When I was 11

[flossy]

When I think of the stigma that was attached to teenage pregnancy when I was born and the lack thereof today, it makes me feel uneasy. My mum was 17 when I was born and lived in a middleclass area where she was made to feel a total outcast. I was born out of wedlock and the local priest refused to christen me (nice!). When my mum married my stepdad and we moved to a working class area of the same town, it was quite normal for a woman of her age to have a child of my age and no-one treated her like a second class citizen. I'm not saying that any of this is acceptable behaviour, but I think we should put this sort of thing into context (plus it goes towards explaining my opinions). I feel that if we don't as a society stigmatize an act such as this, although it doesn't become acceptable, it still becomes more normal. If as a parent, you don't prevent your child from going off getting drunk in another city, it is your fault that she gets pregnant - at 11 it is doubtful that your sense of morals is fully developed and you shouldn't be trusted to make such decisions.

Sex seems like such a commodity.

[hr]

All in all, I'd say I prefer electrons to people.

[Steveo]

Quoting LeopardSkinQueen from 13:22, 13th May 2006
We're taking this part of the law in isolation, however. Have you any legitimate evidence, using psychological studies, for example, to show that this point of law is demonstratably wrong?

Did I at any point state that this point of law was wrong?

No.

[hr]

Set your goals way too high so I can laugh when you fail.

[Lodestone]

Steveo,

If your argument was not intended to have implications for our opinions about consent laws, why did you say--

Just a quick jolt back to reality for all of you here placing your faith in the absolute truth and value of the legal system. I am of course reffering to the idea that this girl, 11, was unable to give any consent. People have been saying she can't, the law saus she's under 13 etc etc.

And if you did intend it to have implications, then your argument is patently nonsense.

And I for one didn't show blind faith in the law: I mentioned the psychology behind the law. An 11-year-old is just not psychologically able to understand the emotional, physical and lifestyle repurcussions of alcohol abuse and unprotected sex.

Which is another reason why I'm so incensed by the attitude of the social snobs here. This is an 11-year-old you're snobbing on. She has very little mastery of her own fate; you don't have that kind of capability at 11.

[Lodestone]

It occurs to me that I could adopt exactly the same attitude to the worst Tories on this board as they adopt to "the underclass". I am truly appalled by the lack of moral integrity they show; by their snobbery and elitism; by their inability to contribute constructively to society; by their leeching and freeloading through shirking on social responsibilities. I despise the fact that a whole portion of society is brought up in the kind of environment where these personal and social values are accepted and allowed to grow like a tumour at the heart of the nation. Have these people no self-worth? Can't they be out working for charities and contributing to the collective well-being like ordinary well-matured adults? I'm terrified about the possibility that my parents have let me go to a University where I'm exposed to these "people".

If we could simply round up the whole lot and shoot them, we'd all be getting along much better.

[Senethro]

Anecdotes and conjectures make the science inside me weep :'(

BTW lode, you're in serious danger of taking the internet seriously.

[Midget]

Quoting Lodestone from 13:46, 13th May 2006
It occurs to me that I could adopt exactly the same attitude to the worst Tories on this board as they adopt to "the underclass".

Yeah we lose much more money that should be in the UK from tax dodgers than we do from people living off benefit.

[hr]

IMAGE:img9.imgspot.com/u/04/241/18/160019.jpg "Little!"
http://standrews.facebook.com/profile.php?id=37100090

[LeopardSkinQueen]

Quoting dunqn from 13:47, 13th May 2006
go to any little girl of approximate age 11 year old in the street. Say, "do you want to have sex with someone in the very near future?"

And then you get arrested for being really creepy.

At that age, not getting pregnant if it is your first time is something she could easily have believed as she hadn't had much sex education. Added to the fact that she'd been drinking...

As for 'zero remorse', she's probably too young to have got her head round the consequences yet.

The lack of compassion and basic humanity in the way some people are talking about this girl shocks me. It shouldn't, but it does.

[hr]

Now at midnight all the agents and the superhuman crew
Come out and round up everyone that knows more than they do
http://tweeasfuck.livejournal.com

[Thackary]

Quoting Senethro from 13:57, 13th May 2006
BTW lode, you're in serious danger of taking the internet seriously.

I think that one should be able to have a serious debate via The Sinner.

If people are going to make sarcastic and overblown remarks, then their post should reflect that. Intonation and sarcasm don't work in the written word unless your use of the English language is unambiguous. It's a shame that people these days seem unable to use the language properly.

[Happy-Go-Lucky]

You know, not that long ago, if an underaged/unmarried girl became pregnant, she'd have the baby removed, against the mother's will, from her and put up for adoption as soon as it was born, and the mother was thrown in an insane asylum as they'd be assumed to be insane for allowing themselves to have sex before marraige. I don't think that is right, indeed, it sounds a bit barbaric, and I'm betting the men were totally forgiven for such behaviour, but I'm betting it worked as an extremely good deterent to any person who would consider letting their behaviour slip. That and the fact that unmarried people just didn't get up to such things. Most of them didn't know what sex was until their honeymoon and their parents would give them a hint what to do. Sex was only for married people. The thought that unmarried peple might do it was shocking, and virtually unheard of.

[Icarus]

Quoting Lodestone from 13:46, 13th May 2006
It occurs to me that I could adopt exactly the same attitude to the worst Tories on this board as they adopt to "the underclass". I am truly appalled by the lack of moral integrity they show; by their snobbery and elitism; by their inability to contribute constructively to society; by their leeching and freeloading through shirking on social responsibilities. I despise the fact that a whole portion of society is brought up in the kind of environment where these personal and social values are accepted and allowed to grow like a tumour at the heart of the nation. Have these people no self-worth? Can't they be out working for charities and contributing to the collective well-being like ordinary well-matured adults? I'm terrified about the possibility that my parents have let me go to a University where I'm exposed to these "people".

If we could simply round up the whole lot and shoot them, we'd all be getting along much better.

How are you even able to sit comfortably in front of your computer with such a large stick up your ass? It's all very well for you not to like Tories, but you entirely compromised your apparently superior moral stance with such a shamefully polemical and bitter diatribe.

[BeccaLydia]

Maybe we should make these underage mothers take parenting classes so that they are better able to bring their children up - maybe it would break the cycle. I'm not saying that all children of underage mothers follow in their footsteps, but it must be a higher proportion.

[hr]

http://facebook.com/p.php?id=37100244&l

[Steveo]

Yes, I should admit, my post concerning social detritus was made in jest, and I thought it was clear enough, and if it wasn't, I apologise.

Quoting Lodestone from 13:46, 13th May 2006
It occurs to me that I could adopt exactly the same attitude to the worst Tories on this board as they adopt to "the underclass".

I am truly appalled by the lack of moral integrity they show; by their snobbery and elitism; by their inability to contribute constructively to society; by their leeching and freeloading through shirking on social responsibilities.

Social responsibility is one of my personal areas of research, and at the very heart of Conservatism. Leeching and free loading are very much not Tory values, and I hope you can see the complete personal bias you're showing here.

It's seen time and time again that the driving forces behind economic growth and civic community in this country are Conservatives. Under Michael Howard, as Home Secretary, crime fell. The only time it has in recent memory, so don't tell me that Tories have no sense of social responsibility when we're so obviously a party that looks out for this country, and we do our damn best to protect it. That's the responsibility of government, to protect it's people, and we do it damn well time and time again.

Personal responsibility is at the heart of Conservatism, and so is Social Justice, we have a policy group nearly ready to report back on just that. We're the party that believes in a better Britain for everyone, and we're not, as you so daftly put, free loaders.

I despise the fact that a whole portion of society is brought up in the kind of environment where these personal and social values are accepted and allowed to grow like a tumour at the heart of the nation. Have these people no self-worth? Can't they be out working for charities and contributing to the collective well-being like ordinary well-matured adults?

What about real, paid jobs? Do they not contribute? Conservatives have classically been a party of big business, and to some extent, that's a good thing. Charities do a lot of good, often vital work, however, so do the people driving our economy, so before you go lambasting people for not doing charity work, think about where we'd be without an economy that thrives, mainly due to Conservative policies implemented in the 80's and 90's.

I'm terrified about the possibility that my parents have let me go to a University where I'm exposed to these "people".

We're realists, people who don't conform to the liberal student stereotype. We're chastised for it by people such as yourself, but I'm as terrified as you that people such as yourself can't see the benefits of capitalism and seem to think that charity work is more important than earning and driving the economy forward. It's possible to do that and be socially and environmentally responsible, don't you know?

If we could simply round up the whole lot and shoot them, we'd all be getting along much better.

In jest, or for real? If it's for real, you're a hypocrite, if it's in jest, you certainly don't make it clear.

I'm sorry this post is, perhaps, slightly out of kilter and rambling, but when Liberals and Lefties attack Conservatives in the mindless, baseless and downright shoddy way Lodestone just has, I tend to get worked up slightly.

[hr]

Set your goals way too high so I can laugh when you fail.

[Colleen]

Firstly, I'm going to take affront to the statement about Conservative economic policies of the 1980s and the 1990s that mean we're in such a great shape economically. Black Wednesday. Yeah. That was a product of Conservative economics. "The government of business is not the business of the government," unfortunately I can't place the quote. Economically we were doing well but we also had the highest rate of unemployment - three million at one point - in recent history. Historially, a great economy does not equal a great and happy population. It generally equals a very rich portion of the population and a section of society in crushing poverty. Families like the one of this girl are a direct consequence of this. Conservatives in the 1980s concentrated on the big business and took away a lot of traditional working-class occupations. What about the dockers in Liverpool, or the coal miners in Yorkshire? These people end up as they do because there are no opportunities available, because policies implemented a few decades ago are still leaving people struggling now.

Conservative paternalism worries me intensely. What would the Conservative party, the modern Conservative party under David Cameron, say about this pregnancy of an 11 year old? What would they do to prevent it? The only thing I've heard recently basically consists of David Cameron lambasting shops that sell adult looking clothes for little girls.

In all seriousness, I'm genuinely curious. Would they provide free counselling and support to someone this age? Would they provide, I don't know, better sex education and funding? Specially trained nurses into schools to tell kids it's a bad idea? Would there be homes available for this 'social detritus?' Community activities so pre-teenagers don't have to go to Edinburgh for a night out? This girl, what I read from the story, hasn't been in school for a while. So, has she wasted her chance - she's ELEVEN, whatever else her sins are - and should be left to struggle for herself, in the way that all these big businessmen from nice middle-class families have struggled?

I think the fact that we have a society that results n an eleven-year old getting pregnant in tragic. I'm actually interesting to see what all the parties will say about it because I think we can all agree that a socety in which is happens is not a good one.

[Guest]

maybe so lodestone,

yes, some opinions are over the top - but they have said that it was only for a reaction so you cant really question his opinion.

[Guest]

Quoting maz from 15:37, 12th May 2006
I think the legal age of consent for boys in Scotland is 14, but 16 for girls so if a 14 year old girl slept with a 14 year old boy it would still count as statutary rape. I'm not sure though. I think its kind of sick that the grandmother/mother is proud of her little girl.I'm not sure being a grandmother at 34 is something to be proud of. What a contrast with the 63 year old a week or so ago.

No it is not it is 16 for both.

[Steveo]

Quoting Colleen from 15:53, 13th May 2006
Conservative paternalism worries me intensely. What would the Conservative party, the modern Conservative party under David Cameron, say about this pregnancy of an 11 year old? What would they do to prevent it? The only thing I've heard recently basically consists of David Cameron lambasting shops that sell adult looking clothes for little girls.

I would say that's, in a small way, related to this issue. David Cameron is demonstrating, as a family man himself, his displeasure at the ever lowering moral standards of Britain, where it's acceptable for children to be (to make up my own word here) sexualised.

This little girl of 11 had sex, got pregnant. That in itself doesn't indicate lowering standards of integrity, but the fact that teenage pregnancies on the whole are higher than ever before does.

In all seriousness, I'm genuinely curious. Would they provide free counselling and support to someone this age? Would they provide, I don't know, better sex education and funding? Specially trained nurses into schools to tell kids it's a bad idea? Would there be homes available for this 'social detritus?' Community activities so pre-teenagers don't have to go to Edinburgh for a night out?

Well, here we stumble. Is it the reponsibility of national government? Local Government? Where does blame and responsibility lie? I don't rightly know for sure, but my personal belief is that national government should be implementing policy accross the board, for broad spectrum assistance for those most unable to help themselves. The specifics would, no doubt, be the responsibility of local government, and how they go about that could be so varied I'm not even sure what could be done.

This girl, what I read from the story, hasn't been in school for a while. So, has she wasted her chance - she's ELEVEN, whatever else her sins are - and should be left to struggle for herself, in the way that all these big businessmen from nice middle-class families have struggled?

Of course she shouldn't be written off yet, but she's certianly headed down a path that will consign her to the lowest rungs of society.

Everyone, as individuals, can change for the better. Individual responsility for ones own actions and destiny are paramount, but the state should always help the individual.

Society, and humanity, as a whole, in my opinion isn't good. Not all people are basically good people. What I do believe, though, is that it's not the task of government to change society en masse, it's the task of government to assist the individual for their improvement, and in turn the improvement of the wider community.

I think the fact that we have a society that results n an eleven-year old getting pregnant in tragic. I'm actually interesting to see what all the parties will say about it because I think we can all agree that a socety in which is happens is not a good one.[/quote]

[hr]

Set your goals way too high so I can laugh when you fail.

[kitty]

I could have gotten pregnant at 10 if I wanted to have sex at that age. I did probably look like I was....14 maybe? I had precocious puberty and would guess that she did too. However, I don't think her parents should have been allowing her to smoke and booze it up or have enough freedom to be able to have sex.

And despite my precocious puberty I was still not interested in sex at that age. Crushes on random boys - sure. Thoughts about kissing - occasionally. I might have even made my barbies have sex once or twice, but I would still never have done it myself.

I do think there should be better sex education all over the world. I don't remember learning about contraception until some point in middle school (at the age of 13 or so). I remember that for a long time I thought sex was being naked together. I can't remember what age that changed. Probably my first sex ed class.

[Lodestone]

Icarus, Steveo,

That I prefixed that particular post with "I could" should have indicated that it's not actually what I would say under normal circumstances. I just wanted to turn the stereotyping, stigmatising and baseless generalising around to try and make a point about how damaging it is.

dunqn,

On the competency of an 11-year-old to make their own moral judgements and understand fully the consequences of sex, I'll get back to you once I've gone back to my books. Two points, though:

By "mastery of her own fate" I meant her ability to reach moral decisions by herself, rather than simply following the commands and actions of her role models. An 11-year-old is very little other than the product of eir upbringing--that's what I meant--that one is not then at the stage when one starts to really control oneself, rather than be controlled.

The second is that, aside from the psychology, which I'll find for you, it is the opinion of those who have shaped the laws of this country that an 11-year-old is not morally competent or competent to understand the consequences of eir actions.

[duckgirl]

Go Lodestone...No point me repeating what he's saying, so Go Lodestone.

Quoting Lodestone from 00:51, 14th May 2006
Icarus, Steveo,

That I prefixed that particular post with "I could" should have indicated that it's not actually what I would say under normal circumstances. I just wanted to turn the stereotyping, stigmatising and baseless generalising around to try and make a point about how damaging it is.

dunqn,

On the competency of an 11-year-old to make their own moral judgements and understand fully the consequences of sex, I'll get back to you once I've gone back to my books. Two points, though:

By "mastery of her own fate" I meant her ability to reach moral decisions by herself, rather than simply following the commands and actions of her role models. An 11-year-old is very little other than the product of eir upbringing—that's what I meant—that one is not then at the stage when one starts to really control oneself, rather than be controlled.

The second is that, aside from the psychology, which I'll find for you, it is the opinion of those who have shaped the laws of this country that an 11-year-old is not morally competent or competent to understand the consequences of eir actions.

[Lodestone]

the fact that teenage pregnancies on the whole are higher

I'm not going to engage in the discussion about Tories, but it's worth pointing out, Steveo, that the above is completely untrue.

http://www.nhsinherts.nhs.uk/hp/health_ ... gnancy.htm