In her column in last Sunday’s Times (11th August 2013 – “No, m’lud, it is women who have been caught in the temptress trap”), Jenni Russell brought up some interesting points, but she was misguided about several things. To begin with, paedophilia is defined as “sex with a child”. Now, according to the Dictionary, the definition of a child is a human being from birth to puberty. Over the age of puberty, one is no longer a child, so there is no such thing as paedophilia after reaching puberty. It is true that in England, sex with teenagers under the age of 16 is against the law, but different countries have different laws about this. In Italy, for example, the age of consent is 14. It is somewhat naive to say that one cannot imagine a 13-year old girl “persuading” a man to have sex with her (her word “force” is inapplicable). All she has to do is open his trousers and take hold of his penis.
Miss Russell is also somewhat adrift about the question of women’s attire. Since the beginning of time, the way a woman dresses was always meant to indicate her intentions. Miss Russell said that today there is “huge social pressure” to look “hot”. This is nonsense. No girl is forced to dress in a tarty way, or to look vulgar, or to encourage men. Those that choose to do so must take the consequences. Suppose three women walked into a pub — one is dressed in a normal way, the second is wearing a skirt up to her crotch, and has her boobs hanging out, and the third is completely nude. Does anyone believe that the men in the pub would have the same reaction to all three women?
It is true that all adolescents develop sexual desire, but they do not all behave the same way. Some have manners and dignity, and above all self-preservation. It is this self-preservation which has disappeared from women’s behaviour over the past 50 years. Miss Russell is also quite wrong to suggest that women’s sexual activity is “disturbing” to men. On the contrary, men welcome it. Men love naughty girls.
Why should anyone be surprised that there is a “double standard” when it comes to sex? Men and women are clearly very different. It is well known that if any attractive, or even semi-attractive, woman encourages a man, the man will NEVER say no. So whether a man and a woman to go bed, depends entirely on whether a woman says “Yes”, or “No”. As we live in an age of easy contraception, women today never become pregnant unless they want to. That is why people laughed at Ulrika Jonsson – she was incompetent as well as promiscuous. But there is nothing to say that Liam Gallagher asked his mistresses to get pregnant. If they wanted children, that was their affair.
Everyone knows that men do not require emotional involvement to go to bed with women. But women are expected to have emotional involvement, otherwise they are considered to be promiscuous – like Ulrika Jonsson. Nor is it true that sexual women are considered “deviant”. It is at least 100 years since people thought that way. All women have sexual desires – some control them, others do not. These things are not “prejudices”, they are simply conclusions from thousands of years of human behaviour. Obviously one can never see men and women in the same light.