliation, bigotry and intimidation from other children at school (though I did kick ass back – I was never a victim), something I have never experienced as an adult. Childhood is not romantic and is not innocent. It’s nasty and cruel for most people outside the family, and for a lot even worse inside it.
it’s the same way they romanticise the past. I remember a music obsessive at work saying how much better it’d be to live in the 50s, to which I said I agreed, as long as you weren’t black, gay, female, young, poor, disabled or lived in a non-western country.
My late Grandma refused to romanticise the past, saying tales of how you could leave your door unlocked were lies, and people would regularly steal your washing off your line and beat each other half to death in pubs with rape especially being an unavoidable part of life for a lot of women with forensics and surveillance being non-existent.
People are essentially animals. Violent from birth and sexualised from puberty and we’re genetically hardwired for both. The notion that either is the fault of governments or the current times is so stupid as to be beyond contempt.
I wonder how many pills it would take for them to all go back to the 1950s.
Agreed, Steven. My grandparents always said things along similar lines. And childhood’s not all it’s cracked up to be for a lot of kids- a student I worked with in my previous job once came up with a brilliant way of putting it- ”
“With the possible exceptions of prison or the army (which obviously not everybody experiences), school is the the most blatantly hostile and scary place anybody will ever go in their lives.”
I suspect that most contributors to this site believe more sex education to be the answer. Well here’s a quote from Peter Hitchens last Sunday which sums up my opinion: ‘Alfie Patten, four feet tall, is a father at 13. What I very much want to know is how much sex education he (and 15-year-old mother Chantelle Steadman) had. My guess is lots and lots.’
Well put! Sex education makes matters worse, not better. Childhood innocence, and yes there is such a thing, should be preserved for as long as possible. Remember the words of the old music hall song:
‘Don’t get flirty until you’re thirty. And don’t be naughty until you’re forty!’
That’s my idea of sex education.
Yeah, I’ll tell the missus we’re leaving off the shagging for the next fifteen years.
As to Potty Pete, why haven’t all the other 4 foot 13- year olds who’ve had “Too much” sex education started knocking out babies yet?
The idea you that you could keep sex a secret from 13- year olds is preposterous and most people would rather they knew the potential consequences of their actions than not.
Trying to “Keep them innocent” through not educating them seems pretty silly to me. Maybe we shouldn’t bother teaching children road safety either and just hope they won’t fancy crossing one til they’re 17!
In this particular case the lad was probably just exceptionally stupid. You do get them- just look at all the Littlejohn and Mad Mel apologists we get on here!
Haha! Spectacular example above you there Jeff. Where do we get these loons? (Although personally I suspect he’s probably just having a laugh).
Anyway, yeah, I’ve been at it (not uninterruptedly) since I was 15 and have managed never to make any babies, on purpose or otherwise (our school was a bit late with the old sex education- we quite comically didn’t get any til we were 16).
Personally, I don’t think it’s a case of “This 13- year old obviously didn’t know what he was doing!” or “Too much education made him do it!” either.
In his own silly little mind having a baby was probably a cool thing to do, like getting an ASBO, certainly some evidence for having got some!
At least if all teenagers are educated ignorance is no excuse. As it isn’t in this case. Which would be why the vast majority don’t end up pregnant, funnily enough.
Having just come out of the evil state education system, we were quite clearly told every couple of months that sex can actually equal kids. You can’t blame Social Services (who were part of a controlling nanny state last time I remember) for the actions of two silly kids.
The only thing I coud thing of in terms of government intervention would be to forcibly sterilise everyone under the age of 18, and I’m sure the Daily Mail would just ~love~ that.
DaveyP
You are joking aren’t you? Have you not realised that it is our purpose to reproduce and to do so once we hit puberty. Society has dictated that we should not have children until we are at least 16. Nature dictates that we should start reproducing when we reach puberty. The average life span of homsapien is 30-35 years, society with drugs and health care has increased that.
Sex education is needed to stop unwanted pregnancies. It is there to teach that if you do have sex under age (about 95% of the human race) then use protection, not to stop teenagers doing what nature intended.