to think Stephen Fry is a shit

[AgaPanthers]

Apparently he thinks Operation Yewtree is a sham and we need tougher laws against people making up sexual abuse allegations.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/stephen-fry-criticises-operation-yewtree-in-dinner-party-rant-calling-for-tougher-laws-to-deter-false-sex-abuse-allegations-9602686.html

I thought he was supposed to be intelligent? Surely he realises that

Don't be naive Nomama, the Mail have reported this because they hate the Labour party and Stephen Fry, and won't pass up an opportunity to report their "divisions" and fights and discredit them and their supporters in the run up to the General Election.

They don't give a fuck about people who have been falsely accused or victims of sexual abuse, they just want the Tories to be elected in 2015.

^^ this.

He is an intelligent man and he did have a point.

I think that if over 10 women who don't know each other say that someone sexually abused them and all describe a very similar modus operandi then the evidence is very strong. It is a shame that there hasn't been much publicity about the fact that the charges were dropped against Paul Gambaccini but that is the fault of the media not Operation Yewtree.

The fact that Rolf Harris, Max Clifford, Jimmy Saville and Stuart Hall managed to abuse children for decades without prosecution shows that the laws in this country against sex abusers aren't/haven't been tough enough. The last thing we need now is to have tougher laws to discourage people from making claims.

I noticed the other day that a child molesting vicar from my childhood has recently been prosecuted (and put in prison) for offences he committed in the 1990s. I know that these offences are just the tip of the iceberg because he was doing exactly the same thing in the late 70s early 80s in the village I lived in. I think that in the past children and their parents thought that they wouldn't be believed if they complained to the police about but because of Operation Yewtree people are now coming forward.

Fry was somewhat misrepresented in reports of the women liking sex issue. See www.pinknews.co.uk/2010/11/05/stephen-fry-returns-to-twitter-to-say-women-do-like-sex/

Have we got a transcript of what he actually said?

People like Roache, Davison etc would do better under a 'not proven' or 'not guilty' system because if they truly were 'not guilty' then the mud wouldn't stick. As it is, all we know is that maybe they are innocent of the crimes or maybe they are guilty but there isn't enough evidence to convict. Not ideal I agree.

"From his biography I seem to recall he stole the credit card of a friend he was staying with (correct me if I'm wrong). Pretty low if I'm right. Apologies if I'm wrong."

Yep. When he was 17. It was the culmination of a childhood full of stealing- he was expelled from a prep school for stealing. He has never made a secret of his mental health issues. Or of his character flaws.

This is relevant exactly how?

Hakluyt, no transcript, I don't think the gala was filmed. So just reports from people who were there!

I don't think any less of him for the conviction NoMama, nor does it make his opinion irrelevant. I find him irritating more often than not but I don't think he is a stupid man. I have enjoyed some of his programmes, the road trip across America, for example.

"Hakluyt, no transcript, I don't think the gala was filmed. So just reports from people who were there!"

Ah, hearsay then. Move on, people, nothing to see here.

The Independent isn't what it was; not that it was ever all that.

Stephen Fry says what he says. Sometimes I agree. Sometimes I don't. Mostly I have no opinion on his opinions. He's clever but he's not the oracle.

But to cut to the chase, I have the hots for the MP Jim Murphy the Labour MP Jim Murphy who's commented positively on Fry's announcements.

Can a Westminster or Glasgow insider tell me whether I'm wasting my time?

I had a bit of a thing for Frank Field too. You might detect a hankering for stern, asthetic grey-haired middle-aged blokes there.

Apparently I was wasting my time there too...

Whatever I understand that at the moment, Gambaccini still hasn't been charged or cleared. He's in limbo.

Just for interest, here are the stats surrounding Yewtree. Bill Roache, and Michael LeVell were not Yewtree.

Those arrested - 18.
Those told there will be no prosecution - 7.
Those awaiting trial - 3 (including Gary Glitter)
Those on bail and in limbo - 4 (including Gambaccini)
Those deceased - 1.
Those found guilty - 2 (Clifford and Harris).
Those cleared of some but awaiting retrial on other - 1 (Travis)

You may not Alis, but others might, and that is how I read the posts upthread... casting aspersions. There was no other reason to mention it.

Perhaps I have not read something you guys have, but this is what I took from the article.
-Fry suggested we have tougher laws to deter FALSE ALLEGATIONS
-He had a rant over Labour's treatment of Gambaccini (who, despite being a long running Labour supporter was not invited to a fundraising event despite not being yet charged with any offences) stating he should be treated as innocent until proven guilty.
I didn't see him criticise Yewtree or say people shouldn't be allowed to make claims of sexual abuse.
The audience were not happy with him because he criticised the Labour Party.

Absolutely, hotfuzzra.

That is what I read too. But the title of the OP gives a hint of the way this was going to go!

I don't know.
I don't think he said that women don't like sex. I think the reference comes from a character in a novel of his who banged on about women not being as obsessed by sex as men are.
But in one of his autobiographies he made comments about sexual preferences that I felt were a bit....well, made me feel a bit uncomfortable about his view of ppl's preferences. You know, a bit apologist.

I love Steven fry though.

I didn't see him criticise Yewtree or say people shouldn't be allowed to make claims of sexual abuse.

He reportedly complained that “fewer than half of the people held under the ongoing police investigation had been found guilty." That sounds like a criticism of Yewtree to me..

Although he didn't say that people shouldn't be allowed to make claims of sexual abuse he did call for tougher laws to discourage people from making claims (obviously he says false claims but we all know that such laws would discourage claims full stop)

His report of his conversation re "women hate sex"
"At some point we chatted about gay sexuality – well, you would wouldn't you, for a gay magazine? – and as part of that conversation I repeated the old canard about how men, unlike women, were cursed with their uniquely pressing and annoying libidos. Straight men I have known have often (of course mostly in a kind of bitter jest) said how much they envied gay people the simplicity of their erotic lifestyles (cottaging and cruising and so on) and I vamped for a while on that theme. I do not believe it as some kind of eternal gender truth, I was simply taking a thought for a walk, I was "playing gracefully with ideas" to repeat Oscar's great phrase, or at least attempting to do so. But the important thing to remember is that the subject was not straight female sexuality, but gay male sexuality. It's the only sexuality of which I have direct experience and how could I presume to speak of any other?
Much as you may wish to think me a compound of the most misogynistic, ignorant, sexist and antediluvian pig who ever trod the planet I can truly report that I know and love enough women to be quite assured of the fact that women do indeed enjoy sex. I would have to ignore evolution, precedent, personal experience and the empirical observation of vibrator sales and teenage pregnancies and all kinds of obvious and unavoidable facts in between to believe anything else."

From personal experience many false rape/sex assault complaints are not challenged or prosecuted, and the 'suspect' is simply released and told he is NFA and the 'victim' often told 'don't waste our time again'.
disclaimer: this is where the complainant admits they made it up in malice, or fear for the boyfriends finding out etc. I'm not saying this is a genuine 'victim' experience. God I hope not anyway.

People like Roache, Davison etc would do better under a 'not proven' or 'not guilty' system because if they truly were 'not guilty' then the mud wouldn't stick.

What a stunningly naïve view, Jodie. I hope you never get called for jury service and haven't ever been before.

As a standalone sentence, maybe. But even in the outraged reports, that is not stated in a vacuum!

Nor did he say, as reported, that the laws should be made tougher to prevent people from making false claims - that is a paraphrase too far. He seems to have said that people who make false claims should be prosecuted, we need stronger laws for that.

So, he didnt say the things which the OP has accused him of. He didnt make the comments about female sexuality which other posters accused him of. He has a criminal conviction which he has never denied.

What exactly is this thread really about?

Nor did he say, as reported, that the laws should be made tougher to prevent people from making false claims - that is a paraphrase too far.

Were you there?

Did you read what I posted? As reported - reported by the people who were supposedly upset by his rant. I did post that, really, I did. Twice!

Eh? I read what you posted. You said "Nor did he say, as reported, that the laws should be made tougher to prevent people from making false claims - that is a paraphrase too far.*

How do you know he didn't say that laws should be made tougher to prevent people from making false allegations if you weren't there? The newspapers are quoting guest(s) who were there.