Obit: RIP Sir Jimmy Savile of BBC [2011]

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 14 Oct 12 - 05:15 PM

"Adulation" was the word you used, Mr Carroll. Not "defence". Might 'do nicely' for you because you are a spineless equivocator; but till you put your specific 'adulatory' quote where your foolish fat gob is, it won't do for me.

~M~

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: greg stephens
Date: 14 Oct 12 - 05:16 PM

Say what you like about Sir Jimmy, he's a great promoter of discussion.

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Oct 12 - 05:38 PM

Dave the Gnome asks if Savile's Glitters and Co's victims were complicit in their own abuse' by wearing the wrong clothes, gushing over celebrities, inappropriate behaviour..."

NO I DID NOT.

I pointed out that certain people on this thread supported this philosophy. If you cannot be bothered to read even parts of the thread I linked then I will make it simple. I abhor the view that the victims of any such crime can be made, even partially, a scapegoat. Yet at least 2 of the people who are being very vociferous here suggested that the victims of rape can be held responsible for the actions of their attackers. There is no need for me to name the perpetrators. The sickening proof is in the thread.

Now, Eliza, go and look at the thread and see how wrong your assertion that I hold that view is. Apologies not required.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 14 Oct 12 - 06:26 PM

DtG is right in what he says. It is the "hand on your ha'penny" brigade who implied what Eliza accused him of.

Myer, Myer - you defend and praise Thatcher. If you can't live with being faced with it, don't do it. And you repeatedly seek to misrepresent those left of Thatcher and the ultra-right Camermoron and his further right backbenchers as "ultra-left".

For a man who made a living (allegedly) with words you are very cavalier about accuracy.

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 Oct 12 - 06:48 PM

""Savile and his ilk sum up the values of Thatcher's Britain pretty well""

A thoroughly inane statement Jim.

As has now become obvious, Savile had been conducting his nefarious activities for 21 years before Maggie Thatcher became prime minister.

In fact she became an MP a year after Savile became a Radio Luxembourg DJ.

Don T.

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 14 Oct 12 - 06:50 PM

Bollocks to Thatcher - she has nowt to do with this - far as I can see. This Saville bugger was up to no good through various administrations.

Lets agree to drop that bit.

What I'd like to say is that I don't envy anyone whose job it is to sort this lot out regarding Saville. When all that stuff came out about him abusing young disabled people - I just felt like clamping my hands over my ears, and terrorising young girls. I just wanted to stop hearing any more but its seems like its everywhere on every newscast - every newspaper is running stories. All horrible, in their detail.

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 Oct 12 - 06:57 PM

""Paedophiles in Prison and online claim the children 'love it' and 'ask for it', 'it' meaning being raped. This reminds me of those who say women who are raped 'ask for it'. All teachers for example know that young pupils can get a 'crush' on them. They take great care to discourage it and to distance themselves from the child's emotional state. I'm very angry about this attitude that any paedophile can help himself to whatever arrives in front of him.""

On a point which was raised in protest when I used the word "Paedophile", (evidence, not anecdote please) does anybody know whether any, and if so how many, of Savile's victims were prepubescent?

It was pointed out fairly forcefully that I would be wrong to suggest that sex with underage girls was automatically paedophilia.

Don T.

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 14 Oct 12 - 07:27 PM

92

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Jack Campin
Date: 14 Oct 12 - 08:48 PM

Thanks to Johnny J on another forum for this one:

Jimmy Savile's March to Lochaber Games

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 14 Oct 12 - 11:43 PM

"Myer, Myer - you"
.,,.
If you cannot have the courtesy to use my correct title, Mr Bridge, I have nothing further to say to you. You have not been invited to address me in that familiar, arrogant, discourteous fashion, and you have no sort of warrant to do so.

You are a yobbo & a boor. I do not debate with yobboes and boors.

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: GUEST,Bored with boors
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 12:21 AM

MtheGM, you are one of a small group of mudcat posters
who never fail to hijack and spam threads for your own petty personal squabbles.
You are all boring boors.

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 12:32 AM

Perhaps rather a boorish thing for a Guest to say of his hosts? If you don't like us, don't visit us but take your boredom elsewhere, Mr/Ms Bored... I don't expect any of would repine too bitterly at your absence.

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 02:14 AM

Well I'm a member and I'm sick to the back teeth of Carroll, Hertford, Bridge and the rest of the Usual Suspects Gang shitting up any thread they alight on with their sickening, childish name-calling and squabbling. For God's sake grow up, you morons, or (preferably) bugger off for ever.

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: GUEST,Alan Whittle
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 02:24 AM

perhaps we could do a cabaret spot - songs from the boor wars...

why does everybody call me bighead?
I'm a pink toothbrush, you're a homophobic bastard...no I'm not
Putting on the Ritz...?you pathetic upper class swine...!I'm not!
To be a Farmers Boy...murdering defenceless animals
The folks who live on the hill...have no right to describe that as folk music!
Camptown Racists sing this Song.   I'm not a racist,! Yes you are!

I wonder who would sing those numbers....

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 02:34 AM

As thread drift seems an occupational hazard on this subject...

Please forgive me.

Bridge. I just want to take you up on your stance of being proud to be on the left. You see, that troubles me. Shouldn't I know but it does.

It just goes to prove what you keep denying, that you are not capable of rational debate. You have a stance and judge everything by it. You should run for Archbishop of Canterbury. Christian welcome preconceived viewpoints, and they make decent cups of tea after their group indignation sessions on a Sunday.

Being proud of a fixed stance which any subject is then compared to does you no credit.

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 02:51 AM

Don't waste your time trying to reason with any of them, Ian. Their heads are firmly embedded in their own recta.

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 03:11 AM

"Time for it to be closed, methinks."
Not really B - the Thatcher connection was well established by those who pointed out the support that Savile gave her.
"Lets agree to drop that bit."
Agreed - you are right that we've chuntered on long enough though.
Savile was what he was, and that seems to be well on the way to being proven; he's dead an beyond punishment, but his victims are still around and need closure on what happened to them. Part of that closure has to be finding out who knew what, and why he was allowed to go on doing what he apparently did for so long unchecked.
Also, for me, it's worth looking what Savile and others were used for as part of the the dumbing down of our media. His rise to being one of the Beeb's blue eyed boys coincided with the ending of the Radio Ballads, the sacking of Charles Parker and the closure of the features department which gave us so many folk-based programmes.
Film and radio programme makers like Philip Donellan had to fight to have their films shown (his 'Gone For a Soldier' met with so much resistance that it was debated in Parliament) and many of them had to resort to showing their work privately. Eventually they disappeared from our screens and radios altogether, to be replaced by such reliable role models as Bernard Manning, Freddie Starr, Russell Brand, Jonathon Ross, Jim Davidson......
If the BBC and other bodies have deliberately covered up Savile's abuse in order to give us the pale shadow we have today, they have far more than abuse victims to answer to.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Rob Naylor
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 03:27 AM

JC: Savile and his ilk sum up the values of Thatcher's Britain pretty well

So are we to assume that Karl Marx sexually abusing his young house maid was an indication of *his* Thatcherite values?

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Rob Naylor
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 03:38 AM

Big Al: Bollocks to Thatcher - she has nowt to do with this - far as I can see. This Saville bugger was up to no good through various administrations.

Lets agree to drop that bit.

I agree: As little love as I have for the woman myself, it seems that there are people who tend to ascribe all the ills of the world to her, as if she's some kind of unique demon from the pits of hell who single-handedly caused the human race to fall from a state of near-perfection!

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 03:52 AM

I'd like to point out that I only came to the "Thatcher" debate on this thread after the apologists for her started. Ask Myer the meaning of "apologist". It's nothing to do with the current conventional meaning of "apology".

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 05:23 AM

"So are we to assume that Karl Marx sexually abusing his young house maid was an indication of *his* Thatcherite values?"
No - it was an indication of his abusing his maid - if that is what happened.
Savile turning out on Thatcher's campaign trail were an indication of his Thatcherite values - you apparently wish to continue on this theme - not me
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: selby
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 05:29 AM

According to some of todays papers another disc jockey has form, with uninvited sexual advances. What was going on at the BBC at this time.The BBC is listened to all around the world through its world service to get the TRUTH. The damage done by these self serving monsters to their victims and the BBC is immeasurable.
Keith

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 06:06 AM

As Lord Denning said in Roe -v- MoH [1954] one "must not look at the 1947 accident with 1954 spectacles". The standards that might have been expected in the late 60s and early 70s are not those of today and there are two distinctions to be drawn.

First - age, or rather sexual development. It has already been pointed out above that an 8 year old is a different person from a 15 year old, and even the law recognises this - Sections 5 to 8 deal with offences against teh under 13s (12 and downward) but SSn 9-15 13 to 15 and SSn 16 to 14 the limited range that relate to 16 to 18.

Second - coercion or its absence. You can't simply draw a realistic line between invited and uninvited sexual advances, as otherwise the first invitation is always an uninvited advance.

The 60s were the years of the great sexual revolution - they did not legitimate sex with under 13s, but, to be frank, sex with under 16s was commonplace (and the law of "abuse of position of trust" did not yet exist and still does not apply to rock stars or DJs with whom groupies want sex). Equally they did not legitimate coercion or assault.

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Musket
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 06:26 AM

Did you notice that?

Carroll has managed to slip in that Saville was responsible for the sacking of Charles Parker, the ending of the radio ballads and the dumbing down of folk on The BBC...

I'm well and truly fucking staggered... Mind you, let's wait and see if he can weave in Th*tcher's contribution to less folk music on The BBC.

For his information, the radio ballads were nothing to do with folk music. They were documentaries on working life. The music was no more (and no less) than a medium for expanding the image the interviews were portraying.



Careful Bridge.. Truth has no place when the nation is in a hand wringing session.

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: GUEST,Alan Whittle
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 06:26 AM

No the human race wasn't near perfection, but Thatch buggered up a lot of peoples lives.

I always thnk about carpet fitters somehow. Housing tends to be cheap in mining areas, and one compensation of a shit job is that miners used to be able to buy their families, (hey used to marry early) a very nice house, better tha most young married Londoners could dream of.

Then they needed carpet fitters and the like to make their homes look nice. After Thatch closed all the mines, broke up the families - the housing market collapsed - estate agents, solicitors, carpet fitters - they all started going broke and out of business. Twas not pretty. I appreciate most southerners didn't have a ringside seat - so they went on voting for her - by and large they were taken care of.

Sorry Jim , I still don' see the connection with Saville. John Wayne Gacy got photographed with every serving Preseident of the USA - it doesn't mean to say, they knew what was in his floorspace.

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: The Sandman
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 07:44 AM

Savile turning out on Thatcher's campaign trail were an indication of his Thatcherite values -,
I think that is a perfectly reasonable comment, that does not make Thatcher a sex abuset, furthermore JIM is not saying that.
I think jim is meaning the following, that Thatcher believed in a WORLD where people looked after number one and did not care about others,the survival of those that[are strongest or] starting off with the most money, she said that there was no such thing as society.
Jimmy Saville did not care about others,although his raising money for charity, may have been a way of getting rid of his guilt concerning his taste for sexual abuse.
But BOTH OF THEM along with Blair[ he supported the invasion of Iraq], were only concerned with power and themselves, AND promoting themselves, and appeared to have little concern about treating people with respect. Thatcher was not a sexual abuser, but she[imo] had little social conscience, a trait she shared with Saville .

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Musket
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 08:12 AM

Mining wasn't a shit job Alan. I was very happy as a miner. it was a career with, in my case, professional qualifications and satisfaction of doing a job that contributed to the wealth of the nation. Not sure we all married early either. Sometimes very difficult to read how you and people around you have been stereotyped over the years.

You carpet fitter bit is spot on mind. When I left the pit, one of the other industries I sold equipment to in my new role as a rep / engineer was refractory concrete, as there were many steel industry plants around Sheffield and Rotherham, and the refractory trade supplied them........

Careful, Saville was a miner. The only time I saw him in the flesh was when he came to our pit canteen to launch a union sponsored charity....... Good soldier Schweik seems to forget something when he mentions social conscience. The reason Saville is in the public frame when he is neither the first or the last well known person to be a suspected paedophile is precisely because of his well known social conscience. Not all his fund raining efforts gave him access to children, and from accounts, not all access resulted in abuse.

Still a nasty bastard...

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 09:34 AM

"Carroll has managed to slip in that Saville was responsible for the sacking of Charles Parker....."
No - I never said anything resembling such a stupid statement - your dishonesty does you no credit (either that, or your acute dyslexia is in need of urgent treatment.
I said "Savile and others were used as part of the the dumbing down of our media."
As far as I know Savile had no say in BBC policy, but those who did were replacing a pretty high quality service with a dumbed down one dominated by people like Savile, Dawson, Starr, Davidson et al.
Don't suppose it's any use to you (unless your local night school does literacy classes for beginners) but there's an excellent book on the BBC entitled Prospero and Ariel - the rise and fall of radio, a personal recollection, by D G Bridson.
"the radio ballads were nothing to do with folk music"
The Radio Ballads had everything to do with folk music - all of them included some traditional songs as well as newly composed songs made using traditional tunes and forms - go and have a quick re-listen and see if you can spot them second time round.
"Th*tcher's contribution to less folk music on The BBC"
Why should anybody try - the rejection of folk music by the Beeb was all their own work.
It's always an indication that your points are striking home when your opponents need to resort to distortion and open dishonest instead of straightforward argument - keep up the good work!
"Sorry Jim , I still don' see the connection with Saville"
Jack Campin's photos make the connection for me Al. It remains to be seen exactly how much them upstairs knew about the reported abuse and what they were doing, if anything, to prevent it.
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/multimedia/dynamic/00296/07sav_296940k.jpg
http://static9.imagecollect.com/preview/560/d9ecf90873ebc9a
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 10:34 AM

Savile, Dawson, Starr, Davidson

Tsk, tsk Jim - How can you lump Les in with the rest of that crew? Must have been a musical genius to play like this. :-)

Saville was a case on his own as this thread shows. Compared to Starr and Davidson, Dawson was a breath of fresh air. The only pity was he did that crap Blankety Blank show but I can forgive him that.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 10:41 AM

Sorry Dave - I Realised I'd made a mistake when I sent it - of course I meant that loveable racist misogynist Bernard Manning - will go and wash my mouth out
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Silas
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 10:52 AM

Oi! I knew Les Dawson very well, you cannot compare him to those other people!

Although he was famous for his MIL jokes, thats all they were - jokes.

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 10:54 AM

One of the most misinterpreted out-of-context remarks ever was her "No such thing as society"; which was not, however, as well-phrased as it might have been, leaving her vulnerable to the kind of misrepresentation and obloquy which followed, as she subsequently admitted."

Does that qualify as "adulation", I wonder, Jim? Oh dear me. Still waiting patiently for some examples of posts which you think are: but I won't hold my breath. You have, as I explicitly predicted, typically avoided that question and purported to be dealing with it by answering another one which nobody asked ~~~ your usual sort of MO in such situations, as I remarked before.

BTW, you keep saying my assumptions as to your political allegiances are mere guestimate. Same goes for you (+ old Richie Pons-Asinorum) re mine, for the matter of that. You are a proper old pot·&·kettler, did you know that?

~M~

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 11:27 AM

You should, Myer, consider your analogies more carefully. Think about the functions of the Pons Asinorum a moment. Horse, drink. Duck, quack.

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 12:38 PM

It's old Ponsy's own functions I am more concerned with ~~ for which Asinorum [or at least the genitive singular - Asini? ~~ forgotten most of my Lat Gram after all these years] seems a perfect label.

Can't address the rude pig directly, it will be noted. Too unmannerly a little twerp.

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Silas
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 12:44 PM

Pot/Kettle - never more appropriate.

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 01:40 PM

Eliza, just so that you know, and I'm sorry you've been dragged into this...

Dave put that thread on there to have a dig at me, as ever. I'm surprised no-one else mentioned it until you did, which must have been driving him more than a little nuts, for my goodness he so *wanted* to paint me, yet again, in the blackest light he can find.

If you read that thread, which has nothing to do with this thread, it was about whether women could ever be guilty of inviting rapists into their lives.

I said that I was extremely worried about how many young women dress these days, and behave, getting drunk as skunks, falling down legless, or into the back of taxis etc, even passing out completely, week in, week out..being overtly sexual to the point of the worst kind of lager lout behaviour, making lewd sexual comments to men etc...

I went on to say, as I recall, that if you behaved in a certain way, you were inviting trouble...and my goodness, but the heavens did open!

Today it is very popular to become aghast at this, for women have created a situation where they now feel that they can be as bloody irresponsible as they so choose whilst maintaining they have every right to lead a man on, to behave in the most outrageous manner without any risk of anything happening to them. They may well give out the message to a man that they are, to use a modern day expression, 'up for it', then change their mind at the last moment or cry 'rape' after, as has happened in some cases. YES, of COURSE they are at liberty, always, to change their minds, but at some point, the chances may well be that they are going to do this with a man who refuses to see it in that way and, having been taunted, played with and sexually aroused, 'loses it completely'....

And at that point Responsibility for their actions must come in, for even the most Stupid person can't truly believe that ALL women are safe from ALL men???

And yes, I know that women get raped who are dressed incredibly demurely, who do not invite any man to even look at them in a sexual manner, but I'm not talking about that kind of situation, but the one that is played out on our town and city streets every weekend these days. Down here in Torquay the churches have volunteers who go round picking the drunken women up off the streets, I kid you not, giving them blankets to keep them warm and who do their best to ensure these young women, who are completely out of it, get home safely.

This NEVER used to happen, EVER, in our towns and cities.

It will always be, ultimately, the man's fault, of course it will, BUT women need to get real, need to become far more responsible again, stop acting like hookers 'just because we can and we want to' and put some bloody intelligence and self-respect back in their heads, rather than constantly thinking it's their 'right' to tease a man as much as they want, or to get utterly plastered to the point where they can't even remember what they did, who they may have done it with, or even if they did it willingly or not.

WTF has happened to us, as a Species, that we think this is OK? It's NOT ok at all! It's shocking and it's deeply dangerous, for there will ALWAYS be predatory men out there just watching and waiting...so why the hell put yourself in such a stupid situation in the first place?

The vicious, violent and serial rapists will show no respect for any woman whatsoever and will always try to blame them, but sadly, the women who DO behave in such a way as I've mentioned above, give the rapists back-up for their sick words because some of them DO behave as if they're asking for it...

Trust me, I've travelled home on late trains before now and the behaviour from some young people takes my breath away and makes me shudder, for if *I* can see the Danger, WHY CAN'T THEY?

Women have totally lost the plot in my opinion, and are seen by many men these days as nothing more than something to have a quick shag with, not even a someone, just a something. I feel that many young women actually hate behaving/dressing this way, but get forced into it by a society that has become overtly sexual, to the point of almost 'bullying' women into behaving this way.

I spoke to someone a while back on the internet who commented on a blog I did called 'Bums, Boobs and Brains' and she said that she too was worried sick about what was going on, and, on going out with some friends, many of whom were dressed more for a porno movie than a night out, she asked them why they dressed and behaved this way, knocking back the drinks etc..Many of those women then admitted that actually, they didn't feel very happy about what they were doing...

It starts very early on in life with our young girls being surrounded by sex everywhere, from magazines, TV, CD lyrics, Pop Stars dressed in a way no decent hooker would even dream of, Soaps, which often have the most appalling storylines in...and of course, toys, such as The Bratz Dolls, which have been toned down a little recently, but were one a Paedophile's Dream, for the Bratz Dolls taught little girls very early on that they were on the planet merely to puff out their chests, wiggle their bums, pout their lips and dress in the most common, sexually 'inviting' and dangerous way possible to attract the Bratz Boys, who, of course, thought all the Bratz Girls were hot stuff....

Paedophiles R Us at work......

Dave will stop at nothing to try to lower me in the eyes of many, and I've no doubt he'll try to spin the words I've put here to say I 'support' rapists. I do NOT, in ANY WAY, never have, never will. But I DO support women being taught/given back self-respect and responsibility again and for them to realize that first and foremost they are a human being, with a mind and a soul, as well as a body...and that they are NOT there purely for men to salivate over, or use for a quick shag on a Saturday evening round the back of the club...

Never EVER knowingly put yourself in a dangerous situation through your own actions, without being able to accept that YOU were the one who decided to take those actions, which may, or may not, have gone on to lead to some terrible things happening.

And now, back to Savile the Sociopath..and for those who keep asking "HOW could this have happened???" PLEASE look up what Sociopaths do, for he fits the bill 100%, for so very often they are intelligent, gifted, charming, manipulative, ruthless, scary, highly sexed with no feeling whatsoever towards their victims, intimidating, with no sense of emotion, nor remorse for whatever they may do. All of these things enabled Jimmy Savile to do what he did, to those he did it to, for probably most of his life.

There is no excuse for those who knew, but kept silent.

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 02:33 PM

You were not the only one supporting that view, Liz. So don't think it is to have dig at you. It isn't. It is just to point out that some people believe that those who put themselves at risk , such as these young people did, must be in some way culpable. There are umpteen examples of people spouting the same rubbish but you said it quite sucinctly just above.

I went on to say, as I recall, that if you behaved in a certain way, you were inviting trouble.

or

BUT women need to get real, need to become far more responsible again, stop acting like hookers

Sum up your views quite nicely. Need I say any more?

As to trying to lower you in the eyes of many - I have absolutley no need to do so. People have already made up their minds and nothing any of us say or do will alter their opinions of either of us. I do think you need to get over the fact that not everyting is about you though. There are a number of people with the same wretched view.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 02:38 PM

Oh, sorry, and if anyone doubts the veracity of what I say, please don't take mine or Liz's word here. Read the thread. Bit of a marathon but a real eye opener for anyone who thought Victorian Values were a thing of the past.

D.

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 03:49 PM

I think Lizzie might have a point - if the same set of rules applied to men.
I can think of dozens of derogatory words that are used to describe women who 'put it about' - wonder why I can only think of terms of admiration that describe the the same behaviour in men?
The logical conclusion to Lizzie's argument is that men will continue to dictate what women wear and how the behave.
Modern society continues to present women as 'available' and while that remains the case women will continue to be the target of male predators   
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: The Sandman
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 04:56 PM

Exploitation, one of the fundamentals of capitalism.
there is a similarity, once you stop respecting peoplPeople no longer get treated with respect they can become a way to be exploited to make money, or an object to exploit for sexual gratification

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 05:30 PM

You know, it is the way of the cyber-bully to use only a certain part of what someone has said in order to paint them in the dark colours they so love to try and paint their prey in.

Here is the full version of what I said, Dave, and please note the very first part of the paragraph which, of course, you chose, as ever, to leave out

>>>"It will always be, ultimately, the man's fault, of course it will, BUT women need to get real, need to become far more responsible again, stop acting like hookers 'just because we can and we want to' and put some bloody intelligence and self-respect back in their heads, rather than constantly thinking it's their 'right' to tease a man as much as they want, or to get utterly plastered to the point where they can't even remember what they did, who they may have done it with, or even if they did it willingly or not."<<<


And don't call me Liz, for there is only one person on here who I am happy to call me by that name, which was the name my Dad always called me by. Therefore, only a person for whom I have the highest respect and/or love has 'my' permission to call me by that name.

You most certainly have neither my respect, nor my love.

You also know that it upsets me when others refer to me in this manner, which is, of course, why you do it.

Go and write in the Cyber-Bully thread, for you may feel more at home there, although Savile was a nasty piece of work...so.......

Thank you

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: GUEST,Lizzie Cornish
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 05:39 PM

(not sure what happened to the post above, so here it is again)

You know, it is the way of the cyber-bully to use only a certain part of what someone has said in order to paint them in the dark colours they so love to try and paint their prey in.

Here is the full version of what I said, Dave, and please note the very first part of the paragraph which, of course, you chose, as ever, to leave out:

>>>"It will always be, ultimately, the man's fault, of course it will, BUT women need to get real, need to become far more responsible again, stop acting like hookers 'just because we can and we want to' and put some bloody intelligence and self-respect back in their heads, rather than constantly thinking it's their 'right' to tease a man as much as they want, or to get utterly plastered to the point where they can't even remember what they did, who they may have done it with, or even if they did it willingly or not."<<<

And don't call me Liz, for there is only one person on here who I am happy to call me by that name, which was the name my Dad always called me by. Therefore, only a person for whom I have the highest respect and/or love has 'my' permission to call me by that name.

You most certainly have neither my respect, nor my love.

You also know that it upsets me when others refer to me in this manner, which is, of course, why you do it.

Go and write in the Cyber-Bully thread, for you may feel more at home there, although Savile was a nasty piece of work...so.......

Thank you

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 07:30 PM

Liz,

You also know that it upsets me when others refer to me in this manner, which is, of course, why you do it.

Of course I do. Isn't your whole point? If people give an excuse to abuse you, then it is your own fault?

As I said before,I will leave it to people to read the thread and decide for themselves for themselves what your views are. I have no need to enhance or embellish it.

And I want neither your respect or love. I reserve that for people that matter to me.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 07:43 PM

BTW - Your 'permission' to call you anything at all is completely irrelevant considering that I know your name is neither Lizzie or Cornish. But I will, for now, respect your anonymity.

:D

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 11:20 PM

FWIW, I am with Lizzie on this one, as anyone who read that other thrwead will know.

~M~

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Howard Jones
Date: 16 Oct 12 - 04:36 AM

It is very difficult to look back on this without colouring it with modern attitudes. Things were very different in the late 60s and 70s. It was post-Pill and pre-AIDS, and amongst the younger generation sex was thought of as a good thing. Pop stars and DJs, most of whom were little more than kids themselves, had girls throwing themselves at them - although many of these probably didn't fully understand the implications and just wanted to get close to their heroes.

Savile was older than most, and it seems took advantage of this youth culture. However I suspect that many who knew about his activities may have thought his behaviour a bit near the knuckle but probably didn't regard it as wicked, the way we would now. "Child abuse", "sexual harassment" and "paedophile" weren't part of the vocabulary. "Rape" was being dragged into the bushes by a stranger, and I doubt whether many would regard coerced, as opposed to forced, sex as rape. On the other hand, attitudes towards women generally were fairly primitive. Feminism was still a minority shouting from the sidelines and wasn't being taken very seriously.

Unfortunately, these things just weren't taken as seriously at the time as they are now. My guess is that it wasn't that people were turning a blind eye but that they simply didn't regard it as a serious matter, and assumed that the girls knew what they were getting into.

Whether it was just the attitudes of the times or whether it was taken seriously but covered up, either way the BBC will now be judged by modern attitudes and is in for a pasting.

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 16 Oct 12 - 05:05 AM

>>>>Liz,

You also know that it upsets me when others refer to me in this manner, which is, of course, why you do it.

Of course I do. Isn't your whole point? If people give an excuse to abuse you, then it is your own fault?

As I said before,I will leave it to people to read the thread and decide for themselves for themselves what your views are. I have no need to enhance or embellish it.<<<



Go and STALK someone else! I'm sure I'm not the only one on your 'list'.

That's the polite version.

The other version is:

Fuck OFF!

Thank you.

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Oct 12 - 05:19 AM

You are not right about the 60s & 70s, according to my recollections, Howard. I don't know your age: but they are nothing but an eye-blink ago to me. Such offences were not taken any more lightly or matter-of-factly by the law then than they are now. There was the fuss about the visiting rock-singer with the 14-yr-old wife, for instance. Why do you think Savile took so much care to cover his tracks that the truth is only just coming to light, if, as you say, attitudes were so laid-back that no-one would have cared had they known? And how long do you think this permissive attitude lasted? ~ didn't help G Glitter in 1990s, did it?

~M~

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Oct 12 - 05:24 AM

No stalking.

No list.

I just don't suffer fools gladly.

DtG

Subject: RE: Jimmy Savile :-( UK disc jockey
From: Howard Jones
Date: 16 Oct 12 - 06:06 AM

Michael, the law took these offences seriously, but I don't think society, or at least the younger generation, did. Groupies were regarded as part of the scene, and a perk of being what we now call a celebrity. I suspect that many of those around Savile may have been a bit uncomfortable at the young age of some of the girls but wouldn't have regarded it in the same light as we do today. Especially as crowds of girls were throwing themselves at the celebrities, although as I said before in most cases probably without a full understanding of the possible consequences.

Of course, the question is how many older and wiser heads at the BBC were aware, and whether it was a matter of a blind eye being turned or the matter just not being taken seriously. The other question is why didn't it come to light as the pendulum of public opinion swung the other way? Savile seems to have been careful to cover his tracks and whilst there were rumours and allegations there seems to have been little hard evidence - unlike Gary Glitter, who got careless.