assume nothing.

This is excellent news.

So the stakes could scarcely be higher for Langham right now. His future will depend in large part on whether or not viewers believe he is sexually attracted to children. It would take far too long to revisit all the details of his trial, but in brief Langham was caught with 15 graphic videos of extreme child abuse on his computer. He has always sworn he downloaded them in order to research a character for Help! who would be a paedophile – and that he could only bring himself to watch a few seconds of four of them. Expert witnesses testified that he was not a paedophile, and appeared to convince the judge, who told Langham: “Paedophilia is not an issue in this case. You are not a sexual predator.” But a police officer told reporters outside, “I am satisfied that he is a paedophile,” and either way he was guilty of the offence of downloading images, and sentenced to 10 months, reduced to six on appeal, of which he served a little over three.

I spend an afternoon at his family home in rural Kent, and for what it’s worth – because of course, we’ll never know – I believe his explanation. I’ve never heard of a paedophile downloading just 15 images – their computers usually contain thousands and thousands – and nothing he says makes me suspicious.

[….]

“Not being able to work is terribly painful, because it’s what I do. But the tabloids are a bit like the secret police. Everyone despises them but everyone’s terrified of them at the same time, and so everybody was frightened of professional association with me, in case some tabloid said you’re obviously soft on paedophiles.

“Because that’s the big lie – that I am one. It is a lie. That’s one of the things that I’ve struggled with forgiving. The judge stated really clearly that I’m not a paedophile – and then the policeman said afterwards that I was – and that’s what the press have run with ever since.”

Didn’t he realise what he was doing on his computer was unbelievably dangerous, and indefensible? “I knew it was illegal. It was just hubristic and arrogant of me to think I’m above the law because I’m an artist. I thought after [I’d played the character], I’ll reveal I’d researched it, and people would say gosh, you’ve taken this really difficult subject and done something amazing. I’ll do this thing, and everyone will think I’m wonderful. I thought if I pulled it off, everyone would admire me. And I’m a slut for approval.”

This makes me angrier than I can possibly attempt to get across.

I don’t care if you’re not a paedophile, I don’t care if you’re not using the excuse of being sexually attracted to children.  Chris Langham, you downloaded those images and that makes you complicit in the abuse and rape of children, and for that you should not be forgiven.  You especially shouldn’t be heralded in a national newspaper as some kind of sad case worthy of pity.  Do you really believe that the abusers creating the material in question care whether you’re downloading it to get off or to do “research”? The fact that you download it makes you part of their market, makes them see some sort of demand, encourages them further. 

(I’m not saying, by the way, that if nobody was downloading it then child porn wouldn’t exist.  I have no doubt that the abusers do it for themselves as much as for their target audience.  But downloading the material, regardless of reason or intent, makes you part of their world.)

Rape accusations – like abortions, or becoming a single mother – are not something most women do for a lark, squeezing them in between mani-pedis and Pilates or, in the case of Diallo, cleaning another man’s toilet. That Diallo lied about a rape in order to gain asylum in America where she has since been so humiliated by a “sexual encounter” is just one of the bitter ironies here.

Despite the efforts of the DA and Strauss-Kahn’s defence team, a trial most certainly did happen: it just happened to be a trial of the accuser rather than the accused. Strauss-Khan has denied the allegations, and what occurred in room 2806 will never be known. What has been proved, on an international scale, is that only women who have led lives as sheltered as Rapunzel and have memory recall as robotic as computers are capable of being raped. The rest are money- grabbing sluts with vaginal bruising.

Excellent commentary right here.

thepersonalispolitic:

stfurapeculture:

nygis:

Possible rape triggering below, please be advised.

“Eventual” consent is not true consent, in regards to having sex. Coercion and emotional manipulation are as bad as physical force. Anything less than 100% consent without pressure…

(Source: lil-ith)

Ed Miliband urges prime minister to sack justice secretary for suggesting ‘date rape’ is not as serious as other kinds of rape.

Oh yeah, this is exactly as bad as it sounds.

I have posted a comment here, should anyone like to see.