Jimmy Savile

Abusers. My iPad doesn't like abusers. Types a users?

All the research has found that 100% of child abusers have been abused, emotionally, physically and/or sexually themselves. From the little known about him, he came from a dysfunctional family and was overly protective towards his mother. There was a lot of gossip about the relationship being 'unnatural.' He said more than once that he shared his mother's bed. I won't make assumptions, though, because i have known of men who did this to protect their mother from a brutal husband. Additionally, he moved in a circle of extreme promiscuity.

However, none of this excuses him. The vast majority who are treated brutally do not sexually abuse others.

This may be controversial, but just as not all celebs are abusers, not all catholic priests are abusers and not all catholic children were abused.

glitabo I am against ALL generalisations of any sector, i.e. gender, race, sexuality, religion etc. They are (I feel) the product of a very ignorant and closed mind.

Not controversial at all glitabo. Thank goodness most children enjoy their childhoods in safe, loving circumstances. It's difficult to discuss any subjects without making some generalisations, but anyone with an ounce of common sense will use information wisely and not apply it irresponsibly.

I am quite sure that nobody has suggested for one moment that all catholic children have been abused - I wasn't! Nor has anybody suggested that all priests are abusers. One must not extrapolate from one remark!

I think the post
He was a catholic - I wonder if anything similar happened to him in his childhood? does imply an acceptance that this would not be unusual.

I have always enjoyed and respected your postings greatnan and have admired you for standing up for your views. I just think that this time, what could be construed as a casual throw away remark, is overloaded with an implicit assumption that it would be natural to make this leap.

This is not personal on my part. I am not a practicing catholic, but had you said
He was black/a jew/an aetheist - I wonder if anything similar happened to him in his childhood? there may have been a more indignant reaction.

hate the word dysfunctional in relation to families!!

Expect that is what we are maybe with having lost our daughter and grand kids!!

I am practising Catholic, it does insense me as of course most priests are absolutely fine they do vary in other ways just like anyone, is a very big issue.

Of course Church of England clergy have record of abuse also but they do not have to be celibate which I suppose makes it less controversial.

I have no idea what religion J Saville was but am sure did not contribute to his alleged child abuse.

I did not mean it to read like that and I am sorry if that is what you saw. We don't actually know how many children were abused by priests but I am sure there were very many who have still not spoken of it. Not all abused children become abusers, of course, but it seems all abusers have been abused.

He was a high profile catholic.

Greatnan

Bit off topic, but anneandgraham I was in a seminar earlier this week and the language that we use in relation to addiction and families came up: "dysfunctional"; "enabler"; "co-dependent" being just some of them. Interesting, made me think and I decided never going to use dysfunctional again. We are all just doing our best to be functional most of the time!

In defence of greatnan - not that she needs it! - catholicism is a religion where the priesthood is encouraged (indeed required) to repress their sexual instincts, which is not healthy, so the possibility of an unhealthy influence is there. It is not that all priests were/are abusers, it is just that the climate is set for the possibility.

Half a dozen times at least I have started to post about things long forgotten (involving rock stars, music/record people and Catholic priests) and then deleted. (How bizarre were my teenage years?) I'm not the least bit traumatised and I'm very unsure that abuse is the right word but I simply don''t want to talk about it. At the same time I have very strong feelings about genuine abuse and the importance of coming forward to prevent its recurrence. This is not a cut-and-dried issue and is far more complex than the way it is presented.

I think I may be about to post something controversial, but I believe that in the main, the Catholic religion is one founded on fear.

I have many friends who are RC, and this is something that they have said.

However, yet again, there is a drift away from the subject of the O.P.

Indeed it is Phoenix. I don't agree with you, but perhaps you could start a new thread and anyone on this forum who is brave enough to admit to being a practising Catholic could debate the issue with you.

I've known many lapsed Catholics over the years and it does seem to trouble them; almost a fear of disobeying. I must admit to loving the pomp and ceremony of such religions, and the beauty of their churches but fail to understand the ideology behind their beliefs [correct me if I'm wrong about these things and their attitiude has changed towards them] such as being against birth control and expecting women to just churn out babies throughout the whole of their child bearing years; being against the use of condoms in places like Africa where Aids is so prevalent; not acknowledging that it is quite normal for a man [or woman] to be gay, and, yes making their priests take vows of celibacy.

Why would you need to be brave? Everyone is entitled to believe what they like. I think there are many practising catholics who do not agree with everything the church teaches and would like it to be more liberal in its thinking.
I don't think I would be posting on such a thread as I have made my views clear many times.

I'll start a new thread! I'm not RC but my early life was at a Convent.

I did write a long comment trying to explain my views on catholicism but I deleted it as I do not think this is the right thread. However I have expressed very strong anti catholic views on another thread.
To get back to the OP, I think that JS was a sick, repugnant, abusive b******d and the fact that he was catholic is irrelevant.

I'm not sure that his Catholicism was irrelevant if he was a chid abuser. A while ago, The Catholic Herald published an article about what a fine man, seeking nothing in the way of praise and keeping his religion secret, Jimmy Savile was. Obviously, the article was talking about his fund-raising which was, indeed, charitable and praiseworthy, but an accolade from a Catholic newspaper may have given him an opportunity to bask in approval and mentally sideline other, more questionable activities.

He was also very highly praised by the Prince of Wales who will one day be the head of the Church of England.

And, glitabo, much admired, liked and respected by all sorts of people. So what?

I was merely suggesting that he might have found comfort and support (albeit perverse if he was genuinely a chid molester) in the words of a Catholic newspaper, given that he was a Catholic. No more, no less.

I just feel incredibly angry that none of this came into the public domain until after he died, so he effectively got away with it.
I fully understand why it didn't: It was made clear to all the girls who were brave enough to try to report the abuse that taking it any further would be very high profile. How many youngsters would chose the media circus in those circumstances? And would they ever have been believed back then??
Like many others on GN, I experienced my fair share of "dirty old men". Some incidents were relatively minor, but others were very traumatising. Some were narrow escapes that could have ended very badly if I'd not had my wits about me. As others have said, on the whole we brushed it off because we knew no better, and got on with life.
But why the hell did we have to, and why the hell do girls (and boys) go on having to experience such gross, vile disgusting experiences?
I know most men are decent and loving human beings - I'm not condemning them all, but it is scary how many sexually deviant predators seem to be out there. What is wrong with mankind??
I guess my anger is for myself and everyone else who has been their victim.

There have been some very good points made here, and I would agree with those that say that we should perhaps consider a new thread.

This one started with the title "Jimmy Savile" . We have wandered, digressed and moved away from that, but in the main the wanderings etc have been points well made.

To be utterly honest, a day or so ago I was tempted to start TWO new threads, one entitled " I was abused in the past and don't want to talk about it." and the other "I was abused in the past and would like to talk about it"

I think that, as we are all of "an age" so to speak, although I do fully appreciate that our ages probably span at least 4 decades, then it is highly likely that we have all been on the receiving end of some sort of wrong doing, discrimination, patronised or "abused" in various ways, mentally physically etc. And this could include things that were, in their time, considered "acceptable", the pinched bottom from the boss, the husband constantly undermining one and assuming that the mere fact that they are male somehow makes them superior.

Sorry for the soapbox, and I hope I have not upset or offended anyone.