The perks of being a rock star don't exist anymore

Church on Tuesday

SoundsRight wrote: »

It begs the question why women entered into relationships with him, if he was such a big meanie.

Money.

anewme

[Deleted User] wrote: »

What about 46 year olds?

I’m 49 so clearly past it.

Calibos

Deleted User wrote: »

What about 46 year olds?

You are quite right, Should have said 55. Jennifer Aniston just turned 50 and is still a stunner!

Calibos

Calibos wrote: »

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote:

I think you're being unfair to most men here. I don't think I'm alone in not understanding the attraction towards teenagers - even those who are over 18. If you don't understand that, maybe you're the one with the problem, and not the rest of us.

You're going to have to define what you mean by attraction.

Is it creepy to want to have a relationship with a teenager around the age of consent and above?

Hell Yes!!

For all the obvious reasons that don't need repeating.

However, are you saying that you can't understand physical attraction to fully developed teenagers?

I'm not sure what there is to elaborate upon the meaning of 'attraction' - I'm referring to an ongoing, although perhaps not exclusive attraction towards teenagers.

When I say I don't understand it, obviously I'm not saying it doesn't happen, or that there isn't a biological reason for it. But I know a lot of my friends wouldn't be interested in 20-year-olds as a general rule. The very fact of their age can be a turn-off. Even if they look physically mature, they're usually head-wreckers, not to put too fine a point on it.

I think there's a really distorted public image of men that we'll sh*g anything with legs, and the younger the better (within the confines of the law). I don't recognise that stereotype. In fact, there's probably an argument that such sexual a sexual predisposition is expressed so conspicuously/ shamelessly, that it creates a bias whereby we unwittingly assume it to be more common than it is.

It may be that we just notice these guys a lot more than guys who don't have a propensity towards any 'shocking' sexual predilection. To put it another way again, anecdotally speaking, I always find that sexual 'creeps' are a lot more vocal than guys within the normative range.

First off, its obvious the guys friends nor most people seem to know about the fact that Paedophilia is the persistent attraction to prepubescent children and a persistent attraction to 15-19yo teens is called Ephebophilia.

I think this topic has been so prominent in our news cycle and public discourse in recent years, that by now most people understand the difference. I'm not sure, however, to what extent the distinction has any practical application. In either group, we're talking about the same cohort of people who, statistically, tend to be emotionally immature and poorly equipped to navigate relationships and the world around them, in comparison to most adults.

Birneybau

Irish Guitarist wrote: »

One of the 'perks' was that no one cared if you slept with young girls. I think Gary Glitter molesting girls whose ages weren't even in double digits made people rethink their attitude to this and made them wonder where they should draw the line. Music books and magazines used to be full of stories about how great Led Zeppelin were for having sex with anything with a pulse and for shoving fish inside women but I think most people nowadays would think this looks creepy.

Sardonicat wrote: »

When are they coming for Jimmy Page?

That girl in the above picture is Lori Mattix/Maddox

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lori_Mattix

While she was still 14, at some point around the time she claims to have met Bowie, Mattix began dating Led Zeppelin guitarist Jimmy Page. According to Rolling Stone, Page went to great lengths to keep the relationship a secret due to the possibility of being arrested for statutory rape.[4] Mattix claimed she ended the relationship when she was 16 years old after finding Page in bed with Bebe Buell.[1]

Which I now see has already been debated

Epic Eir Epic

Let's not forget, the thread isn't all about underage sex. How did it take this turn?

Ash.J.Williams

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

The rock music phenomenon was always about the teenage girls. It was never 'about the music' - most if not all of it was rubbish anyway. But was catnip to teenagers with simplistic musical tastes open to being manipulated by it, and to throw themselves at the predominantly 20 year old men churning it out.
Some lapped it up, others justified it on the basis that it must be OK because were the ones throwing themselves at them, and society said something along the lines of - fair play to them, wish it were me. And still does.

That is a fair amount of ****e you have spouted there

Irish Guitarist

They've already come for Jimmy Pages buddy Roy Harper (as in Hats Off To (Roy) Harper).

https://www.herefordtimes.com/news/11757930.roy-harpers-trial-hears-evidence-from-californian-actress/

One of the more bizarre things about that story is how he was described as having a blue penis. The woman that accused him was painted as a gold digger who was making all this up but no one in their right mind would make up something so weird.

It turns out he was a farmer in the seventies and gave one of his sheep mouth to mouth resuscitation. As a result he developed toxoplasmosis. I Googled the symptoms of this and one of them is "Blueberry muffin appearance (blue-grey nodules under the skin)". Make of that what you will.

He's since been cleared due to lack of evidence.

Baby, won't you play with me ?
Games that no one else can see ?
Leanin' over out my window
Flashing me a mini flower show

Steal away from mummy, oh there's my little girl
On the pillow of my tummy give my hair a curl
Run your fingers under and over, make us a little pool
And don't forget about tomorrow in the same place after school

Baby, make me calm your fears
Let me hold your thirteen years
In between the silky, love me
Race my heart and let my tongue rest

Oh baby I can feel you, see my thunderburst
Melting us together in the plains of magic thirst
We can be forever and ever, watching the water fall
Floating in the lake of all peace after love and after all

We can be forever and ever, watching the water fall
Floating in the lake of all peace after love and after all

Irish Guitarist

Epic Eir Epic wrote: »

Let's not forget, the thread isn't all about underage sex. How did it take this turn?

There was no turn. It was right there in the article you linked to.

Seven women—including Moore and Adam’s ex-girlfriend Phoebe Bridgers, the up-and-coming indie-rock artist—described to the Times “a pattern of manipulative behavior in which Adams dangled career opportunities” while often pressuring the women into sexual situations. Some of the women said they were significantly younger than Adams at the time of these encounters, including “Ava,” who said she was 14 when they first met.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Vera Late Queue wrote: »

But isn't the point that they WERE having sex with under-age girls?

Good title anyway OP, "It's not acceptable for musicians to have sex with teens anymore, boo!"

Still though, while it may not be a palatable viewpoint, if those teenage girls were doing all they could to have sex with those musicians (because they were silly teens)... obviously the musicians should not have gone there, but in a booze and drugs fuelled surreal bubble of reckless abandon and ego and the whole free love counter culture, I can see why they did. I don't think it's the same as, say, the abuse by Jimmy Savile.

Ideally it shouldn't have happened of course, and those girls were legally too young to consent but they did. They did queue up for it. I read the biography of so called super groupie Pamela Des Barres and was absolutely shocked at the stuff she did so casually at 14. And no regrets either.

But of course it was disgustingly seedy, and the rose tinted specs are being removed in relation to the summer of love etc - an absolute predators paradise.

Well so? Who were the adults here? Some teenage girls think they are so grown up. I can think of plenty of girls from my year in school who would have queued up, given the chance. It was up to the adults in the situations to halt it.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Calibos wrote: »

You're going to have to define what you mean by attraction.

Is it creepy to want to have a relationship with a teenager around the age of consent and above?

Hell Yes!!

For all the obvious reasons that don't need repeating.

However, are you saying that you can't understand physical attraction to fully developed teenagers?

I'm reminded of a boards thread a few years ago were some lad was shocked that his group of mixed gender friends genuinely thought he had Paedophile tendencies because one time when walking through the streets of Dublin an attractive young female caught his eye and turned his head before he copped she was a schoolgirl. His friends noticed the girl turning his head, noted she was a schoolgirl and confronted him about Paedophile tendencies. First off, its obvious the guys friends nor most people seem to know about the fact that Paedophilia is the persistent attraction to prepubescent children and a persistent attraction to 15-19yo teens is called Ephebophilia. The point was, that even if the guy did have a philia for 15-19 year old schoolgirls, that did not make him a Paedophile...but he didn't have a persistent attraction to schoolgirls anyway. His young red blooded males eye was simply caught by a very attractive fully developed female form for a split second before he realised she was a schoolgirl. The guy was distraught that there was nothing he could say or do to convince his female and whiteknighting male friends that he didn't have 'paedophile' tendencies. The consensus of that thread was that they agreed with his friends which boggled my mind. (To clarify. IIRC he described the uniform as not as obvious as many where it could have passed for the uniform of the likes of a Powercity reception/till staff with a small school crest instead of a Powercity Name badge in the same place)

Is it creepy to want to have a sexual relationship with a 15-19 year old female as an older male?? I'll say it again. HELL YES! Is it creepy to have your eye/head momentarily turned by the physically attractive fully developed female form of many 15-19 year old female teenagers? No. Its simple biology/instinct. Am I defending the rockstars? No All I'm saying is that its understandable and biologically/evolutionarily expected that males of any age will find the fully developed adult female form be she 15 or 45...physically attractive. The creepiness or wrongness only comes into it if that male pursues a non platonic relationship sexual or otherwise with the teen. Societal/cultural development in the last few hundred years cant overwrite 2 million years of evolution, that'll cause a guy to turn his head when a physically attractive female walks past.

Eh, to be honest, very few 15 year old girls are fully developed. I know that my hips weren’t filled out at that age and that was the norm. Sometime between 15 and 16, they started to fill out but at 15, I was still very much snake-hipped. And I’d started puberty at 11, not saying too much. Many girls were less filled out than me at 15.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

is_that_so wrote: »

I don't disagree on the older guys but even the young lads couldn't say for sure how old some of them were. My point is that there was a very different perception around pop stars and how they behaved, especially activities we now see as completely unacceptable.

There was also a very different perception around teenage girls and sexuality. In the 1970s and '80s, The Sun, the UK's most popular newspaper, frequently published pictures of 16-year-old Page 3 girls wearing nothing but their g-strings. That was considered acceptable back then. And so, if a rock star was sleeping with a 15-year-old -- well, she was only a year younger than the girl whose bare breasts were on millions of British breakfast tables. It wasn't necessarily considered such a big deal.

We're now judging these rock stars by the standards of 2019 rather than the very different standards of their own times.

aloneforever99

Emersyn Quick Sportscaster wrote: »

We're now judging these rock stars by the standards of 2019 rather than the very different standards of their own times.

Well, no, we're judging Ryan Adams for behaviour over the last five years or so.

And while a 14-15 year old having a relationship with a 17-18 year old band member might have been considered normal, I find it hard to believe anyone ever thought relationships between teen girls and men in their 40s/50s was normal.

eviltimeban

Begs the question would a movie like Almost Famous get made now... the "band aids" in the movies were depicted as being about 16 years old. Obviously true to life, but there'd be Twitter outrage if that movie came out now.

I'm not a fan of Adams but I like some of his songs. It's a shame as he was very well respected. I wonder will it go the way of Kevin Spacey, who seems to have no chance of redemption, or the Louis CK way, who is making a comeback and being welcomed warmly by his fans.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

eviltimeban wrote: »

Begs the question would a movie like Almost Famous get made now... the "band aids" in the movies were depicted as being about 16 years old. Obviously true to life, but there'd be Twitter outrage if that movie came out now.

I'm not a fan of Adams but I like some of his songs. It's a shame as he was very well respected. I wonder will it go the way of Kevin Spacey, who seems to have no chance of redemption, or the Louis CK way, who is making a comeback and being welcomed warmly by his fans.

It would be a shame if true events couldn’t be portrayed on celluloid. As long as the actors are of age, then it should be okay. I suppose we have yet to see how things have changed post-Weinstein and post-Me Too. It has all felt seismic but what will the aftershocks be?

Even watching old episodes of ‘Friends’, I have to think that a lot of the jokes about homosexuality wouldn’t make the cut now. It’s a shame really. I fear we are entering a joyless age. Depending on how the subject matter is handled, anything and anyone should be fair game for humour.

Re: Louis CK. I was a huge fan and I gotta say I’m not now and I don’t think I ever will be again. I was as repulsed by his actions as those of other people I’m wasn’t a fan of. The one thing I think might have helped him is that he completely owned up to everything. No “I’m sorry if you were offended” crap or denials. Just “Yes, I did that. It happened.”.

Sleepy

On the acts of the 60s/70s it has to be remembered that the society this took place in was *very* different than the times we live in.

The school leaving age again only rose to 16 in the UK in 1972. Here in Ireland, in 1967 when plans were announced for free second-level education only about a third of 16 year olds were still in school:

Irish Times wrote:

"At the time, about a third – or 17,000 children – who finished primary school were dropping out of education; at 15 years of age fewer than 50 per cent were still in full-time education. By 16, only 36 per cent were still at school."

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/fifty-years-after-free-secondary-education-what-big-idea-do-we-need-in-2017-1.2967984

16 year olds were considered young adults. They were expected to be working, would have had their own money. The generation who reared them full of stories about "the war" and heroic young lads of 15 who lied their way to the front (where many of them were maimed, killed or left permanently traumatised). Age gaps were common. My own Grandfather would have been 20 odd years older than my grandmother when they were married in 40's Ireland.

Hell, go back to Roman times and 12 was considered a reasonable age for a girl to marry. And while that's centuries ago, it's relatively recent in the history of humanity. IIRC, the age of consent in Spain was 13 until relatively recently!

I'm not defending Ryan Adams in any way. He's of the now, and his actions should rightly be held up against the laws and mores of the society he chose to act upon them in. Any judgement on the actions of 50 years ago through the lens of the present day morality is always going to find those actions questionable imo.

Sleepy

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Even watching old episodes of ‘Friends’, I have to think that a lot of the jokes about homosexuality wouldn’t make the cut now. It’s a shame really. I fear we are entering a joyless age. Depending on how the subject matter is handled, anything and anyone should be fair game for humour.

Just this weekend my other half showed our 13 year old Ace Ventura: Pet Detective. I'd forgotten everything about it bar some of Carey's antics.

We were saying afterwards that there's no way in hell that movie would be made now: the "baddie" is an ex-footballer who broke out of an insane asylum and transitioned to female. The "heroes" reaction to having kissed her earlier is to scrub himself in the shower to the them from "The Crying Game". The whole thing is utterly transphobic.

EDIT: just realised that movie is 25 years old! Christ, I'm old.

The Rape of Lucretia

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Even watching old episodes of ‘Friends’, I have to think that a lot of the jokes about homosexuality wouldn’t make the cut now. It’s a shame really.

A lot of people are strongly against homosexuals being the butt of jokes these days alright.

Gimme A Pound

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Well so? Who were the adults here? Some teenage girls think they are so grown up. I can think of plenty of girls from my year in school who would have queued up, given the chance. It was up to the adults in the situations to halt it.

I acknowledged that though. Of course they shouldn't have done it but given the fog of drugs and booze they were also in the middle of, and their own relative youth, I can see how it happened, even if i think it was totally inappropriate.

FTA69

I remember raising this sort of stuff when Bowie died and getting barred off the page and a ton of abuse off a load of people. This sort of noncing was rife and there's no sense of dismissing it just because you happen to like people's music. At the very least the behaviour of Bowie and Paige etc was highly inappropriate and weird.

Epic Eir Epic

FTA69 wrote: »

I remember raising this sort of stuff when Bowie died and getting barred off the page and a ton of abuse off a load of people.

Barred off what page may I ask?

FTA69

Epic Eir Epic wrote: »

Barred off what page may I ask?

The thread on this about Bowie after he died.

bnt

I was going to mention Almost Famous too: it's a fictionalized version of what Cameron Crowe saw for himself as a teenage journalist in the '70s. There's not much exaggeration there. So the notion that it could not get made today is shocking.

But they can make Game Of Thrones, can't they? In the very first scenes we meet a 13-year-old girl who is about to be sold off to a tribal warlord as a virgin bride in exchange for a promise of military support. In the TV series she's played by an older actress, understandably, since we see her bathing in the nude.

The treatment of women in medieval times, especially younger women, is a running theme in the books and the show. Mild spoiler: another girl is basically held captive until her first period, with the intention of having her get married and start procreating straight away. Harsh times.

weldoninhio

bnt wrote: »

I was going to mention Almost Famous too: it's a fictionalized version of what Cameron Crowe saw for himself as a teenage journalist in the '70s. There's not much exaggeration there. So the notion that it could not get made today is shocking.

But they can make Game Of Thrones, can't they? In the very first scenes we meet a 13-year-old girl who is about to be sold off to a tribal warlord as a virgin bride in exchange for a promise of military support. In the TV series she's played by an older actress, understandably, since we see her bathing in the nude.

The treatment of women in medieval times, especially younger women, is a running theme in the books and the show. Mild spoiler: another girl is basically held captive until her first period, with the intention of having her get married and start procreating straight away. Harsh times.

You do know Game of Thrones is a fantasy book/show. Riiiiiiiiiight??

bnt

weldoninhio wrote: »

You do know Game of Thrones is a fantasy book/show. Riiiiiiiiiight??

You do know the author researched everyday medieval life, took inspiration from real historical events, and tried to create period-realistic characters. Riiiiiiiiiight?? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

The way women were treated back then was no fantasy - it's well-documented. They were basically property, with some rare aristocratic exceptions.

eviltimeban

The point is, Almost Famous depicts underage girls (and boy) having sex (well, not explicitly. Implied). You could imagine if that was being pitched nowadays the studio would be saying "Can we make them all a bit older, like college age?".

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

There's still a double standard, though. Almost Famous depicts an underage boy having group sex with older teenage groupies. I don't think it would be acceptable to show an underage girl in a similar situation.

When Kate Winslet, in The Reader, played a 36-year-old having a sexual relationship with a 15-year-old boy, she took home an Academy Award for Best Actress.

When Jeremy Irons, in a remake of Lolita, played a 40-year-old man attracted to a 14-year-old girl, the movie had trouble finding a distributor, took a year to clear the US censors, and was almost banned in Australia after protests by child protection groups. It was eventually released there after two years, under a very restrictive "R18+" rating.

Lillyfae

https://www.breakingnews.ie/showbiz/mandy-moore-opens-up-on-untenable-marriage-to-ryan-adams-905474.html

While his actions are definitely scumbag- y, is any of this testimony from his ex wife admissable in a criminal case? I don't think it proves anything other than he's a pr*ck.

What gets me about all of these accusations is that most of them won't stand up in court and by the end of all the public shaming, very little of them will end up in conviction. People like Harvey Weinstein will go off into the sunset with their bags of money without ever having to answer to anyone for their crimes, because newspapers and accusers, genuine or no, can't just keep it between them and the police until the judiciary procedures are over.

Pa8301

Lillyfae wrote: »

https://www.breakingnews.ie/showbiz/mandy-moore-opens-up-on-untenable-marriage-to-ryan-adams-905474.html

While his actions are definitely scumbag- y, is any of this testimony from his ex wife admissable in a criminal case? I don't think it proves anything other than he's a pr*ck.

What gets me about all of these accusations is that most of them won't stand up in court and by the end of all the public shaming, very little of them will end up in conviction. People like Harvey Weinstein will go off into the sunset with their bags of money without ever having to answer to anyone for their crimes, because newspapers and accusers, genuine or no, can't just keep it between them and the police until the judiciary procedures are over.

It's his interactions with the teenager that are probably going to cause him the most legal difficulty. I think the FBI are already investigating that aspect. The other allegations just shed light on his horrible behaviour towards these women.

Lillyfae

Pa8301 wrote: »

It's his interactions with the teenager that are probably going to cause him the most legal difficulty. I think the FBI are already investigating that aspect. The other allegations just shed light on his horrible behaviour towards these women.

Yes but it wasn't clear to me listening to Matt Cooper's interview with the New York Times journalist yesterday that he was aware of her age. She insisted that she was 19/20 numerous times iirc. While I believe that a criminal conviction can be pursued on the basis of this, I don't think it's as simple as has been made out.

Definitely needs context of the time. A 20 year old rock start "grooming" a 16 year old groupie in the 70s doesn't really wash with me. These girls were already damaged in a lot of cases, socio economics probably had more to do with it.