the sir jimmy savile obe thread

[bubblesmcgrath]

I'm leaving this shit thread.
Too much pomposity ...and people who just want to pick ...

 

[toggle]

My post is not in conflict with VP's unnecessary "explanation" of the court system or the meaning of the term "criminal conviction "...

But why don't you go ahead and explain VPs post again
......

You originally used the phrase criminally responsible and VP has responded to your use of that phrase. this has a specific meaning and is not synonymous with 'criminal conviction'.

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

You originally used the phrase criminally responsible and VP has responded to your use of that phrase. this has a specific meaning and is not synonymous with 'criminal conviction'.

VP didnt mention "criminal conviction". I did.
The term "criminal responsibility" was used by both of us in the same way.

 

[UrbaneFox]

Bubbles, I wonder if you have such intense discussions with your colleagues? Perhaps they could answer some of your questions, and suggest reading matter.

You said that you had been working there * for some years, so they must trust you, and would be happy to educate not just you, but all members of staff on these points.

You must have staff training days. Why not suggest some of the questions you have asked here be the topics for future training days? The group could publish its own papers if the subjects are not covered in 'the literature'.

 

[UrbaneFox]

*

I actually work very closely with teenagers with disabilities and the training they get is very intensive and covers all asoects of abuse....from familial to stranger. They are brought through a programme provided by educational psychologists that gives them the skills to use the three steps. It makes it very accessible to them.

But then again I'm in Ireland and there's been a massive input into this training for teachers, care personnel, and young childten and teenagers...particularly those with special needs.

 

[UrbaneFox]

*

I said the programme implemented over here gave
the teenagers I was speaking of skills to USE the steps...(as in personal, social and communication skills)

The programme run by psychologists, teachers and carers is aimed at prevention but also at disclosure and counselling. It coordinates with health service, child care and social workers. There are direct referrals to child care personnel and the gardai.

It's a huge step in the right direction in actively trying to prevent and or interrupt/stop abuse ... it covers sexual, emotional, physical abuse and neglect.

 

[UrbaneFox]

*

No it's not the stay safe programme although it does use some of it. It is a programme on relationships and sexuality which has been implemented by psychologists in a special educational setting. Because it deals with helping individuals it has a very personal slant. Group sessions are given by psychologists.

 

[Pickman's model]

Using the term "criminally responsible" does mean that the person you are speaking about has been found criminally responsible in court. Which was why i used the term.
And as VP explains (unnecessarily in my view) the court system includes judge and jury.
My post was clear and concise. .. No sloppy thinking.
But carry on....explain where my post was sloppy? Or did I just not use enough words. ..

you used enough words, just not the right words or in the right order.

 

[Pickman's model]

..

 

[UrbaneFox]

*

I operate as an educationalist working from both a position of prevention and child protection.

 

[UrbaneFox]

*

I've 16 years in working with teens with special needs. The work being done with them in the area of relationship and sexuality is groud breaking.

 

[Pickman's model]

*

*

bubblesmcgrath is it #3850 or #3851?

 

[UrbaneFox]

@ existentialist

Glad you got my pm and the info I sent you on the "Freedom" programme plus contact names and addresses.

...you're welcome to contact my place of work, and the other centres mentioned in the pm, for further info.

Bubbles, I wonder if you might PM the same information to me?

Thank you

 

[UrbaneFox]

Anyone who wants the info can pm me....and I'll send them on the contact name.

You said it was OK.

Do I have to PM you, or will this public request suffice?

 

[ibilly99]

Back on topic briefly....

How are Jimmy Savile , Westminster paedophiles and mobile phone batteries alike?

 

[Pickman's model]

Back on topic briefly....

How are Jimmy Savile , Westminster paedophiles and mobile phone batteries alike?

don't give up the day job

 

[ibilly99]

don't give up the day job

couldn't figure how to do the spoiler thing ....

A. We only charge them after they're dead.

 

[Pickman's model]

couldn't figure how to do the spoiler thing ....

A. We only charge them after they're dead.

yeh i saw that

 

[ibilly99]

Alan Bennett waded into dangerous territory back in 2009.

The taboos protecting young people from sexual abuse took a long time to build up. They have to be protected from erosion, because Alan Bennett is terribly wrong – the "real children" are never old men who want to cop a feel of adolescents.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...tt-and-the-question-of-innocence-1828408.html

 

[existentialist]

I'm leaving this shit thread.
Too much pomposity ...and people who just want to pick ...

 

[Frances Lengel]

so by 'the means' do you mean 'a decent job'?

No, not necessarily.

Wealthy people abuse their kids too.

Undoubtedly. but what i'm trying to say & I'm probably not going to be able to articulate it properly is that when you've got fuck all every setback's a major disaster - Your kid spills the milk, clumsy fucker but no harm done, your kid spills the milk & that milk was bought with your last fifty pence, oh that kid's getting twatted - And that's poverty & circumscribed circumstances that's in a way making people into abusers due to frustrations beyond their control. IYSWIM.

 

[existentialist]

No, not necessarily.



Undoubtedly. but what i'm trying to say & I'm probably not going to be able to articulate it properly is that when you've got fuck all every setback's a major disaster - Your kid spills the milk, clumsy fucker but no harm done, your kid spills the milk & that milk was bought with your last fifty pence, oh that kid's getting twatted - And that's poverty & circumscribed circumstances that's in a way making people into abusers due to frustrations beyond their control. IYSWIM.

I think this is a good point, though I am not sure that diverting money from support services directly to people in poverty is necessarily the answer: I don't think you lift people out of poverty purely by throwing money at them.

But the support services need to be good, joined up, and managed for the benefit of the people they're there to serve, not the people who run the show.

I wouldn't agree entirely with your characterisation of social services, but I do think there is some validity in your criticism of them: there's a lot of clunky, clodhopping interventions done by people who think they know best for other people, and that's just bollocks, not to mention even more disabling of the people they're purporting to help.

TBF, part of the problem is that Social Services is the agency nobody wants to appreciate, which means that it tends to end up being a job that few aspire to do, with the obvious effect on recruitment and quality of staff, and of course - like any other public service - they're under-resourced, which means that even good staff are pushed to do a decent job, even where they want to.

My work as a counsellor with deprived kids (mainly) is hard enough that I am, after six years, looking for a way out. I know for a fact that it is infinitely more gritty, depressing, and demanding for social work staff, even competent ones, and the burnout rate is horrible.

What we need is (small s) social services that are joined up, client-led, and not just about last-minute interventions when it's all gone tits up. They need a supportive and preventative role, and they need to be integrated into all of the statutory and voluntary support services so that it doesn't end up being a situation where they're effectively the parent police, parachuting in when it's all gone wrong to interfere and judge. Which, all too often, is how it ends up at the moment.

 

[Rural]

I think this is a good point, though I am not sure that diverting money from support services directly to people in poverty is necessarily the answer: I don't think you lift people out of poverty purely by throwing money at them.

But the support services need to be good, joined up, and managed for the benefit of the people they're there to serve, not the people who run the show.

I wouldn't agree entirely with your characterisation of social services, but I do think there is some validity in your criticism of them: there's a lot of clunky, clodhopping interventions done by people who think they know best for other people, and that's just bollocks, not to mention even more disabling of the people they're purporting to help.

TBF, part of the problem is that Social Services is the agency nobody wants to appreciate, which means that it tends to end up being a job that few aspire to do, with the obvious effect on recruitment and quality of staff, and of course - like any other public service - they're under-resourced, which means that even good staff are pushed to do a decent job, even where they want to.

My work as a counsellor with deprived kids (mainly) is hard enough that I am, after six years, looking for a way out. I know for a fact that it is infinitely more gritty, depressing, and demanding for social work staff, even competent ones, and the burnout rate is horrible.

What we need is (small s) social services that are joined up, client-led, and not just about last-minute interventions when it's all gone tits up. They need a supportive and preventative role, and they need to be integrated into all of the statutory and voluntary support services so that it doesn't end up being a situation where they're effectively the parent police, parachuting in when it's all gone wrong to interfere and judge. Which, all too often, is how it ends up at the moment.

U dont have to throw money at them but ensuring a decent standard of living is possible with social security would goa long way to alleviating misery

 

[Frances Lengel]

<snip.: I don't think you lift people out of poverty purely by throwing money at them.

- I'd say you do - give people a bit more money, they aren't going to be poor anymore. And there's an end to poverty. it is that simple.

I wouldn't agree entirely with your characterisation of social services, but I do think there is some validity in your criticism of them: there's a lot of clunky, clodhopping interventions done by people who think they know best for other people, and that's just bollocks, not to mention even more disabling of the people they're purporting to help.<snip>.

Thanks for that reasonable reply - You're probably right not to agree entirely coz I do just hate them & i've got my own reasons for that, but nice one - Your point about clodhopping interventions & disabling the people they're supposed to be helping is pretty much what i was trying to say - You managed to say it in a more reasonable way than i could hope to manage though - I do respond emotionally to this kind of thing and I know that's not the best way to state your case.

 

[existentialist]

Believe me, Frances, nobody could be more pissed off than me ( )by the way in which Social Services have landed on clients of mine and thoroughly wrecked months of careful trust-building and confidence improvement with one clueless, ill-advised, insensitive lumpen intervention in the middle of a delicate piece of work. Without, naturally, so much as a by-your-leave or acknowledgement of what they were about to do, nor apology for the wreckage they left behind.

 

[UrbaneFox]

TBF, part of the problem is that Social Services is the agency nobody wants to appreciate, which means that it tends to end up being a job that few aspire to do, with the obvious effect on recruitment and quality of staff, and of course - like any other public service - they're under-resourced, which means that even good staff are pushed to do a decent job, even where they want to.

My work as a counsellor with deprived kids (mainly) is hard enough that I am, after six years, looking for a way out. I know for a fact that it is infinitely more gritty, depressing, and demanding for social work staff, even competent ones, and the burnout rate is horrible.

I'll say.

 

[Frances Lengel]

"Turned into perverts". I'd disagree with that. The original abusers were the perverts. Their victims were merely displaying some of the more obvious and expected reactions to being nonced. Turned into something they loathed, yes - they were turned into offenders themselves - but they weren't abusing power in the same structural way as their own abusers in order to do so.

I'm not even trying to pick an argument but yeah, I'd say those kids were turned into perverts in that their sexuality was knocked off the rails and perverted (in the dictionary sense of the word) as a direct result of the abuse they suffered. In the end it's semantics though - They got damaged. By abusers. That's all I was really trying to say.

 

[Frances Lengel]

You can stick this thread up your arse.

only if you're over sixteen though.

 

[UrbaneFox]

I'll say.

In fact, and this was a few years ago, I hardly got involved with it. I thought that so much of that world was a well-meaning but cheap shambles, with things rushed through, all expenses spared, minimal training for some, a lot of trainees wanting client work, blame passed on all the time, and behind it all some quite damaged kids from fairly crap families. I didn't stick around.

 

[Frances Lengel]

Are we finished with this bullshit yet or do we need another twenty pages of it?

There's life in the old dog yet

and if it's an ailment which can't be cured it strikes me as perverse and cruel to keep them in prison

No it fucking isn't cruel at all. Lock them up for everyone's good. Is that honest to god the position you're taking? Sticking up for nonces? Mind you, should we be surprised? Fuck knows what went on in the dorm, eh? It wasn't all midnight feasts and Jennings goes To school, eh? Really, what positive contribution to this thread have you made? I know I was a wanker but really, you've done fuck all but make sly (and not even funny) digs & you're a genuine nonce apologist. And a pisshead who no longer drinks - Is that what you have to do to put some interest in your life now the ale won't do it? Stick up for nonces yeah? Fuckin prick - he wanks over Crowley and all that bullshit (and it is bullshit) - "Magick"? -My sweaty ringpiece - Oh yeah, despite my private school eduction, I'm that much of an inadequate that i was lucky even to get this boring job in a library and get treated like shit by fucking students, so I'll buy into this absolutely fucking nonsensical magick wancking bullshit just to give my life some illusion of meaning. Jesus H - I was raised a catholic & that was bullshit, but whatevs - What i didn't feel the need to do was adopt a whole other lot of equally wanky bullshit in a futile attempt to imbue my life with meaning. Still though, whatever gets you through I suppose. I recommend this though



Piss weak no mates twat.

And you haven't got any mates so don't even try to lie - If you did have, you wouldn't feel the need to affiliate yourself with all that creepy-crawly-crowley bullshit. A man forced by his own loneliness to take up perversion. And a public school wanker as well.