A senior official with the Dutch Olympic committee has insisted that a convicted child rapist in its beach volleyball team is not a paedophile, in an email seen by the Guardian.
A concerned British man who has lived in the Netherlands for more than a decade, wrote to the Dutch Olympic committee and called the inclusion of Steven van de Velde in the team “a stain on the Dutch national side”. In a reply the Dutch Olympic committee spokesperson wrote: “Steven is NOT a peadophile [sic]; you really don’t think that de Dutch NOC would send someone to Paris who IS a real risk? No, he isn’t a risk.”
There has been mounting public anger at the presence of the beach volleyball player Van de Velde, who was convicted of raping a 12-year-old British girl in 2016. Earlier this week the International Olympic Committee faced calls for an investigation into how a convicted child rapist has been allowed to compete at Paris 2024. The IOC has said the selection of athletes for the Games was the responsibility of individual committees.
There has been mounting public anger at the presence of the beach volleyball player Van de Velde, who was convicted of raping a 12-year-old British girl in 2016. Earlier this week the International Olympic Committee faced calls for an investigation into how a convicted child rapist has been allowed to compete at Paris 2024. The IOC has said the selection of athletes for the Games was the responsibility of individual committees.
The world has going immensely nuts;
- Genocide seems okay by most of the presidents.
- Calling for justice is a hate crime and gets you arrested.
- Racism and Fascism on the rise.
- Raping a 12 year old person seems to be okay, doesn’t get you labeled as a pedophile.
- Calling out that Zionism is in fact bad gets you the “antisemitic” name.
- Quoting Hitler seems to be okay
- Saying that you want to erase and nuke a whole group/race seems to be okay.
I’m seriously worried for the future.
All of those things happened in the past, too. Probably even more than now.
I think the difference, now, is that it gets called out a lot more. In the past, it happened quietly and people went along or pretended to not notice. Now, people are calling it out and the shitty people have to openly defend it.
With regard to this specific issue, you don’t even have to go looking for cases of young women being discouraged from reporting rape and sexual assault allegations against promising young athletes, because “think how you could hurt his future prospects” – examples are so plentiful that you can’t help but find them if you spend any time reviewing sports news. It’s really only been in the last decade or so that anybody has seriously pushed back against the idea that Johnny Sportsball’s ability to score points for the local team is more important than the safety and bodily autonomy of women.
You mean like the rapist Brock Allen Turner?
Yeah, definitely like the rapist Brock Allen Turner.
Are you guys talking about the rapist who now goes by Allen Turner to avoid his reputation as the rapist Brock Turner?
I think I got an Allen Turner with a desk I bought from Ikea… Should I throw it out? The desk too?
Naw, that’s an Allen wrench. They’re useful and contribute to our society, unlike Brock Allen Turner, the rapist.
It’s definitely a double edged sword though. The hatred/bad actors are more visible through the broader lens brought on by social media, but also those who would not have found support or like minded people now have echo chambers with others they can join
History comes in waves. I fear for the next cycle.
Up is down, right is wrong.
fascism in a nutshell.
Let’s briefly set aside the fact that she was 12.
He was convicted of raping another person… period. That alone should disqualify him from representing his country at the Olympics.
Now back to your regular scheduled world wide publicity for Steven van de Velde, who repeatedly raped a 12 year old girl.
Yea, wtf is this shit? He’s a convicted rapist. The end.
But apparently not a pedophile. Not sure how that works, I’m also unclear on why it’s even relevant.
If he’d murdered someone would that be better or worse?
They just want to clarify that he’s not selective, he’d also rape adult women if given the opportunity.
The Dutch wikipedia explains that according to research, 25% to 50% acts because of a sexual preference for minors.
The others only act because they see an easy opportunity to have sex, or worse, want to exploit them.
I guess that’s what he bases his statement on?
Just a bunch of downplaying stuff with definitions and nonsense talk in my opinion.
Well actually, If you set aside her age it wouldn’t be rape at all, since it’s statutory rape. She technically consented and did things herself. But of course since she’s a child she can’t consent, she was manipulated by someone much older.
My point is her age is very important and should definitely not be set aside.
She technically consented
He got her drunk… Not only she was too young to consent, he made her drunk this invalidating any chance for valid consent even if she was much older.
They talked for a long time through messaging before hand and talked about having sex. Either way, she couldn’t consent she was just a child. Disgusting.
Nothing you are saying mitigates this in any way. She was 12. None of the shit leading up to it should have happened either. If anything that makes it worse.
While controversial, comment OPs point is a response to taking age out of the equation. All they are saying is that you shouldn’t do that. They’re not saying “It’s not rape,” or that he “isn’t a rapist.” Which… You seem to be agreeing with.
Well actually, If you set aside her age it wouldn’t be rape at all, since it’s statutory rape.
If adults talked about having sex, got drunk, and had sex, I don’t think people would generally consider it rape. That one of the people involved was 12 is what makes it absolutely rape and utterly disgusting.
Yeah exactly?
Presumably did his time, but you have to let criminals who have completed their sentence rejoin society.
A child rapist is another story
He was convicted in 2016, thats a pretty short sentence even for adult rape imo.
Hey, he got her drunk first. It’s not like he did it for free!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_van_de_Velde
Under a treaty between the Netherlands and UK, Van de Velde was transferred to the Netherlands to serve his sentence. The sentence was at that time adjusted in line with Dutch law, and the charge of rape was substituted for that of fornication.[11] After serving a year of his original four year sentence, he was released from prison.[8]
So basically the Dutch think it’s ok for a 19 year old to get a 12 year old drunk and rape her.
The victim would eventually go on to self-harm and once overdosed.
Some people are saying it ok because it was consensual, this doesn’t make it sound very consensual to me.
Wtf.
Consensual? Kids cannot consent. Kids are confused, curious hormone bombs who are easily manipulated and tend to put a lot of trust in adults who sound like they know what they’re doing. That’s the entire point of why we place that responsibility on the adults, and not the kids who don’t know what the fuck they’re doing.
“Some people are saying…”
Who Tyler… Who are you talking about here?
You can’t have consensual sex with a 12 year old.
Further down in this thread. https://lemmy.ca/post/25818425/10643476
Also https://www.gbnews.com/sport/dutch-olympic-committee-defend-steven-van-de-velde-rape
De Telegraaf newspaper played down the conviction, insisting that “they had consensual sex” and that “sex with a 12-year-old girl is labelled as rape” in Britain, while in the Netherlands “punishment in this area is much milder”.
I agree with you.
That comment isn’t saying it was consensual; it’s saying her age is what made it nonconsensual, so you can’t just ignore her age.
So basically the Dutch think it’s ok for a 19 year old to get a 12 year old drunk and rape her.
No, he was put in prison for it. You can criticise the length of the sentence if you want, but phra as ING it like they let him off Scott free is misleading.
Generally I believe in rehab but this case is seriously WTF. The dude’s lack of remorse is even bigger WTF. No one should be defending this monster.
Is everyone here talking about Steven Van de Velde the child rapist and peadophile? I heard he only served 13 months for repeated raping a child who he encouraged to get the morning after pill. She self harms herself now due to the guilt. Is it that Steven Van de Velde, the child rapist you are talking about?
I believe we are indeed talking about Steven van de Velde, convicted child rapist and paedophile.
Oh, thanks for clarifying, I thought we were talking about Brock The Rapist Turner for a second.
Pedophile or not, it doesn’t matter. He’s still a child rapist.
Being a rapist doesn’t even need a qualifier, you’re a piece of shit regardless.
Van de Velde, who is now 29, was sentenced to four years in prison in 2016 after pleading guilty to raping the girl in Milton Keynes. He had flown to England to meet her in 2014 with full knowledge of her age, having met her on Facebook. He served 12 months in a British prison, before being transferred to his home country where he was released after a further month.
This does sound just a tiny bit pedoey.
Yeah. It would be extremely questionable but still a little believable if the situation was “we met at a club that was supposed to be 21 and up and I thought she just looked young.” The reality is he traveled to another country to rape someone he knew was a child.
I’m sorry, but in what world does this not make him a pedophile?
He went to a location to have sex with a 12-year old. There are loads of people in ass-pounding prison right now for those exact acts as pedos.
He’s a pedo and a rapist. This is some asinine Brock Turner level nonsense. The Dutch should be ashamed to have even accepted him back home let alone send him to the Olympics.
Most men who commit these crimes aren’t sexually attracted to children/adolescents. It’s the power trip behind it and the feeling of control. Unfortunately, they end up targeting children because they are so vulnerable.
Pedophilia is rather rare and can be treated easily but society and the media have done so much damage that people who are truly pedophiles are afraid to seek help.
Brock Allen Turner and this guy are sociopaths. Entitled, narcissistic shits who think they can have or do whatever they want.
Unrelated to the main post but your comment brings up a point I think is important for society to understand. “pedophiles are afraid to seek help.” Pedophilia is a mental disorder and doesn’t inherently mean someone is a criminal, or ever will become one. But because it is such a violent and life destroying term to be labeled as a pedo those who have this mental disorder and are struggling to not offend will never seek the mental help they desperately need, this in turn leads to children being harmed.
Everyone is responsible for their actions, and pedophiles who rape or hurt kids are also responsible for their actions, but society as a whole contributes to more children being harmed by the way we represent and treat the mental disorder.
Interesting. Surprising you’d rape someone you’re not sexually attracted to. Quite sick in any case.
Definitely sick. The main point is that they really don’t care about the identity of their victims - just that they can satisfy their own desires. This guy would probably just as likely rape a passed out 50-something woman if he thought he could get away with it.
People do that indeed, unfortunately.
Yeah, in what world is he not a pedophile (don’t @ me about ephebophilia)? I thought the rub would be that he was 14 months older than her or something. He was 19 and traveled to another country to have sex with a preteen.
Well his Wikipedia page is the stuff of horror
In August 2014 van de Velde, then 19 years old, raped a 12-year-old girl he had met on Facebook who lived in Milton Keynes, England. He travelled to her home and, when her mother was out, gave her alcohol and then raped her several times at her home as well as near Furzton Lake which was nearby. The victim would eventually go on to self-harm and once overdosed. Van de Velde returned to the Netherlands after the rape, although he was eventually extradited to the United Kingdom and arrested in January 2016
After his release in 2017, van de Velde complained about “all the nonsense” reporting on his crime in the media, claiming that the term pedophile did not apply to him, without expanding further. At the same time he stated not yet having read any of the reporting he was criticizing. The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) condemned his comments at the time, stating that his “lack of remorse and self-pity is breathtaking”.
Okay, WHEW. I was getting worried that NL was going to let a pedophile rapist represent their country but it turns out they are merely letting a rapist of 12 year olds represent their country which, as we all know, is way better.
Don’t worry, as they say he is “not a risk”. I mean i was not thinking of an Olympic athlete raping children at the olympics before that statement.
He raped a 12 year old. So yes he is. Put him in the registry.
He is on the UK Sex Offenders’ registry.
Steven van de Velde has somehow achieved Matt Gaetz / DonOld Trump scot-free immunity status
Well, he bumps an inflated ball just so well while standing in sand.
Somehow, I think the more important part is the child rape conviction. If the Dutch Olympic Committee would rather Steven van de Velde be known as a convicted child rapist rather then a paedophile, then I think the Guardian could accommodate that.
Van de Velde has consistently remained transparent about the case which he refers to as the most significant misstep of his life.
Raping a 12 year-old child is a misstep, people; relax! Yesterday I accidentally stepped in some dog poo; we’re exactly the same!!!
This dude has no place in the Olympics. The Dutch standing behind him is disgraceful.
I actually wholeheartedly believe in reintegration of convicted criminals in society. I also, maybe even more wholeheartedly, believe that pedophiles need to be open about it so that they can get the help to cope with their urges, and we should not be judgemental about it and stigmatize them ahead of time - the majority of SA offenders who attack minors are not pedophiles. You won’t prevent a pedophile from assaulting a minor by yelling at him for his preferences alone.
Now, that being said, fuck this guy. A misstep? If this happened in 2016 he should still be serving his sentence and definitely not be back on the Olympic team.
Ok, I looked it up: it happened in 2014, so he was 20 then. The age of consent in the Netherlands is surprisingly high (16), so you cannot even claim due diligence or anything. (I am from Germany and over here it is 14, and I have known a couple of 14-18+ relationships, and I could have seen a case where a German 18 year old guy has sexual relations with a British 15 year old and gets in trouble because of this.) He was sentenced to 4 years and served 1. One year for raping a 12 year old girl when he was 20. Wtf? The judges should be ashamed. And as for the Olympic team, shame on them too. This guy should not be representing your country.
Dunno if I’d call 16 “surprisingly high”, here in America, at least, it’s 18. To the extent anyone thinks we should change it (it’s not a common point of discussion, except that there’s legal inconsistency between ages of consent for sex, smoking, drinking, driving, owning firearms, etc.), they think it should be 21. We also have Romeo and Juliet laws, which protect relationships between minors and people of very close ages (such as between 17 yrs and 18 yrs) from the same level of punishment as an adult assaulting a minor.
It’s 14 in Germany? Yuck.
The age of consent in America is not 18 everywhere. It is set by each state and ranges from 16-18. From Wikipedia:
While the unrestricted age of consent is between 16 and 18 in all U.S. states, the laws have widely varied across the country in the past. In 1880, the ages of consent were set at 10 or 12 in most states, with the exception of Delaware where it was 7.[104] The ages of consent were raised across the U.S. during the late 19th century and the early 20th century.[105][106] By 1920, 26 states had an age of consent at 16, 21 states had an age of consent at 18, and one state (Georgia) had an age of consent at 14.[104] Small adjustments to these laws occurred after 1920. The last two states to raise their age of general consent from under 16 to 16 or higher were Georgia, which raised the age of consent from 14 to 16 in 1995,[107] and Hawaii, which changed it from 14 to 16 in 2001.[108]
Why shouldn’t it be 14. With 14 you’re old enough to stand trial so you’re old enough to decide who you want to fuck. There’s staggered protections, though:
- No exploitation of lack of sense of sexual self-determination of under 16yolds if the perpetrator is over 21. Over 16 that sense is presumed to be present, and under 21yolds aren’t themselves considered mature enough to know what they’re doing. Also from 18-21 either juvenile or adult criminal law may apply, depends on the defendant.
- No sex against money or money-valued things (prostitution, sugar daddying) until 18, also no sex with persons in a position of authority, trust, care, etc (teacher, boss, whatnot). Also, no porn.
- No recruitment into prostitution under 21years old (side note that’s where a good chunk of the “human trafficking” statistic in Germany comes from. I’m not saying the law is bad all I’m saying we shouldn’t confuse chaining women to radiators with driving through the Romanian countryside asking gals whether they want to make lots of money).
Technically 13/14 relationships are illegal, but courts apply Radbruch’s formula to throw those cases out.
You’re old enough to stand trial
Generally, you don’t get charged as an adult until you’re 18 in America, so, not applicable.
I’m having difficulty parsing this first dotted point… Here, we don’t generally prosecute minors who have relationships with each other, as while the law (and culture) does discourage that, it’s primarily there to protect minors from sexual exploration by adults; hence our “Romeo and Juliet” laws, which protect relationships between minors and adults of similar age (such as for people born within 2 years of each other, but this varies by state).
The rest of this seems nonsensical to me, even America’s laws around adulthood (16, 18, 21) are more clear-cut. I think there’s a very fundamental difference in how law is conceptualized here, so I can’t really understand how or why you would have a law saying 14 years is old enough for sex, but 18 for porn, but 21 for prostitution, as a premise.
Romeo and Juliet laws do exist for many states, but not for all states, and the adoption of these laws is relatively recent. For instance Connecticut and Indiana only passed them in 2007.
The rest of this seems nonsensical to me, even America’s laws around adulthood (16, 18, 21) are more clear-cut.
No, they’re not, ohmygod :D
You have an actual federal government, but yet most of the States have different and sometimes conflicting laws.
The EU doesn’t have a central government, as it’s composed of sovereign nations (US states are not sovereign), and we still try to standardise as much legislation and regulation as possible.
so I can’t really understand how or why you would have a law saying 14 years is old enough for sex, but 18 for porn, but 21 for prostitution, as a premise.
How is it legal for literal children to have firearms? How is a 16-year old old enough to drive a car, but not to have a beer or sex? How is an 18-year old old enough to determine whether they want to literally risk their lives in war, but aren’t old enough to have a single beer?
It’s like your dating system; it’s all over the place.
Don’t talk about nonsense, my American friend.
I think there’s a difference in average maturity between US teenagers and European teenagers. I moved to the states when I was 20 and was shocked about how childish some of my new peers seemed. And I remember also being completely surprised I couldn’t even lift my dad’s case of beer into his trunk (he’s a wheelchair user). The cashier flipped out when I picked it up.
Generally, you don’t get charged as an adult until you’re 18 in America, so, not applicable.
Being charged as a minor is still getting charged. The offences you stand trial for are the same, it’s the sentencing that differs. So if it was illegal to have sex with a 14yold, and then two 14yolds were having sex, we’d have to put them both on trial for sexual abuse of the other because they’re both criminally mature. Under 14yolds cannot be tried.
so I can’t really understand how or why you would have a law saying 14 years is old enough for sex, but 18 for porn, but 21 for prostitution, as a premise.
Because having sex and earning money with sex are two very different kinds of things. Kids are also old enough to buy shovels and dig holes doesn’t mean we let them work in the mines. They can have and earn money (within reasonable parameters, think doing paper rounds or working a trade in the context of learning a trade) and spend it, they cannot take on debt or future obligations (like a mobile contract which you can’t cancel on short notice and such).
Oh, and maybe this is worth pointing out in contrast to the US: We actually have sex ed and none of that abstinence only BS which obviously doesn’t work, look at your teen pregnancy rates.
I wholeheartedly agree about abstinence-only education being an absolute failure of a policy, though I should also point out that it’s a state policy, and states outside of the deep-south generally have at least basic sex-ed, and some states are fairly comprehensive.
Funny enough, when living in Tennessee, it was the class teaching the course, because the teacher was unable to tell us about condoms, how to use them, or where to discretely get them for free. She didn’t stop up us, I think because she wanted the class to know, but wasn’t allowed to teach us proper sex-ed by law.
I do also think there’s a meaningful difference between juvenile criminal law and adult criminal law, in that we treat children’s ability to make informed decisions differently than that of adults’.
in that we treat children’s ability to make informed decisions differently than that of adults’.
14yolds can make informed decisions the question is whether they bother to do so, not whether they have the capacity. The main difference in Germany is a) specialised judges and b) sentences and sentencing institutions which capitalise on the fact that youth are still very malleable. While ordinary prison guards are social workers and adults can be absolutely bone-headed and set in their ways, correctional youth institutions have an army of pedagogues and psychologists running circles around the kids, forming them.
It’s 14 in Germany? Yuck.
Why tough. It’s not like you are a child mentally by age 17 years 11 months 29 days and then BOOM birthday happens and your mind becomes mature all of the sudden.
We assume that kids grow to adults in their teenage years. And we grant them our trust and support them to make decisions for themselves, more and more so.
To me, trying to criminalize sex for teenagers has about the same effect as outlawing abortion. It will still happen, it will just be much less safe.
I want my daughter to be able to come to me about questions and if she decides she’s ready to engage on sexual acts, and be able to do it at home where she’s safe and comfortable and not in a car or outside or a public toilet. I don’t want her to risk getting an STI because she is afraid of buying condoms or asking questions. Her feeling that she is “committing a crime” will not make her safe.
I also want to point out: rape, incest etc are obviously still illegal. And let’s be clear here - sexual assault in minors is awful, but/because it is assault. There is explicitly no consent there. These cases very often happen by grown ass adults that the children know - family members or close family friends. I doubt that a 14 year old will willingly agree to have sex with her dad or uncle - no matter whether this is legal or illegal.
It’s 14 in Germany but apparently parental consent is needed, otherwise it’s 16.
I think this comment has gotten the most responses out of any I’ve made in the time I’ve been on this platform. It’s also the comment with the most negative reaction.
I’m sorry, I understand there are significant cultural differences between Europe and America, but my conscience demands that I dig in my heels with this one: The age of consent must be at least 18 (with much lighter penalties for minors, and exceptions for near-age relationships, the aforementioned "Romeo & Juliet Laws), if not a little higher, as high as 21. I do agree that American law is distressingly inconsistent, and there are some states (notably southern/Republican-controlled states) where the age of consent and marriage is disgustingly low. I comdemn them as well.
My foot is down. 18. No lower. In fact, for every negative reply from some European defending this morally repugnant practice, I’m adding another year!
Technically he was 19. Also under Dutch law the term rape would imply the use of force, which was either not the case or not considered proven hence why the sentence ended up being lowered.
Still awful. Just trying to get the fact straight so people can judge for themselves.
That’s what I assumed. Probably the 12 year old “agreed” to everything.
I’ll be frank here, I remember being a teen in Germany. And let me tell you these were some horny times for some classmates. But at no point, also not looking back, would I have said any of these girls or boys who were sexually active at 14, 13 or even 12, have done so out of pressure or against their will. And judging from what I know of them today, all of them are in secure, healthy relationships and live happy, successful, and fulfilling lives. I’ll also point out that we have sex ed from early on (I remember in elementary), so at the age of consent everyone of us has put a condom on a banana in class at least once. Everyone knows where babies come from, we learn how cycles work, what different kinds of contraceptives there are. Also, just because the age of consent is 14 doesn’t mean you are required to lose your virginity at or by age 14.
Now, you still have to draw the line somewhere. I personally don’t think it should be 18 because it’s just unrealistic to assume that teenagers won’t have sex. Or that they will only have sex with other teenagers. “Gap laws” seem sensible to me. But that’s just my opinion, and it is very influenced by the open culture and a societal distinction between kids and youngsters.
And in this case, he is from a country where the age of consent was set to 16. In Britain it is also 16. So even if I can somehow imagine that it was “mutual”, 19 and 12 is in no way even close to legal in neither country. I don’t really know how this case has made it to court. As I said, I know quite a bunch of people who had sex before the age of consent, but they usually kept that, well, out of the courtroom.
He was sentenced to 4 years and served 1
Any details on the why? I wasn’t keeping an eye on the issue. Seems oddly light
That seems to be a mistranslation. I’m not excusing anything, but the word he used in Dutch is more serious than just a mistake or a misstep. I’m not sure how to translate it, but it’s not a euphemism.
A “misstep” happens once. You learn from it, and avoid doing it again. He did it 3 times. He wenr to bed, woke up, and said “lets do it again”. Thats not a “misstep” anymore.
Yesterday I accidentally stepped in some dog poo; we’re exactly the same!!!
Classic poopiphile behavior.
This dude has no place in the Olympics
The Olympics has nothing to do with this.
Either this guy participates in society or he doesnt and remains locked up.
Are they talking about the pedophile Steven Van De Velde? The pedophile that likes having sex with children Steven Van De Velde? I think that guy might be a pedophile.
gotta love how the terfs defending trans women being excluded from the olympics are still saying that a guy who sa’ed a 12 year old girl is just misunderstood. maybe it’s not actually about protecting children.
Maybe I live in a nicer part of the internet but I have not seen anyone come close to supporting this man.
Meanwhile a female equestrian was banned for hitting a horse.
Maybe she should’ve fucked it, that would be fine it seems? 🤣
Let’s not compare that, I’m happy she was banned. I know you don’t want to say it was ok, but the comparison could be used to pardon her behaviour.
I suspect if it was a man hitting the horse, it would have been brushed away as “part of the sport”.
deleted by creator
I mean different countries different people making the decision.
cruelty to animals have no place in 21st century and she should have been banned - for her, that is her punishment.
for him, some would argue that he already went through his punishment. he is probably still piece of shit, i don’t know the details of the case.
People like you do not understand how to compare stuff.
Alongside the rest of the comments…imagine being an elite-level volleyball player, being told that you’re going to represent your country, and then being asked to partner up with a nonce.
