Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Stephen Fry - abuse victims should "grow up" - opinions? Watch

    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Taken completely out of context for the title of this thread.

    I agree completely with his point.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    and I quote

    'no sympathy for child abuse victims’ “self-pity” if it meant restricting free speech.'
    Either way, he is telling them to grow up, surely that is not appropriate?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bullettheory)
    Is it misunderstanding though? He clearly says "grow up" when talking about abuse survivors



    How is that misunderstanding. He's not talking about free speech or censoring here, he is talking about the reactions from people who have been abused. He clearly attacks a natural reaction, and then tells them to grow up. Where have I misunderstood that?
    I recommend you watch the actual interview, the topic of the whole thing was free speech. He said that people who are trying to ban things and using their abuse as a justification need to grow up.

    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    There's a lot to be said for balance and tact....
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bullettheory)
    http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2...y-charity-mind

    Personally, I am absolutely disgusted at his comments, especially given his position as president of the largest mental health charity in the UK. If it was up to me, he should resign. As someone with mental health problems, I don't see how he can represent the views of vulnerable people, abuse victims, and those with mental illness.

    Thoughts?
    xx
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by bullettheory)
    Is it misunderstanding though? He clearly says "grow up" when talking about abuse survivors

    How is that misunderstanding. He's not talking about free speech or censoring here, he is talking about the reactions from people who have been abused. He clearly attacks a natural reaction, and then tells them to grow up. Where have I misunderstood that?
    He also said that they would get some of his sympathy for the abuse itself, but not for the self-pitying that follows. That, to me, seems like a clear nod to people who don't ever want to move on, especially when the abuse is something relatively minor (expecting to be figuratively mauled for this) like inappropriate touching (as opposed to something like rape).

    It's natural to grieve; it's not natural to insist on pitying yourself and to attack others for not pitying you to the extent that you'd like, in perpetuity. And that includes expecting others to walk on eggshells with what they say around you ('trigger words') in case you get reminded about something that happened 50 years ago. It's called accepting, grieving, and moving on. Why the idea of that is anathema to some people, I don't know. :holmes:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jebedee)
    I recommend you watch the actual interview, the topic of the whole thing was free speech. He said that people who are trying to ban things and using their abuse as a justification need to grow up.

    I have watched the interview. I know the discussion was around free speech. Yes, he talked about censoring and trigger warnings. However, he is still attacking the reactions of people who have experienced abuse. It's an ugly attack telling people to just "grow up". Sometimes we need to protect vulnerable people, and atleast listen to their views, not attack them and their reactions.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bullettheory)
    I have watched the interview. I know the discussion was around free speech. Yes, he talked about censoring and trigger warnings. However, he is still attacking the reactions of people who have experienced abuse. It's an ugly attack telling people to just "grow up". Sometimes we need to protect vulnerable people, and atleast listen to their views, not attack them and their reactions.
    And do we need to protect them from literature? education? words? At the behest of everyone else?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bullettheory)
    I have watched the interview. I know the discussion was around free speech. Yes, he talked about censoring and trigger warnings. However, he is still attacking the reactions of people who have experienced abuse. It's an ugly attack telling people to just "grow up". Sometimes we need to protect vulnerable people, and atleast listen to their views, not attack them and their reactions.
    What qualifies him to make this assertion?

    Ah, must be his medical degree and long stand career as a psychiatrist dealing with abuse and the complexities associated with it.

    Oh Wait.....
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Heartweaver)
    Free speech isn't a ticket to talk whatever s**t you want, just because you're allowed to.
    Except it is

    That is why it is called FREE speech
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I'm more than a little concerned about Stephen Fry. Some of the things he's been saying and doing recently are quite out of character and he never seems to look happy anymore. What he said was very wrong (no matter how much you agree with his free speech argument, there's no denying that telling abuse victims to 'grow up' is just ridiculous) but I hope that he's ok within himself.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bullettheory)
    Is it misunderstanding though? He clearly says "grow up" when talking about abuse survivors



    How is that misunderstanding. He's not talking about free speech or censoring here, he is talking about the reactions from people who have been abused. He clearly attacks a natural reaction, and then tells them to grow up. Where have I misunderstood that?
    Yes but "pull yourself together" is what societies have always, rightfully said to those exposed to mental trauma, accepting that not everyone can. It is still the right thing to say and it a narcissism to refuse to do so.

    There were parts of Germany in 1945 where every female was abused by the Red Army.

    If your son is blown up by an Isis suicide bomber in the Middle East today, you cannot dwell on that he because you are likely to have three more children st home who need you to provide for them.




    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    Except it is

    That is why it is called FREE speech
    So, is it all right to tell lies in the name of free speech?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    He's always been a smug ********, who is nowhere near as funny or as intelligent as he thinks he is.

    This is a man who who has no problem lambasting and mocking others and yet demands absolute respect for his sensibilities.

    Isn't this the man who ran away crying after one bad review of his performance in Cell mates, leaving everyone involved in the production in the lurch? Why didn't he suck it up then?

    He's a hypocritical sack of **** and the sooner he disappears from public life the better
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bullettheory)
    I have watched the interview. I know the discussion was around free speech. Yes, he talked about censoring and trigger warnings. However, he is still attacking the reactions of people who have experienced abuse. It's an ugly attack telling people to just "grow up". Sometimes we need to protect vulnerable people, and atleast listen to their views, not attack them and their reactions.
    I've interpreted it completely differently to you.

    I didn't see him as telling them to "grow up" for being upset or traumatised by abuse. I saw it in this very specific context of him telling people who expect the world to pander to them because of their past to what they are offended by to grow up. And by pander I mean stuff like he was talking about such as banning certain plays or book from classrooms in case it offends someone or upsets someone.

    Things should not be restricted for all because of something that happened to the few. And topics should not be essentially banned from discussion because they upset or offend people. By all means people upset or offended shouldn't have to take part, but to blanket ban things is ridiculous. These things need to be talked about.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bullettheory)
    http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2...y-charity-mind

    Personally, I am absolutely disgusted at his comments, especially given his position as president of the largest mental health charity in the UK. If it was up to me, he should resign. As someone with mental health problems, I don't see how he can represent the views of vulnerable people, abuse victims, and those with mental illness.

    Thoughts?
    I agree, you could certainly argue the general point of what he was saying was valid in that self pity is self destructive, but the way he said it was ill thought out and insensitive, especially for the president of Mind and someone who has suffered from mental health issues himself.

    And it's the alarming lack of empathy and ignorance that is apparent in his comments, no-one is pretending self pity is productive, of course it isn't, but as someone who has suffered from mental illness himself surely he recognises that self pity is itself part of mental illness, I'd possibly even argue it's almost a mental illness in its own right and has certainly been a large part of my own struggles with mental illness. Self pity has almost been like an addiction to me, something I know is not useful to me in any way, but something that I just can't escape, once you start on a slippery slope of self pity, it's very difficult to escape, just like any other addiction or mental illness. 'Poisonous and addictive', a quote I found from a quick google search on self pity. So for the president of a mental health charity to say he has no sympathy for anyone who has difficulties with self pity and attack abuse victims like this is not good at all.

    To me telling a victim of child abuse to 'grow up' is no better than telling someone to someone with anxiety to 'man up' or someone with depression to 'cheer up', trivialising someone's issues and simply telling them to 'grow up' is not in any way helpful and needless to say I don't think he'd appreciate someone telling him to 'grow up' when he's going through episodes of depression or in the midst of a suicide attempt. So I feel not only disappointed by the comments, but also a bit baffled at how hypocritical they are as well, if they had come from Katie Hopkins I wouldn't have been so bothered or surprised, but it's the fact they're from the president of the largest mental health charity in the country is what makes this particularly bad imo. It doesn't matter what he thinks about trigger warnings and censorship, he's allowed his opinions and I'm not saying he can't express them, I don't completely disagree with him in that regard, but there's no getting away from the fact that mental health is a sensitive subject for many and as a high profile representative of a mental health charity he should be more careful in what he says and I'd be interested to know what others at Mind think of his comments.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Heartweaver)
    So, is it all right to tell lies in the name of free speech?
    Yes it is still free speech it's just not truthful.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    Yes it is still free speech it's just not truthful.
    Ah, thanks for clarifying.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by apronedsamurai)
    Not relevant, he wasn't saying "stop having mental issues" he was saying stop using your condition as a weapon against others. Regressives just see what they want to see though which is their daily dose of outrage.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 16, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.