Jay123 not sure where to go with that. i can't really argue against the points you have made but at the same time see some value in having the debate out in the ooen. I doubt very much that Ludwig is the only one who thinks as he does (leaving aside the trolls).

Apart from a long term respect for Ludwig I find the process of debating the points usefull.

Ludwig, I'm not to bothered by the size of sentence. I would have preferred to see a longer sentence before the possibility of release but also don't really want to see his wife spending her last years alone despite my disgust with Harris's actions. Hard to build up a head of steam over the length of sentence. I think he got a sentence that was on the lower end of the scale for the actions involved but at least he is being dealt with for his crimes.

R0bert

Ludwig wrote: 'others have fallen off this thread and disappeared, perhaps because they can see the merit in what I am saying… or they are only interested enough in the issue to condemn Harris, but not interested enough get right into the nitty-gritty of it?'

I posted once on this thread. I have 'fallen off', not because of seeing any merit in what Ludwig has been saying, or am only interested in condemning Harris, but because I saw absolutely no point whatever in talking to closed minds. But I do admire those people who have persisted with challenging Ludwig and his mates.

However I have followed the thread and have given some thought to the subject. My conclusion in next post.

When we toilet-train small children, we instill in them concepts of shame and disgust. It's dirty. Don't touch yourself down there. Don't pull your pants down. Don't pull your dress up. Close the toilet door. Don't let anyone else see, or touch you there. Don't even talk about it! The very words are rude!

All cultures teach that 'down there' is private and embarrassing, and for good hygienic reasons.

However for little girls, it gets worse, when they learn about menstruation. It's even more icky, embarrassing and private. And then as they mature, girls learn that this is where babies come from, and that touching 'down there' can be a source of pleasure!

This is a huge contradiction to come to terms with. Around puberty, 9-14, when girls are highly sensitive to body image, it can be very confusing and deeply embarrassing. Of course most women survive, hopefully with happy experiences of sexual experimentation with young men of similar age.

The worst thing that can happen is when a trusted adult breaks the taboo on touching down there (or worse). It's shameful for all children, but especially for young girls in the lead-up to puberty. And in the case of Rolf Harris, when the adult is a child's hero, and it happens in a public place? You can't talk about it - it's rude! Who would believe you anyway? Is it your fault? You'll be blamed!

It will roll off some kids, but others will internalise it and continue to feel ashamed. For these, it may aggravate the normal confusion of the contradictions described above, an lead to continuing shame. If repeated it may undermine the normal process of awakening sexuality, making it difficult for a young girl to relate normally to young men and lead to fixation on the adult who broke the taboo (as perhaps in the case of friend of Harris' daughter).

This is why I do not accept such behaviour in adult men as a bit of harmless groping. It's a serious betrayal of trust of vulnerable children which can derail their normal gradual maturation

<< Apart from a long term respect for Ludwig I find the process of debating the points usefull. >>

Very good.

<< Ludwig, I'm not to bothered by the size of sentence. I would have preferred to see a longer sentence before the possibility of release but also don't really want to see his wife spending her last years alone despite my disgust with Harris's actions. Hard to build up a head of steam over the length of sentence. I think he got a sentence that was on the lower end of the scale for the actions involved but at least he is being dealt with for his crimes. >>

Fair enough R0bert.

Thanks for your well-considered response Cossomby.

I have no issue with what you have said.

But I would just reiterate that it needs to be put into the perspective of all pedophilic, child-molestation and child-touching offences, and all other things that can have similar effects on children…. and the enormous prevalence of this sort of thing in our society and around the world.

Then we need to compare the position on the spectrum of Harris’ offences to the level of condemnation of him, the destruction of his image and life’s work, the revocation of awards and the removal of his artwork.

When we look at the overall penalty that Harris has copped, I think most reasonable people would see it as severe.

The formal charges and prison sentence is just one part of this.

From Ludwig, "I have no issue with what you have said.. "But"....."

Ludwig then goes on to display he has MANY issues with what RObert's been saying. More word games from Ludwig.

Why oh why do people even bother with Ludwig's shameful attempts to reduce the seriousness of many acts of pedophilia? Talk 'about' him yes, but to directly engage with him only makes him feel empowered. People with children reading his posts, not that many people read this forum anyway, would be raising their eyebrows with nearly every Ludwig word.

The innocent children of this world deserve better than the shameful, backward attitudes from Ludwig. He has shown he has absolutely no desire to reform. It's so sad to witness.