The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
You may or may not be aware of the UK headlines today. Shevaun Pennington, a 12-year-old girl from Wigan, has run off to France with 31-year-old Toby Studebaker, a former US marine. Apparently the two of them met over the Internet, both pretended that they were in their late teens, and at least one of the two met with the other with thoughts of marriage and children on their minds.
Though it's sorely tempting to comment on the fact that, if a US marine can't tell the difference between a 12 year old girl and a 19 year old woman then what chance have they got distinguishing between an Iraqi civilian and an Iraqi guerilla, I'll leave that subject alone for now. I'll also tactfully avoid mentioning just how disappointed the two 'teenagers' must have been upon first seeing each other in the flesh;
"Gee, you look young for 19"
'Yeah, uh...I'm very petite. Um...you look old for your age. In fact, you look as old as my dad'
"Well...you've seen Dawson’s Creek; all teenagers look at least 21, right?"
'Well...I suppose so...fancy going to Paris?'
Instead I'd rather like to spend a bit of time looking at people's reactions to this story. After all, this is a story that has paedophilia at its centre by pretty much anyone's standards. So whilst the papers are, for once, acting with a certain amount of restraint in that the overwhelming tone of the reports is concern for Shevaun's safety, one would expect the general public to be horrified at this soldier for taking advantage of a naive young girl. One may expect the baying for his blood to begin shortly, and in earnest. One would be wrong.
Maybe it's the "If I don't laugh, I'll cry" defence kicking in, but the main reaction as near as I can tell is "Jesus, look at the STATE of her! I mean, Christ, is he so desperate to get laid that he'll take a statutory rape charge in order to have sex with a kid who looks like she would be improved by having a Siamese twin conjoined to her head?!" Maybe that's a trifle harsh (or maybe my friends and I have just got too vivid and unpleasant an imagination...), but nobody seems to be taking this particularly seriously at all. So why not? How come a man can get beaten up in this country for having the same name as a paedophile, but someone who travels over 3000 miles in order to have sex with a 12-year-old girl becomes the subject of bawdy contempt, if not jocular sympathy?
Well, as the full story of what has happened is not known, there's going to be a certain amount of unsubstantiated guesswork going on here, so bear with me. As I've mentioned, the picture of Shevaun that was released to the media is...well, it's less than flattering. The poor girl is not an oil painting, as many have commented on. Well here's a thing; she's only a child, so why the hell SHOULD she have to have model good looks? I rather though that the point here is that she shouldn't have to worry about whether or not she'll be seen as attractive to a 31 year old, yet we're sniggering and making derogatory comments about someone who is a victim in this situation. I don't get it; I mean, when Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman were abducted and murdered, no-one was going "Yeah well, a couple of blondes in footy shirts...I mean, any man would, wouldn't they?".
She's just a child, and as such she shouldn't be expected to worry about how sexually attractive she is. Yet here she is, running off with a man whom she doubtless intends to have a sexual relationship with. So whose fault is that? Is it hers, for lying to a man and leading him on? Is it his for taking advantage of someone who is clearly just a kid? Or is it something more? Well, here is where the guesswork comes in; I would say it's about 1% the first explanation, 49% the second, and 50% something else entirely. If this girls photo has caused disbelieving mirth among all and sundry, it's doesn't take a great leap of the imagination to accept that she quite probably got an equal amount of grief at school. After all, we were all schoolkids once and I'm sure we can all recall the abuse heaped upon the ugly girl in our class, and all in the name of ensuring that whomever it was getting picked on, if it wasn't us then who cares? I know I never gave a damn, just so long as my peers weren't laughing at me.
Well, if we can understand that Shevaun was almost certainly on the receiving end of teasing and bullying about, among other things, her looks then why on earth are we so surprised that she's ran off with someone who most likely showered her with compliments and bolstered her ego by telling her how much he liked her? Again I must stress, this is no more than me guessing as to the circumstances, but it doesn't sound so unbelievable does it? Yes, Studebaker is pretty much without doubt a predatory paedophile and as such he richly deserves to have his testes nailed to the inside wall of a Tiger enclosure at the zoo. But what about the fact that she was driven part of the way into his arms? I'm not talking about the specific individuals who teased her, but the fact that (and you all knew this was coming...) society allows it.
Speaking as someone who, if you allow me a moment of uncharacteristic boastfulness, has raised the use of vitriol and bile to something like an art form, it may seems very strange that I'm bemoaning the fact that it was probably teasing that drove Shevaun into this deeply unpleasant situation. And I should clarify, I'm not expecting kids to stop belittling each any time soon; that’s just part of growing up. But I am expecting society as a whole to take a bit more interest in making young people feel valued. There have been enough foaming tabloid rants about what we should do to protect our children from paedophiles. Surely we should start a little closer to home, and try and arm our kids with a greater sense of self worth, so that the honeyed words of a sick b*****d won’t tempt them to throw away their childhood in exchange for underage sex and mental scarring.
Though it's sorely tempting to comment on the fact that, if a US marine can't tell the difference between a 12 year old girl and a 19 year old woman then what chance have they got distinguishing between an Iraqi civilian and an Iraqi guerilla, I'll leave that subject alone for now. I'll also tactfully avoid mentioning just how disappointed the two 'teenagers' must have been upon first seeing each other in the flesh;
"Gee, you look young for 19"
'Yeah, uh...I'm very petite. Um...you look old for your age. In fact, you look as old as my dad'
"Well...you've seen Dawson’s Creek; all teenagers look at least 21, right?"
'Well...I suppose so...fancy going to Paris?'
Instead I'd rather like to spend a bit of time looking at people's reactions to this story. After all, this is a story that has paedophilia at its centre by pretty much anyone's standards. So whilst the papers are, for once, acting with a certain amount of restraint in that the overwhelming tone of the reports is concern for Shevaun's safety, one would expect the general public to be horrified at this soldier for taking advantage of a naive young girl. One may expect the baying for his blood to begin shortly, and in earnest. One would be wrong.
Maybe it's the "If I don't laugh, I'll cry" defence kicking in, but the main reaction as near as I can tell is "Jesus, look at the STATE of her! I mean, Christ, is he so desperate to get laid that he'll take a statutory rape charge in order to have sex with a kid who looks like she would be improved by having a Siamese twin conjoined to her head?!" Maybe that's a trifle harsh (or maybe my friends and I have just got too vivid and unpleasant an imagination...), but nobody seems to be taking this particularly seriously at all. So why not? How come a man can get beaten up in this country for having the same name as a paedophile, but someone who travels over 3000 miles in order to have sex with a 12-year-old girl becomes the subject of bawdy contempt, if not jocular sympathy?
Well, as the full story of what has happened is not known, there's going to be a certain amount of unsubstantiated guesswork going on here, so bear with me. As I've mentioned, the picture of Shevaun that was released to the media is...well, it's less than flattering. The poor girl is not an oil painting, as many have commented on. Well here's a thing; she's only a child, so why the hell SHOULD she have to have model good looks? I rather though that the point here is that she shouldn't have to worry about whether or not she'll be seen as attractive to a 31 year old, yet we're sniggering and making derogatory comments about someone who is a victim in this situation. I don't get it; I mean, when Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman were abducted and murdered, no-one was going "Yeah well, a couple of blondes in footy shirts...I mean, any man would, wouldn't they?".
She's just a child, and as such she shouldn't be expected to worry about how sexually attractive she is. Yet here she is, running off with a man whom she doubtless intends to have a sexual relationship with. So whose fault is that? Is it hers, for lying to a man and leading him on? Is it his for taking advantage of someone who is clearly just a kid? Or is it something more? Well, here is where the guesswork comes in; I would say it's about 1% the first explanation, 49% the second, and 50% something else entirely. If this girls photo has caused disbelieving mirth among all and sundry, it's doesn't take a great leap of the imagination to accept that she quite probably got an equal amount of grief at school. After all, we were all schoolkids once and I'm sure we can all recall the abuse heaped upon the ugly girl in our class, and all in the name of ensuring that whomever it was getting picked on, if it wasn't us then who cares? I know I never gave a damn, just so long as my peers weren't laughing at me.
Well, if we can understand that Shevaun was almost certainly on the receiving end of teasing and bullying about, among other things, her looks then why on earth are we so surprised that she's ran off with someone who most likely showered her with compliments and bolstered her ego by telling her how much he liked her? Again I must stress, this is no more than me guessing as to the circumstances, but it doesn't sound so unbelievable does it? Yes, Studebaker is pretty much without doubt a predatory paedophile and as such he richly deserves to have his testes nailed to the inside wall of a Tiger enclosure at the zoo. But what about the fact that she was driven part of the way into his arms? I'm not talking about the specific individuals who teased her, but the fact that (and you all knew this was coming...) society allows it.
Speaking as someone who, if you allow me a moment of uncharacteristic boastfulness, has raised the use of vitriol and bile to something like an art form, it may seems very strange that I'm bemoaning the fact that it was probably teasing that drove Shevaun into this deeply unpleasant situation. And I should clarify, I'm not expecting kids to stop belittling each any time soon; that’s just part of growing up. But I am expecting society as a whole to take a bit more interest in making young people feel valued. There have been enough foaming tabloid rants about what we should do to protect our children from paedophiles. Surely we should start a little closer to home, and try and arm our kids with a greater sense of self worth, so that the honeyed words of a sick b*****d won’t tempt them to throw away their childhood in exchange for underage sex and mental scarring.
Page:
Guess what? Wigan is my nearest town.
Anyway, did anyone else see the press conference? I saw some of it, and her father said "Well, it got so that I had to limit her to five hours a day...maximum". If you're worried about your child then you don't just cut it by half - they seem to be under the impression that half the time = half the damage. As I'm sure you can imagine, this is not the case. She could go on for five minutes a day and still be able to organise her little field trip.
I hate to sound clichéd, but it's the parent's fault for not taking an interest.
Anyway, did anyone else see the press conference? I saw some of it, and her father said "Well, it got so that I had to limit her to five hours a day...maximum". If you're worried about your child then you don't just cut it by half - they seem to be under the impression that half the time = half the damage. As I'm sure you can imagine, this is not the case. She could go on for five minutes a day and still be able to organise her little field trip.
I hate to sound clichéd, but it's the parent's fault for not taking an interest.
sorry wrong bit....
Here is the rest of that:
We've since realised when we're not there, can't watch her, that she's been [on the internet] for about 11 hours
Shevaun's father Stephen
"We got to the point where I would limit her to five hours a day, at a maximum," he said.
"But we've since realised when we're not there, you can't watch her, that she's been there for about 11 hours."
Here is the rest of that:
We've since realised when we're not there, can't watch her, that she's been [on the internet] for about 11 hours
Shevaun's father Stephen
"We got to the point where I would limit her to five hours a day, at a maximum," he said.
"But we've since realised when we're not there, you can't watch her, that she's been there for about 11 hours."
Miserableman wrote:
> You may claim that they shouldn't have allowed their daughter on for
> 11 hours a day (a figure I haven't seen/don't believe anyway - try and
> work out where this girl would get 11 hours a day spare
from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/ england/manchester/3067303.stm
The police discovered afterwards that internet fan Shevaun had been exchanging e-mails - and later letters - with Mr Studabaker for some time.
"We had no idea, although we were aware she was corresponding with people abroad," said father Stephen. "She was on hours at a time like any kid probably is".
"If they get the option they'll be on as long as they can, in the chatrooms and so on." Her mother agreed, saying they had believed Shevaun used the net to talk to schoolfriends.
"As far as I'm aware she was talking to people her own age."
Her parents said they had tried to both limit and monitor Shevaun's internet use. The computer was kept in the kitchen and they advised her how to use it safely.
"Obviously we do take interest in what she does on the computer," said mother Joanna. "We told her that she wasn't to give her name, address, any details about the family out at all, to anybody. Just as simple as that, do not tell anybody anything".
> You may claim that they shouldn't have allowed their daughter on for
> 11 hours a day (a figure I haven't seen/don't believe anyway - try and
> work out where this girl would get 11 hours a day spare
from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/ england/manchester/3067303.stm
The police discovered afterwards that internet fan Shevaun had been exchanging e-mails - and later letters - with Mr Studabaker for some time.
"We had no idea, although we were aware she was corresponding with people abroad," said father Stephen. "She was on hours at a time like any kid probably is".
"If they get the option they'll be on as long as they can, in the chatrooms and so on." Her mother agreed, saying they had believed Shevaun used the net to talk to schoolfriends.
"As far as I'm aware she was talking to people her own age."
Her parents said they had tried to both limit and monitor Shevaun's internet use. The computer was kept in the kitchen and they advised her how to use it safely.
"Obviously we do take interest in what she does on the computer," said mother Joanna. "We told her that she wasn't to give her name, address, any details about the family out at all, to anybody. Just as simple as that, do not tell anybody anything".
Miserableman wrote:
> Turn your Daily Mail gene off Light, and stop assuming the whole world
> is made up of paedophiles and other evils. I have no idea what point
> you're trying to put across because I'm too incensed by your ignorant
> assumptions about the two people involved. Commenting on how
> good-looking a 12 year old girl is both insulting and pointless, and
> belies your complete lack of understanding of what an internet
> relationship really is. You may pride yourself on your vitriol, but it
> makes you sound like a &*%£$.
Um...maybe I've missed your point, but didn't I make a point of saying and repeating that what I was saying was guesswork?! Cos, y'know, your response reads like you've scan read what I've said and draw erroneous conclusions...
As to your slagging me for commenting on how good looking she is...well, you've definitely missed the point I'm afraid; look a little closer and you'll perhaps find that I'm annoyed at the fact that her looks even enter into it.
And finally, my 'lack of understanding of what an internet relationship is'? Umm...sorry, but I couldn't give a proverbial about internet relationships. I was commenting on the fact that the marine in question has preyed upon a young girl. Where am I displaying the lack of understanding you mention?
I mean, by all means have a go at me for what I write; I welcome that. But try and stay within spitting distance of what I was actually talking about.
> Turn your Daily Mail gene off Light, and stop assuming the whole world
> is made up of paedophiles and other evils. I have no idea what point
> you're trying to put across because I'm too incensed by your ignorant
> assumptions about the two people involved. Commenting on how
> good-looking a 12 year old girl is both insulting and pointless, and
> belies your complete lack of understanding of what an internet
> relationship really is. You may pride yourself on your vitriol, but it
> makes you sound like a &*%£$.
Um...maybe I've missed your point, but didn't I make a point of saying and repeating that what I was saying was guesswork?! Cos, y'know, your response reads like you've scan read what I've said and draw erroneous conclusions...
As to your slagging me for commenting on how good looking she is...well, you've definitely missed the point I'm afraid; look a little closer and you'll perhaps find that I'm annoyed at the fact that her looks even enter into it.
And finally, my 'lack of understanding of what an internet relationship is'? Umm...sorry, but I couldn't give a proverbial about internet relationships. I was commenting on the fact that the marine in question has preyed upon a young girl. Where am I displaying the lack of understanding you mention?
I mean, by all means have a go at me for what I write; I welcome that. But try and stay within spitting distance of what I was actually talking about.
All you need is a hotmail account and you get bombarded with all sorts of dodgy and illegal spam. Doesn't take a lot for a naive and gullible child to fall for it. The Internet is a dangerous, almost unprotected place and more should be done to police it. Well, the kiddy-threatening bits.
You don't have to be the most computer literate parent in the world to realise spending 11 hours on the net is not healthy. Anyone with a small amount of common sense should know that.
It was a particularly stupid thing to do, even for a 12 year old
Miserableman wrote:
> It's actually really difficult for non-computer literate parents to
> impose limits and checks on what their son/daughter is doing on a
> computer.
--
It's not difficult for parents to take an interest in their child though.
I was limited to how much tv I could watch, or what time I had to be back etc.
She's 12, not 16.
A minor. A child.
You let your kid spend 11hours in front of a computer? Shame on you and I hope you have better luck with the next one.
> It's actually really difficult for non-computer literate parents to
> impose limits and checks on what their son/daughter is doing on a
> computer.
--
It's not difficult for parents to take an interest in their child though.
I was limited to how much tv I could watch, or what time I had to be back etc.
She's 12, not 16.
A minor. A child.
You let your kid spend 11hours in front of a computer? Shame on you and I hope you have better luck with the next one.
this scares me to death of what i'm about to say but:
I agree 100% with Goatboy on this.
I agree 100% with Goatboy on this.
The sagacious one wrote:
> Rosalind wrote:
> Says on the news that the computer was in the kitchen.
>
> Even less excuse for them to not check up on her and impose a limit on
> useage.
It's actually really difficult for non-computer literate parents to impose limits and checks on what their son/daughter is doing on a computer. Would you know how to check who I'd been talking to on MSN? You may claim that they shouldn't have allowed their daughter on for 11 hours a day (a figure I haven't seen/don't believe anyway - try and work out where this girl would get 11 hours a day spare) but it's always easy to play the General after the war.
> Rosalind wrote:
> Says on the news that the computer was in the kitchen.
>
> Even less excuse for them to not check up on her and impose a limit on
> useage.
It's actually really difficult for non-computer literate parents to impose limits and checks on what their son/daughter is doing on a computer. Would you know how to check who I'd been talking to on MSN? You may claim that they shouldn't have allowed their daughter on for 11 hours a day (a figure I haven't seen/don't believe anyway - try and work out where this girl would get 11 hours a day spare) but it's always easy to play the General after the war.
Page: