Monday, 7 January 2013

"I'm glad my daughter had under-age sex." Would a FATHER be less likely to say that?



Sally Feldman

photo of Sally Feldman
Sally Feldman is on the editorial board of New Humanist and a trustee of the Rationalist Association. She is Head of the School of Media, Arts and Design at the University of Westminster, and used to edit Woman's Hour on BBC Radio 4.


Sally Feldman:

"Girls who giggle at the geography teacher attempting to stretch a condom over a Bunsen burner may well be enthralled at Sugar's blow-by-blow guide to oral sex. Unsuitable? Inappropriate? Not according to the Government, which is about to launch a new scheme that will include oral sex lessons, after a trial showed it was successful in helping to reduce sexual intercourse among 16–year olds."

http://newhumanist.org.uk/756/why-im-glad-my-daughter-had-under-age-sex

How long has this DISGUSTING and immoral woman been corrupting the morals of British women?

How long did she work at Woman's Hour?

She has certainly corrupted her daughter's, who is now officially a SLUT and a FORNICATRESS, according to her proud mother. She will probably soon be an SSM too from the sound of things, if she is not one already.

I wonder if Sally Feldman is one of those Slut Single Mums I have denounced at  
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Are-Slut-Single-Mothers-a-burden-on-the-state/220271251432495?fref=ts

I really wouldn't be surprised if she was.

I would certainly be very surprised to discover that Sally Feldman's daughter's biological father is still married and living with her mother.   If Ms Feldman's husband were indeed still residing in the matrimonial home, then he must be a very contemptible man indeed, with no morals or moral courage, and happy to let his wife allow his own daughter to become a slut, and an under-aged slut at that.   If he has been used as sperm bank and then sent on his way, then there is not much you can expect a man in this position to do except move on and go gay, probably.

http://newhumanist.org.uk/176/sally-feldman

Perhaps in future mothers and fathers who are out and proud that their daughter is a slut should be  prosecuted under the Sexual Offences Act 2003

Child sex offences

Section 9 Sexual activity with a child

(1) A person aged 18 or over (A) commits an offence if—
(a) he intentionally touches another person (B),
(b) the touching is sexual, and
(c) either—
(i) B is under 16 and A does not reasonably believe that B is 16 or over, or
(ii) B is under 13.
(2) A person guilty of an offence under this section, if the touching involved—
(a) penetration of B’s anus or vagina with a part of A’s body or anything else,
(b) penetration of B’s mouth with A’s penis,
(c) penetration of A’s anus or vagina with a part of B’s body, or
(d) penetration of A’s mouth with B’s penis,
is liable, on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years.
(3) Unless subsection (2) applies, a person guilty of an offence under this section is liable—
(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or both;
(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years.

Section 14
Arranging or facilitating commission of a child sex offence

(1) A person commits an offence if—
(a) he intentionally arranges or facilitates something that he intends to do, intends another person to do, or believes that another person will do, in any part of the world, and
(b) doing it will involve the commission of an offence under any of sections 9 to
13
(2) A person does not commit an offence under this section if—
(a) he arranges or facilitates something that he believes another person will do, but that he does not intend to do or intend another person to do, and
(b) any offence within subsection (1)(b) would be an offence against a child for whose protection he acts.
(3) For the purposes of subsection (2), a person acts for the protection of a child if he acts for the purpose of—
(a) protecting the child from sexually transmitted infection,
(b) protecting the physical safety of the child,
(c) preventing the child from becoming pregnant, or
(d) promoting the child’s emotional well-being by the giving of advice,
and not for the purpose of obtaining sexual gratification or for the purpose of causing or encouraging the activity constituting the offence within subsection (1)(b) or the child’s participation in it.
(4) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable—
(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or both;
(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years.

It is a delicious thought,  is it not, that a woman like her could get a nice long prison sentence for corrupting the morals of her daughter and the nation, if all the elements of the crime listed above are satisfied?

The Sexual Offences Act 2003 was already in place when her daughter had under-aged sex too.  How old was her daughter in 2004 when that confession was written?

All that is required is for the police to arrest her and the CPS can do the rest.  Sally Feldman has after all already confessed.  I wonder what has become of Sally Feldman's daughter.  We already know she is a slut, but is she now also an SSM?  If she is, then it would be conclusive that she has corrupted the morals of her own daughter as well as the morals of countless British women who have been subjected to the kind of moral poison she and women of her ilk have been spreading for decades now.

Let us hope that this little scenario I have illustrated will give her and women like her pause for thought.

No comments: