Stephen Bear is despicable – I hope he’s caged for a long time for terrorising Georgia Harrison, says Ulrika Jonsson
BEARS are wonderful, gentle, tolerant creatures. They are affectionate, sensitive and attentive.
Stephen Bear, on the other hand, is a vile, depraved, despicable human being.
Thankfully, he’s now been found guilty — by unanimous verdicts, no less — of two counts of disclosing private sexual photos and films, with intent to cause distress.
The world can finally see his true colours. It is said that sometimes good people do bad things. But some people are just plain bad.
Rocking up in court suited and booted with a fake fur coat draped across his shoulders; clasping a snake-headed cane, emerging, day after day from a rented Rolls-Royce, donning sunglasses and puffing on a cigar like some kind of mafioso, clearly basking in the glory of his crime. Bear was clearly relishing the theatre of his own making.
Meanwhile, the victim of his revolting crime — his brave ex, Georgia Harrison — turned up looking dignified, solemn and composed.
A woman who has shown great courage by waiving her anonymity in order that she might give strength to others who, like her, have been dehumanised by revenge porn.
Such was his disdain for the legal system and the plight of his victim, Bear made a mockery of proceedings by asking his social media followers to vote for the colour suit he should wear each day in court.
Mediocre pornstar
And if ever there was a sign of the disparate approach two people took to the repugnant act of distributing an intimate moment for all the world to see, this was surely it.
Revenge porn is a relatively new crime, of course. While it has existed in more rudimentary forms before, it’s been massively accelerated by social media platforms and the internet.
It is a hugely invasive crime designed to humiliate in the crudest way.
Its roots lie in control and shame. The majority of perpetrators are men — while three out of four victims are female, according to a 2019 study by University of Exeter — who assume a right to the control of a woman’s body even when a relationship has broken down. It’s an act of punishment with the explicit intent of denigrating, vilifying and maligning her. It is also done to shame the woman.
We all know women aren’t supposed to enjoy having sex, so to show her being intimate with someone — regardless of the setting — is done with the sole intention of bringing shame on her for having the audacity, independence and freewill to engage in a sex act. As women, we can’t win. We’re either viewed as frigid or promiscuous. It’s a fine line to tread and not one that men are forced to endure.
Who knows what Bear’s intentions were but they certainly didn’t have any basis in love, respect or admiration for his former girlfriend. This was an act of exploitation. He reputedly made £40k by posting the footage on an app.
Bear and Harrison had been in a relationship. This young woman was unaware she was being filmed and when she found out, she pleaded with him not to show anyone.
Even if she had been aware that she was being filmed, she should have every right to presume that the footage remained between the two of them.
Women should feel quite safe that whatever happens in the bedroom (or the garden or the kitchen) stays between the two parties.
Why did poor Georgia Harrison feel the need to plead with her boyfriend to not show it to anyone?
Sex can be frivolous and fun but it’s also deeply personal and private. Privacy appears to be something Bear knows nothing about.
Naturally, he’ll now pretend he’s unfazed by the court’s verdict. After all, nothing is more important in Bear’s life than Bear himself. It’s always been that way and I suspect it always will be.
I’m so grateful to Georgia for bringing this case. I admire her guts and determination in the face of such disdain and repugnance by a man who thought he could do what he wanted with her body and her desires.
I strongly object to the perception that women should be shamed for enjoying themselves whether in a committed relationship or a committed one-night stand.
Women should be afforded the same rights as men when it comes to sex.
Bear’s mum, Mama Bear, must be so proud of the young man she’s brought up and to think he dragged her into court as a character witness.
Loyally, she claimed he is a “lovely boy and a bit of a showman” but also “a really private person”.
As you would be, Mama Bear, when you’re trying to resuscitate a failing career by becoming a mediocre porn star. Bear will be sentenced in the New Year and one can only hope he gets a custodial sentence but there’s no guarantee.
It’s time for you to take your shades off now, Stephen Bear. Your future ain’t looking very bright.
And that brings me great joy.
Just get with the times, Alan
LORD Sugar says he’s “sick of the WFH culture” and that all the lockdowns benefitted “a bunch of lazy layabouts”.
I like Lord Sugar – I’ve always had a sweet spot for him (see what I did there?) but his comments don’t sit well with me at all.
I don’t live or work in the business world. I haven’t worked in an office for some 35 years, so granted, I expect a lot of things may have changed.
Back in those days, you really did have to be solidly on time and could never clock off a second before 5.30pm. It was strict. It may even have been efficient because in those days we didn’t have computers in the office – we just about stretched to electronic typewriters.
There was no such thing as emails. And there were only landlines. It was restrictive.
The joy (and sometimes the bane) of life today is that we are accessible at all times and can reach people in more ways than one – that’s certainly progress. And it is progress for so many working parents.
Mothers were largely ignored as a workforce when I went to the office but they are finally getting greater recognition today because the world is beginning to understand that women can want to work and have a family at the same time – even though it does put enormous pressures on them.
Surely one of the greatest things this country learnt during lockdowns – quickly catching up other European and Nordic countries – was that flexible working and WFH really can be a huge positive.
Productivity can be better; less time wasted commuting; less stress and tiredness.
The idea of poo-pooing the whole prospect of WFH in one fell swoop is a huge mistake and it might just expose Lord Sugar as a bit of a dinosaur.
Much as I love him.
LOVE IT
IAN McKellen was nigh on brought to tears in a recent podcast when he talked about how endearing he finds it when he might get into the back of a taxi and the cabbie calls him “love”.
Oh, Sir Ian, inset. I’m with you all the way.
I recall arriving on these shores and getting into a black cab and being called “darling”.
It was the most charming term of endearment and one I’d never experienced before.
Nowadays, of course, some people – often women – take great objection to being called “love”, “darling” or even “sweetheart”. They see it as degrading, derogatory and demeaning.
It’s become quite the fashion to view this kind of comment as belittling.
But why? It’s all about the tone and the intent. It’s almost always said with affection and great fondness – often between two strangers and it really warms the cockles of my cold, dark heart.
I’m a feminist and Sir Ian is a proud, gay man. If we can take it, I’m pretty sure you can, love.
Sick of office party
IT might be highly unlikely you get to your work’s Christmas Party this year – what with the white stuff on the ground and the rail strikes.
Maybe you feel robbed. Maybe it’s all you’ve looked forward to all year. Maybe you were hoping for a secret snog under the mistletoe with Nigel from Accounts. Or you just fancy fleecing the firm by drinking as much Asti Spumante as your hollow legs can take.
Well, I’m really rather grateful I don’t have to go to one. I can’t imagine anything worse than having to schlep into the city and mix with everyone who’s coughing, spluttering and on their last legs but are intent on sharing their germs. Plus, there’s every chance you’ll get stuck with the person you’ve spent most of the year trying to avoid.
I fully appreciate that office Christmas parties play a big part in employer’s showing their staff their appreciation but, frankly, I bet many would rather have the money in their pocket. Especially right now.
I did go to one Christmas party when I had my first job as a secretary. We were put on a coach with booze and sent to some restaurant in the sticks.
I was 20 at the time and still hadn’t quite established my alcohol tolerance levels.
Thankfully, there were no camera phones in those days.It really wasn’t a pretty sight.
Maybe that’s why I’m allergic to them.