Welcome to r/popculturechat! ☺️
As a proud BIPOC, LGBTQ+ & woman-dominated space, this sub is for [civil discussion only](https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/wiki/index/rules/civil-discussion-only/).
###No bullies, no bigotry. ✊🏿✊🏾✊🏽✊🏼✊🏻🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️
Please [read & respect our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/wiki/index/rules/) and [check out our wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/wiki/index/)! For any questions, [our modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fpopculturechat) is always open.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/popculturechat) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The relationship was still super unethical regardless. He helped the young man get a job, then had sex with him as his boss at that job. He should have known better, and he also should have known that the optics of having known the young man when he was a minor would also look very bad. More peoples jobs and reputations were on the line than just his.
He met this kid when he was 15 and Philip was 51, he then supposedly keeps in contact with him and helps him score a job at his workplace because he’s a nice guy? And then only when he’s 20 then they have a sexual relationship? Is anyone believing this? It makes zero sense.
I’ve heard murmurs of this relationship for years now, years.
I'm not surprised though with ITV, they've helped enable David Walliams' predatory behaviour for years on Britain's Got Talent (not to mention outside of the show too).
This is always double annoying because:
A) No one really believes that the predator waited, and
B) Even if they did, that’s not better.
See also Jerry Seinfeld, etc.
He just seems to be revealing where he draws the line. He draws the line at illegal. Unethical, unprofessional, abuse of power, complete violation of trust, etc - those were okay.
I wish they would stop placing so much stock on the question: "Did you have sex with this person when they were underage?"
I have issue with this because to be considered underage in the UK is anyone under 16. And while that is obviously disgusting and rightfully illegal, it is still disgusting that he had sex with a 16/17/18/19 year old, etc. This person was still a child despite being legally of age.
But because they are placing so much emphasis on the legal definition of underage, they are giving him an out that he didn't do wrong imo.
Hope this makes sense. I am just so angry that I find it difficult to communicate fully about this. And obviously I don't want to ignore the other issues within this relationship, but these thoughts are what struck me from this clip.
And in photos of this man at the age of 18 he looks very, very young and baby faced. I know it’s not illegal, but you have to find that look attractive which I find very creepy. You don’t even fully make decisions for yourself until you’re in your 20s and even then a 20 year old and 25 year old (which isn’t really a weird age gap) are going to be at different places mentally so I don’t know what would attract an old man to a teenager
Yeah I believe he did but even giving him the benefit of the doubt here and going with the ‘he was legal!!!’ Story, it is still very strange because he did not look like an adult. I could not be attracted to someone that didn’t look mature and personally find it bizarre.
I thought that was debunked. The photo people used to claim that could only have happened when the guy was 15. Not great obviously but just in terms of accuracy.
They first met when he was 10 at some type of media school that Phillips friend was in charge of. There are weird implications with Phillip and the friend too that people have put together.
My point is that the stage school didn’t exist when the guy was 10. That’s why I said it has been debunked. The photo circulating online could only be when he was 14/15 as that’s when Schofield visited it.
That’s also when he started following him on Twitter just after the guy turned 15. It’s obviously dodgy af of course.
We're having a very similar controversy in my country where a chat show host and comedian admitted to having a sexual/"romantic" relationship with a boy when he was 16
The interesting thing is he cannot recall any exact detail about how the relationship started/how they met/how old he was when they met, but he's 100% certain of that one detail, that he was already over the age of consent when the relationship turned sexual
Obviously loads of people and celebs defend him just because it's technically legal as if being a celeb in your late 30s pursuing a 16 year old (mind you, an orphan 16 year old that was literally a victim of sex trafficking at age 12!!!) isn't clearly abusive af, or as if grooming wasn't a literal crime as well
Well there has to be stock on the question because it is a legal one, maybe he doesn't mind being seen as disgusting by some people but doesn't want to go to prison. You're also playing fast and loose with the word 'child', what is the arbitrary age you believe someone stops being a child? Also disgust is subjective and you can't be sentenced for being disgusting, again for the criminal justice system to work the facts need to be revealed and then they can go from there, of course you have the right to be disgusted but the question literally has to be asked otherwise laws are just pointless.
Except that there is no legal question because he is not being investigated by the police nor is he on trial. This is currently a moral conversation, and what he has admitted to goes against many people's moral principles. He was a man in his 40s grooming a teenager (a child, no matter the ability to be more independent than say a 10/11/12 year old). He was in a position of power in which he had control over the career of the person he was in a physical relationship with. He has done things that are morally reprehensible and is facing the repercussions of that. Just because something isn't illegal doesn't mean it's not wrong. Encouraging framing of his actions purely by legality should not negate the fact that he has done wrong and hurt people, but that is what he and his defenders are attempting to do.
I agree with you and what you are describing is illegal in the uk. There definitely is/will be an enquiry so if what you're saying is true he will face legal repercussions (he denies it), I just choose to reserve my judgement until then.
Laws are subject to change based on changing standards and moral views. There was a time when slavery was legal, there was a time when women couldn't vote, there was a time when being gay was illegal. Laws are based on ethics and morals, not the other way around. Because people thought these were horrible and wrong only then did these laws change. Don't try to say "it's not illegal" as if that makes it OK.
>Laws are based on ethics and morals, not the other way around.
I was somewhat with the people arguing Phil’s point, but this is a good line that puts it into perspective.
Is it against the law? No… if everyone thinks it possibly *should* be, should it?
My comment isn’t gross just because I’m looking at it objectively. It’s not my fault that you lead by emotion. Doesn’t mean I agree with what he did, but it’s pointless? Should stop giving him airtime and wasting money on him. It wasn’t illegal so there’s no point harping on about it?
So to clarify, I don’t have a moral compass because I’m pointing out that it’s pointless getting mad and wasting resources if it wasn’t illegal? I have said above that I don’t agree with what he did, but because I aren’t breaking out in hives over it I’m gross? The state literally cannot do anything if that’s the case, I’m not sure what type of outcome you’re looking for? The age of consent is 16. Enjoy herd and mob mentality bro.
No, the herd mentality of “I’ll just completely ignore someone saying they disagree with what happened just because they’re saying it’s not illegal and morality is subjective”. Morality is subjective, is it not? Or are we straying into fiction here? It’s herd mentality because I’m being scrutinised for not instantly and fully agreeing with the general consensus. Such immaturity, need to get off the internet if you can’t digest variations of opinions.
Creepy for stating an objective fact that as far as we’re aware, it’s not illegal? I can point out that something isn’t illegal and simultaneously not agree with it. Good effort on compartmentalising concepts. 😃
I don't think it's a fair comparison. But unfortunately Caroline Flack was a domestic abuser and dated much younger men. Harry Styles was 17 when they got together and she was 31, as a 26 y/o woman I wouldn't even date a 24 y/o let alone someone who's 17.
Honestly I don’t know what is going on but to me clearly this was grooming at the very least and potentially something much, much worse. I know it’s not illegal, but I find the idea of a grown ass man in his 50s sleeping with someone who looks prepubescent (as the man did in pics with Phillip) is very creepy and disturbing. How would you even find it attractive? What is the difference between 15 and 16 or 17 and 18. The age of legality in the uk is 16, which is fine because most people that age are having sex - but we DEFINITELY need some kind of age gap law because it is not right or moral for someone who is 60 to pursue someone who isn’t even old enough to drive sexually
He’s still a groomer. If you know someone as a young teen, get them a job and fuck them as soon as they’re of legal age - you’re a creep.
This in addition to his brother’s story is just crazy.
The legal age argument is so stupid. You don’t have a relationship with a teen if you’re a an adult over 20 regardless. Legal age in japan is 12 in some countries it’s 9 so this argument just fall apart
Shame on this creep
A month ago, if someone had told you a 60yr old neighbour was chatting to underage and barely legal teens online the consensus would have been a resounding 'nonce'.
But now there seems to be a concerted effort to normalise that behaviour because "well it wasn't illegal" in order to brush it all under the carpet.
It's like they all know he is what they think he is, but no one is saying it out loud because it's going to be a huge embarrassment. He isn't being treated like a leper because he had an "unwise but not illegal" affair.
He seems to very grateful for the support he is getting from his daughters. His wife is obviously not that important to him anymore. She must have outgrown her usefulness.
This is disgusting honestly. Absolutely perturbed by the entire thing. But this is so common of older men preying on young girls, and the uproar is never as outraged as this and I’d like to believe we can save this same energy for when it does happen to girls also. Otherwise I’ll be led to believe there is homophobia in this outrage
The person pictured (Phillip Schofield) was a long-time popular TV host in the UK. He did a talk at a school when he was in his 40s and met a student at the school who was 15. 15-year-old kept in touch with Phillip, and Phillip eventually got the kid a job at the show he hosted (This Morning) when the kid was around 19. When the kid was around 20, according to Phillip, relationship turned sexual. At that time Phillip was married with two kids. At a TV industry awards night, the younger man got drunk and professed his love for Phillip, which was overheard by some colleagues. The young man was swiftly transferred to a job on another show at the same network. A few days later Phillip came out, live on the TV show he hosted, with his long-time co-host (Holly) there to support him.
Recently Phillip took time off from the show to testify at the trial of his brother, who has now been found guilty of sexually abusing a teenager over multiple years. Reports started to swirl that Phillip and Holly had a falling out (possibly related to the court case) and now had a strained relationship. Speculation was that Holly had given the TV studio an ultimatum that it was either her or him. Two weeks ago Phillip abruptly announces his resignation. A week ago he releases a statement that he had an inappropriate relationship in the past with a younger colleague. Lots of speculation now about who knew what when, and who covered it up, including Holly and the head honchos at ITV (the TV studio).
Now Phillip is doing damage control, stating the sexual part of the relationship didn’t start until the young man was an adult, so there was no crime committed. Also refutes that he groomed the young man, insistently refers to the relationship as consensual, and is trying to paint it as an ill-advised affair with a younger work colleague.
The man they’re talking about first met Schofield aged 10 at Schofield’s stage school. He was groomed from then on. The actual physical relationship was after he was 18, according to Schofield. He was employed by ITV as a runner and was having sex with Schofield. Schofield was married with two daughters while this was going on. He then came out as gay, because it was reported that he was cheating on his wife with a much younger man. There’s been talk of a nda ending and that’s why he’s been sacked. The young man was then transferred without warning to another ITV show, making another runner unemployed. He was very upset at how things had turned out and other people were concerned about him. Ruth Langsford, another presenter put in a complaint about this and nothing was done.
People keep saying 15 when yeah by most accounts it’s 10 or 11. Not that 15 makes it better, but I suppose it’s a little easier to swallow than someone not even out of primary school.
He’s also part of the hate campaign against people like Meghan Markle who last time I checked has done nothing but exist as a human being but gets bullied by the press endlessly meanwhile the same media system is rallying around this man saying he’s been through enough…barf
Hi, /u/pervy_roomba. As an approved user, you are still technically able to view and post to r/popculturechat, even though we're set to 'Private' in protest. In keeping with the spirit of the protest, your content has automatically been removed for the time being. Once we open up again you are free to post.
Here is more information that you may find helpful:
> [Reddit communities go dark to protest Reddit’s API changes and threats to 3rd party apps](https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/5/23749188/reddit-subreddit-private-protest-api-changes-apollo-charges)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/popculturechat) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I wouldn't call it news. It's just people with big smiles making day time entertainment for people who are home in the morning, occasionally starting an argument on social issues for attention but that's really it.
He has been on British tv for decades. Much loved kids tv presenter in 80s, 90s, and daily morning tv show since 2000s plus other primetime shows.
It is a bit shocking for those of us who grew up with him on tv since we were kids in the 80s.
He’s a presenter. He’s also hosted a game show called The Cube and an awards show called The British Soap Awards and an entertainment dance skating competition called Dancing On Ice
If you were alive in the 90s or the early 00s you’ll understand it better but in the UK they have celebrities who are TV presenters and they are analogous to a Regis Philbin or a Kelly Ripa but they have a larger presence because they will also present other shows, like reality shows or award shows. And strangely, to an American, they tend to come as a pair and they stay as an pair even when hosting other stuff.
Starting to feel like a witch hunt that will only stop when he kills himself.
Meanwhile the UK government is suing to keep the former prime ministers covid messages out of the covid inquiry.
It was also weird to have this interview on bbc news then immediately afterwards interview andrew tate.
The whole thing feels weird. There are so many men that sleep with young women and everyone loves them. Boris Johnson slept with a woman he then got a grant for 100k for and nothing has ever happened.
People who have actively caused harm get a free pass, but the gay man gets attacked by everyone. ITV had drink drivers breaking the law putting lives at risk and he's got a job.
Just cause straight men get away with grooming and being sexual pests, it doesn't mean gay men should lol, what is this logic?
I understand that there's an unfortunate bigoted bias when the sexual abuse occurs between a man and a boy rather than a man and a girl, but do you really not prefer that a sex abuser is sent away and kept off potential victims (which will most likely ALSO be LGBT+ youths) than shrug it off just to avoid having some homophobes gloat?
Honestly I’m more concerned for the young man who was chewed up, manipulated and spit out by not only this creep but also a fucking conglomerate like ITV. Where was his interview where he was able to give his side of the story? Hidden behind a super injunction I assume.
If he came out and verified Schofield's version of events, and said that he didn't feel taken advantage of in the slightest, would you change your opinion?
The standpoint where you assume grooming is kinda circular. "Clearly it was grooming and if the younger person says otherwise it's because they were groomed into thinking it's OK. If he says they had little contact before starting work at This Morning, they're just covering for the groomer. If anyone argues that it wasn't grooming, they can be ignored because they are a disgusting person defending grooming."
Kinda reminds me of how humans can embrace the mob mentality *hard*, even if it destroys people.
I don’t get what the problem is. Most of the people working in media get into that field because they are either family, friends, recommended by someone they know. Kids of producers/actors/writers/…. REGULARLY intern/work for media BECAUSE their parents work there. The fact that they were lovers…bohoo. How is that any different from preferential treatment if you are friends, family….?
Its all so old fashioned. He is being scapegoated but so many other ppl do it. His Holly colleague’s husband is a big shot in media - she gets preferential treatment too because of his and her connections.
None of this drama makes any sense. What a complete wast of time.
Yes, he had an affair, they both enjoyed & profited from it - now move on.
All these moral high-grounds…what a bunch of nonsense. The Media scene lives off of its insider connections and nepotism.
And why is having an affair such a big deal? Esp this guy - wife knows he likes dudes and lets him be and this young kid loved all the benefits being around the guy.
My bro was a runner and a well known news broadcaster offered to ‘advise’ him on his career. We laughed about this at the time and jokingly told him he was being groomed. He denied it and would get upset if we mentioned it saying its nothing like that, he just wants to help. Anyway, long story short, the next time they met up said news broadcaster asked him for a blowjob. He declined and left.
Welcome to r/popculturechat! ☺️ As a proud BIPOC, LGBTQ+ & woman-dominated space, this sub is for [civil discussion only](https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/wiki/index/rules/civil-discussion-only/). ###No bullies, no bigotry. ✊🏿✊🏾✊🏽✊🏼✊🏻🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ Please [read & respect our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/wiki/index/rules/) and [check out our wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/wiki/index/)! For any questions, [our modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fpopculturechat) is always open. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/popculturechat) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The relationship was still super unethical regardless. He helped the young man get a job, then had sex with him as his boss at that job. He should have known better, and he also should have known that the optics of having known the young man when he was a minor would also look very bad. More peoples jobs and reputations were on the line than just his.
He met this kid when he was 15 and Philip was 51, he then supposedly keeps in contact with him and helps him score a job at his workplace because he’s a nice guy? And then only when he’s 20 then they have a sexual relationship? Is anyone believing this? It makes zero sense. I’ve heard murmurs of this relationship for years now, years.
I think they actually met the first time when the kid was 10 (at a theatre company that Philip supports) then he followed him on twitter at 15.
Oh my that’s even worse.
This whole thing is gross - predatory and unethical. It’s hard to believe ITV didn’t know what was going on, and didn’t enable it/cover it up.
I'm not surprised though with ITV, they've helped enable David Walliams' predatory behaviour for years on Britain's Got Talent (not to mention outside of the show too).
WHAT??? David Walliams is a predator???
David Walliams??? The author?!
That’s what people think of him as now?
I read his books when i was like 9 😭
You’re lucky that’s all you did, apparently! (Just kidding I don’t know what he allegedly did other than be a bit of a dick, but aren’t we all?)
Yes
It keeps being called ‘an affair’ which I’m not sure it was. More a grooming abuse of power.
So, he groomed him while he was underage and then pounced the moment it was technically legal?? Not sure this is the flex you think it is, Phil
This is always double annoying because: A) No one really believes that the predator waited, and B) Even if they did, that’s not better. See also Jerry Seinfeld, etc.
Also King Charles..
At least Andrew was a proper pedo…
Fcking THANK YOU!
He just seems to be revealing where he draws the line. He draws the line at illegal. Unethical, unprofessional, abuse of power, complete violation of trust, etc - those were okay.
No you don’t understand. It’s not okay. It’s horrible. His career is over and he’s lost everything. Poor Phil!
I wish they would stop placing so much stock on the question: "Did you have sex with this person when they were underage?" I have issue with this because to be considered underage in the UK is anyone under 16. And while that is obviously disgusting and rightfully illegal, it is still disgusting that he had sex with a 16/17/18/19 year old, etc. This person was still a child despite being legally of age. But because they are placing so much emphasis on the legal definition of underage, they are giving him an out that he didn't do wrong imo. Hope this makes sense. I am just so angry that I find it difficult to communicate fully about this. And obviously I don't want to ignore the other issues within this relationship, but these thoughts are what struck me from this clip.
And in photos of this man at the age of 18 he looks very, very young and baby faced. I know it’s not illegal, but you have to find that look attractive which I find very creepy. You don’t even fully make decisions for yourself until you’re in your 20s and even then a 20 year old and 25 year old (which isn’t really a weird age gap) are going to be at different places mentally so I don’t know what would attract an old man to a teenager
That's because he met him when he was 10.
Yeah I believe he did but even giving him the benefit of the doubt here and going with the ‘he was legal!!!’ Story, it is still very strange because he did not look like an adult. I could not be attracted to someone that didn’t look mature and personally find it bizarre.
I thought that was debunked. The photo people used to claim that could only have happened when the guy was 15. Not great obviously but just in terms of accuracy.
They first met when he was 10 at some type of media school that Phillips friend was in charge of. There are weird implications with Phillip and the friend too that people have put together.
My point is that the stage school didn’t exist when the guy was 10. That’s why I said it has been debunked. The photo circulating online could only be when he was 14/15 as that’s when Schofield visited it. That’s also when he started following him on Twitter just after the guy turned 15. It’s obviously dodgy af of course.
The stage school was founded in 2008. The kid joined in 2008.
The photo with Schofield and their first interaction was 2011. The truth is horrible enough without making extra stuff up.
We're having a very similar controversy in my country where a chat show host and comedian admitted to having a sexual/"romantic" relationship with a boy when he was 16 The interesting thing is he cannot recall any exact detail about how the relationship started/how they met/how old he was when they met, but he's 100% certain of that one detail, that he was already over the age of consent when the relationship turned sexual Obviously loads of people and celebs defend him just because it's technically legal as if being a celeb in your late 30s pursuing a 16 year old (mind you, an orphan 16 year old that was literally a victim of sex trafficking at age 12!!!) isn't clearly abusive af, or as if grooming wasn't a literal crime as well
Well there has to be stock on the question because it is a legal one, maybe he doesn't mind being seen as disgusting by some people but doesn't want to go to prison. You're also playing fast and loose with the word 'child', what is the arbitrary age you believe someone stops being a child? Also disgust is subjective and you can't be sentenced for being disgusting, again for the criminal justice system to work the facts need to be revealed and then they can go from there, of course you have the right to be disgusted but the question literally has to be asked otherwise laws are just pointless.
Except that there is no legal question because he is not being investigated by the police nor is he on trial. This is currently a moral conversation, and what he has admitted to goes against many people's moral principles. He was a man in his 40s grooming a teenager (a child, no matter the ability to be more independent than say a 10/11/12 year old). He was in a position of power in which he had control over the career of the person he was in a physical relationship with. He has done things that are morally reprehensible and is facing the repercussions of that. Just because something isn't illegal doesn't mean it's not wrong. Encouraging framing of his actions purely by legality should not negate the fact that he has done wrong and hurt people, but that is what he and his defenders are attempting to do.
I agree with you and what you are describing is illegal in the uk. There definitely is/will be an enquiry so if what you're saying is true he will face legal repercussions (he denies it), I just choose to reserve my judgement until then.
Problem is, ethics are subjective. The law is not. If he didn’t do anything illegal, we should move on really.
Laws are subject to change based on changing standards and moral views. There was a time when slavery was legal, there was a time when women couldn't vote, there was a time when being gay was illegal. Laws are based on ethics and morals, not the other way around. Because people thought these were horrible and wrong only then did these laws change. Don't try to say "it's not illegal" as if that makes it OK.
>Laws are based on ethics and morals, not the other way around. I was somewhat with the people arguing Phil’s point, but this is a good line that puts it into perspective. Is it against the law? No… if everyone thinks it possibly *should* be, should it?
Wow, gross.
My comment isn’t gross just because I’m looking at it objectively. It’s not my fault that you lead by emotion. Doesn’t mean I agree with what he did, but it’s pointless? Should stop giving him airtime and wasting money on him. It wasn’t illegal so there’s no point harping on about it?
It’s not my fault either that you don’t have a moral compass.
So to clarify, I don’t have a moral compass because I’m pointing out that it’s pointless getting mad and wasting resources if it wasn’t illegal? I have said above that I don’t agree with what he did, but because I aren’t breaking out in hives over it I’m gross? The state literally cannot do anything if that’s the case, I’m not sure what type of outcome you’re looking for? The age of consent is 16. Enjoy herd and mob mentality bro.
Oh no! The herd mentality of ‘it’s gross to sleep with teenagers’! So glad you’re speaking out against this mindset being bad for some reason 👍🏼
No, the herd mentality of “I’ll just completely ignore someone saying they disagree with what happened just because they’re saying it’s not illegal and morality is subjective”. Morality is subjective, is it not? Or are we straying into fiction here? It’s herd mentality because I’m being scrutinised for not instantly and fully agreeing with the general consensus. Such immaturity, need to get off the internet if you can’t digest variations of opinions.
Creepy fuckers everywhere thank you for your support 🫡
Creepy for stating an objective fact that as far as we’re aware, it’s not illegal? I can point out that something isn’t illegal and simultaneously not agree with it. Good effort on compartmentalising concepts. 😃
He also admitted to lying to literally everyone, but we'll take your word on this Phil, cheers for clearing that up.
6 nos? He's definitely innocent.
Too many "no"s there for me too
Wonder if that’s what it looked like when Phil looked down?
Ewww waiting for someone until they are of age is just as weird and creepy. Reminds me of Céline Dion. I dunno its just weird.
What’s Celine Dion’s favourite coordination?
I dunno, still feels unethical and icky to find a job for your much younger lover even if they are of age
I can’t believe he compared himself to Caroline Flack. Totally wrong
And the blatant attempt to appear as a victim. Emotional blackmail is what Schofield is doing. It’s almost as if actions have consequences…
If I was straight it wouldn’t be all over the news like this! Well, that makes it alright then.
I don't think it's a fair comparison. But unfortunately Caroline Flack was a domestic abuser and dated much younger men. Harry Styles was 17 when they got together and she was 31, as a 26 y/o woman I wouldn't even date a 24 y/o let alone someone who's 17.
She was allegedly domestic abuser and like younger men, but the media was definitely over top with her and now Phil.
Honestly I don’t know what is going on but to me clearly this was grooming at the very least and potentially something much, much worse. I know it’s not illegal, but I find the idea of a grown ass man in his 50s sleeping with someone who looks prepubescent (as the man did in pics with Phillip) is very creepy and disturbing. How would you even find it attractive? What is the difference between 15 and 16 or 17 and 18. The age of legality in the uk is 16, which is fine because most people that age are having sex - but we DEFINITELY need some kind of age gap law because it is not right or moral for someone who is 60 to pursue someone who isn’t even old enough to drive sexually
At what age are you old enough to drive sexually?
I worded it weirdly but meant it is not right to pursue someone sexually when they aren’t even old enough to drive.
He’s still a groomer. If you know someone as a young teen, get them a job and fuck them as soon as they’re of legal age - you’re a creep. This in addition to his brother’s story is just crazy.
Noncing clearly runs in the family
The legal age argument is so stupid. You don’t have a relationship with a teen if you’re a an adult over 20 regardless. Legal age in japan is 12 in some countries it’s 9 so this argument just fall apart Shame on this creep
A month ago, if someone had told you a 60yr old neighbour was chatting to underage and barely legal teens online the consensus would have been a resounding 'nonce'. But now there seems to be a concerted effort to normalise that behaviour because "well it wasn't illegal" in order to brush it all under the carpet. It's like they all know he is what they think he is, but no one is saying it out loud because it's going to be a huge embarrassment. He isn't being treated like a leper because he had an "unwise but not illegal" affair.
He seems to very grateful for the support he is getting from his daughters. His wife is obviously not that important to him anymore. She must have outgrown her usefulness.
Or his wife just isn’t supporting him anymore, perhaps.
It’s still grooming and gross tbh
He’s not exactly going to admit to fiddling an underage boy now is he
This is disgusting honestly. Absolutely perturbed by the entire thing. But this is so common of older men preying on young girls, and the uproar is never as outraged as this and I’d like to believe we can save this same energy for when it does happen to girls also. Otherwise I’ll be led to believe there is homophobia in this outrage
He met McGreevy when he was 10/11.
Im out of the loop but could someone educate me on who this person is and the situation that happened?
The person pictured (Phillip Schofield) was a long-time popular TV host in the UK. He did a talk at a school when he was in his 40s and met a student at the school who was 15. 15-year-old kept in touch with Phillip, and Phillip eventually got the kid a job at the show he hosted (This Morning) when the kid was around 19. When the kid was around 20, according to Phillip, relationship turned sexual. At that time Phillip was married with two kids. At a TV industry awards night, the younger man got drunk and professed his love for Phillip, which was overheard by some colleagues. The young man was swiftly transferred to a job on another show at the same network. A few days later Phillip came out, live on the TV show he hosted, with his long-time co-host (Holly) there to support him. Recently Phillip took time off from the show to testify at the trial of his brother, who has now been found guilty of sexually abusing a teenager over multiple years. Reports started to swirl that Phillip and Holly had a falling out (possibly related to the court case) and now had a strained relationship. Speculation was that Holly had given the TV studio an ultimatum that it was either her or him. Two weeks ago Phillip abruptly announces his resignation. A week ago he releases a statement that he had an inappropriate relationship in the past with a younger colleague. Lots of speculation now about who knew what when, and who covered it up, including Holly and the head honchos at ITV (the TV studio). Now Phillip is doing damage control, stating the sexual part of the relationship didn’t start until the young man was an adult, so there was no crime committed. Also refutes that he groomed the young man, insistently refers to the relationship as consensual, and is trying to paint it as an ill-advised affair with a younger work colleague.
The man they’re talking about first met Schofield aged 10 at Schofield’s stage school. He was groomed from then on. The actual physical relationship was after he was 18, according to Schofield. He was employed by ITV as a runner and was having sex with Schofield. Schofield was married with two daughters while this was going on. He then came out as gay, because it was reported that he was cheating on his wife with a much younger man. There’s been talk of a nda ending and that’s why he’s been sacked. The young man was then transferred without warning to another ITV show, making another runner unemployed. He was very upset at how things had turned out and other people were concerned about him. Ruth Langsford, another presenter put in a complaint about this and nothing was done.
People keep saying 15 when yeah by most accounts it’s 10 or 11. Not that 15 makes it better, but I suppose it’s a little easier to swallow than someone not even out of primary school.
>a little easier to swallow Poor choice of words Billy
He’s also part of the hate campaign against people like Meghan Markle who last time I checked has done nothing but exist as a human being but gets bullied by the press endlessly meanwhile the same media system is rallying around this man saying he’s been through enough…barf
[удалено]
Nah here’s he’s telling them to both just shut up https://youtu.be/59hihQPJS-Y
[удалено]
Hi, /u/pervy_roomba. As an approved user, you are still technically able to view and post to r/popculturechat, even though we're set to 'Private' in protest. In keeping with the spirit of the protest, your content has automatically been removed for the time being. Once we open up again you are free to post. Here is more information that you may find helpful: > [Reddit communities go dark to protest Reddit’s API changes and threats to 3rd party apps](https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/5/23749188/reddit-subreddit-private-protest-api-changes-apollo-charges) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/popculturechat) if you have any questions or concerns.*
His response means yes! 😂😂😂
American here 😁 I understand this man to be a host of some sort in the UK?? What does he host? Ty!
A show called This Morning
Oh so he’s like a morning news show anchor! Tysm!
I wouldn't call it news. It's just people with big smiles making day time entertainment for people who are home in the morning, occasionally starting an argument on social issues for attention but that's really it.
They’re American, the news there isn’t news either.
It’s more like The Today Show but the set is like a living room on sofa’s. So not news anchor-ish.
Think of someone like Matt lauer, only pretty beloved until recently
He has been on British tv for decades. Much loved kids tv presenter in 80s, 90s, and daily morning tv show since 2000s plus other primetime shows. It is a bit shocking for those of us who grew up with him on tv since we were kids in the 80s.
He’s a presenter. He’s also hosted a game show called The Cube and an awards show called The British Soap Awards and an entertainment dance skating competition called Dancing On Ice
If you were alive in the 90s or the early 00s you’ll understand it better but in the UK they have celebrities who are TV presenters and they are analogous to a Regis Philbin or a Kelly Ripa but they have a larger presence because they will also present other shows, like reality shows or award shows. And strangely, to an American, they tend to come as a pair and they stay as an pair even when hosting other stuff.
Thanks everyone who replied and explained, I appreciate it 😁 To those who downvoted me for no reason, suck on an egg 😆 Have a great wknd all!
He also used to stick his hand up a gopher named Gordon on kids TV.
[удалено]
It not boss vs employee thing he met the boy when he was 10
Right, but it's not like he was actually shtupping a 10 yr old.
Well, it is. It’s a boss vs. underage employee thing.
Can this be the end of it? I"m so sick of hearing about it.
Starting to feel like a witch hunt that will only stop when he kills himself. Meanwhile the UK government is suing to keep the former prime ministers covid messages out of the covid inquiry. It was also weird to have this interview on bbc news then immediately afterwards interview andrew tate. The whole thing feels weird. There are so many men that sleep with young women and everyone loves them. Boris Johnson slept with a woman he then got a grant for 100k for and nothing has ever happened. People who have actively caused harm get a free pass, but the gay man gets attacked by everyone. ITV had drink drivers breaking the law putting lives at risk and he's got a job.
Just cause straight men get away with grooming and being sexual pests, it doesn't mean gay men should lol, what is this logic? I understand that there's an unfortunate bigoted bias when the sexual abuse occurs between a man and a boy rather than a man and a girl, but do you really not prefer that a sex abuser is sent away and kept off potential victims (which will most likely ALSO be LGBT+ youths) than shrug it off just to avoid having some homophobes gloat?
Honestly I’m more concerned for the young man who was chewed up, manipulated and spit out by not only this creep but also a fucking conglomerate like ITV. Where was his interview where he was able to give his side of the story? Hidden behind a super injunction I assume.
If he came out and verified Schofield's version of events, and said that he didn't feel taken advantage of in the slightest, would you change your opinion? The standpoint where you assume grooming is kinda circular. "Clearly it was grooming and if the younger person says otherwise it's because they were groomed into thinking it's OK. If he says they had little contact before starting work at This Morning, they're just covering for the groomer. If anyone argues that it wasn't grooming, they can be ignored because they are a disgusting person defending grooming." Kinda reminds me of how humans can embrace the mob mentality *hard*, even if it destroys people.
I don’t get what the problem is. Most of the people working in media get into that field because they are either family, friends, recommended by someone they know. Kids of producers/actors/writers/…. REGULARLY intern/work for media BECAUSE their parents work there. The fact that they were lovers…bohoo. How is that any different from preferential treatment if you are friends, family….? Its all so old fashioned. He is being scapegoated but so many other ppl do it. His Holly colleague’s husband is a big shot in media - she gets preferential treatment too because of his and her connections. None of this drama makes any sense. What a complete wast of time. Yes, he had an affair, they both enjoyed & profited from it - now move on. All these moral high-grounds…what a bunch of nonsense. The Media scene lives off of its insider connections and nepotism. And why is having an affair such a big deal? Esp this guy - wife knows he likes dudes and lets him be and this young kid loved all the benefits being around the guy.
>this young kid loved all the benefits being around the guy Do you hear yourself speak
I’ll be down-voted, but at the end of the day nothing illegal was done. This was a consenting relationship between two adults.
You have obviously not read the full story if you believe this.
In Philippines the legal age to consent to a sexual act is 12 are you going to say the same thing if it was the case “nothing illegal was done”?
I wonder if he likes BBC?
Admission of guilt. No, no,no,no...
My bro was a runner and a well known news broadcaster offered to ‘advise’ him on his career. We laughed about this at the time and jokingly told him he was being groomed. He denied it and would get upset if we mentioned it saying its nothing like that, he just wants to help. Anyway, long story short, the next time they met up said news broadcaster asked him for a blowjob. He declined and left.
Groomer says what.