Today we have legal tolerance, and, indeed, encouragement of men, clothed or naked, in women’s toilets and In woman and children’s changing rooms and anyone who complains is likely to be prosecuted for breaching trans rights.
As I read, I thought of how the normalization of confusing children about gender will be viewed years from now. How could telling a boy that he is a girl and feminizing or changing his name, letting his hair grow and insisting he be allowed in girls' toilets and all be good for him? How could convincing a boy or girl to mutilate themselves to look like the opposite sex be good for anyone? How could the government decree that men, whether they've mutilated themselves or not, must be treated like women? Questions and more questions...
Yes, just as we look back in horror at some aspects of the 1970s and attitudes towards sex, I think that in future decades people will scarcely believe it possible that we behaved in this way about sex and gender!
Legislation and CRB checks are all very well but perverts will find a way: they’re a resourceful bunch. If you’ve ever wondered what the long term goal of progressives and identity ideologues is, wonder no more.
On the NMC website look for those who have been struck off for misconduct/conviction, there’s an active link in the right hand column that says what the sanction is.
Likewise on the MPTS website look for those doctors who have been “erased”, if you click on the name of the doctor then it takes you to another page. If it says Decision Published, then go down the page to an active link box named Decision.
You may be surprised how many are for sexual misconduct of various types including images of children.
As all doctors and nurses are required to have advanced DBS clearances this shows the deficiency in that system.
I'm not sure we (born before 1950?) do forget it, rather I regard it as common usage rather than abusage. Your essay seems to me to contain a lot of prejudicial language, which I'd have thought inappropriate for a historian - though perhaps you are wearing a different hat today..
Applying current codes of behaviour to past events may have some value in debating those current ideas, but IMO doesn't help understanding the past, when people were living under different codes. You end up being amazed and appalled by past events, rather than seeing them as clues to understand the thinking of people at the time. It would be more interesting to me to understand why and how people's attitudes have changed.
Alexander Baron (who I do not know) has sent you some links about Jimmy Savile. These websites are very detailed. The following links about Jimmy Savile and Rolf Harris provide a more concise summary correcting the misinformation you are spreading about these two individuals.
I hope you will do the decent thing and issue an apology and correction for the misleading assumptions you made without apparently undertaking any research of your own on the matter.
Thank you. I would very much appreciate an open minded critical assessment of these findings. Some of the information in the Savile document relating to the Duncroft School complainants is slightly incorrect as a result of more recent revelations, but this does not affect the overall conclusions. If you have any evidence or information to refute these findings this would be most helpful.
I can't disagree with the historical background, but you are totally mistaken about both Jimmy Savile and Rolf Harris, and very likely about Huw Edwards. I've just made a video about Edwards; he was an older man who lost the plot. Savile and Rolf were innocent. Rolf's only so-called victim was a much younger female, a friend of his daughter, with whom he'd had a consensual if foolish affair. She turned against Rolf when she found out he had another mistress but waited a decade and a half for her revenge. As for Savile - teenage girls have been known to commit suicide for all manner of reasons. I knew one who did, but I will say no more about that. Here are some links to set the record straight:
One of our local secondary schools had a uniform change a few years ago, and to be honest I consider the girls’ uniform to be very very dodgy. Certainly it would have raised eyebrows in the late 60’s and early 70’s when I was at school. It looks like a throwback to St Trinians but worse. What is more concerning is that it’s a Catholic school.
This can be a two way street. As an 8 or 9 year old boy back in the 50s I was propositioned by two girls on different occasions and they were only a couple of years older than me! And I did witness a local scout master indulging in so called play fighting with my best mate at the time. The former went to prison for molesting small boys.
I once had an arts radio show and I interviewed the show photographer for “Top Of Thé Pops,” when it was produced in Manchester.
After the show all the acts would go on to a pub in Rusholme and lots of the young girls from the audience would also be invited.
All sorts of tawdry stuff happened in the pub but the landlord had some standards: to this day, a ‘manly,’ male singer of international fame is barred because he was caught interfering with a 13 year old girl.
You mentioned DJ John Peel (née Ravenscroft) who enjoyed both dressing as a school girl and lusting after them. The British establishment's official 'bad boy' act the Rolling Stones had all sorts of songs about raping slaves and underage runaways ('brown sugar', 'Stray Cat Blues') that were considered the height of musical cool in the early 70's, while Led Zeppelin's Robert Plant would appear on stage many nights wearing the blouses of girls he'd ''slept with' the previous night. At this point in our history all this was celebrated as sophisticated and hip. We live in a totally different and far more paranoid era today, also greatly complicated by gender confusion and homosexuality being celebrated with 'pride' and societal innocence...
I think it was also prevalent in the 1960s. Songs such as “Young Girl”, (get out of my life… ending with “better run girl, you’re much too young girl.”)
Today we have legal tolerance, and, indeed, encouragement of men, clothed or naked, in women’s toilets and In woman and children’s changing rooms and anyone who complains is likely to be prosecuted for breaching trans rights.
Yes, it certainly makes it easier for perverted men to gain access to little girls.
As I read, I thought of how the normalization of confusing children about gender will be viewed years from now. How could telling a boy that he is a girl and feminizing or changing his name, letting his hair grow and insisting he be allowed in girls' toilets and all be good for him? How could convincing a boy or girl to mutilate themselves to look like the opposite sex be good for anyone? How could the government decree that men, whether they've mutilated themselves or not, must be treated like women? Questions and more questions...
Yes, just as we look back in horror at some aspects of the 1970s and attitudes towards sex, I think that in future decades people will scarcely believe it possible that we behaved in this way about sex and gender!
Don’t forget Grease, although the characters are meant to be 16, what was the age of consent in the USA in the 1950’s?
You mentioned Mikado by Gilbert and Sullivan, there’s also Ruddigore.
Good points!
Legislation and CRB checks are all very well but perverts will find a way: they’re a resourceful bunch. If you’ve ever wondered what the long term goal of progressives and identity ideologues is, wonder no more.
Yes, we can never weed out all characters of this kind, but I think we can do our best to keep them away from kids.
If you want proof of this all you have to do is visit the following websites
https://www.nmc.org.uk/concerns-nurses-midwives/hearings/hearings-sanctions/
https://www.mpts-uk.org/hearings-and-decisions/medical-practitioners-tribunals
On the NMC website look for those who have been struck off for misconduct/conviction, there’s an active link in the right hand column that says what the sanction is.
Likewise on the MPTS website look for those doctors who have been “erased”, if you click on the name of the doctor then it takes you to another page. If it says Decision Published, then go down the page to an active link box named Decision.
You may be surprised how many are for sexual misconduct of various types including images of children.
As all doctors and nurses are required to have advanced DBS clearances this shows the deficiency in that system.
I'm not sure we (born before 1950?) do forget it, rather I regard it as common usage rather than abusage. Your essay seems to me to contain a lot of prejudicial language, which I'd have thought inappropriate for a historian - though perhaps you are wearing a different hat today..
Applying current codes of behaviour to past events may have some value in debating those current ideas, but IMO doesn't help understanding the past, when people were living under different codes. You end up being amazed and appalled by past events, rather than seeing them as clues to understand the thinking of people at the time. It would be more interesting to me to understand why and how people's attitudes have changed.
Further to my reply to Simon below here’s one I have just found
https://www.mpts-uk.org/-/media/mpts-rod-files/dr-alexander-knight-03-sep-24.pdf
This doctor was sentenced to 20 months imprisonment, probably because he didn’t plead guilty or show remorse.
https://www.mpts-uk.org/-/media/mpts-rod-files/dr-huw-glover-05-sep-24.pdf
https://www.nmc.org.uk/globalassets/sitedocuments/ftpoutcomes/2024/september-2024/reasons-apana-agey-ftpcsm-87836-20240906.pdf
These are a disgrace to my former profession as a nurse practitioner.
Alexander Baron (who I do not know) has sent you some links about Jimmy Savile. These websites are very detailed. The following links about Jimmy Savile and Rolf Harris provide a more concise summary correcting the misinformation you are spreading about these two individuals.
http://bit.ly/2dybGYs
http://bit.ly/2mMrQza
https://bit.ly/3OqfbPk
I hope you will do the decent thing and issue an apology and correction for the misleading assumptions you made without apparently undertaking any research of your own on the matter.
I have my own opinions on the matter, but will certainly look at these links.
Thank you. I would very much appreciate an open minded critical assessment of these findings. Some of the information in the Savile document relating to the Duncroft School complainants is slightly incorrect as a result of more recent revelations, but this does not affect the overall conclusions. If you have any evidence or information to refute these findings this would be most helpful.
Of course, indecent exposure does not matter if you get higher up, like Mountbatten and Heath, two notorious pre boomer deviants.
Is there actual evidence about Edward Heath? I have heard many rumours, of course.
I can't disagree with the historical background, but you are totally mistaken about both Jimmy Savile and Rolf Harris, and very likely about Huw Edwards. I've just made a video about Edwards; he was an older man who lost the plot. Savile and Rolf were innocent. Rolf's only so-called victim was a much younger female, a friend of his daughter, with whom he'd had a consensual if foolish affair. She turned against Rolf when she found out he had another mistress but waited a decade and a half for her revenge. As for Savile - teenage girls have been known to commit suicide for all manner of reasons. I knew one who did, but I will say no more about that. Here are some links to set the record straight:
https://annaraccoon.com/
https://jimcannotfixthis.blogspot.com/
https://old.bitchute.com/video/hfBYZ68rTTEs/
https://rolfharris.site/rolf-harris-press-2023-5-23.pdf
https://rolfharris.site/rolf-harris-letter-2017-12-12.pdf
I shall certainly look at these.
One of our local secondary schools had a uniform change a few years ago, and to be honest I consider the girls’ uniform to be very very dodgy. Certainly it would have raised eyebrows in the late 60’s and early 70’s when I was at school. It looks like a throwback to St Trinians but worse. What is more concerning is that it’s a Catholic school.
This can be a two way street. As an 8 or 9 year old boy back in the 50s I was propositioned by two girls on different occasions and they were only a couple of years older than me! And I did witness a local scout master indulging in so called play fighting with my best mate at the time. The former went to prison for molesting small boys.
I once had an arts radio show and I interviewed the show photographer for “Top Of Thé Pops,” when it was produced in Manchester.
After the show all the acts would go on to a pub in Rusholme and lots of the young girls from the audience would also be invited.
All sorts of tawdry stuff happened in the pub but the landlord had some standards: to this day, a ‘manly,’ male singer of international fame is barred because he was caught interfering with a 13 year old girl.
He was not the only one to be barred.
Sad to say, this was pretty much par for the course in the 1970s.
You mentioned DJ John Peel (née Ravenscroft) who enjoyed both dressing as a school girl and lusting after them. The British establishment's official 'bad boy' act the Rolling Stones had all sorts of songs about raping slaves and underage runaways ('brown sugar', 'Stray Cat Blues') that were considered the height of musical cool in the early 70's, while Led Zeppelin's Robert Plant would appear on stage many nights wearing the blouses of girls he'd ''slept with' the previous night. At this point in our history all this was celebrated as sophisticated and hip. We live in a totally different and far more paranoid era today, also greatly complicated by gender confusion and homosexuality being celebrated with 'pride' and societal innocence...
Indeed. You might say “It’s not unusual.”
I think it was also prevalent in the 1960s. Songs such as “Young Girl”, (get out of my life… ending with “better run girl, you’re much too young girl.”)
Eek.
…With all the Mum’s at home humming along…