Moi aussi? Could well be…
Discussion
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-5842...
If these allegations are true, there’s every chance this could be the next enormous chapter in the growing list of systematic abuse scandals.
I’d be amazed if it wasn’t indeed rife considering the age that girls begin their modelling careers.
If these allegations are true, there’s every chance this could be the next enormous chapter in the growing list of systematic abuse scandals.
I’d be amazed if it wasn’t indeed rife considering the age that girls begin their modelling careers.
57Ford said:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-5842...
If these allegations are true, there’s every chance this could be the next enormous chapter in the growing list of systematic abuse scandals.
I’d be amazed if it wasn’t indeed rife considering the age that girls begin their modelling careers.
It's been an open secret forever and I'm certain it still happens.If these allegations are true, there’s every chance this could be the next enormous chapter in the growing list of systematic abuse scandals.
I’d be amazed if it wasn’t indeed rife considering the age that girls begin their modelling careers.
I can already hear the usual PH misogynists saddling up so I'll get in first:
1) She's not doing this for personal gain, or for retribution. She wants to raise awareness so that it will stop happening.
2) She didn't raise it at the time because she was told not to.
3) The fact that it happened a while ago doesn't make it any less bad, or mean that she should just carry on hiding it, or that it didn't affect her.
In her own words:
"One of the questions that people ask is, well, why didn't you report it at the time? And I say that is the wrong question. The question is, why did it take so long for women to be heard, for women to feel comfortable to come forward and tell their stories, for women to be believed and not to be victim blamed?"
deckster said:
It's been an open secret forever and I'm certain it still happens.
I can already hear the usual PH misogynists saddling up so I'll get in first:
1) She's not doing this for personal gain, or for retribution. She wants to raise awareness so that it will stop happening.
2) She didn't raise it at the time because she was told not to.
3) The fact that it happened a while ago doesn't make it any less bad, or mean that she should just carry on hiding it, or that it didn't affect her.
In her own words:
"One of the questions that people ask is, well, why didn't you report it at the time? And I say that is the wrong question. The question is, why did it take so long for women to be heard, for women to feel comfortable to come forward and tell their stories, for women to be believed and not to be victim blamed?"
Saying it was the wrong question to ask is just deflecting.I can already hear the usual PH misogynists saddling up so I'll get in first:
1) She's not doing this for personal gain, or for retribution. She wants to raise awareness so that it will stop happening.
2) She didn't raise it at the time because she was told not to.
3) The fact that it happened a while ago doesn't make it any less bad, or mean that she should just carry on hiding it, or that it didn't affect her.
In her own words:
"One of the questions that people ask is, well, why didn't you report it at the time? And I say that is the wrong question. The question is, why did it take so long for women to be heard, for women to feel comfortable to come forward and tell their stories, for women to be believed and not to be victim blamed?"
She was/is part of the problem.
Of course it was never her fault that it happened to her - that's purely down to the abuser - but she became part of the problem when she remained silent for so long.
It took so long for women to be heard because women said nothing! Hard to be heard when you remain silent...and this woman was part of the problem...and possibly/probably meant hundreds of other girls were abused due to her silence.
If no-one ever complained, or reported it because they thought it would be ignored, then of course it would keep happening, as the pervs/abusers know they could keep getting away with it.
If they just put up with it to get the job then they are as culpable as the abuser for covering the abuse up.
57Ford said:
Reading the BBC article, the most obvious questions that springs to mind is that if she was undercover to report on alleged abuse of models, why was her own encounter not published at the time of the original expose?Mandat said:
57Ford said:
Reading the BBC article, the most obvious questions that springs to mind is that if she was undercover to report on alleged abuse of models, why was her own encounter not published at the time of the original expose?But, y'know
mmm-five said:
they are as culpable as the abuser for covering the abuse up.
deckster said:
Mandat said:
57Ford said:
Reading the BBC article, the most obvious questions that springs to mind is that if she was undercover to report on alleged abuse of models, why was her own encounter not published at the time of the original expose?But, y'know
mmm-five said:
they are as culpable as the abuser for covering the abuse up.
The article also says that the exposé documentary was aired in November 1999.
This begs the question; why was the abuse experienced by the undercover journalist not made public at the time of the original exposé in 1999?
Presumably this would have been the killer "gotcha" that the documentary would have been aiming for in the first place.
Mandat said:
You're missing the point.
The article also says that the exposé documentary was aired in November 1999.
This begs the question; why was the abuse experienced by the undercover journalist not made public at the time of the original exposé in 1999?
Presumably this would have been the killer "gotcha" that the documentary would have been aiming for in the first place.
I don't know why it wasn't aired in the documentary, but your point is exactly hers: "I didn't question that wisdom. And I know now I should have done."The article also says that the exposé documentary was aired in November 1999.
This begs the question; why was the abuse experienced by the undercover journalist not made public at the time of the original exposé in 1999?
Presumably this would have been the killer "gotcha" that the documentary would have been aiming for in the first place.
That said. Why ask the question? What does it matter why it wasn't brought up at the time? There were probably a million reasons why, none of which are relevant in any way. We already know that the culture back then wasn't conducive to women speaking up about abuse.
Even now, we've had "she was just as much at fault" and "why didn't she say anything". Victim blaming is alive and well in 2021 so god alone knows what it would be been like in 1999.
deckster said:
I don't know why it wasn't aired in the documentary, but your point is exactly hers: "I didn't question that wisdom. And I know now I should have done."
That said. Why ask the question? What does it matter why it wasn't brought up at the time? There were probably a million reasons why, none of which are relevant in any way. We already know that the culture back then wasn't conducive to women speaking up about abuse.
Even now, we've had "she was just as much at fault" and "why didn't she say anything". Victim blaming is alive and well in 2021 so god alone knows what it would be been like in 1999.
Sorry, but 'victim blaming' would be saying "she went out looking for it because she was wearing sexy clothes and was drinking."!That said. Why ask the question? What does it matter why it wasn't brought up at the time? There were probably a million reasons why, none of which are relevant in any way. We already know that the culture back then wasn't conducive to women speaking up about abuse.
Even now, we've had "she was just as much at fault" and "why didn't she say anything". Victim blaming is alive and well in 2021 so god alone knows what it would be been like in 1999.
I am saying she could have done something about it at the time, shortly after, or at any time in the intervening years to help other victims from never being victims.
She didn't, as she/the team wanted a story for the TV, so is she not partially responsible for those additional victims (along with everyone else on the production team)?
What brought about the #me too movement?
Were women just waiting for Twitter to be invented?
Or was it caused by women speaking out about the abuse they suffered.
In 1999 social media didn't exist. Newspapers were hacking phones etc, and I doubt anything controversial against powerful/rich media figures would have survived 5 seconds.
So whilst some might think breaking this all apart just needed a few women to be pathfinders, I think in reality any pathfinders were just squashed.
It took the technology and getting media out of a few people's hands to break it all open.
But the casting couch..surprised anyone is surprised. But I think that women born lucky enough to be able to be models should be able to do it without the sexual (or indeed any) exploitation, even if it was industry standard at the time.
Were women just waiting for Twitter to be invented?
Or was it caused by women speaking out about the abuse they suffered.
In 1999 social media didn't exist. Newspapers were hacking phones etc, and I doubt anything controversial against powerful/rich media figures would have survived 5 seconds.
So whilst some might think breaking this all apart just needed a few women to be pathfinders, I think in reality any pathfinders were just squashed.
It took the technology and getting media out of a few people's hands to break it all open.
But the casting couch..surprised anyone is surprised. But I think that women born lucky enough to be able to be models should be able to do it without the sexual (or indeed any) exploitation, even if it was industry standard at the time.
Mandat said:
You're missing the point.
The article also says that the exposé documentary was aired in November 1999.
This begs the question; why was the abuse experienced by the undercover journalist not made public at the time of the original exposé in 1999?
Presumably this would have been the killer "gotcha" that the documentary would have been aiming for in the first place.
I haven't read the linked article, but the article I read yesterday stated that following the broadcast of the programme the BBC were sued by a modelling agency and as part of a confidential settlement it was agreed that the programme would never be shown again. The article also said that the BBC had told the victim they couldnt release the footage. I guess they can if ordered to by a court.The article also says that the exposé documentary was aired in November 1999.
This begs the question; why was the abuse experienced by the undercover journalist not made public at the time of the original exposé in 1999?
Presumably this would have been the killer "gotcha" that the documentary would have been aiming for in the first place.
Ian Geary said:
What brought about the #me too movement?
Were women just waiting for Twitter to be invented?
Or was it caused by women speaking out about the abuse they suffered.
In 1999 social media didn't exist. Newspapers were hacking phones etc, and I doubt anything controversial against powerful/rich media figures would have survived 5 seconds.
So whilst some might think breaking this all apart just needed a few women to be pathfinders, I think in reality any pathfinders were just squashed.
It took the technology and getting media out of a few people's hands to break it all open.
But the casting couch..surprised anyone is surprised. But I think that women born lucky enough to be able to be models should be able to do it without the sexual (or indeed any) exploitation, even if it was industry standard at the time.
Were women just waiting for Twitter to be invented?
Or was it caused by women speaking out about the abuse they suffered.
In 1999 social media didn't exist. Newspapers were hacking phones etc, and I doubt anything controversial against powerful/rich media figures would have survived 5 seconds.
So whilst some might think breaking this all apart just needed a few women to be pathfinders, I think in reality any pathfinders were just squashed.
It took the technology and getting media out of a few people's hands to break it all open.
But the casting couch..surprised anyone is surprised. But I think that women born lucky enough to be able to be models should be able to do it without the sexual (or indeed any) exploitation, even if it was industry standard at the time.
Still in the era of a
holes like Max Clifford(also a massive abuser) 'fixing' things.ofcorsa said:
Seems incredible that a documentary expose didn't include the fact that a crew member was assaulted during the filming or pursue charges once aired.
That's the point that I was making.It seems strange that this assault was not made public at the time, since the whole point of the investigation was apparently to uncover such abuse.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff