[Zippy]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Wrong on both counts.

There was no legal age for consent for homosexual sex during Wildes time. Homosexuality was illegal. Incidentally since the introduction of The Offences Against the Persons Act of 1861, males under the age of 14 were deemed to have the same protection in law as females.


As for the age of consent for Jonathon Kings crime's. It had been lowered to 16 a few months before he went on trial for the offences, however at the time of the offences cited and for which he was charged and prosecuted the age of consent for homosexual men was 18. There is no statute of limitations on sexual offences.

well obviously I know about there being no gay age of consent back then because Ive mentioned it in prior posts.

I was just stating the only available age of consent. As Ive said before(Im having to repeat a lot) if there had been a homosexual age of consent back then it would have been almost certainly higher than 16 going by what it was later introduced as.

The boys in the King case were 14-16. Yet he has been branded a paedo by the media. Which makes my point about modern day use of the word paedophile.

Anyways Ive already said all I have to say. I addressed your point about the witnesses called in Wildes court case. You seem to assume that Queensbury knew absolutely everything about Wilde's sex life and had access to every boy he'd ever had sexual contact with. That he could just go find every rent boy and get them to be a witness in court. Highly unlikely! Truth is, a lot of what we know about Wilde has surfaced in literature released since his death. Queensbury didnt have access to all this back then so he would have only had limited information. I doubt Wilde would have flaunted his encounters with the younger boys. We are talking about an underground world here back then.

Like I said, you conclude what you like about him. But nothing you say will change my opinion and Im not interested in changing anybody elses.