What do you think about Prince Andrew?

[theilltemperedclavecinist]

Sexual exploitation of women and girls used to be saucy (think Carry On movies, the Playboy Mansion or seaside postcards) and no-one wanted to think about the power imbalance apart from hairy feminists.

Now we know that Epstein was a sex trafficker, the media and the public think that every man who met him must have known about it and is therefore equally vile.

It's not as though misogyny has gone away though. Daily Mail articles about teen pregnancy for example attract highly rated comments about those slutty girls.

Why the discrepancy? Everyone seems to suffer the same kind of magical thinking - that every individual has perfect knowledge and perfect autonomy. The hard-of-thinking celebrity who gropes a pretty girl (or worse) and thinks its all good clean consensual fun? Definitely a p@#£do.The devious fourteen year-old, plotting her way to a cushy life on benefits? Definitely couldn't be a victim. Always think the worst of everyone.

Not sorry for Andrew, except insofar as he's a careless wielder of unconscious privilege who probably still doesn't get what he did wrong. But frustrated by the portrayal of misogyny as a parade of pantomime villains rather than the everyday menace that women all know about.

I agree.

Also, the “list” that everyone is mentioning is just the list from VG’s civil claim against GM in 2016. So just people VG knew about from her two years of being involved with JE. It’s not the full list of all involved.

Saucy was innuendo and double entendre amongst adults not flying to an island to meet your paedo pal to abuse young girls. Andrew knew what he was doing, so did many others. The paedo in the royal family has been talked about for years but Andrew enjoys diplomatic immunity and his staff are bound to confidentiality. Shame on all those around him that supported him. The Royal family could have cut his funding years ago but no, he was allowed to spend public money to fly to abuse girls. This shows us all how little girls and women matter compared to a rich, privileged royal male.

Who on earth 🌎 is Peter Ball then?🤔

100% this. I certainly doubt he was aware of any legal technicality that meant that despite being above the age of consent, she was "trafficked" due to moving across states.

He's clearly an absolute arsehole but as a rich, famous, royal man only in his 30s at the time, he would have had all kinds of women flinging themselves at him.

I think (at best) he's a selfish, arrogant, entitled prat with the IQ of a woodlouse, who fell for all the celebratory fawning and was too stupid to realise he was being used as part of their respectability cover story.

Whether he actually committed a crime, it hasn't been proven and I believe in innocent until proven guilty for everyone.

He is certainly a liability and has to accept he can NEVER be part of royal life again.

Meanwhile the general process of wealthy or famous men exploiting inexperienced and vulnerable young women ( and young men) for sex will continue because if they are over the age of majority and are persuaded to allow it, there is nothing in law to prevent it.

The answer is to raise girls (and boys) to value themselves far higher, and that starts much earlier with better education for parents which means it will take generations. I do think things are improving gradually in wider society. I hope the sex abuse rings in Rotherham etc can never be repeated. And sexual harassment which was rife in the workplace when I started work, is now much less, but there's a long way still to go.

I dont believe the press critised meghan and harry in a conspiracy with the royal family to take attention away from andrew. Why would charles let his son take the blame?

The press went overboard with the meghan coverage, but they would have been willing to critise andrew more if it wasnt such a libellous topic. Its difficult to critise andrew and not point the finger at other very powerful men who would be able to ruin careers and whole newpapers.

His interview with the BBC shows he wasnt guided by anyone with any sense high up at Buckingham palace.

This about covers it.

@cerisepanther73 he was a distinguished cleric who was renowned as a spiritual, leader of a monastic community, a Bishop from 1977 to 1993

So he would have seemed like a perfectly appropriate friend for someone interested in religion.

He resigned in ‘93 after being cautioned for sexual abuse. He was convicted in 20 17, I believe, for abuse of young men.

I don’t know a lot about his crimes, but the handling of the accusations and the response in CofE is a major part of current church safeguarding training. It was a shit show, frankly. We are all ashamed of it.

Quite @ZuttZeVootEeeVo

I dont believe the press critised meghan and harry in a conspiracy with the royal family to take attention away from andrew. Why would charles let his son take the blame?

I don’t either.

Unfortunately H&M ultimately gave the press enough ammunition for them to be targeted. Some of it was of course deeply unfair but I think they didn’t help themselves with their actions after stepping down.

PA is another thing all together.

The press went overboard with the meghan coverage, but they would have been willing to critise andrew more if it wasnt such a libellous topic. Its difficult to critise andrew and not point the finger at other very powerful men who would be able to ruin careers and whole newpapers.

I can’t help but feel sorry for his daughters. It is a gut wrenching day when you find out the man you idolised is not the perfect hero you thought he was. This is another level of horror. And although it is being reported, they are indeed being careful with how far they go.

And it will be the princely sum of bugger all to do with being reluctant to smear PA but with being reluctant to clart those with far more clout.

I haven't read the full thread so apologise if this has been said. I note people saying that times have changed - and indeed yes! But what I think is that people knew it was wrong to abuse their power to coerce young women barely out of childhood back in the 80s. Society didn't pick them up on it then. But wrong things comes back to find you. In the same way people now know that it is wrong to tell children lies about sex and lies about being born in the wrong body and lies about being able to change out of that. Also lies about gender. These things are wrong, those who perpetrated such will be called to task in time because it is wrong. Those who said nothing or were complicit will have been silent/complicit. People are being called out for no moral compass. It is what happens.

There were girls as young as 11 on that Island.

What have you got against Scotland?

I am confused by your (very well written) post. Is the premise that SA / grooming of young girls only hits the headlines if involves Red Top names?

If that was for me, then yes, though I was trying to find out what others thought without leading too much. Also, victim blaming, prioritising the narrative of the powerful, but then, when the powerful get caught, narrowing the story down to one about an individual evil person, rather than about systemic oppression.

The more I hear the more I want a revolution. Andrew and his sordid little secrets, Charles wanting to be a tampon.... can't stand the lot of them #notmyking and certainly #notmydukeofyork

I think Andrew should be given a break. He's fallen into witch hunt territory after settling with Virginia and being mothballed by the RF.

Now the American lawyers are after him again. Why wouldn't they? He coughed up a fortune for Guiffre without actually being found guilty of anything. Why wouldn't other girls try their luck? This pattern of events could be repeated endlessly without any evidence ever being presented. He is not the most likeable of men but American celebrities are not being pursued with the same zealousness. I think he is a fall guy in this.

And it’s probably worth noting that the money Andrew used to pay off this woman was ultimately from UK the tax payer .

There're reports of references to sex tapes of andrew, clinton and Richard bryson?

Andrew must have known this when he paid the women he has no recollection of having sex with? Maybe he was being blackmailed by Epstein for years.

You know the Royal Family are independently very wealthy?

Yeah - they don't pay income tax, then there's this little beauty you die intestate and here is nobody contesting then King Tampon gets it https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/nov/23/how-royal-estates-use-bona-vacantia-to-collect-money-from-dead-people-king-charles

"independent" of what? from their lines of work other than royalling?

If these men were being blackmailed then they are also victims of a crime- both Branson and PA may have been unaware of the age of consent in Florida, for example.
not that I can summon up any sympathy. Always best never to do anything you’d be embarrassed by.

Here.

Have the world's tiniest violin for middle aged men who can't grasp how it's horrid and entirely questionable even if the girls are over the local age of consent.

I have zero sympathy whatsoever.