Liddle: “I could not remotely conceive of not trying to shag the kids”

September 30, 2012 at 11:53 am (child abuse, children, crime, Jackie Mcdonough, law)

Rod Liddle is one of those people, like Jeremy Clarkson and Richard Littlejohn, about whom I rarely comment, here or anywhere else. Partly because these people are such utter cocks that comment is generally otiose. Also because getting lefties and liberals annoyed is exacly what these people aim for (he only does it to annoy / because he knows it teases) and I don’t want to play into their hands.

Rod_Liddle

(Rod Liddle is associate editor of The Spectator. He writes a weekly column in the magazine, as well as contributing to The Sunday Times and The Sun).

Nevertheless, I feel obliged to draw your attention to a piece in this week’s Specator where Mr Liddle appears not just to excuse the sexual exploitation of pupils by teachers, but to confess (or boast) that had he become a teacher…well, read an excerpt for yourself:

“I never found out [what sort of teacher I'd be] because the one thing stopping me from being a teacher was that I could not remotely conceive of not trying to shag the kids. It seemed to me to be virtually impossible not to, and I was convinced that I’d be right in there, on day one. We’re talking secondry school level here, by the way – and even then I don’t think I’d have dabbled much below year ten, as it is now called. I just thought we ought to clear that up early on. At my old comprehensive school a few teachers were known to be schtupping the pupils: one of them, a female teacher who was extremely foxy in a Pot Noodle scuzzy kind of way — she copped off with some fifth-form lad, and another teacher (a man with a guitar and a faux rebellious attitude) gained the affections of an extremely attractive fourth-form girl. As pupils, we didn’t remotely mind about this and both teachers were very popular. But I knew, when I was considering my career options, that this sort of behaviour was definitely frowned upon by the authorities and that I would not last the week in my new job. Frowned upon, although not much more, I ought to say — certainly not the deranged howling that is kicked up these days, the fury and the righteous anger.”

NB: The Sexual Offences Act, 2003 makes it a criminal offence for a teacher to have any form of sexual contact with any pupil at their school who is below the age of 18, even if the pupil is above the legal age of consent. Such “abuse of a position of trust” also applies to carers and trainers of young people under the age of 18 in any other institution.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/contents

16 Comments

  1. Sarah AB said,

    I have noticed that Peter Tatchell has been tweeting about this extensively. He is irritated by the use of the word ‘abduction’ to describe the teacher’s action, even though he is not condoning what happened. He says it’s anomalous that children should be deemed responsible for crimes at (?)10 but not capable of giving consent to sex. I’m not sure what to make of this. I suppose I am receptive to those who want to take age differential, as well as age, into account.

  2. Mike Killingworth said,

    The only people who come well out of this are the French police for announcing that hunting down this unhappy deluded couple was not going to be a priority for them.

    I notice that both our host and Sarah duck out of giving an opinion on the 2003 Act, so I’ll suggest that it was an example of moral panic and that teenagers are no safer for its passage, and indeed their own passage into adulthood is now even harder than it was before.

  3. Sarah AB said,

    I wasn’t actively ducking out – I don’t know quite what I think of it.

  4. SteveH said,

    I agree that a teacher going out with a pupil is inappropriate at best and probably a complete abuse of power, but who knows maybe they really do love each other!

    However the abduction of the girl was by the police and the authorities as it seems to me the girl went with the teacher perfectly willingly. Now I am not saying the police were incorrect to abduct this girl or maybe that is exactly what I am saying. After all this clearly is not a case where kids are being systematically abused by adults as happened in jersey for example.

    I presume this teacher has technically committed statutory rape and with reference to the utter hysteria surrounding modern day hero Assange I would have thought that the pro imperialist pro mass muder of Muslim left would have forced themselves into a bit of a corner on the old rape issue. Surely Sarah Ab cannot be conflicted when terrible rape is at issue! Or is she joining the rape apologists and rape deniers!!

    PS Hang the Pedo’s! Support Zionism!

    • sackcloth and ashes said,

  5. Mike Killingworth said,

    Bless you, Steve!

  6. Sarah AB said,

    I think what Galloway said was deplorable for a range of reasons but I have not been in clear agreement with his most severe critics over his word in particular or the issues more generally in fact. One of the problems with Galloway is that he was talking about actual women, an ongoing investigation. Some of the discussion about this on the far left was just vile and misogynist. But on the subject of rape, or defining rape, I have (before banned from inhabiting the same virtual space as him) not been too much at variance with Andy Newman. I wouldn’t want to overstate this – I thought Laurie Penny’s fairly recent post on the topic was very good, for example.

  7. Sarah AB said,

    ‘his words’ not ‘his word’.

  8. Monsuer Jelly More Bounce to the Ounce said,

    i think that Rod Liddle should be killed in his flthy bed. The set fire to. I think that would be great. and good.

  9. Monsuer Jelly More Bounce to the Ounce said,

    i want to know where rod liddle lives. any person who is able to tell me whre rod liddle lives will get 15 ponuds amd my everlasting manlove. the reson i want to know the information requested in because i want to hunt him down and KILL HIMM with spoons and shit.

  10. Sarah AB said,

    I’ve now written something on this topic here.

    http://hurryupharry.org/2012/09/30/the-age-of-consent/

    • bler4eg omceonmretatry said,

      Haven’t read it but I bet it can be summarised as ‘having sex with kids is bad but on the other hand it isn’t’.

    • sackcloth and ashes said,

      ‘One forty nine’.

    • Faster Pussycat Miaow! Miaow! Miaow! said,

      I knows what I knows and I knows what I don’t knows (except when I don’t knows what I don’t knows and that is well random) and that is that that Shatcocks and Gashes is actually David Starkey the noted cultural historian of ebonics don’t you know.

  11. martin ohr said,

    I’ll take a go at defending the 2003 act, whose intention I believe was to remove any grey areas/questions of judgement in pupil/teacher relationships. My take on this is that it provides protection for teachers by telling them exactly where they stand on this.

  12. martin ohr said,

    on a separate but related note…

    I normally try to avoid reactionary “thought for the day”; but I caught one last week which basically condoned church involvement in child abuse. I’ll try to dig out the details, but the gist of it ran “morally good people can act immorally when they are part of a group which acts like that and it doesn’t mean they are necessarily bad”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 497 other followers

%d bloggers like this: