Jump to content

Jimmy Savile And Other Paedophiles


GarethRDR

Recommended Posts

Villaguy; I'd seriously consider toning it down before someone who has been so unfortunate to be the victim of abuse reports you to the police. You keep referring to the fact that you've "also done worse" and if the police sees those comments and puts them in relation you'll probably have officers at your door pretty soon. For that matter I suggest anyone who knows about something as vile as rape or paedophilia goes straight to the police, it's something that cannot be tolerated and as fellow human beings we have a responsibility to protect those who are weaker and can't defend themselves.

 

Get some help.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its a thin line though isn't it. Although none of us agree with what villaguy has posted he's still only posting his opinions, Its not a crime as far as I know to have an opinion.

 

The line has definitely got thinner.

 

The debate has become impossible because failure to participate in the moral panic comes with a lot of risks.

 

The question I am curious about is whether an audience's response to the plight of the McMurphy (Jack Nicholson) character in One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest has changed in these post-Savile times?

 

In the film/book he is put in the mental institution because he (statuary) raped a 15 year-old girl.

 

Back in 1975 his punishment was considered harsh and the audience was sympathetic.

 

So now that attitudes have shifted, do we now think that McMurphy got what he deserved?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Savile did more than the statutory rape of a teenager, I don't think the comparison is relevant.

 

Villaguy was trying to claim he was actually a pretty good guy and his victims were just looking for 15mins of fame/money by coming forward.

 

I think people are right to challenge that type of victim blaming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Savile did more than the statutory rape of a teenager, I don't think the comparison is relevant.

 

 

 

Villaguy was trying to claim he was actually a pretty good guy and his victims were just looking for 15mins of fame/money by coming forward.

 

 

 

I think people are right to challenge that type of victim blaming.

 

I make no such comparison, I am just attempting to assess the shift in attitudes.

 

 

I can write out a long condemnation of sexual predators if you like but I assumed that my condemnation was taken as a given. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I can write out a long condemnation of sexual predators if you like but I assumed that my condemnation was taken as a given. 

 

 

 Why would you feel the need to do that?

 

You seem to have gotten an idea that people are under pressure to display their disgust at paedophilia when on a public forum? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LondonLax I think you've missed where MakemineVanilla is coming from. Ignoring Savile for a minute, no comparison was being made between him & McMurphy. The question was solely on whether today's audience would be as sympathetic towards Nicholson's character's plight as the audience was back in 1975. MakemineVanilla suggests it probably wouldn't be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I understood that point but it was the reason for asking it I found odd, in particular this false premise:

 

 

 The debate has become impossible because failure to participate in the moral panic comes with a lot of risks.

 

 

 

Edit: Just to expand on that a bit, if you think back to the case of the school teacher who ran away with his student to France last year, I read responses in the media from quite a few people who sympathised with the guy, even though he had taken advantage of his position of power.

 

I think the attitudes to that case are a better comparison to the attitudes to the character in One Flew Over. A lot of people thought the teachers sentance was quite harsh as well, even in these 'post Savile times'.

Edited by LondonLax
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are definitely risks associated with trying to look at something so emotive in an objective fashion. Almost as if by not being enraged about it you're somehow sympathetic towards it. Surely you've seen or been a part of that on or offline in the past. I've certainly seen it countless times on facebook with various different articles relating to many subjects. Where anything less than foaming-at-the-mouth condemnation is met by the mob with a curious accusatory tone. The risk is you could be labelled a sympathiser when nothing is further from the truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm disappointed the original posts were deleted, I think villaguy should be held accountable for his opinions whatever they may be. If you live by the sword...

On the other hand he's had a **** mare there.

I do want to know how wanting to shag a bird when you're a 12 year old hormonal lad is comparable to being raped by Jimmy Savile. I'm intrigued how you made that leap villaguy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I understood that point but it was the reason for asking it I found odd, in particular this false premise:

The debate has become impossible because failure to participate in the moral panic comes with a lot of risks.

Edit: Just to expand on that a bit, if you think back to the case of the school teacher who ran away with his student to France last year, I read responses in the media from quite a few people who sympathised with the guy, even though he had taken advantage of his position of power.

I think the attitudes to that case are a better comparison to the attitudes to the character in One Flew Over. A lot of people thought his sentance was quite harsh as well, even in these 'post Savile times'.

Indeed. I wouldn't say I sympathised, but I understood. See I know of two cases where a mature 15 year old girl has entered into a relationship with an older man and it has worked out long term. Of course the position of power thing is the kicker, it makes his actions impossible to condone. But I "get it" to a point.

That one, for me, is debateable however clear the outcome should be. But some things in life are so reprehensible that they should be beyond debate, certainly beyond defence. I would be seriously concerned about the mental state of anyone who could bring themselves to defend the actions of somebody like Savile, I certainly wouldn't want them around me or those that I care about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â