Carryfast:
So what gives you the right to say that a couple who love each other are morally wrong to marry each other regardless of their relative ages.
Christ you’re such a hypocrite. Now replace that with ■■■ and as yourself the same question.
(Apologies for lateness of reply to this, I only skim read your daft posts so missed this gem)
Carryfast:
Wheel Nut:
Carryfast:
Wheel Nut:
Carryfast:
switchlogic:
And as for Carryfast I assume he has nothing in his closet since he seems more than happy to tell us about his paedophilic tendencies on an open forum…As I’ve said if anything I’ve said about my own views is the same thing as being a zb ■■■■■■■■■■ then so is Prince Philip, Prince Charles,at least two other examples which I’ve posted here and two others which I know of personally in which the church was happy enough to marry the couples which precedent shows were perfectly legal large age gap relationships,and my own Father.
You keep mentioning Charles and his Father, what did they do to make them paedophiles?
Prince Philip began corresponding with Elizabeth when she was 13. When he was at war I doubt he was shagging her in the orchard of the palace. The royals have their path mapped out for them, or they certainly did then, the choice of suitors is decidedly small.
And how does Prince Charles marrying Diana make him a ■■■■■■■■■■, she was working as a play school teacher when they got together. she was 19
As I heard it he was what would be classed an ‘adult’ assuming adult means the age of 18 sending romantic letters (e mails now) to a thirteen year old girl.Is that grooming under your ideas or not
.
Prince Charles first ‘noticed’ Dianna Spencer when she was 15 so not much different to a quick whistle and wink at the 15 year old Sam Fox assuming that she’d have preferred bokes to women.
Perhaps you have read the romantic letters I haven’t, but what is so different from writing pen pal messages to a friend? We did that before email and she was probably helping him to learn English or she to learn Greek.
Of course Charles noticed Diana, he was shagging her sister Sarah
None of which make it paedophilia.
However many of your own posts would lead me to think if someone went missing in your area, then the police would have reason to visit for an alibi
According to the historians the letters written by Prince Philip were a bit more romantically inclined than just pen pals as the marriage which came a bit later after them proves.But no surprise that you’re one of those who seem to think that the idea of understanding large age gap relationships and marriages seems to in some way then jump to the assumption of someone being a suspect in something like ‘someone going missing’
All of which seems to suggest to me,just as I’ve said,that the whole thing possibly in this case,but definitely in the Jeremy Forrest case,is just being used as a stunt to turn decent large age gap relationship into something much more sinister.
Next thing you’ll be saying that it was me not Savile who was there pulling all the birds on TOTP.If only I was that lucky.
The main reason you can never get a straight answer from me or anyone else is that your posts are so bitter and twisted from your experiences in life, according to you that is, it was all so unfair, those young girls would have nothing to do with you, neither would the older ones. I don’t give one stuff about Prince Charles or Philip, they were not shagging underage girls. The girls were pure, they had to be as they got an audience on their wedding night, maybe you could put your name down to observe the next royal servicing.
According to your historians? OK that must be true then. as our Queen wasn’t married until she was 21 I can only agree that “your bit later” was actually 8 years later with a 6 year war between that period. Most girls of 13 have looked at an older man and told him how handsome he looked, how the hell 5 years is ageism.
You really need to look in a mirror to find the reason why all the girls ran away
Georgie Porgie, Puddin’ and Pie,
Kissed the girls and made them cry,
When the boys came out to play
Georgie Porgie ran away.
The problem with this thread and some posts is the thinking that shagging an underage girl is in any way right, and I mean underage in the UK not the weird states of America that allows children to marry. My grandparents had a 15 year age gap because the girls were given away by a caring father to someone who could provide for them, not just sign on every fortnight. The alternative was the workhouse or being left on the shelf. You never hear of an eligible spinster.
The age of consent for heterosexuals is 16, not 15, 13 or 10.
The age for consenting adults of the same ■■■ is 18 or maybe 21
A teacher is a legal guardian, legal guardians are not allowed to shag their charge, neither are DJ’s, Parents, Uncles or dirty old men
Sorry to correct you Mr Nut but the age of consent for people of the same ■■■ is 16!
switchlogic:
Sorry to correct you Mr Nut but the age of consent for people of the same ■■■ is 16!
beg puddin
Carryfast:
kr79:
switchlogic:
Carryfast:
switchlogic:
Carryfast:
Who’s calling who a pervert now.I’m calling you a pervert you daft old codger because I’ve had enough of morally dubious types like you on here calling me one for having relationships with consenting adults. Yes adults, because unlike you I don’t ■■■■ after children.
So are you saying that it’s illegal for anyone to marry or at least have a normal ■■■■■■ relationship with a ‘child’ under the age of 18 or not
The question as to wether it should ever be legal for two blokes or two women to marry each other is another matter.I certainly wouldn’t want to get married under any roof in any church where the vicar had married two blokes or two women to each other.
I called you morally dubious, not illegal. And let’s face it you’re the most morally dubious character on here. It’s a fine line between 15 and 16 and one I reckon you’d have no problems crossing. I’m 34 and I’d consider it morally dubious having a relationship with a 16 year old at my age let alone your advanced years. Thankfully I doubt any would touch you with a bargepole.
I’m a similar age to you I’m 33 and I wouldn’t dream of having a relationship with a 16 year old. A person under 21 has such a different outlook of life than someone of my age there views on life and moral compass isn’t formed and I think dn older person can manipulate them and take advantage and I’ve found men I have come across who are over 30 who have been in relationships with teenage girls have given me the creeps and come across as Pervs.
And this is no PCM brainwashing Carryfast its real life experince.
As for gays your mental the thought of getting intimate with a man makes me cringe but if you want to do it with another consenting man it’s none of my business and you should be able to and if you want to commit to marriage it’s about love not gender.
Anyway what time you off to the park tomorrow.Who gives a zb what ‘you’ think it’s a matter of choice and if two people of very different ages love each other that’s got nothing to do with you because it’s none of your business just so long as such a relationship complies with the age of consent.
What you’re saying is that large age gap relationships involving under 18 girls and middle aged blokes are illegal and perverted just because of the age gap when the fact is they aren’t.Yet.
But if you really want a retrospective witch hunt,concerning middle aged blokes,who’ve dated and managed to marry mid teen girls there’s plenty of examples out there for you to start rounding up not me.Because,as I’ve said,I haven’t ever managed to find one whereas there’ plenty of blokes out there who have and that’s also based on real life experience and their wives or the vicars who married them certainly didn’t think that they were perverts.
I’d say that your comments are jut a load of ageist bs as bad as,if not worse than,any so called homophobia or racism.
Where did I say anything was illegal I just said its not for me and I find it a bit odd.
I was out last week in the pub and my mates daughter who is 19 was there with her mates nices girls had a laugh with them but I just don’t look at them in a ■■■■■■ way.
Your the one who comes on here all bitter and twisted wether its relationships or not getting the euro driving gig in the heyday of British European haulage. I’m happy enough with doing what I’ve wanted to do in my life even if it hasn’t panned out how I hoped it would.
switchlogic:
Carryfast:
switchlogic:
Carryfast:
Muckaway:
Sky News have shown pictures of Savilles’ accusers how they looked when the abuse occured, and how they look today.
The captions say “Now…then…now…then…now…then.”Or more like
Well considering they were underage you seem to have just implied something here…
So was I assuming it was all about the early 1970’s or before and as I’ve said the age of consent doesn’t apply in the case of just smiling at or dating a bird anyway.
But it was meant more of a comparison concerning the way they’ve aged since because birds with those morals wouldn’t have been on my list anyway at the time.
Birds with those morals? Ah yes, you mean young girls who objected to being ■■■■■■■■ abused as children. Well done you old perv.
As I’ve heard it and saw it on the tv at the time that’s just it they didn’t object at all.It’s only now with all the ageist bs where decent age gap relationhips are all being lumped in together with the types of criminal act that have been alleged in this case.
But no surprise none of those allegations seem to have been raised by either the alleged victims or the so called adult witnesses who are themselves criminals ‘if’ the whole thing isn’t a load of made up bs all put up on the basis of a different agenda related to age gap relationships in general.
switchlogic:
Carryfast:
So what gives you the right to say that a couple who love each other are morally wrong to marry each other regardless of their relative ages.Christ you’re such a hypocrite. Now replace that with ■■■ and as yourself the same question.
(Apologies for lateness of reply to this, I only skim read your daft posts so missed this gem)
It seems you’re still unable to work out the difference between what I meant by (relative ages) and actual ages.The word ‘marry’ should have been a clue as to the ‘actual’ age that I was referring to which in this country is 16 just like the age of consent.
The fact is there are no age gap laws in this country that stop anyone of any age having a ■■■■■■ relationship with a girl over the age of consent.Unlike the bs situation in the states where it’s one law for under 18 blokes being with under 18 girls and a different one for over 18 (adult) blokes being with under 18 (child) women which leads to the bs situation of blokes over 18 being unable to have any type of relationship with under 18 girls.Which effectively means two different ages of consent depending on the bloke’s age.
Which has been my point from the start and which,in my view,is the real agenda behind such cases as,possibly this one,but definitely the Jeremy Forrest one.But it’s not my fault if you can’t understand what I’ve written.
Wheel Nut:
Carryfast:
Wheel Nut:
Carryfast:
Wheel Nut:
Carryfast:
switchlogic:
And as for Carryfast I assume he has nothing in his closet since he seems more than happy to tell us about his paedophilic tendencies on an open forum…As I’ve said if anything I’ve said about my own views is the same thing as being a zb ■■■■■■■■■■ then so is Prince Philip, Prince Charles,at least two other examples which I’ve posted here and two others which I know of personally in which the church was happy enough to marry the couples which precedent shows were perfectly legal large age gap relationships,and my own Father.
You keep mentioning Charles and his Father, what did they do to make them paedophiles?
Prince Philip began corresponding with Elizabeth when she was 13. When he was at war I doubt he was shagging her in the orchard of the palace. The royals have their path mapped out for them, or they certainly did then, the choice of suitors is decidedly small.
And how does Prince Charles marrying Diana make him a ■■■■■■■■■■, she was working as a play school teacher when they got together. she was 19
As I heard it he was what would be classed an ‘adult’ assuming adult means the age of 18 sending romantic letters (e mails now) to a thirteen year old girl.Is that grooming under your ideas or not
Prince Charles first ‘noticed’ Dianna Spencer when she was 15 so not much different to a quick whistle and wink at the 15 year old Sam Fox assuming that she’d have preferred bokes to women.
Perhaps you have read the romantic letters I haven’t, but what is so different from writing pen pal messages to a friend? We did that before email and she was probably helping him to learn English or she to learn Greek.
Of course Charles noticed Diana, he was shagging her sister Sarah
None of which make it paedophilia.
However many of your own posts would lead me to think if someone went missing in your area, then the police would have reason to visit for an alibi
According to the historians the letters written by Prince Philip were a bit more romantically inclined than just pen pals as the marriage which came a bit later after them proves.But no surprise that you’re one of those who seem to think that the idea of understanding large age gap relationships and marriages seems to in some way then jump to the assumption of someone being a suspect in something like ‘someone going missing’
All of which seems to suggest to me,just as I’ve said,that the whole thing possibly in this case,but definitely in the Jeremy Forrest case,is just being used as a stunt to turn decent large age gap relationship into something much more sinister.
Next thing you’ll be saying that it was me not Savile who was there pulling all the birds on TOTP.If only I was that lucky.
The main reason you can never get a straight answer from me or anyone else is that your posts are so bitter and twisted from your experiences in life, according to you that is, it was all so unfair, those young girls would have nothing to do with you, neither would the older ones. I don’t give one stuff about Prince Charles or Philip, they were not shagging underage girls. The girls were pure, they had to be as they got an audience on their wedding night, maybe you could put your name down to observe the next royal servicing.
According to your historians? OK that must be true then. as our Queen wasn’t married until she was 21 I can only agree that “your bit later” was actually 8 years later with a 6 year war between that period. Most girls of 13 have looked at an older man and told him how handsome he looked, how the hell 5 years is ageism.
You really need to look in a mirror to find the reason why all the girls ran away
Georgie Porgie, Puddin’ and Pie,
Kissed the girls and made them cry,
When the boys came out to play
Georgie Porgie ran away.The problem with this thread and some posts is the thinking that shagging an underage girl is in any way right, and I mean underage in the UK not the weird states of America that allows children to marry. My grandparents had a 15 year age gap because the girls were given away by a caring father to someone who could provide for them, not just sign on every fortnight. The alternative was the workhouse or being left on the shelf. You never hear of an eligible spinster.
The age of consent for heterosexuals is 16, not 15, 13 or 10.
The age for consenting adults of the same ■■■ is 18 or maybe 21
A teacher is a legal guardian, legal guardians are not allowed to shag their charge, neither are DJ’s, Parents, Uncles or dirty old men
Are you really serious in saying that a 49 let alone 30 year old teacher,who chucks their job in,and then sets up home with their ex pupil when that pupil is 16 and then marries her just as Clive Richards (legally) did,is the same thing as ■■■■■■.You are one (very) seriously mixed up (sick) person. 
And where the zb have I ever said that it’s not a criminal act to have a ■■■■■■ relationship with any girl who’s under the age of consent.
My argument is all about the bs situation of a bloke considered as being an ‘adult’ (over 18) being considered as unable to legally have a ■■■■■■ relationship with a woman considered as being a child (under 18).Do you get it.
And if I was really bitter do you really think that I’d be defending the late 40’s bloke who managed to pull the (well) under 18 bird of my own age who I wanted,because ever since it happened I came to realise it’s what happens in some cases when a couple love each other regardless of age.Instead of saying let’s introduce the same age rules as apply in the States and set the law retrospectively so the zb can then be nicked as a so called dirty old man who went for a child instead of a woman his own age.
kr79:
Carryfast:
kr79:
switchlogic:
Carryfast:
switchlogic:
Carryfast:
Who’s calling who a pervert now.I’m calling you a pervert you daft old codger because I’ve had enough of morally dubious types like you on here calling me one for having relationships with consenting adults. Yes adults, because unlike you I don’t ■■■■ after children.
So are you saying that it’s illegal for anyone to marry or at least have a normal ■■■■■■ relationship with a ‘child’ under the age of 18 or not
The question as to wether it should ever be legal for two blokes or two women to marry each other is another matter.I certainly wouldn’t want to get married under any roof in any church where the vicar had married two blokes or two women to each other.
I called you morally dubious, not illegal. And let’s face it you’re the most morally dubious character on here. It’s a fine line between 15 and 16 and one I reckon you’d have no problems crossing. I’m 34 and I’d consider it morally dubious having a relationship with a 16 year old at my age let alone your advanced years. Thankfully I doubt any would touch you with a bargepole.
I’m a similar age to you I’m 33 and I wouldn’t dream of having a relationship with a 16 year old. A person under 21 has such a different outlook of life than someone of my age there views on life and moral compass isn’t formed and I think dn older person can manipulate them and take advantage and I’ve found men I have come across who are over 30 who have been in relationships with teenage girls have given me the creeps and come across as Pervs.
And this is no PCM brainwashing Carryfast its real life experince.
As for gays your mental the thought of getting intimate with a man makes me cringe but if you want to do it with another consenting man it’s none of my business and you should be able to and if you want to commit to marriage it’s about love not gender.
Anyway what time you off to the park tomorrow.Who gives a zb what ‘you’ think it’s a matter of choice and if two people of very different ages love each other that’s got nothing to do with you because it’s none of your business just so long as such a relationship complies with the age of consent.
What you’re saying is that large age gap relationships involving under 18 girls and middle aged blokes are illegal and perverted just because of the age gap when the fact is they aren’t.Yet.
But if you really want a retrospective witch hunt,concerning middle aged blokes,who’ve dated and managed to marry mid teen girls there’s plenty of examples out there for you to start rounding up not me.Because,as I’ve said,I haven’t ever managed to find one whereas there’ plenty of blokes out there who have and that’s also based on real life experience and their wives or the vicars who married them certainly didn’t think that they were perverts.
I’d say that your comments are jut a load of ageist bs as bad as,if not worse than,any so called homophobia or racism.
Where did I say anything was illegal I just said its not for me and I find it a bit odd.
I was out last week in the pub and my mates daughter who is 19 was there with her mates nices girls had a laugh with them but I just don’t look at them in a ■■■■■■ way.
Your the one who comes on here all bitter and twisted wether its relationships or not getting the euro driving gig in the heyday of British European haulage. I’m happy enough with doing what I’ve wanted to do in my life even if it hasn’t panned out how I hoped it would.
So where’s the big problem in the case of those who don’t see it your way.Such as in the case of missing out in their teenaged years with the birds of their own age for whatever reason and now just hoping for the same type of chance as plenty of other blokes in middle age have managed to find with much younger,still single,women.Usually on the basis of second or more chances in life for those blokes while the single blokes remain left on the shelf.
The chance of having a family,before it’s too late,with a girl who’s young enough to see her kids grow up and still be around and fit when they’re 30-50+,to see her grand children grow up and hopefully her great grandchildren,is a bit different than missing out on running international in the so called heyday of British international transport (which trust me never existed).
Carryfast:
But it’s not my fault if you can’t understand what I’ve written.
What on earth makes you think I dont understand what you’ve written? I understand all too well. I just like goading you. You still cant see how you’re a hypocrite, you plead for us not to judge you and say ‘its none of our business’ yet you’ll judge people like me all the time simply because a tired old relic of an institution tells you its ‘wrong’ and ‘not natural’. I’ll tell you what’s wrong and not natural, listening to a institution that worships a fictional fairy in the sky insetead of making your own mind up. Neither you nor them have any idea about what’s ‘natural’, you’re just full of crap.
Im bored with goading you now, so I’ll leave youu to it. I have no real interest in what goes on in your sordid little mind because I honesty believe that thankfully you haven’t the balls to ever go throughh with anything.
switchlogic:
Carryfast:
But it’s not my fault if you can’t understand what I’ve written.What on earth makes you think I dont understand what you’ve written? I understand all too well. I just like goading you. You still cant see how you’re a hypocrite, you plead for us not to judge you and say ‘its none of our business’ yet you’ll judge people like me all the time simply because a tired old relic of an institution tells you its ‘wrong’ and ‘not natural’. I’ll tell you what’s wrong and not natural, listening to a institution that worships a fictional fairy in the sky insetead of making your own mind up. Neither you nor them have any idea about what’s ‘natural’, you’re just full of crap.
Im bored with goading you now, so I’ll leave youu to it. I have no real interest in what goes on in your sordid little mind because I honesty believe that thankfully you haven’t the balls to ever go throughh with anything.
I’ve never said that I’m a raving bible basher who believes every single page of the bible 110%.But like many others over the years I’ve decided that on basic values,like same ■■■ relationships being seen as unnatural and that a decent church wedding beats signing a book at the registry office the church is correct.The relevant bit,for this topic,is that the church are happy to marry couples regardless of the their ‘relative’ ages (age gap).The same conditions apply to the conditions for the legality of relationships and marriage wether it’s a same age couple or a couple with a 30 year + age gap between them.
As I’ve said the agenda behind cases such as that involving Jeremy Forrest seems to be all about changing that situation to one in which different laws apply in the case of large gap relationships between over 18 blokes and under 18 women compared to same/close age ones involving under 18 blokes and under 18 women.
However this case also seems to be more about the age gap than alleged criminal acts in view of at least one of the accusers comments and the strange circumstances surrounding all these allegations only being made after Savile’s death and the fact that the many of the,adult at the time,witnesses involved in confirming these allegations,would obviously be implicated in being involved in the alleged crimes themselves if they are true and as yet no charges against those witnesses have been brought . 
However it’s strange as to why you seem to have issues about anyone going through with a large age gap relationship and marriage ,assuming that they were lucky enough to find the type of girl who would want to be involved in one.I can assure you it’s only that lack of luck that has ever stopped me since reaching the type of age where it would need to be that type of marriage in order to have a family anyway.However I can’t see any real reasons why that search should have to be limited to women over the age of 18.Although that seems to be the implication of recent societal views concerning the issue.
But no it’s obviously not me who’s being a hypocrite in judging what was an illegal type of unnatural relationship that’s been made legal after a lot of protests by those involved in them.While those same lot are then judging what are legal types of relationships by calling for them to be considered as illegal.
As for Savile the fact is he is dead so can’t defend any court action against him and Jeremy Forrest doesn’t seem to have done anything much different to what other previous precedent shows has been considered as legal.Although having said that it’s obvious that Savile doesn’t seem to have been the type of bloke who any girl,with even a bit of common sense and morals,which at least should have applied to those in the recent tv programme in which he was accused,would have wanted to even get near him let alone get into the situations which they’ve described.While,as usual,the case of Jeremy Forrest seems to be a typical case of a married bloke who’d found another younger woman willing to give him another chance instead of her wanting giving a single bloke one chance.Although that case doesn’t seem to match the charge of ‘child abduction’.
I actually used to think you were fairly intelligent, not anymore. Your posts are over long drivel, shorten them and people may read them. ‘Carryfast, never use 10 words when 100 will do.’ One thing though, I like how you say you’re not a bible basher yet on some things you take the word of the big sky fairy? That’s not deciding for yourself, that’s being a sheep. But hey ho, it’s no surprise a man who listens to the church for his moral viewpoint has an interest in young girls.
Carryfast:
But no it’s obviously not me who’s being a hypocrite in judging what was an illegal type of unnatural relationship that’s been made legal after a lot of protests by those involved in them.While those same lot are then judging what are legal types of relationships by calling for them to be considered as illegal.
No sorry Carry old chum its still you that’s the hypocrite. I haven’t said anything more than already is should be made illegal. Don’t read things that aren’t there. I just think your andl old racist bigot that has a thing for young girls. And despite your late in the day protestations I dont think any age of consent would stop you either. The fact of the matter is I and many others on here it seems find you a dirty creepy old man. Thankfully I think the girls of the UK are safe from you, although you do strike me as one of those types that spends a month a year in Thailand on his own
I thought that about the Thai thing too lol.
Carryfast your better off single all women are nutcases.
Kev…Don’t let your Mrs see this. You’ll be whinging about splitting up again! 
I’ve learnt my lesson I won’t winge next time lol
kr79:
I thought that about the Thai thing too lol.
Carryfast your better off single all women are nutcases.
I’m now thinking Carryfast looks like Mr Dudley from Little Britain. 
switchlogic:
Carryfast:
But no it’s obviously not me who’s being a hypocrite in judging what was an illegal type of unnatural relationship that’s been made legal after a lot of protests by those involved in them.While those same lot are then judging what are legal types of relationships by calling for them to be considered as illegal.No sorry Carry old chum its still you that’s the hypocrite. I haven’t said anything more than already is should be made illegal. Don’t read things that aren’t there. I just think your andl old racist bigot that has a thing for young girls. And despite your late in the day protestations I dont think any age of consent would stop you either. The fact of the matter is I and many others on here it seems find you a dirty creepy old man. Thankfully I think the girls of the UK are safe from you, although you do strike me as one of those types that spends a month a year in Thailand on his own
So are you saying it should be illegal for over an over 18 (adult) bloke to be in a relationship with an under 18 (child) girl or not .
I’m supposed to be a racist in your view remember so why would I want to get involved with looking for a Thai bride of Chinese ethnic origins who’s more than likely just in it for the money to get out of her lousy life anyway.I’m no more racist than any of the other type of foreign ethnic groups who prefer white western women to their own for the simple reason that they’re more attractive than most of the rest with the exception of the Italian birds.
kr79:
I thought that about the Thai thing too lol.
Carryfast your better off single all women are nutcases.
The ironic thing is that all of the blokes who I’ve heard that bs from wouldn’t want to try a lifetime of being single and it’s my bet that you’re no different in that if you were still single in your 30’s you’d probably change your mind about that 19 year old bird if she was interested.Although you’d probably get a shock to find out that in most cases you’d have more chance of pulling one if you’re already married or at least divorced.So maybe that comment about the wife reading this is right.
Carryfast I can assure you I’ve had enough grief off of women to have had a bellyful of them most of it has been deserved to be fair to them but I’m with you on the fact about the Thai brides they just don’t do it for me either.