German man castrates teenage daughter's 57-year-old boyfriend

Bottle_of_Smoke

I hope the dad gets a harsh sentence. no call for that.

GaryMunster

Dudess wrote: »

.

I understand you not liking the idea of it (can't think of the exact reason why - his age doesn't mean he's likely to hurt her at all, but I can still understand it) however you don't have a right to threaten him with physical violence, not least because it could be upsetting for her.

so your saying he should of invited the 57 year old over for a chat and asked politely would he stop shagging his daughter?

Dionysus

sollar wrote: »

Whats the age of consent in germany? if its 17 then the father will be looking at a very long sentence as no law was broken by the 57 yr old.

Excellent question so I googled it. According to Wikipedia, 'The age of consent in Germany is 14, as long as a person over the age of 21 does not exploit a 14–15 year-old person's lack of capacity for sexual self-determination.'

From this it would appear the 57-year-old victim has German law on his side - whatever good that'll do him now.

The number of otherwise decent regular posters here who are engaging in a "Go on ya good thing" ode to this idiotic father and his barbarous act is unsettling.

First they came for the communists...

Ridley

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

That doesn't make any sense

Terrible pun but yeah it does.

Getting castrated for consensual sex.. What is this? 600 years ago?

Shenshen

goat2 wrote: »

by saying she is a child, yes when you think 57 then you see a person of 17 as a child, i am 51 and i have a 25 yr old daughter, i would not accept a 57 yr old man as her partner, quiet simply he would be too old,

So you're saying you cannot accept your 25-year-old daughter living her life the way she sees fit?

Wow.

You're way worse than that 57-year-old, at least he never showed such disrespect and downright oppressive tendencies.

Shenshen

GaryMunster wrote: »

that 57 year old got what he deserved, sick f**k...just because the law says its ok doesnt mean its right

Yes, certainly, consensual sex does warrant mutilation and possibly death.

What kind of world do you people live in? Do you hide your women under curtains and batter them for speaking in public???

sensibleken

Castration was a bit much. He should have bought him an ice cream and hid some bees in it!

stovelid

You'd wonder if there even more to it than meets the eye.

Perhaps even a dose of jealosuly on the father's side.

Lirange

stovelid wrote: »

You'd wonder if there even more to it than meets the eye.

This is definitely the work of the Decepticons.

curlzy

I say fair play to that father. A 17 year old is a child, the 57 year old sleeping with her is just sick. Just because something is legal doesn't mean it's ok. So yeah I hope the father gets off lightly.

curlzy

curlzy wrote: »

I say fair play to that father. A 17 year old is a child, the 57 year old sleeping with her is just sick. Just because something is legal doesn't mean it's ok. So yeah I hope the father gets off lightly.

You can't have morals be the reason that a man gets castrated. Consent plays a massive role here.

KnifeWRENCH

I love how the article gave a very helpful picture of a bread knife. Just in case any of us didn't know what one looked like....

Oh, and hope the father gets a very heavy sentence. Sure, a 57 yr old guy and a 17 yr old girl in a relationship is "icky" - that doesn't justify making the guy a eunuch.

Castrating and nearly killing him - well, it's just not cricket.

Shenshen

curlzy wrote: »

I say fair play to that father. A 17 year old is a child, the 57 year old sleeping with her is just sick. Just because something is legal doesn't mean it's ok. So yeah I hope the father gets off lightly.

And apparently, just because something is illegal, like attempted murder, doesn't mean it's wrong, either...:rolleyes:

senordingdong

KnifeWRENCH wrote: »

I love how the article gave a very helpful picture of a bread knife. Just in case any of us didn't know what one looked like....

Oh, and hope the father gets a very heavy sentence. Sure, a 57 yr old guy and a 17 yr old girl in a relationship is "icky" - that doesn't justify making the guy a eunuch.

Castrating and nearly killing him - well, it's just not cricket.

In fairness, she could have been an uggo.
Double icky.

sensibleken

a better revenge would be to put a tiny amount of hot water in his sugar bowl so it all blends together into one lump. I hate that!:mad:

vibe666

its actually a really tough one. when i first read it my first thought was that initial "fair play to the dad" emotional response, but then i was reading through the posts and the comparisons to the likes of sharon stone with the twilight dude and thinking that the guy nearly died even though he didn't technically break any laws.

look at hugh heffner and all his playboy bunnies. some of those are just barely 18 and he's supposed to be some sort of sugar daddy celebrity who gets to doink them all and he even gets his own tv show for it.

then my (pre)paternal instinct kicks in again and i'm back to thinking that if a 57 year old man is interested enough in a 17 year old girl to actually date her then what else is he interested in?

when i was 18 i briefly went out with a 17 year old girl (about 10 months my junior, but would have been in the year below me at school) and i felt terrible because she was under 18 even though i was far from being her first proper boyfriend (truth be told, i found out she was a bit of a bike and we broke up pretty quickly).

i'm 34 now and when i look at 17-18 year olds i still see children and i couldn't comprehend how anyone who is 57 could see anything but a child when they look at a 17 year old girl and it actually makes me feel queasy to even think of it.

if you're in your mid-thirties plus, can you honestly tell me that when you look at a 17-18 year old girl you don't still see them as a child? i know the law says they're technically an adult, but just think of any 17-18 year old girl you know from family or friends and tell me you think of them as a proper grown-up who is fully equipped to make the decision to have sex with a 57 year old man and that morally speaking you'd be okay with them dating one?

i know i know, it's legal etc. etc. but it's still morally repulsive and i can understand how a father would react in the way he did. if it was me i don't think i'd be able to do what he did, but at the same time i do know that very few people now what you are truly capable of given the right circumstances.

Deleted User wrote: »

Getting castrated for consensual sex.. What is this? 600 years ago?

to be fair, 600 years ago he could have married her when she was 10 or 11 years old, so its not a great comparison.

Bottle_of_Smoke

vibe666 wrote: »

its actually a really tough one. when i first read it my first thought was that initial "fair play to the dad" emotional response, but then i was reading through the posts and the comparisons to the likes of sharon stone with the twilight dude and thinking that the guy nearly died even though he didn't technically break any laws.

look at hugh heffner and all his playboy bunnies. some of those are just barely 18 and he's supposed to be some sort of sugar daddy celebrity who gets to doink them all and he even gets his own tv show for it.

then my (pre)paternal instinct kicks in again and i'm back to thinking that if a 57 year old man is interested enough in a 17 year old girl to actually date her then what else is he interested in?

when i was 18 i briefly went out with a 17 year old girl (about 10 months my junior, but would have been in the year below me at school) and i felt terrible because she was under 18 even though i was far from being her first proper boyfriend (truth be told, i found out she was a bit of a bike and we broke up pretty quickly).

i'm 34 now and when i look at 17-18 year olds i still see children and i couldn't comprehend how anyone who is 57 could see anything but a child when they look at a 17 year old girl and it actually makes me feel queasy to even think of it.

if you're in your mid-thirties plus, can you honestly tell me that when you look at a 17-18 year old girl you don't still see them as a child? i know the law says they're technically an adult, but just think of any 17-18 year old girl you know from family or friends and tell me you think of them as a proper grown-up who is fully equipped to make the decision to have sex with a 57 year old man and that morally speaking you'd be okay with them dating one?

That's just not how human attraction works. I'm 25 and yeah I see 17 years olds as children in some senses, but definitely not in the sexual sense.

As you get older you don't become more attracted to older people. Physical attraction is all down to reproductive capability. If a 17 year old (or younger) displays reproductive features such as breasts/body shape etc they will be attractive to males.

This does not of course justify sleeping with any physically developed girl, what it does do is explain why men are attracted to them.

A indicator of this is porn. Virtually all guys wach it. Aside from niche markets the girls are 18-22 for the most successful sites.

Sorry to be blunt but what do you think gets more searched more - ''teen pussy'' or ''30 year old pussy''?

So I don't think this guy was a pervert or sick or anything like that. If I was the dad I'd be having a stern word telling him he is not a suitable match and I would appreciate he ends the relationship or there'll be more to it.

Cutting off his balls is an outrageous thing to do and guess what - his young daughter is probably gonna go hunting for a father figure now that he's gonna be doing time for grieveous bodily harm. Didn't think that one through did ya knifey.

sensibleken

He should have given him a biscuit, but secretely farted on it first

vibe666

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Sorry to be blunt but what do you think gets more searched more - ''teen pussy'' or ''30 year old pussy''?

possibly "gee like a wizards sleeve"? :pac:

Dudess

GaryMunster wrote: »

so your saying he should of invited the 57 year old over for a chat and asked politely would he stop shagging his daughter?

No? I love the way it's either that or castration - no in-between. I would understand the father taking him aside and saying firmly "She's too young, keep the hell away". I'd imagine a 57-year-old man isn't going to get involved with a 17-year-old girl and all the hassle that comes with it though, without really good cause.

Deleted User wrote: »

Getting castrated for consensual sex.. What is this? 600 years ago?

It's not just consensual sex in fairness - it's who's having the sex, but yeah, castration as something to be celebrated. Jesus.

curlzy wrote: »

I say fair play to that father. A 17 year old is a child, the 57 year old sleeping with her is just sick.

For cutting a man's balls off - "fair play"...? And without you knowing anything about the relationship? Would you agree with, as already asked, clitoral slicing and vaginal sewing up after a knife shoved up there first of a 57-year-old woman who had sex with a 17-year-old boy? And a 17-year-old is not a child - many 17-year-olds are driving, working, have moved out of their parents' home, drinking, taking drugs, fucking, having children themselves. So they're adults.

vibe666 wrote: »

i'm 34 now and when i look at 17-18 year olds i still see children and i couldn't comprehend how anyone who is 57 could see anything but a child when they look at a 17 year old girl and it actually makes me feel queasy to even think of it.

if you're in your mid-thirties plus, can you honestly tell me that when you look at a 17-18 year old girl you don't still see them as a child?

As you mentioned: Playboy bunnies, also page three girls. No way do all men in their mid 30s onwards just look away because these young women are "children". If they're children, how come they have a woman's physique, are naturally sexual beings and with the capacity to bear children themselves?
That's not to say I think the relationship is great or anything, but no way is the man flawed for fancying her. The problems with such a relationship I think lie in the generation gap - they're miles apart, and at times in their lives where they're just not going to be compatible. Also, she has a lot of growing up to do and while this may feel right to her now, unlikely it will in five years' time etc. But the sex thing: while there's the potential of him just using her (doubt it though - as I said, too much of a risk), he also might genuinely love her. We don't know.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

A indicator of this is porn. Virtually all guys wach it. Aside from niche markets the girls are 18-22 for the most successful sites.

I thought some of those were older though and impersonating 18 to 22-year-olds?

Anyhoo, why the insatiable need for fathers to protect daughters (when they don't want such protection) and not sons? Bit old-skool and... possessive no?

cojomo2

sensibleken wrote: »

a better revenge would be to put a tiny amount of hot water in his sugar bowl so it all blends together into one lump. I hate that!:mad:

On a more serious note, he could have made her wear one of these:
http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ksat7w4VBD1qzam53o1_400.jpg

Ouch.

sensibleken

cojomo2 wrote: »

On a more serious note, he could have made her wear one of these:
http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ksat7w4VBD1qzam53o1_400.jpg

Ouch.

yowza! that reminds me of that film teeth.

or he could have started doinking the 57 year olds daughter

Chairman Meow

Hide ya kids, hide ya wife, hide ya husband, cause they castratin' errbody out here

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/man-castrates-pet-after-it-tries-to-mate-with-pedigree-dog-2459424.html

Demonique

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Banging a 17 year old kid.

A LEGAL 17 year old kid

sollar wrote: »

Whats the age of consent in germany? if its 17 then the father will be looking at a very long sentence as no law was broken by the 57 yr old.

14

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

If it were my kid, it would be.

Such a pity that the law doesn't feel the same way...

Bottle_of_Smoke

Dudess wrote: »

I thought some of those were older though and impersonating 18 to 22-year-olds?

That's very possible and if anything backs up my point - would indicate porn users are after 18-22 year olds.

Anyhoo, why the insatiable need for fathers to protect daughters (when they don't want such protection) and not sons? Bit old-skool and... possessive no?

Its a genetics thing. Daughter gets pregnant to a loser she's giving up significant bodily and financial resources looking after a child with 50% loser genes.

Son gets some loser 30year old pregnant he can still have more kids with better quality females. All he's lost is an ejaculation, well in pre-court order maintenance times when we evolved anyway!

vibe666

Dudess wrote: »

Anyhoo, why the insatiable need for fathers to protect daughters (when they don't want such protection) and not sons? Bit old-skool and... possessive no?

i think its just a natural thing for a man to want to protect any young woman from *that* sort of attention, even more so for a father.

at the end of the day i think it comes down to whether you are the sort of man who's first instinct would be to protect a young impressionable girl simply because he knows what is the right thing to do or to be the sort of person who would abuse a situation where she's looking up to you as a father figure and use it to take advantage of her.

Dudess

vibe666 wrote: »

i think its just a natural thing for a man to want to protect any young woman from *that* sort of attention, even more so for a father.

at the end of the day i think it comes down to whether you are the sort of man who's first instinct would be to protect a young impressionable girl simply because he knows what is the right thing to do or to be the sort of person who would abuse a situation where she's looking up to you as a father figure and use it to take advantage of her.

Or whether you'd leave her make her own decisions. If the man was sleazing on his daughter and harassing her, it would have been only right for him to intervene, but when it was consensual: her life, her decision, her mistake - it's what life's about. He would have been right to have words with her - advising her of the mistake she's making, of how she'll regret it etc, but after that, up to her. A friend of mine was involved with a man in his early to mid 30s when she was 18 (she had a child by him) and she's now 28 and wondering what the hell she was thinking, and also harbours anger towards him for making advances in the first place. But she fully accepts too that she had a role to play in it also, and it did feel right at the time.

prinz

Dudess wrote: »

No? I love the way it's either that or castration - no in-between. I would understand the father taking him aside and saying firmly "She's too young, keep the hell away". I'd imagine a 57-year-old man isn't going to get involved with a 17-year-old girl and all the hassle that comes with it though, without really good cause.

+1 on all of this. It's not unnatural or perverted to have an attraction to or a sexual interest in a girl of that age. Most people just have the cop on* (*might not be the best way to put it) to know that it would be inappropriate basically in a lot of cases.

I'm only mid twenties but even now if the situation arose I would not be inclined to act on it, had an experience a few years ago too where I met a beautiful girl and assumed her older than she actually was, there was definitely a physical attraction on my part but I used my head instead of something else and was able to distance myself from that situation. It just wouldn't be right, the girl should be having fun with people her own age group etc.

On another note this is something not uncommon, I remember seeing a documentary a few months back about a teenage girl in the UK (IIRC she was 17 too) getting into a relationship with a neighbour who was the father of her best friend at the time, and the two went to Gretna Green to elope. I was impressed by her tbh. She really expressed herself well and maturely and it was obvious from what she said that the relationship with her own parents was dysfunctional prior to her getting involved with the much older man, and then when she was involved with the neighbour suddenly her parents became all concerned etc. Could well be a similar case in Germany. That girl could have been seeking an affection/protection from a man who provided it when her own family possibly didn't.

Anyway the case of the girl in the above documentary was presented as something taboo and shocking, and a couple of days later on the same station was a show about Peter Stringfellow and his young wife who have an age gap bigger than the one involved in this case and it was presented as if nothing was out of the ordinary, quite the opposite, more a celebration of how 'lucky' etc he was to have such a beautiful young wife, despite the fact that he has a daughter almost twice the age of his wife. One law for the 'celebs' another for the plebs?

Dudess wrote: »

Anyhoo, why the insatiable need for fathers to protect daughters (when they don't want such protection) and not sons? Bit old-skool and... possessive no?

I don't know if it's all that cut and dried. If anyone did anything to me or my brothers you'd have my da to deal with.:pac:

Pace2008

I’d weep for humanity if I thought those supporting the psychopath that carried out the act were sincere, but in reality I’m sure most people are just cock-sizing with their e-peers over who’s the hardest/most “devoted" parent out there.

I, for one, am not impressed.