Dave Lee Travis

Utterly bloody arrogant and not a scrap of remorse at what he'd done. Completely agree he just doesn't see he has behaved disgracefully.

I understand there are men who are a bit too touchy feely for some women but who don't grope in a sexual way. They would be mortified if they were called sex pests but would stop the behaviour and feel sorry they made someone uncomfortable.

DLT doesn't fall into that categorically. He felt he was entitled by his famous status to treat women like objects for his sexual gratification. He was a serial sex pest. I used to like him but now loathe the arrogant detestable prat.

I absolutely agree with women sharing experiences. Not for the benefit of men, though.

I find the " Only by hearing from their mothers, wives and daughters are men going to realise how much of this goes on and how much it hurts" thing a bit problematic. Court cases should be tried on their evidence and aginst the laws that stood at the time of their committance. And people should be treated as fully human at all times. That stuff happens to their nearest and dearest shouldn't make these incidents a lightbulb moment, however personally distressing they are. They shouldn't happen to anyone's nearest and dearest. That the existence of such (in relation to those close to them) should influence an on-line commentator, a jury or a perpertrator is a bit disturbing to me.

Plus: I think the "not alone" thing is achieved by high profile cases - look at Vanessa Feltz telling her Rolf Harris story once she knew she was not alone, and many many less famous Savile victims coming forward too.

Elephants, the Everyday Sexism site is good for hearing stories repeated over and over.

I don't understand your point, really. The details of the event are what make it a sexual assault and the court needs to know them. Max Clifford forced someone to perform oral sex on him. How is it distracting that he's been found guilty for that?

I see where you're coming from, but, the kind of person who won't listen to the stories and women's everyday lived experience might sit up and take note if those women take it to court and a judge and jury listens to them.

The sad thing is that this IS women's common experience. Women experience this every day.

I think they should tell their stories and repeat them often. Only by hearing from their mothers, wives and daughters are men going to realise how much of this goes on and how much it hurts.

Only by hearing other people's stories are women going to truly understand it's not their fault, their not alone.

Only by hearing a DFs story and imagining some one laying a finger on my own DDs do I begin to understand (because I, somehow don't seem to attract this shit from men).

Yes, Stories should be told, repeatedly and loudly. Unfortunately sometimes I think concentrating on the minute detail of one story as you have to for a court case, distracts from the wider issue and drowns out women's common experience.

What crimes that are against the law now, but are glossed over by the police, could I commit tomorrow and sit tight for 20+ years until they became more publicly distasteful?

Sadly, it's still likely to be a crime against a more vulnerable person.

I don't think anyone on this board has forgotten any of that Elephants. The Rotherham clusterfuck amply demonstrates exactly what various agencies think of dispossessed young people.

None of this detracts from the experiences of women from 20, 30, 40 or more years ago. None of this makes it ok to tell women who were sexually assaulted that they shouldn't bring their cases, shouldn't tell their stories.

IT WAS AGAINST THE LAW THEN!!!

And yes, there is still a way to go. Somthing that still doesn't make sense to me. I don't see anyone treading lightly around my views.

Dont know if you've seen this. Fucking grim, says it all really

i totally agree elephants that it doesn't solve all the problems we still have. but i don't think it makes things worse, and i don't think it's a reason not to pursue the charges

Some of you are forgetting we still live in a country where golf clubs and the church are still voting to treat women as equal. Where the police still think a 14y girl doesn't deserve protection if she's 'not a nice MC girl'.

Far to much needs to change in the here and now, before historical cases make sense to many people.

That utter twat Kate Copstick was on Jeremy Vine the other day, passionately arguing how ridiculous it is to convict men like DLT, and that having your tits groped is nothing to get hot under the collar about.

She was also on the radio a few months ago when all the Savile stuff was current, saying that if a dirty old man groped her NINE YEAR OLD she wouldn't call the police.

Horrible woman.

But, but, but - if it was a crime then, why the "it was different then" cries? And why aren't the likes of Jeremy Vine reporters shutting down those claims in a flash? Why is equal air time given to "each side" when there is no equivalence. That is something that riles the hell out of me and why I can't listen to much that is on the radio and TV.

Why on earth would it make bosses fear recruiting female workers?! What does it have to take for the problem to be seen as something other than a female one? I'd rather there wasn't a generalised backlash at all, but if there's going to be one, lets not make women's employment potential take another blow.

the thing that was different was that women didn't feel able to object or report, despite the laws

i do wonder whether some of the women objecting to the historical reports and saying "it was different then" know that some of their closest male relatives behaved in that way and it's easier to excuse it on that basis than to face up to how their behaviour might have felt to the victim

So, the "it was different then" thing is meaningless?

I think that people who stick up for blokes like him can't think very much of men as a whole. It's not difficult to refrain from physically touching your co-workers. I manage it every day and I am surrounded by people I wouldn't chuck out of bed for eating Doritos.

I've always disliked DLT - he was an arrogant so-and-so throughout his career. Steve Coogan must have drawn from him for Alan Partridge.

i would have thought that hiring managers would be far more wary of hiring men who commit sexual assaults

Yup.

Aren't these men tried under laws that existed at the time of the offence?

(Not saying the groupie situation was all fine and dandy, to be clear)

Puffins, I think the downside of Yewtree as an umbrella phrase is that many have latched onto the "it was different in the old days" and think it's 16 year old groupies in the 70s who were willing to go down on 19 year old sexy celebs who have decided to call assault 40 years later to get some attention and maybe some money to glamourise their later years...

Those people are not reading the details of the cases. Here, it's clear there was no "groupie" interaction, a nearly 30 year age gap, a difference in power at work and a straight out assault.

I'd like to think if someone came on MN asking what to do about a senior visitor to work who assaulted her years ago in her first job, she'd be supported to report him if she felt able to do so.