Groping versus sexual predators.

[i-need-a-martini]

Let me preface this post by saying that I thnk anyone that has sex with a child is evil and I do not support anyone who is this way inclined. 

However, as I read the Rolf Harris trial it seems to me that the now grown women he was handy with are taking this to the extreme. He doesn't seem to have done anything beyond being very handy. The only sex he had was with a girl who was in her 2os at the time and there is no crime against that. Yet the news report women standing in the dock sobbing and being emotional or describing their lives wasted by depression, drug and alc addiction all because Harris groped them once. In one case something happened when one of the girls was 5 so not even at an age to fully appreciate that a touch could be sexual.

I don't get it where these women are coming from. How can they be so vulnerable and have fallen apart so readily at something like this?

I come from a big Italian family so I am used to 'handiness'. As kids we learnt to duck certain relatives but it never occurred to me then (and nor does it now) that it was anything other than annoyance.

(I should also point out that I haven't read every article in the Harris case so if there is more to it that I am not seeing, let me know).

[the_bob_delusion]

Umma, the femenist would have you for lunch. 

[the_bob_delusion]

I actually wondered if what he did is as bad as Robert Hughes from Hey dad? 

Plenty of Sleaze bags out there then. I think they're different to sexual predators. 

[icyfroth]

Have to agree, Martini.

I don't really know a single woman that hasn't been groped by some dirty old man or sleazebag at some stage in their life.

While it's not pleasant and certainly not acceptable I don't see how it's traumatising.

As girls we used to talk and laugh about it and warn each other about certain "uncles".

Sexual predators like Jimmy Saville, for instance, is a different matter altogether.

[youcandoityoucandoityoucandoit]

I hesitate to weigh in here, but perhaps there are important differences - one being that you mentioned relatives or 'uncles' as opposed to a stranger, the fact of the age difference, the changes in society and changes in the law...

Also, just because there is a trial, I wouldnt assume all the information is reported.

[icyfroth]

The sad thing is that in most cases, the gropers are relatives or friends of the families.

Sexual predators tend to seize children opportunistically, as in the Daniel Morcombe case.

[daydream**believer]

i was inappropriately touched by a police officer.

It was a day i will never forget but i didnt let it impact my life.

I think Rolf is guilty of innapropriate behaviour but the girls shouldnt use that as an excuse for their drug and alcohol abuse imo

[azureline**]

---

@youcandoityoucandoityoucandoit wrote:

I hesitate to weigh in here, but perhaps there are important differences - one being that you mentioned relatives or 'uncles' as opposed to a stranger, the fact of the age difference, the changes in society and changes in the law...

Also, just because there is a trial, I wouldnt assume all the information is reported.

---

is there a difference? I can't see why anyone should accept that because "Uncle" or "grandpa" did it, that it is better than "neighbour" or "friend's dad"

however, I have also been harbouring the same thoughts as Martini.

At some point in our lives, we take responsibilty for our own reactions.

[icyfroth]

My neighbour's daughter is coming back from England and has asked her mother to babysit their 12mth old little boy for 2 days a week. She gladly agreed, but was shocked that her daughter asked he never to leave the little boy alone with my neighbours male companion.

Man friend has 6 sons of his own and is no doubt an honourable man, but I agree with the daughter. Neighbour is disgusted her daughter would even suggest such a thing.

But at least she's been made aware.

[freakiness]

---

@i-need-a-martini wrote:

Let me preface this post by saying that I thnk anyone that has sex with a child is evil and I do not support anyone who is this way inclined. 

However, as I read the Rolf Harris trial it seems to me that the now grown women he was handy with are taking this to the extreme. He doesn't seem to have done anything beyond being very handy. The only sex he had was with a girl who was in her 2os at the time and there is no crime against that. Yet the news report women standing in the dock sobbing and being emotional or describing their lives wasted by depression, drug and alc addiction all because Harris groped them once. In one case something happened when one of the girls was 5 so not even at an age to fully appreciate that a touch could be sexual.

I don't get it where these women are coming from. How can they be so vulnerable and have fallen apart so readily at something like this?

---

Did he only grope them once each?

We can't really know what went on for them.  Maybe they told someone and were told not to cause trouble, or called liars or something.  Who knows how they beat themselves up with for letting the grope happen.  Maybe the grope wasn't such a friendly harmless grope that they could just brush off and forget about.

I think if we make excuses and allowances like we always have done nothing will change for the young girls of today and the future.

Girls do not exist for the groping pleasures of men.