Where is Matt Lucas?

Tbh what people have to start to accept when it comes to 'celebs' is that they all know who the abusers are. They know. The bosses know. The companies know.

These things are kept quiet as long as possible to avoid damage to the companies. (Often the bbc).

When things get too bad they chuck one of them under the bus then carry on protecting the rest.

The entire industry is a cesspit and they don't speak up because either theyve got their own secrets they dont want exposed or they are prioritising their own career over exposing abuse.

That doesn't make it ok!

It wouldn’t make any difference what that particular lady wore. She went to his house to offer sex and put herself in danger.

BTW, I am female.

I haven't suggested it does

But might explain why in your words he presents like an 'odd uncle'?

ML has problems of his own he probably doesn't want highlighted. There was a male model on tiktok claiming ML had treated him poorly but ML got a restraining order on him and he fled the country. He claims ML's legal team were getting his posts / accounts removed and had to keep making new ones. Given ML's company and the general behaviour of men with fame and money I'm inclined to believe there is something in these claims. I notice ML was vocal about his autism diagnosis not long after this which seems to be a regular go-to for famous men behaving badly (my husband is autistic so I'm very aware of how unhelpful that is for the autistic community) .

...and none of which is remotely relevant to alleged sexual assault in this specific case.

Getting a bit of second hand embarrassment at these celebs trying to defend themselves against having simply known someone who was a bad seed. It's getting to witch hunt territory. Where are the tv producers/execs who enabled if not encouraged this behaviour, why aren't they accountable? they were't friends they had a duty not to employ these characters and give them access to the public.

Doesn't make what ok?

I thought they usually fall when they stop making as much money - or it gets to expensive to hide it all.

I have heard some media voices commenting on this described protecting the talent - the one making the money that pays everyone elses wages. There's an inhererent conflict there but in many cases they should do better managing it.

I saw Matt Lucas in a Les Mis documnetary and as bake off presenter - didn't like the combiation of presentors for show - but he came across as kind and sweet - but he an actor and knew there were cameras there.

PR wise surely keeping his head ddown trying to put as much clear blue water between him and DW till scandel dies down is surely likely what he being told to do.

I'm so torn about this because yes, obviously loads of people must have known about DW's behaviour in the 2000s and 2010s but all of the stuff now about how people working with him should all have "spoken up" - but spoken up to who? The police say that so far there haven't been any criminal allegations, so what do we want people to do about it if it's not actually a crime so the police can't be involved? Being gross and weird isn't in itself a crime?

Obviously this is very different from the Russell Brand case where there were, we now know, serious crimes taking place that he seems to have been shielded from the consequences of until now, when thankfully justice is being done.

But what exactly are you supposed to do if someone you work with is a creep? Who is the person responsible for doing anything about it? A PP mentioned taxi drivers etc - what, are they supposed to risk their jobs by suddenly taking against a client? And I mean, in DW's case, he was OPENLY a horrible creep ON STAGE AND ON TV and millions of people, clearly, thought it was funny and entertaining because he got mega ratings. So we all knew about it - so are we all complicit? I don't know what to think about this but it's all pretty sickening.

And PP are saying producers etc should be held accountable - what would that look like? I genuinely don't know what the mechanism would be for this. Publicly shaming them in a newspaper, never allowing them to work in TV again, or just making them apologise? This is why some people say it's a witch hunt, it's easy to get frothed up without knowing what we actually want to happen, how things actually need to change

TV execs didn't have to employ these people, they have far more power than drivers, runners etc who I agree aren't in a position to do anything. They turned a blind eye because of money and ratings like someone else said. I find the hypocrisy of Channel 4 particularly nauseating as they employed RB for years on multiple programs. Their hunt for him is politically motivated in my opinion with no moral intent at all (before you come for me I'm not defending him or disputing the outcome).

Of course he knew. Speaking out would have destroyed a massive income source though let’s face it.

I think he distanced himself years ago

if i were ML, i would stay very quiet at this stage

You do realise females can be misogynists too?

TV execs didn't have to employ these people, they have far more power than drivers, runners etc who I agree aren't in a position to do anything.

This.

I can see filming sets full of performers who will play up to audience of crew which are also busy places could be extremely diffcult places to manage. But if they are reported issues why are TV execs using them still - though open rumours could be harder to act on.

The publishing house of DW surely had decent chance of not tolerating the behavior not expecting staff manage the risk - yet they were very late in letting him go.

I can't recall that any of the victims went to his house to offer sex.

Did you even watch the ITV documentary?

Who are you talking about?

Yes

To be fair, as his publishers, he was unlikely to be in their office more than once a year or less.

And they set up systems to protect their young women staff when he was in the building.

Isn't that the very problem.

The expectation that putting up with sexual harrisment while doing your job is fine because it's only once or twice a year.

While the opposite cause of action making it very clear it's not tolerated behavior and had repercussions could have stop it ever happening again.

Insead it only it's only a few times a year - just stay together - he doesn't really mean it - he's the talent making the cash so shut up and out up.Then when it slowly drips out everyone like what can you do - everyone knew.

How the fuck is going to someone's house "offering themselves" ?

I think the names being thrown around saying they must have known etc. I dont disagree but its all of us who need to question what we see.

A few days ago I was at an airport and saw a man literally shouting in the face of his partner. She was just looking at him. It was clear she was used to him kicking off. I did ask her whether she was OK. Everyone else was passing by and pretending not to see.

She did nod and I do wonder if I could have done anything more.

But teenagers are naive - as they should be able to be, to an extent, because they are children learning about the world. Many of us learned through experience that when some men say they want to have a drink or chat alone, that’s not what they actually mean. Nowadays we teach kids about grooming and safety but that wasn’t always the case. Plus, vulnerable girls can’t see the red flags that girls who haven’t been neglected or abused can. Then there is the fact that someone can do something before you have a chance to say no. Or they are in a position of power and threaten that you will end their career, you won’t be believed, they will lie about you etc. It is so much more nuanced than just not offering yourself up (not mentioning the fact that there shouldn’t be abusers and nonces to offer yourself up to in the first place)

Fucking hell, the rape apologists and dick panderers on this thread.🙄 If you dont want to read women's posts on the epidemic of MVAWG, don't open the thread.

Women won't wheesht.😡