The thick of it - Savile joke

[wavingwhilstdrowning]

I just got round to reading an addition of Popbitch from 14/10. Always nice to see just how many ways and times that the BBC protected him. This will have happened in 2005ish I guess, 6 years before he died.

Basement cracks

@Ionlydomassiveones

I think people forget what life was like in the 70s and early 80s. Child abuse was simply not acknowledged as such. The culture was to down play it as not that big a deal, ‘there, there’, don’t ruin a famous man’s reputation at any cost, (or priest, or scout leader or any ‘pillar of the community’). Children were still very much chattels to be seen and not heard.

We are still having to write policies to protect children to this day because we’ve been conditioned to protect the patriarchy above all else.

People didn’t report because there was nothing to report to. It was institutionally and culturally sanctioned. Just like all the other egregious, morally reprehensible shit that went on in the 70s - open racism, sexism, elitism etc.

So true.

As a young teenager I was in the difficult position of having to politely accept a lift from a very senior police officer who was indeed a pillar of the community. Once in the car the dirty bastard lunged at me making his intentions quite clear. I told my mother what had happened and she laughed it off, didn’t want to know. I realised no one would protect me so I had to be “rude” and refuse lifts from him again. Luckily I was “rude” enough to see him off.

@thinkingaboutLangCleg

When you type Jimmy Saville into Google this comes up. Not a single word about how awful he was. Just praise . Even now. — That's the way Google works - it just shows the first few sentences of the link. You do actually have to read the article.

That’s appalling. Lots of people will glance at what they think is a summary instead of ploughing through the whole article. But it’s not a summary, just a very out-of-date introduction. Very badly presented, and totally misleading.

It should start with something like “Disgraced BBC presenter JS raised millions for charities and was rewarded with a knighthood while sexually abusing numerous children. Though widely suspected, his crimes were not revealed until after his death.”

Yes, things were so different - why aren't the horrified and disgusted chasing up those who turned a blind eye to the Rotherham grooming gangs - at least that is in our time.

Society has changed so much since then.

I think much of the problem was the money raising he did for charities. I don't think it was a common thing for people in the news to gift money or do fund raising - - Children in Need started in 1980.

And he was one of so many dirty old men who got away with it because they could.

Sorry, quoted the wrong post

I think talk of some BBC conspiracy/ cover up fails to get to the heart of the issue.

Journalists did try to run stories accusing Savile of attacking women quite a few times, but editors were worried about being sued.

The newspaper has to prove the story is true and so it relies on its source. As so many of the women Savile preyed on were from troubled backgrounds, they’d be ‘unreliable witnesses’. Even though they were telling the truth, it would be their word against his.

This was the 80’s - women struggle to be believed nowadays fgs! This was a time when judges were old, rich men who grew up in the 40’s/50’s. Their views of women - even ones of their own class- would be dubious at best.

This isn’t the BBC. This is everyone in society ( and that includes all of us). We live in a society that hates women.

“Ionlydomassiveones
People didn’t report because there was nothing to report to. It was institutionally and culturally sanctioned. Just like all the other egregious, morally reprehensible shit that went on in the 70s - open racism, sexism, elitism etc.“

I think this is right.
And I know that there were people
who were not so evidently depraved as Jimmy Saville, who slept with thirteen year olds (when they were much much older themselves) without giving it a second thought. It seemed part of life at the time.

Eg rape but it was not thought of as being rape. It was thought of as being seduction.

But not to mislead, most men would have known it was wrong and not done that themselves. I don’t think they’d have reported it though.

I thought he was a creep, but not in my wildest dreams did I ever imagine the extent of what he did. I assume a lot of people felt the same.

Plus the normalisation of many of the behaviours, as others have said.

Even back in 2005 this was way before Me Too. I remember talking online even about sexual harassment being routine and extremely common and men just didn't believe me or thought it was me drawing attention to myself or being exceptionally pretty or precocious when I was younger.

So things have changed post Saville's death and post things like Me Too and other campaigns, which is very recent indeed.