I'm an abuse survivor and went on to work with abused kids just to prove that 'what everyone knows' about abuse victims is dead wrong .
Don't, just don't, get me going on this or you might see the other side of my otherwise (I hope) gentle and inclusive nature.
That scumbag rock star is apparently now tweeting (how come he still gets access?) about what a great laugh abusing kids all was and not understanding what all the fuss is about.
Sweet Jesus Christ on a bike.......................:o(
Edited at 2013-12-18 06:09 pm (UTC)
One of these days we- as a society- are going to take this matter seriously.
The people care, but apparently the establishment doesn't. Very strange...
I've just had a squint at his twitter feed. The arrogance and coldness of the man is matched only by the adoring idiocy of those who refuse to believe the evidence.
He'll laugh on the other side of his face when he goes down. 35 years was mentioned, I believe.
I also used to do prison visiting via Friends (I'm a Quaker) and the cons don't like his sort of person at all. The screws don't think much to them either and tend to look the other way when stuff kicks off.
I was once told there was an unspoken code amongst cons. Men beat up and kill other men. Accepted. But hurt women or children, and they'll rip you limb from limb.
Pretty much that. I was visiting folks in a women's prison and he ought to consider himself damn lucky that he'll not be sent to one! The girls like his sort even less than the guys.
I suspect after a year of jeers, abuse, being threatened with and actual physical violence, not to mention spitting and urinating in his food, he'll probably want to kill himself. And if he does, then that's the ultimate cowardly betrayal.
Hurt women or children and have money/influence inside jail and you are pretty much untouchable. There are very few men inside Cat 1 jails who haven't hurt women or children. Lots of sentimental shites have 'mum' tattooed on their arms, but still slam their fists into the faces of their childrens' mums.
Screws turn a blind eye when their palms are greased or their cocks sucked. There is as little honour amongst them as there is amongst thieves.
Edited at 2013-12-18 11:00 pm (UTC)
I have to say that prison visiting was a real eye opener for me!
surely he is in jail and can't have access to twitter? Is it a fake account?
Which is reasonable enough. You've got to have a sense of perspective in these matters. We're talking about people of worth and substance- a rock star, an educator; people who give back to the community. It would be a shame to discommode them over such a relatively trivial matter.
Sexual abuse of children - like sexism - is endemic. It isn't the preserve of the powerful or famous, they simply get away with more than the average man. The vast majority of child abusers are average men. The 'public' does a lot of shouting about it, but a lot of the shouters are guilty of the same crimes.
I make the point because I think one of the unfortunate consequences of this case and Operation Yewtree is that it makes child rape seem like it is mainly the preserve of the influential and powerful, not the stepfather and the neighbour.
It also implicitly provides an excuse for the procurers and those who assisted the likes of Savile, as if he was too famous to challenge, whereas they were probably benefiting from his 'leftovers' or simply taking money off him for it.
Similarly - and predictably - Watkin's ex-partner wasn't listened to when she repeatedly made allegations and supplied names and details of his intention to abuse children and history of assaults on them. Was she ignored because he was famous, or simply because she was a bitter ex, a woman scorned, a woman?
Edited at 2013-12-18 11:45 pm (UTC)
No-one wants to acknowledge the extent of child abuse. The more cases we can write off the more comfortable we feel.
Watkins' ex-girlfriend is a person of low status all ways round. She can be ignored without any risk of comeback from the golf club or the lodge.
Yes this. Ditto with what's coming to light in the Catholic Church. The church hierarchy enables abuse (thus attracting people who wanted to abuse) but it's the regular, everyday men who do the bulk of abusing. There's not enough attention paid to the everyday hierarchies and social mores that allow most sexual abuse to happen.
Still, I've just seen this guy has gone down for at least 20 years (with lifelong parole) and I am pleased about that.
I think Savile was pretty much his own procurer. And I'm hearing he may have procured for others. There's a rumour that he used to deliver boys to Edward Heath. I have no idea whether this is true or not.
I follow John Ward at the Slog. He makes the same point- that most abuse goes on in the home- and people like Savile are the exception. He also reckons, for what it's worth, that the extent of Savile's predation is being exaggerated.
You make a fair point.
The Sho'ah and village massacres were the doing of 'ordinary men' rather than the senior horrors who usually get paraded as the perpetrators.
I get most of my info about Great British Paedos from The Slog.