Thinking about my own friendship group (late 30s / early 40s men, most of whom are single), I think there are a couple of us who would say something privately at least, but there are others who I very much doubt would care.
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
You are dismissing and minimizing SA. You’ve also tried to make out that women on women assault is just as common which I can assure you it isn’t. I’ve never been felt up by another woman
I loved watching it with my grandson, too - it's not mindless guff like Gecko's-f*cking-Garage!Aw no way we must've just caught it before it went. Gutted about that, my daughter loves it and he was only a very minor part
)
I knew someone who went on a date with Matt Lucas. This person (let’s call him Pete) did a charity thing and ML contacted him to congratulate him. Anyway they ended up meeting up for dinner. ML wanted to see him again but Pete just didn’t fancy him.
Probably for the best since Pete ended up going to prison for sexual abuse.
Probably for the best since Pete ended up going to prison for sexual abuse.
He’s the embodiment of smug. I hate the way he constantly talks over Marina Hyde on TRIE.I've always considered Osman to be
I take it it’s the one I have on ignore. At what point can you get someone removed from a thread?! There’s free speech and there’s deliberate provocation.
I was thinking to myself last night, how odd the timing is with this one. Straight after Brand's sentencing. It has somewhat taken the heat off Brand because everyone is talking about Walliams. Not that anyone has forgotten what Brand has done. Maybe I am just super suspicious.
I wonder if there is a big whistleblower in celebdom. Been a lot of this since Schofe hasn't there? I am shocked nothing further came out about PS.
I wonder if there is a big whistleblower in celebdom. Been a lot of this since Schofe hasn't there? I am shocked nothing further came out about PS.
Sorry but this is hideous victim blaming. The girl who stayed at his house, ‘Jade’ grew up in foster care. She was clearly vulnerable and very likely had no one keeping tabs on her- coming up to London for modelling jobs etc on her own or at best with friends of a similar age.
I used to tell my mum I was going to practice for my drama A level with my classmates of an evening- and probably be in a field somewhere or someone’s garage or at a party with men in their twenties getting off my face on Bacardi breezers and snogging the boys I fancied. Thankfully nothing untoward happened to me- that came later when I had the misfortune to work with a nefarious chef at the pub where I waitressed- but at 16 if I wanted to find a way to go out and drink and party, i would.
Would I have been culpable in any way of the consequences of predatory behaviour because I wasn’t exercising common sense, or I’d manipulated my mum into thinking I was in a bedroom somewhere reciting Top Girls? Would it have been my mum’s fault for not following me to make sure I was going where I said I was? No, of course not. Common sense has duck all to do with it. How about these monsters have the ‘common sense’ not to sexually predate on women.this is where the buck needs to stop, not reaching around to blame the circumstances that resulted in an assault or grape.
Last edited:
Lucy Beaumont has definitely gone way up in my estimation, I’ll support all her terrible pottery making attempts in future.
We need more strong women to stand by those who need someone to lean on when times are hard.
We need more strong women to stand by those who need someone to lean on when times are hard.
The timing was entirely due to the date of the two separate legal proceedings, that have been going on for quite some time. Not something to be easily manipulated.
I’m sure she corrected Cathy when she said that. Or it could’ve been talking about Brand. Sure it was Walliams though.
She did, Cathy said something along the lines of her being on panel shows with him, and Lucy reiterated that she's never worked with him.
BIB, well Brand is in the juggy-wug where all heat will continue to be of his own making, and the Met have already said they've received further reports. So any heat or lack of on Brand is irrelevant until the next lot comes to court
I don't think the heat is off Russell Brand with him going to prison for 10+ years. Not sure how much hotter it could get for him. He just might eventually share a cell with a fellow fallen celeb now.
I might get a bit of stick for this but I honestly think there's a bit of perspective missing from some of these discussions.
I'm seeing all the comments about David Walliams, Russell Brand and now Chris Evans and Billie Piper, with people questioning whether he groomed her. I'm also seeing people suggesting age gaps should be limited and I just think we're in danger of labelling absolutely everything as grooming or abuse without actually looking at the circumstances.
I'm not saying inappropriate behaviour should be excused or that just because something was considered normal at the time it automatically makes it right. But surely we have to acknowledge that attitudes, expectations and what was considered acceptable were very different 20 or 30 years ago.
I'm talking about relationships involving people aged 16 and over here, not children or underage situations. There's a distinction. Not every relationship with an age gap is grooming. You can think an age gap is strange, you can disagree with it, but that doesn't automatically mean someone has been abused or manipulated.
I'm also not suggesting every woman involved in these situations had the same experience. Some will have been exploited, some won't. We shouldn't dismiss anyone's experience, but equally I don't think we should automatically assume someone was groomed purely because of an age difference.
If we go far enough back in history there are countless things that were considered acceptable that we'd rightly challenge today. Society moves on, we learn and our expectations change. That's a good thing.
But surely the point is that we learn from it and apply what we know now going forward, rather than retrospectively trying to judge every person and every relationship from decades ago purely by today's standards.
I'm not defending anyone or saying nobody should be held accountable. I just think there's room for a bit more common sense and nuance. Not everything is black and white and not every age-gap relationship is automatically a scandal.
I'm seeing all the comments about David Walliams, Russell Brand and now Chris Evans and Billie Piper, with people questioning whether he groomed her. I'm also seeing people suggesting age gaps should be limited and I just think we're in danger of labelling absolutely everything as grooming or abuse without actually looking at the circumstances.
I'm not saying inappropriate behaviour should be excused or that just because something was considered normal at the time it automatically makes it right. But surely we have to acknowledge that attitudes, expectations and what was considered acceptable were very different 20 or 30 years ago.
I'm talking about relationships involving people aged 16 and over here, not children or underage situations. There's a distinction. Not every relationship with an age gap is grooming. You can think an age gap is strange, you can disagree with it, but that doesn't automatically mean someone has been abused or manipulated.
I'm also not suggesting every woman involved in these situations had the same experience. Some will have been exploited, some won't. We shouldn't dismiss anyone's experience, but equally I don't think we should automatically assume someone was groomed purely because of an age difference.
If we go far enough back in history there are countless things that were considered acceptable that we'd rightly challenge today. Society moves on, we learn and our expectations change. That's a good thing.
But surely the point is that we learn from it and apply what we know now going forward, rather than retrospectively trying to judge every person and every relationship from decades ago purely by today's standards.
I'm not defending anyone or saying nobody should be held accountable. I just think there's room for a bit more common sense and nuance. Not everything is black and white and not every age-gap relationship is automatically a scandal.
AH that's good then, I watched it a bit bleary eyed this morning and thought it was odd, but sounds like it was all straightened out.
This reminded me of a weird incident I explained several years ago. On a very hot day I offered my window cleaner & his young colleague a cold drink as they were working. As they left he randomly grabbed me in a tight hug. I was rigid with shock, totally unprovoked & unwanted contact. He then messaged me hours later saying how kind I was. I decided then & Thete to get new window cleaner, my spidey senses were tingling. When I told him I wouldn’t be needing his services again he rang & textes me multiple times. I never picked up & blocked him.
Edit “experienced” not “explained”
Room on the broom is the current topic in my kids nursery, they've been making little brooms and painting pictures etc so not sure what the school will do now. Hoping they move on quickly. As for watching it, my kid loves it but is only 3 so im sure I can divert them to something else. Whilst I am annoyed its been pulled as its such a good little film I respect them for doing so. Hopefully they can just remove his voice and add someone else?
Dunno man ask Stephen Fry and his fella
Or Mr DiCaprio
It's context dependent, on a serious note. If the younger person is a sex worker, or is deliberately holding out the promise of sex because they want the holiday, then 'grooming' as traditionally understood may not apply
The law isn't the only framework on which UK society is built, and I don't think the law can solve for all moral, psychological and emotional situations.
Yes fair point. I don’t think all of them, but would like to think one would and that would probably be a woman if anyone.