Were the 1970s the perviest decade?

Though just to add, the support for PIE came from homosexual rights groups as well and the age of consent for homosexual sex was 21 which was higher than heterosexual sex. That was unfair though why this became abolish the age of consent, goodness only knows.

But I do wonder how the distinct issues (campaigns related to homosexuality and young boys and sexualisation of young women) overlap. The latest disclosures relate to footballers (boys and young men). Child protection is both sexes. Also, it happens mostly in the family, where it is hardest to prove.

Thanks for the link Dadwashere. I knew about PIE, but was not going to mention it. I think they were on the boundaries of acceptability but yes, they did see it as an acceptable issue to campaign for. The whole argument was based on dissolving boundaries I think. With real consequences for children being abused and the abuse being minimised and rationalised.

The Paedophile Information Exchange was set up in 1974. I find it hard to understand how this was ever an acceptable issue to campaign on behalf of....

sp.oxfordjournals.org/content/20/1/137.full

I was a professional photographer back in the 70's. We (myself and other professionals I knew) found the work of Hamilton et al to be cringe-worthy, even when we were asked by clients to replicate it. Benny Hill was also horribly cringe-worthy, but it was also very popular.

Unfortunately its not unlike the problem of blaming journalists for pestering the royal family when people eagerly buy newspapers that 'reveal all'. Where enough varied choice exists it is consumers as a collective group that dictate what products are produced for their consumption. The 70's were a decade of a very immature attitude to sex and sexuality.

There was a subset of the free love sexual liberation 1970s generation which sought to dismantle barriers between adults and children when it came to sexual matters, yes. It wasn't just pervy, it was paedophilia.

I read about David Hamilton and I don't know enough to comment fully but I wonder if photos like that went out of fashion not only as a result of feminism and rising awareness of child abuse by the 1990s but also the spread of the internet. In other words, those so inclined could get images in other ways.

I also wonder if the overt sexualisation of young people today (and there is an awareness of least that this is happening, if not enough action to address it) actually functions to hide the fact that, as ever, most sexual predators are adult men in the child or young person's family circle.

I do see what you mean, OP.

I'm uncomfortable with the "Pervy" description as that seems almost normalising. Not sure what word would be better.

Lass, yours made me wonder how the current sex positive, Anne Summers, widespread porn and permatan/fake lash culture will appear in 20 years time

I don't know- I don't know what you are referring to.

Lass, yours made me wonder how the current sex positive, Anne Summers, widespread porn and permatan/fake lash culture will appear in 20 years time.

As an utter embarrassment I hope Devi. The 1970's liberated sex - for men that is. Capitalism re-packaged female sexual liberation and sold it back to us, in the process sexualising female children. The likes of Saville took full advantage of that sexual culture. In many ways its only got worse; there might not be the appalling televisual sexism that you got in the 70's, but 'shag bands' are sold to nine year olds and we have, in the online sex industry, created a playground for misogynist trolls and nonces. Young boys are growing up thinking girls are objects they are entitled to use. My daughter gets asked for anal by boys at her school. She's thirteen. Everything's going backwards

Interesting posts quencher and lass

Lass, yours made me wonder how the current sex positive, Anne Summers, widespread porn and permatan/fake lash culture will appear in 20 years time.

A child in the 70s is unlikely to have been a child of those who fought in the war. I was born in 1959, my parents were 10 when the war ended and 24 when I was born. I was a teenager in the 70s.

My take on the 70s were that the sexual revolution of the 60s really only affected a small, metropolitan /artistic/bohemian elite and only started to trickle down in the 70s but once it started old mores were sweeped away.

If you haven't lived through the 70s you may be unaware that things like Pan's People("here's one for the dads"), the Benny Hill show, Jim Davidson, Miss World being event television in the same way as Eurovision and David Hamilton were mainstream, although by the end of the 70s they were being challenged as sexist.

No one spoke up against porn except Mary Whitehouse and Lord Longford and they were ridiculed and laughed at (It didn't help that she was actually a horrible person). A very odd decade.

Op, to address your question, I think the 70 might not be the previest but the children of those who would not have said anything about what was wrong. The children of those who fought in the war. If bad things happened, (am assuming here), they expected people to soldier on and be strong. There was shame in opening up because it made you look weak. A lot of people took advantage of that.

I also believe that when people talk about the sexual revolution 60s+ and it's freedom. I don't think they just meant women's and men's freedom to do what they want without getting pregnant. Probably what they were talking about for some of them was the freedom to sexually abuse young children without shame and punishment. The freedom to sexually abuse young fans whose parents thought they were safe. The freedom to abuse young children in their care.

Sex being shameful act that people didn't talk about, I think might have been one of the issues. I would include, victim blaming and it's the attitude that needs to change. It's shameful that some people still victim blame.

I do believe that grand parents of those who grew in the seventies will not be as open in coming forward. That is almost a lost generation of abused young children. Most of them are dead. Some of them will not see the benefit of coming forward now. The seventies children there attackers are still out there, they have children now too and they have the means to voice their opinions on social media and lots of people will come forward to support them. They have a louder voice in bigger numbers. Lots of People are willing to listen.

David Hamilton was thought to be tasteful and artistic- a photographic equivalent of Victorian artists like Edward Poynter (see The Cave of the Storm Nymphs)

There have been a couple of cases of prosecutions and convictions of possession of child porn at the lowest level relating to his books and also Sally Man's.

His (and her) books were widely available, not "top shelf" material.

It was always obvious Hamilton was a sicko.

Tbh, I think it's as bad now as ever. At least back then it was just the odd perv with a camera, now there's literally hundreds of thousands of them operating freely online. Convictions for child abuse images have gone up by about 2000% in 20 years.