I have had enough of Phillip sodding Schofield and his apologist attitude towards Jimmy Savile

[BupcakesAndHaunting]

Last week, it was saying how sorry he felt for JS's family to the VICTIMS of JS fgs, basically saying that he knew the layout of the dressing rooms at the BBC and he can't imagine that happening and no-one seeing and now, just, he said "But that's what television and radio was like in those days"

Errr, no Phil. Rape/molestation has ALWAYS been wrong, you daft twat. Yes, they were sexist times but there is a world of difference between sexual assaults on underage girls and sexist banter/inequality in the workplace.

And you have young daughters IIRC, Phillip. Shame on you.

BUT Sparkling, at least she has been brave enough to speak out and admit her failings. She could have just kept her mouth shut and say she knew nothing. But she hasn't. She knows she will now come under fire and she has, but at least she has been brave enough to take on that responsibility.

And yes MaryZed, I see what you mean now.

I think it shows where the Childline concept came from. These things were happening, in seemingly plain sight. I remember Childline being launched. It was a huge deal.

Yes it could be Chickens. I don't know what to think about anything or anyone on the TV any more.

Has the JLC verdict been announced yet? he's someone else who has made me .

The thing with JS is that he deliberately picked vulnerable girls to abuse. Girls in care etc, so he knew that if they spoke out, they wouldn't be believedbecause of their background.

Like any abuser, he was very cunning and clever about it. He knew exactly what he was doing and that it was wrong. How anyone can dismiss this as a bit of sexism typical of the era is beyond the realms of my comprehension.

Esther Rantzen read what she says. It's quite a good article.

Thanks Rhubarb I will have a read.

I don't think people on this thread are dismissing it Buppy. I'm certainly not.

But the reason he got away with it then was because of the sexism of the era.

I'm not saying that, Buppers. I'm saying it was easier for him to operate within a culture of inherent sexism. He could muddy the waters, or others willingly did it for him. The sexism prevalent at the time helped abusers and rapists live in plain sight

I don't think the inherent sexism helped him cover it up - I think it was far more sinister than that.

No, no, no, I meant that Schofers is dismissing it as sexism of the era, not anyone on this thread. Should have clarified.

Do you, Shirl? In what way?

never liked him when I was young, always got his hands on someone, creepy.
Note he was Gary Glitters mate.

And I agree with Shirls.

This wasn't a bit of Benny Hill bum-slapping.

Ah, got you Buppers. Yes, I see your point.

Oh, ok, I (thankfully) haven't seen Philip Schofield.

Shirley, I think there probably was a ring of them, who did and knew a lot more than others. But I wonder did everyone know it was like that, or did most people just look at them in a "pretty disgusting, but leave them to it" way, just as nowadays celebrities get away with drugs and prostitution and other appalling behaviour, for example.

Sort of one of those vices that is ignored because they are famous, without anyone really thinking about who is harmed by it.

Again, I'm not excusing it in any way.

He was a nasty bastard - I deffo think he had some criminal contacts
Lots of friends in weirdly high places - WHY were prince charles and Diana his friends? Why? That's so weird, plus THATCHER.

Masons, I'm telling you there's definitely masons shit going on.

And I think that he was probably part of a paedo ring. A ring that included some high level people.

Lots and LOTS of people knew that JS was abusing young girls.

I think that nobody could do anything, people clearly tried to report him to the police but nothing ever stuck - you've got to wonder why.

"Sort of one of those vices that is ignored because they are famous, without anyone really thinking about who is harmed by it."

You only have to look as recently as the Roman Polanski case to see this type of thing at play. His peers rushing to defend him, Kate fucking Winslet being one of them. Very concerning cince she has a daughter. Him raping a child is just seen as a funny little foible of being an artiste. If RP was your local weirdo who lives in the flat above Costcutter, he'd be hounded with torches and picthforks but because RP is considered to be some great director, it's perfectly fine.

I also believe that JS supplied children to other people in the industry. Mainly from care homes. He deffo had underworld connections and this made him untouchable, the creepy, sad old shit.

And to every idiot defending him and whining on about trial by media: tough shit. The mental old cunt evaded trial by jury when he was alive because every time someone tried to speak up about him, they got silenced. So he would hardly be in a position to moan about "a fair trial" now.

The Roman Polanski stuff is just appalling.

Well, a lot of the stuff I've read this week has just made me want to scream really. When I look back and think all that "wild child" old shite that they used to write in the papers about girls "gone bad" and shit. It's so fucking depressing.

And things might have changed, but they haven't really changed that much have they? Lots and lots of people still think that sort of shit.

My boss is only one of them.

Victim blaming. Its shitty shitty shitty.

Very shitty, Shirls.

Still, it's heartening to see that the people who've been defending JS and Schofield's rape apologist remarks on FB/Twatter etc seem a bit dense.

Yes, actually, I think that's clarified something that I've found difficult to put into words.

It doesn't matter, at all, whether they (some of them or all of them or none of them or the occasional one of them) were willing, for whatever reason (fame, or money, or treatment, or to keep their parents happy or any reason) they were still victims of a society that thought people in power using people with no power to boost their own ends (fame, acclamation, money, sexual gratification, whatever).

I think that's why I got so cross about the teacher/teenager threads - it doesn't matter one bit whether she was willing, or thought her teacher was God. It was and is still morally wrong. Thankfully now more people are accepting it's wrong.

Sorry, that's a bit of a convoluted clarification .

Someone up there said Mandy Smith was willing.

It's irrelevant, it was still wrong.

i was talkign to my mum about Roman Polanski and that i struggle as i like the film Chinatown and she said well he has had a terrible life and what happened to his wife

yes i know he had a terrible childhood but reminded her that her uncle was in a concentration camp too and also his liking for young girls started before his wife was murdered her reply oh well that is how some men are and some girl girls can easily pass as beign in their 20's wtf

i really despair of my mums opinions at times but at the same time she has been conditioned to think this way :( :(