Prince Andrew and the Moral Law

The problem I have with this Prince Andrew thing is that he hasn't actually been proven guilty. The truth is that no-one actually knows one way or the other. It seems a shame, then, to discuss him as if he IS guilty, without actual proof other than the words of one individual. In truth, anyone can accuse anyone else of anything so I do feel it's important to be careful not to judge him or anyone else until it's known for sure (or not) that he is guilty. I could consider: Are Prince Andrew's words reliable? But at the same time I could also ponder if the accuser's words are reliable. At this time no-one really knows the answer to that.

If anyone is considered guilty from the outset, there could be bias already in place before any judgement is made.

Also, would this accuser being accusing Prince Andrew (so many years later) if he had been anyone off the street rather than a prince?

Iam I am truly sorry

No, based totally on previous experience Annie. I'll stop here

Iam. You know your comment will result etc , ? with respect
you may as well continue with this thread replying to yourself .

Galaxy - after I posted in haste, I realised I'd said nothing about a) the dangers men pose to women or b) the need to put huge efforts into helping our boy children grow up in the full awareness that they are responsible for not behaving abusively towards their female (or male) partners.
I know this comment will result in posters telling me that women can also be abusive, like this could possibly be news to me.
As for it being a pretence to tell women to keep themselves safe. I agree in that I've no doubt how dangerous being born female is. I was a bit shocked when my 16 year olds told me they didn't want to use taxi's because the drivers were "sleezy" but that's one example of girls keeping themselves safe. We either picked them up or used the one cab driver for years

I think telling women that there are ways to keep themselves safe is pretence really.

Annie-I said that all responsible parents will bring their daughters up with the knowledge they need to keep themselves safe. Almost 20 years ago as well as talking, stressing the need to always stay with friends if out, Igave them a £10 note to keep in case they ever needed a taxi. They soon told me that they weren't using taxies "the drivers are sleezey". We identified one cab driver, he did all the pick ups and drop offs for about 15 years.

Warning children isn't putting responsibility on them. Blaming them, or their parents, when things go wrong is understandable (sometimes, rarely) but it gives abusers carte blanche. Maggie Oliver the GMP Officer who whistle blew the grooming scandal in Rochdale and other areas supported parents who many would have rejected. That was one way in which she was able to get the girls to cooperate with a police investigation.

Iam is it not sensible to warn daughters of dangers ?

Perhaps there will come a time when there are no sex abusers
I doubt it.

I don’t see warning girls of abusers is putting responsibility on girls.

I was out yesterday and today so just catching up with this thread. I despair that despite so many older women continue to put responsibility on girls to keep themselves safe. Yes of course, responsible parents bring their boys and girls up to respect themselves and others. Sadly, not all children have responsible parents. Some get themselves into dangerous situations, despite the best advice while they were growing up.

Responsibility for identifying, targeting and grooming young teenagers (11 plus) lies with the abusers. It doesn't matter whether the abusers are white, black, asian, poor, rich or poor, they're abusers. They are good at spotting children who are vulnerable and likely to respond to being treated like grown ups, whether its by being given alcohol and car rides, or being 'trained as a masseuse' in the home of a millionaire.

Also, boys don't get much of a mention but the grooming gangs I know of included boys in their 'stable' of children available at a price. Price to be paid to the gang, not the children of course, they just got loaded up with alcohol and drugs to make the physical and emotional pain slightly numb.

Suziewoosie:
"HM to PA “just because you meet a teenager who is sexually available to you because she’s been let down and exploited by others in her life, it doesn’t mean you should take advantage. In fact Andrew, if you become aware of a situation like this, you should step away and help authorities to pursue tge exploiters” "

Good!

Elizabeth Bennet could not have said it better.

Do they share one thing in common ? No father or an abusive
father ?

You can see can't you how men can succesfully groom , manipulate and trade girls at all levels of society because there are people who still believe it's the girls' fault. The process of course is much the same from the gangs of Pakistani men on run down esates to the powerful rich men with jets and islands. And the girls are victims. The places they are abused may differ but being passed from man to man at any level is demeaning and destroys lives. The big difference of course is that the rich and powerful are less likely to ever be brought to court.

I don’t think being at a party where young girls are available
is acceptable for anyone

Good post 11.46 Suziewoozie

Too silly now

I agree annie only in a world of fantasy would HM ptovide moral guidance to darling Andrew

No need for Prince Andrew to go to America to be interviewed as apparently there is a branch of the FBI here he could attend. However perhaps he wouldn’t be able to trust himself and he realises what trouble being honourable got him into before !!

Yes! That is definitely what the queen should have said to Prince Andrew!

Oh God! Am I really giving parenting advice to the Queen?

Now we are in the world of fantasy

Alexa this is a good post

Yes - vulnerable, poor and young, and lacking in any kind of moral guidance. Someone let her down there."

Is moral guidance about protecting oneself, or about protecting others?

It’s both isn’t it - eg

HM to PA “just because you meet a teenager who is sexually available to you because she’s been let down and exploited by others in her life, it doesn’t mean you should take advantage. In fact Andrew, if you become aware of a situation like this, you should step away and help authorities to pursue tge exploiters”

How many wrongs make a right annie.?

Lucy, you are getting to the heart of it.
"I am not victim blaming. I am blaming whoever was responsible for the upbringing of that young girl."

Do what did this mean then lucy

So the seventeen year old was bound and gagged was she, when she was taken into the world of middle-aged users?

You make it sound as though she had a choice

Regarding Andrew and the 17 year old girl, much critcism of
the Queen, no critcism of the girls father who was introduced
to Epstein,

No question as to why the girl who was forced to have sex with
Andrew and has spoken of how distressing it was , kept a photograph of him for some years .

Lucy, sexual predators teach vulnerable kids that self respect depends on having some older man wanting to romance them.

Other markers of self respect such as having meaningful work, parenting, or schooling may be absent