Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Pop and Rock Stars... and underage girls

trashpony said:
They all ran really really fast in the opposite direction. Along with the boys
cliff_calendar_web_3113566c.jpg
Click to expand...

Casually Red said:
Nice suit . Saville Row ?
Click to expand...

LiamO said:
Some celebs - because we love them for their artistic genius - get a bye-ball. Others, such as celebrity DJs and TV presenters, don't. Whether an Artiste is perceived as a bit of a drug-feuled hornball or a 'dirty fuckin nonce' seems to be dependent on how cool or how influential you are
Click to expand...
LiamO said:
a) The blatant hypocrisy in how we view what they did. If we like or admire a person's work there is a tendency to focus on their achievements/canon of work rather than their sexual shortcomings. If we don't like them then we focus on their sexual proclivities and ignore their work.
Click to expand...

Let's see who sticks up for little Cliffy.
 
belboid said:
she wasn't the only girl on the 'scene', but she was the only one definitively fucked by Bowie (which was 8den's point). Queenie Glam was, according to that, 'linked with' him, but that just means they were all part of that crowd. Maybe he fucked her too, but there doesn't seem to be anything more about him doing so (and Queenie herself seems to managed to avoid being on the internet too much, so its hard to know much more about her)
Click to expand...
In Lori's account, 2 hours after Bowie had sex with her, Sable was invited to join in for a threesome so I would say that it wasn't just Lori that had sex with Bowie.
 
I think it's a fair point that we are more motivated to make sense of the wrongdoings of a man who we have affection for, than one who leaves you indifferent.

I had a scan through the Peel thread to see whether I'd had much to say, and I can't see a comment, but I've always been pretty dismissive of Peel's a actions as noncey (though he did go on to marry a fifteen year old, so more of an Elvis than a Bowie, maybe).

But then Peel wasn't an influence on me. (It was too bloody cold to listen to the radio in my bedroom of an evening: I chose "Terry and June" in the living room instead...) Whereas Bowie was important in my life. In some ways shaped the person I became. And so it isn't that I want to whitewash him - but I am motivated to spend more and deeper thought about what he did, and how I react to that, than I did with Peel.
 
comrade spurski said:
Most people on this thread seem to accept that the law is not there to deal say a 14 or 15 year old having a sexual relationship with a 16 or 17 yr old...and are talking about adults in there mid 20s upwards having sex with under aged children/young people.

So with that in mind I think it is important for adults to be absolute (personally I prefer the word clear) about it is never acceptable for an adult to have sex with an under aged child/young person. Some of the things I read on here in the earlier genuinely disturbed or concerned me.

This doesn't mean that I think have the right to say that any/every/some one who have had these experiences as an under aged child /young person are damaged or scarred etc. That is nothing to do with me.

Children and young people under the age of 16 develop sexual crushes on older adults, probably always have and probably always will. There is obviously nothing wrong with this but...and this is the important bit for me...the only acceptable thing for an adult to do in that situation is to kindly decline.

For me being clear on this is not me being a man telling women how to view their experiences nor is it me "mansplaining" and nor is me shout or screaming others into submission. To be honest, while men are statistically more likely to be the adult and girls more likely to be the under aged child/young person, it is not unheard of that women are the adults or boys are under aged (I know this is complicated by the higher age of consent for gay sex back in the day due to homophobic laws so to avoid this I am referring to an equal age of consent of 16). In the cases of adult women and under aged boys it has been (and often still is) seen as a joke...lucky boy etc.

Many of us have negative experiences that have shaped us in positive ways and vice versa but in my honest opinion if an adult did something wrong to or with me when I was a child and I have used the experience to be a good and kind adult it does not mean that the adult in questioned should not be held to account.

Sorry for rambling.
Click to expand...
I agree with you, that the responsibility to not have sex with a child is with the adult. Always. The point at which is becomes difficult to navigate is when the girl/boy/woman/man says that they feel the relationship was consensual. Obviously there are factors, like very young age or Stockholm Syndrome (?), that would mean it was abuse regardless but in some situations I'm not sure telling that person they are wrong and that they were taken advantage of is the right course of action. I don't know what the answer to this is, or even what I think, though.
 
It's all rather difficult, isn't it? Lori Maddox insists the experience was
not a negative one for her, in fact it seems to be a much cherished
memory, and it's her right to view it that way. Bowie on the other hand,
as an adult, should have fucking known better than to do what he did.
He used his status to take sexual advantage of a child.
 
Has Gillik competence been referenced in this thread yet?

Rights and Interests of Children - Ministry of Ethics .co.uk


UNDERAGE SEX & SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 2003
Much has been written regarding capacity and consent and ways to approach it. In the case of anyone under 18, contraceptive advice and prescription are backed by Gillick competence and Fraser guidelines. But the legality of a minor engaging in sexual intercourse is a major area. Should the doctor prescribe if he knows that the child under 16 may engage in sexual intercourse?


  • Legal aspects covered by Sexual Offences Act 2003
  • The partner involved is committing an offence under section 9 for Sexual activity with a child.
  • Similar to adults convicted under section 9, the same rules apply for offenders under 18, although the maximum imprisonment sentence drops from 14 years to 5 years.
  • However, if the person involved reasonably believes that the child between ages 13 and 16 is 16 years old or over, he or she would not be committing an offence.
  • Under no circumstances would it be legal for someone to engage in sexual activity with a child under 13.
  • A comment by Lord Parker C J in 1965 on Regina V Howard reiterates how the court views this, even when the child aged under 16 consents to intercourse
    "...the law has provided no such consent affords no defence to a man on a charge of carnal knowledge of a girl under sixteen".
Click to expand...
Again, not defending him but so far as I have read, he didn't ask her age. From the period photos she has dressed and made herself up to appear more mature than the 13/14/15 that is, depending on who's account you read, the age when he had sex with her
 
There should be some kind of very simple and definitive age testing kit. Like you take a tiny blood sample and carbon date a person.

Then we can have precise ages at the time of every encounter and pretend the difference between cases of abuse and perfectly healthy sexual activity is governed by the relationship between someone's birth and the reading on a clock.
 
LiamO said:
Let's not get shouty. there are several possible explanations for why she may get her precise age wrong.

1. She doesn't have a baldy notion cos she was a young kid stoned out her box at the time.

2. She is simply mis-remembering. This is not at all unusual.

3. She wants to believe she was older as it makes it all a little less sordid. She may well over time have come to believe that she was older.

4. Or the one I suggested which is kind of like the last one - except I, perhaps a little harshly, suggested she had made herself older to muddy the waters and protect her 'friends'... Messrs Bowie & Page.

Either way, human memory is plastic/pliable. Her birth date and the tour/concert dates which Thora posted are not. They are checkable facts. Thora checked them. I assume she would be perfectly happy to direct you to where you can check them for yourself.
Click to expand...

She could equally have got the circumstances mixed up but still remembered how old she was, it was an interview specifically discussing her age.

There is a fith possibility which is that it didn't happen. I only say that because it cannot be discounted as a possibility (I think it probably did) and that this did not come from an allegation of abuse like similiar allegations but more of a boast from someone who appears to be quite proud she lost her virginity to a rock star. FWIW Sadie Starr tells a different story of that night in this book and suggests Lori wasn't present. Some vile things happened on that scene without a doubt, but Bowie is not the best place to look, from an evidential point of view its a bit thin and its a shame really that this didnt come out properly before he died, then the allegations could have been put to him and been properly investigated - some of us have been banging on about this shit for years, perhaps turning the attention on some of the other, still living possible offenders might be more fruitful.
 
8ball said:
There should be some kind of very simple and definitive age testing kit. Like you take a tiny blood sample and carbon date a person.

Then we can have precise ages at the time of every encounter and pretend the difference between cases of abuse and perfectly healthy sexual activity is governed by the relationship between someone's birth and the reading on a clock.
Click to expand...
A case for mandatory identification cards?
 
Rebelda said:
I agree with you, that the responsibility to not have sex with a child is with the adult. Always. The point at which is becomes difficult to navigate is when the girl/boy/woman/man says that they feel the relationship was consensual. Obviously there are factors, like very young age or Stockholm Syndrome (?), that would mean it was abuse regardless but in some situations I'm not sure telling that person they are wrong and that they were taken advantage of is the right course of action. I don't know what the answer to this is, or even what I think, though.
Click to expand...
I agree with that, and it's probably counter productive to simply tell a 14 or 15 year old that they've been abused or raped (and as you say that too depends on the circumstances). It's important to say all that, but the way the girl/young woman thinks about it doesn't alter what the adult male did. And that's even more the case when you are talking about popstars who have something like an infrastructure in place for gathering up groupies.
 
Mation said:
It's all difficult. When I was 15, my boyfriends, my schoolfriends' boyfriends were all mid-20s. My 24 year-old-boyfriend took me on holiday to Amsterdam for my 16th birthday. Everyone knew. Friends, family. I'm still in touch with some. There was no subsequent pattern of young teen girlfriends. It was just what was then.

I'm not excusing anything abusive, but its hard to feel that it was in my case, even while accepting that it might have been - I was certainly very vulnerable in many ways.
Click to expand...
If it doesn't feel like it was abusive, even now at this distance, what meaning does it have to say that it might have been? Because other people are saying it ought to feel like it was abusive?

I'm actually quite pissed off with people brazenly stating that others are in denial. Sounds to me like they want it to have been abusive in order to validate their black and white position.
 
littlebabyjesus said:
If it doesn't feel like it was abusive, even now at this distance, what meaning does it have to say that it might have been? Because other people are saying it ought to feel like it was abusive?

I'm actually quite pissed off with people brazenly stating that others are in denial. Sounds to me like they want it to have been abusive in order to validate their black and white position.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately the hysteria is overshadowing the measured debate. As it usually does on urban
 
I don't think that's fair. There have been some heated moments, but I think this thread has been impressively measured. No one that I can remember has been told they are in denial - personal contributions have been respected. Let's not make it hysterical by saying it has been :)
 
Rebelda said:
I don't think that's fair. There have been some heated moments, but I think this thread has been impressively measured. No one that I can remember has been told they are in denial - personal contributions have been respected. Let's not make it hysterical by saying it has been :)
Click to expand...
Yes, you are right, I yield to that point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ElizabethofYork
Men’s violence against women and girls is a national emergency
34 35 36 37 38
Replies
1K
Views
44K
The39thStep
The39thStep
_Russ_
Rock against Racism
Replies
1
Views
228
19force8
19force8
hash tag
Starmergeddon time
2
Replies
42
Views
2K
hash tag
hash tag
N
Why do right-wing populists succeed?
2
Replies
45
Views
2K
nightowl
N
brogdale
Prime Minister Starmer dressed as...
Replies
29
Views
1K
Karl Masks
K
Back
Top Bottom