David Walliams dropped by his publishers

I’ve always found David Walliams, his books and his ‘comedy’ characters very creepy. 🥴

NanKate

I thought he was gay, perhaps not.

Let me be the eight hundreth person to say this.
I thought he was gay as well.

I don’t think I’ve ever seen him on television, so can’t comment, but my grandchildren enjoyed his books, and we all enjoyed the films and televisations, I think he has written some very enjoyable books and have never noticed anything weird about them, they are funny and sometimes poignant.

He has now been dropped by the BBC as well, although they will still be showing anything scheduled that he is in as well as a couple of dramatisations of his books over the Christmas period.
I've never particularly liked him as a person but I have to admit that I’ve read some of his books with my DGD and we’ve both enjoyed them. We are also currently reading Grandpa’s Great Escape and enjoying that too.
I notice that he is being compared to Roald Dahl who was anti semitic and apparently also a deeply unpleasant person but it didn’t stop him from being a favourite children’s’ author, although some of his books have also offended people.
I wonder who will now public DW’s books, perhaps he’ll set up his own company.

Whatever happened to innocent before being proved guilty,I abhor this cancel culture we now have,I'm not a fan of his but this total trial by media is so wrong

Flippin2

Whatever happened to innocent before being proved guilty,I abhor this cancel culture we now have,I'm not a fan of his but this total trial by media is so wrong

I did wonder if he has had a chance to defend himself or this is on the say-so of one person?

Does anyone remember when he completed a gruelling swim down the Thames, suffering from hypothermia and bacterial infection? He raised £1million for charity.

He isn’t being tried by media. His publishing company dropped him after allegations of inappropriate behaviour towards young women. Given the money he’s made for them, I say good. If only Saville, Edwards, Harris and many others had been dropped as a result of allegations, some young people might have been saved from abuse or harassment t

I am not doing trial by media, I am basing it in my own judgement of knowing a predatory man when I see one.

Galaxy - very well and imo bravery said
I felt the same about him, flesh crawling.

I understand people's concerns about trial by media but I also believe, rather bizarrely considering my pragmatic nature, that instance is very important. Especially for women.

Instinct not instance. This phone drives me mad.

I often wonder if my phone has been taken over by gremlins

I never was interested in David Williams.. I dismissed him early on as an arrogant, entitled nobody, and I disliked his’in your face’ comedy….if that’s what you call it

I know nothing of the man, seems he was dropped by his publishers following allegations made by the Telegraph, surely
trial by media

Barbadosbelle

Bluebell

Goodness Bluebelle - your sentences are really SO exhausting!!
Maybe some commas and full-stops?!
.

I m so sorry you find my few sentences so exhausting, Barbadosbelle, Six lines must be very fatiguing.

I always thought it was considered quite rude to comment on here on spelling or grammar.

Anniebach he’s not being tried by the Telegraph or any other publication. Young women have complained about his behaviour towards them, it must be pretty serious to let him go, he must earn a lot of money for them.

Bluebell I read “following research by the telegraph”, it brought to mind Phillip Schofield and the family of the man he was having an affair with, they went to a newspaper

Well maybe it was brought to light by the Telegraph Anniebach but it appears a young lady or ladies had complained to HarperCollins about his behaviour towards them and they said they care for their employees, so had to act.

Many years ago, one show that starred DW I cannot remember its name, he played the part ofa grown up son with his mother, I tried to watch it a couple of times but one scene he had with his actress mother each week was so revoltingly cringing I avouded watching him from then on , definitely found him seedy and odd as I did Saville, the one that did surprise me was Rolf Harris. How do they get away with it? Surely everyone must know.
Can posters refrain from being rude to other posters that they find exhausting, they don't have to read their posts.

The media will be able to prove anything they print. If they are not going into detail it will be because doing so could prejudice a trial if there is one. Walliams is notoriously litigious, and it may well be that, plus his OTT camp presentation that parodies women, people of colour and gay men, and his charity work that has protected him for so long.

An ‘eccentric’ persona that includes inappropriate but supposedly comedic behaviour, very public charity work, access to children and young people - that MO has worked before, and so many people said afterwards that they always knew there was something wrong there, too.

Greenfinch

*Grandmabatty*, that’s maybe why my son has never allowed his four to read his books. I offered to buy one last Christmas but he declined the offer merely saying he didn’t like him.

My DS refuses to have his books in his house, I’ve never read any but always thought Walliams was creepy, like Saville and Rolf Harris there’s something unsettling about him.
I can’t help wondering why these individuals are attracted to doing charity work, are they hiding in plain sight?
Skin-crawling and sickening behaviour, it makes me wonder how many more will be uncovered.

His sneering face made me switch over whenever he appeared. I'm not in the least surprised to hear he's misogynistic and a bully. Odious little man.

We went to see “Boy in a Dress” at the theatre, funny and of course popular with the liberal “wokeists” but it is wierd and I’ve always thought Walliams creepy.

Allsorts

Many years ago, one show that starred DW I cannot remember its name, he played the part ofa grown up son with his mother, I tried to watch it a couple of times but one scene he had with his actress mother each week was so revoltingly cringing I avouded watching him from then on , definitely found him seedy and odd as I did Saville, the one that did surprise me was Rolf Harris. How do they get away with it? Surely everyone must know.
Can posters refrain from being rude to other posters that they find exhausting, they don't have to read their posts.

“how did they get away with it?”

They got away with it because they did much of it openly. Savile used to go into hospitals and take the Matron’s hand (or any VIPs attending) and kiss it and make smarmy remarks. He even used to fawn all over Margaret Thatcher, Princess Diana and many celebs. People thought he was a real character and because he was making millions for charities they humoured him. He used to go into hospitals smoking a cigar, he took over rooms for his own use and had keys to get in! Nobody said a word.

Walliams is the same. His characters in Little Britain were definitely shocking but, again, nobody complained.

I couldn’t watch anything he was a part of so I don’t know if he was talented at acting or even a decent author. I wouldn’t buy any of his books for anyone belonging to me.

I felt uncomfortable just hearing his voice and seeing his face
Just how I felt with the other well know abusers who dominated the media at times.

It’s a brave act to call out these powerful people.

Members of the public who ‘always knew someone was creepy’ can’t call them out though. If as many people who say they always knew had switched off tv, refused to buy books or donate to causes the creepy celebrities were part of they would lose their celebrity status, but no - Savile, Brand, Harris, Hall and others were famous and popular (even in death) when they were unmasked.

Such are the ‘trial by media’ accusations if women speak out about their experiences at the hands of ‘national treasures’ and such is the risk of litigation if the media say or print a single thing that can’t be proved, that they get away with it for many years - decades in some cases.

If more people listened to women, and were more willing to believe them, and to act on those beliefs where possible there would be fewer such cases. As it is, misogyny hampers progress and gives the perpetrators free rein.

Nobody wants to see the innocent suffer; but so often nobody gets to the stage of collecting evidence because charity work or the ability to bring in viewers trumps the suffering of female victims - even very young ones. It says a lot about attitudes, doesn’t it?