In
the UK, we are forced to subsidize a wealthy corporation called The British
Broadcasting Corporation. Regardless of whether we watch their staple diet of
crass programmes. This company expects us to subsidize and pay for their
employees' salaries, all in the guise of a public service. Despite the beeb's
claims that they do not advertise, they have sold numerous programmes worldwide,
and still insist on us to fund their overpaid chauvinists, like Jeremy Clarkson,
or their authoritative male bullies, such as Jeremy Paxman.
Following
the recent revelations about Jimmy Savile, I find it an abysmal abuse of
celebrity power and feel outraged for every child and adult who fell victim to this
degenerate man. Isn't it ironic that he fought so hard to save peoples' lives
but also destroyed so many in return? What was the motive behind it?
Personally, I'd say his charitable acts were a front that enabled him to abuse people. His celebrity status and charity work gave him a passport to abuse,
molest and sexually assault minors and adults.
 |
| The appalling incident in which a young woman was groped by Savile live on Top of the Pops; note the expressions on some of the girls' faces above |
What
is equally disturbing is that many other celebrities at the BBC were aware of
the abuser's acts, but there are claims that the BBC did not want a scandal,
while others expressed fear of not being taken seriously or losing their jobs. They
are just as guilty. Undoubtedly, if
molesters/rapists are rich, they will be enabled by corporations to continue
their violation of children as long as the public image of the beeb is not
ruffled. Subsequently, in the parochial world run by the BBC, fuelled by
privilege, testosterone and misogyny, ratings are more important than justice.
I guess respect and acknowledgment for the victims doesn't count…
Why
didn't anyone contact the police? Were they concerned that Savile was in
collusion with them as well? Bullshit! Self-serving careerists will always make
excuses because their conscience tells them they couldn't act to justify their
conscience. Furthermore, a female who witnessed an act of abuse at the beeb was
cornered and threatened by Savile. This kind of coercive form of
intimidation serves the abuser to wield power over his domain. There was a
disturbing clip on Top of the Pops where Savile clearly assaults a girl. Her
pleas for help were trivialised and dismissed by the BBC. Furthermore, Savile's acts were ignored because of his ability to raise exorbitant sums of
money for charities. His mafia-style intimidation could not have happened in isolation.
Others are involved. And as the shit hits the fan, more names will transpire.
Gary
Glitter, an insipid third-rate pop star who excels as a sexual predator, also
gets away with numerous sexual offences.
I shudder when I recall the lyrics of one of his songs, on TOTP (hosted
by Savile), 'The Leader of the Gang': 'I'm the man who puts the bang in
gang'. He served a mere three years in
a Vietnamese jail for sex offences on the grounds that there was insufficient evidence.
This seems to draw parallels with Savile. What constitutes clear evidence?
Clearly not the testimonies of victims. Because the voices, the desperate
pleas, the outrage, don't count. Why don't they count? And why has this happened?
 |
| I can make you jump out of bed standing on my head, Gary Glitter performs 'I'm the Leader of the Gang' on Top of the Pops |
We
need to explore the prevalent misogynistic attitudes and male power that
encourages male entitlement to grope, assault and sexually assault. And it's
not solely a British thing. Abuses of power predominate throughout the
world.
Let’s
spare a thought for all the victims and how they were silenced by a
corporation that ignored the abused. Instead the BBC chose to dish out this predator on child-focused programming spanning over four decades. Shame on
you. These are the reasons why we should refuse to pay our television licence.
Let's make victims' testimonies count.
