ChatterBank2 mins ago
Currently Listening And Ironing ( Multitasking) To Boom Radio
Very interesting they are playing the last top 40 of Radio London broadcast ( I think) from Radio Caroline Circa 1967.
What utter bully’s the BBC were back then ( maybe still are ), I see also they’ve brought DLT back from the Wilderness , my era and I love it
What utter bully’s the BBC were back then ( maybe still are ), I see also they’ve brought DLT back from the Wilderness , my era and I love it
Answers
AH, bobbi has said this discussion is spoiling her thread and because of that I've declared myself 'out'. If you want to discuss it further, as a courtesy to her, I suggest you do it elsewhere.
10:33 Tue 16th Aug 2022
// The jury of six men and six women found him guilty of indecently assaulting a woman on 17 January 1995, while she was working on the BBC's comedy chat programme the Mrs Merton Show.
She had told the court she was left "shaking" after the incident.
Giving evidence, the woman - now a television personality - said she was 22 when Travis approached her as she was smoking a cigarette in a corridor of the BBC studios in Manchester.
Travis, a guest on the programme, told her she "shouldn't be smoking" and gave her a "squeezing grope", she said.
"He started touching the bottom of my rib cage. Without saying anything else he just slid his hands up to and over my breasts and then kind of left them there and started squeezing," she added.
She told the court: "I absolutely knew he had some weird sexual thrill from this. I felt like I'd been punched, that feeling of being violated." //
She had told the court she was left "shaking" after the incident.
Giving evidence, the woman - now a television personality - said she was 22 when Travis approached her as she was smoking a cigarette in a corridor of the BBC studios in Manchester.
Travis, a guest on the programme, told her she "shouldn't be smoking" and gave her a "squeezing grope", she said.
"He started touching the bottom of my rib cage. Without saying anything else he just slid his hands up to and over my breasts and then kind of left them there and started squeezing," she added.
She told the court: "I absolutely knew he had some weird sexual thrill from this. I felt like I'd been punched, that feeling of being violated." //
Try posting a link, Gromit, so we all know where you're coming from. Here's one that records him being cleared of several charges.
https:/
It was a different world then and I think it's very wrong to judge the past by today's standards. Blimey, if we did that with everything, Alf Garnet would be in the dock!
https:/
It was a different world then and I think it's very wrong to judge the past by today's standards. Blimey, if we did that with everything, Alf Garnet would be in the dock!
// the woman's account of having raised the assault incident at the time was backed up by comedian Dave Gorman, a scriptwriter on the show, and the producer Peter Kessler, who told the jury they remembered her claims clearly. //
https:/
https:/
Naomi - //It was a different world then and I think it's very wrong to judge the past by today's standards. Blimey, if we did that with everything, Alf Garnet would be in the dock! //
You and I have differed on our response to this subject previously, and here we do so again.
Long experience of your posts shows you as a strong woman, and your position indicates that you think that women who are assaulted by men like Travis should respond with a quick kick in the Queensberrys , and a brisk walk in the country, don't forget your headscarf.
The truth remains that a lot of women are not able to dismiss such actions as easily as you clearly feel they should, hence the need for a law to protect them, and punish men who behave in this way.
Of course ''times were different", but that does not that as it is unacceptable now, it was actually acceptable then.
It wasn't, but society's attitudes were that women were simply lesser citizens, and their rights not to be assaulted in the work placed by any man who felt like it, simply did not exist.
It's not a matter of attributing today's attitudes to yesterday's behaviours - assault was a crime when Mr Travis committed it, which is why he was tried and convicted for it.
As for your analogy of Alf Garnet - that is particularly inappropriate since Mr Garnet's entire creation was a satyric pointer at the absurdity of dinosaur bigoted attitudes.
Better perhaps would be the example that it was acceptable at one time for children to be worked to exhaustion so they they fell into mill machinery.
It was acceptable, but that does not mean it was right.
Your apparent attempts to justify Mr Travis by minimising the effect of his behaviour, and apparently attempting to dismiss it as simply being what went on at the time, flies in the face of your normal approach of reason and fairness, and does your gender no favours.
Unlike my factual posts regarding Mr Travis, this is my opinion, and I fully expect us to continue to agree to differ on it.
You and I have differed on our response to this subject previously, and here we do so again.
Long experience of your posts shows you as a strong woman, and your position indicates that you think that women who are assaulted by men like Travis should respond with a quick kick in the Queensberrys , and a brisk walk in the country, don't forget your headscarf.
The truth remains that a lot of women are not able to dismiss such actions as easily as you clearly feel they should, hence the need for a law to protect them, and punish men who behave in this way.
Of course ''times were different", but that does not that as it is unacceptable now, it was actually acceptable then.
It wasn't, but society's attitudes were that women were simply lesser citizens, and their rights not to be assaulted in the work placed by any man who felt like it, simply did not exist.
It's not a matter of attributing today's attitudes to yesterday's behaviours - assault was a crime when Mr Travis committed it, which is why he was tried and convicted for it.
As for your analogy of Alf Garnet - that is particularly inappropriate since Mr Garnet's entire creation was a satyric pointer at the absurdity of dinosaur bigoted attitudes.
Better perhaps would be the example that it was acceptable at one time for children to be worked to exhaustion so they they fell into mill machinery.
It was acceptable, but that does not mean it was right.
Your apparent attempts to justify Mr Travis by minimising the effect of his behaviour, and apparently attempting to dismiss it as simply being what went on at the time, flies in the face of your normal approach of reason and fairness, and does your gender no favours.
Unlike my factual posts regarding Mr Travis, this is my opinion, and I fully expect us to continue to agree to differ on it.
Bobbi - // Andy as this is a well meaning thread about music perhaps opening one of your own in another section about the subject you are keen to discuss ? //
As an experienced AB'er, you know as well as I do that debates evolve and change depending on the posts and opinions offered, and that is how the site has always operated.
And I sure you also know that it is not possible for the originator of a thread to direct or attempt to influence its ongoing development by criticising the development if it follows a path that they feel is not the one they intended, or would wish it to follow.
The thread is going the way it goes, I am not steering it in any way, merely responding to it like everyone else.
If you are not happy with it, then perhaps it is you rather than I who should start another thread, and maybe that will follow a path of debate that is more to your satisfaction.
As an experienced AB'er, you know as well as I do that debates evolve and change depending on the posts and opinions offered, and that is how the site has always operated.
And I sure you also know that it is not possible for the originator of a thread to direct or attempt to influence its ongoing development by criticising the development if it follows a path that they feel is not the one they intended, or would wish it to follow.
The thread is going the way it goes, I am not steering it in any way, merely responding to it like everyone else.
If you are not happy with it, then perhaps it is you rather than I who should start another thread, and maybe that will follow a path of debate that is more to your satisfaction.
naomi - // AH, bobbi has said this discussion is spoiling her thread and because of that I've declared myself 'out'. If you want to discuss it further, as a courtesy to her, I suggest you do it elsewhere. //
I refer you to my post at 10.42.
You would never decide on your responses based on a 'courtesy' to the thread originator, and neither would would you be expected to do so.
That's not how debate works, so I am simply adding to views offered by others, ironically some of which are yours, which could be seen to be 'off piste', but should never be a reason for them not to be expressed.
I refer you to my post at 10.42.
You would never decide on your responses based on a 'courtesy' to the thread originator, and neither would would you be expected to do so.
That's not how debate works, so I am simply adding to views offered by others, ironically some of which are yours, which could be seen to be 'off piste', but should never be a reason for them not to be expressed.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.