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

"Out of interest, would not "unproven" really be the same as guilty in a majority of peoples' eyes?"

Yes.

I'd just like to say, to counter the viewpoint:
'after all this time....'

Many accusations of sexual assault were made, either at the time or in the intervening years, and those in power (parents, teachers, Police) either ignored or rubbished them.

People are not 'suddenly popping up / jumping on the bandwagon'.
Many have been reporting their stories for some time and been ignored or silenced.

dozie, that 'acceptable fallout' is, basically, how people justify a return to the death penalty!

We have to do better than that. Well, more accurately perhaps, we have to strive to do better than just throwing our arms up and saying 'ah well, tis for the greater good that some people get hurt'.

Fair enough, however, the play mentioned in the dm link DOES exist.

It does. If written and published today, Stephen Fry would have been hounded out of town. I can't imagine it being performed. It pretty much romanticises child abuse, from the viewpoint of the adult abuser.

It's a bit like a Lolita play, except I think you can read Lolita as an attempt by a writer to expose an abuser's self-justifications. He wrote it when he was a lot younger, of course, and I think he perhaps might agree on the flawed outlook he had then. I hope so. Because I went, "hmm, what the hell, Stephen!" as a teenager.

firstchoice that's a very good point, and I think this is why some people have spoken out against Yewtree. They feel that so many people in power either ignored, disregarded or, at the worst, covered up allegations previously, that for fear of being accused of not taking things seriously any more, the police and CPS have perhaps gone overboard in some areas.

Whether that's true or not, I couldn't say, but I think that's the gist of their argument. And there have clearly been instances where people were clearly talking rubbish and could have been proved to have been doing so rather quickly, but instead the Met pounced first and asked questions later. The Neil and Christine Hamilton case being one of those and that's over 10 years ago now.

There are definitely particular issues with gay men (of which Fry and Gambaccini are both) in terms of these historical investigations. In the past homosexual behaviour of any kind was illegal and/or illicit, so I think there was a blurring of the line between consenting adults doing what society said they shouldn't, and non-consenting children.

We have to do better than that. Well, more accurately perhaps, we have to strive to do better than just throwing our arms up and saying 'ah well, tis for the greater good that some people get hurt

Yes, Nomama, in most situations I wouldn't say this but deep down suspect that many of these men did do wrong, it just isn't poss to prove it.

Mind you if accusations keep being made for years to come I might start to wonder if people are jumping on a bandwagon and looking to destroy reputations for other reasons, but right now, these things are just coming to light for the first time or for the first time since the 70s.

I think the issues Fry refers to are two separate ones really.
The issue of a public figure being arrested and villified when they haven't been convicted of a crime is the first issue.
The second is the conviction rate of those arrested. If only 50 per cent are convicted, then 50 per cent are not. It is unlikely this amount of people are lying or chasing money. There is a poor conviction rate for rape. Perhaps the same is the case for child abuse. It isn't wrong to raise the point that some of those people are innocent and have been through an ordeal, but I don't think Fry is addressing the complexities in his rant.
Someone mentioned the Mail could be makng it up about the play. The play is also mentioned in this Metro article.

metro.co.uk/2002/08/07/latin-play-by-stephen-fry-475943/

Here is a quote from the article,
'Penned when Fry was a public school stripling, it’s a toast to love and life and an honest – if misguided – effort to justify the sexual relationship between a 26-year-old teacher and a teenage boy.'

A thirteen-year-old boy, wasn't it?

Yes 13 year old boy, the word teenager makes me think 15 , 16 -NOT that that is any better...but its a young child of 13.

I like Stephen Fry less and less as the years go by: it's a shame, because I still think in 'A Bit of Fry and Laurie' he was genius. His second autobiography I found insufferably vain, snobbish and self-aggrandizing.

His first autobiog contains some passing reflections on this subject, where he discusses corporal punishment in schools and says that if he were to find out now that a master who beat him derived some sexual pleasure from it, he would think 'ah, poor man' or something, and not hold it against him in retrospect. That does suggest a murkier approach to child sex abuse than many of us would feel comfortable with, IMO.

That's the problem, dozie. You have no legal basis for your feelings so you become part of the problem, the societal blackguarding of people who have either not been charged or found not guilty.

It is really uncomfortable but we, as lay people, have to sort of disconnect once a legal decision has been made. Not saying that there should be no campaigns after a miscarriage of justice, but society relies on the law being upheld by common consent - it doesn't work otherwise.

AgaPanthers, you may need to rephrase some of that I think I got what you meant, but I also think you may get a little bit flamed as it could be 'interpreted'. I hope not, as I agree with you! There has been a blurring of lines, a societal concatenation of the two behaviours and this continues to cause problems and inflame strong feelings.

'A toast to love and life'

This gives me the rage: if a straight man had written this play about a straight teacher and a female pupil, there would have been hell to play.

Yet because he is a an upper-middle class, gay -yes, gay men are the new saints in some people's eyes- intellectual who is revered as brainy (Julie Burchill put it best: 'stupid person's idea of a clever person') he gets plaudits.

I'm NOT saying Fry is into underage boys himself , but, I think the national treasure mask is slipping and he is being revealed as a vain, shallow man.

not sure that this is the world's biggest problem, but one thing strikes me, he won't be called an ugly pig on line or accused of looking for attention etc..

Scandinavian - but even that 50% figure isn't accurate, because of the 18 arrests, not even 50% have gone to court!

Do you really think someone with bipolar disorder is leading a privileged life?

well he is leading a more privileged life than someone with bi polar without the background and money , isnt he?

I am sorry but he mixes in the sort of circles which all this filth is coming out about, he wrote a play about a 26 master and a 13 year old child.....he will have heard whiffs of all this, probably common knowledge amongst his privalised set.

Disclaimer: when I say 'a murkier view' I do not mean to suggest that Fry has done anything of this kind, that his friends have, or anything speculative at all.

I mean that he seems to hold views on what one might or might not resent or be angry about, or consider wrong which are not necessarily acceptable to most. If he thinks that he would shrug it off, I do wonder what he thinks others ought to be able to shrug off.

He was very young when he wrote it but from the Metro article it seems he was happy for it to be performed in 2002 which seems odd.

That play was not a toast to love and life. If I had known nothing of the author, the best possible interpretation I would have been able to put on the play would have been "unhappy very young man explores his attitudes to relationships, sexuality and puberty". The teacher, Dominic, wasn't presented in a wholly flattering manner.

I know what you mean Original Steaming.

I like Stephen Fry, but I also think that he should be more careful about 'taking his thoughts for a walk'. Some of his thoughts (like undisciplined dogs that bark, mess everywhere and chew up everything in sight) need to be kept on a tight leash when out in public.

I didn't see this so can't really comment. He is a bit odd, though. Probably why he's so popular.

I just wish he'd shut up about not taking meds for his bipolar. He thinks it would dampen down his personality. Not helpful for other bipolar people to hear...

I suspect he realises at some level that his life has been a waste of talent and potential.

I also suspect- and I am fully prepared to be shot down in flames here- that he is conscious of not being born to the poshness he embraces- he does not come from an old English family, and in the circles he moved in as a young man he must have felt a bit of an outsider. Which is why the autobiographies seem so self serving and snobbish.