For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
MKjanQuote
keithsmanQuote
Glam Descendant
I have no idea how to parse that last post.
I'm just pulling your leg mate.
Not sure how to change a title thread as i never start threads, sorry i can't help you, i wouldn't worry about it, it's kept us all busy and BV has been kind enough to let it run.
The horrible PC forces would say pulling someones leg is sexual harassment.
Quote
bleedingman
Edit: From a NY Times article about "Stone Alone": "She was a woman at thirteen, and she certainly looked like the twenty-year-old I had originally believed her to have been," he says of his present wife, who in any case is 33 years his junior.
[www.nytimes.com]
Quote
buttons67
wont give details but i was an unwilling witness to an alleged rape many years ago.
i saw an innocent guy getting dragged through the courts and after many months justice was done. the perpetrator of the false allegations got jailed but much to the inconvenience of myself and the poor guy who done nothing wrong and had to wait a long time for the court date to be set.
today many women make false allegations, ruin guys lives and face no sanctions, yet meetoo stay quiet on that score.
they also say nothing on the horrific increase in rape crime in the city of malmo in sweden in the last 5 years and dont report who the perpetrators are and from which ethnic groups, for fear of being called racist. the facts are there, according to police reports.
so what credibilty do meetoo have, none i think.
Quote
keithsmanQuote
RedhotcarpetQuote
stanloveQuote
keithsmanQuote
His Majesty
In time I am sure this will get round to The Rolling Stones and other 60's and 70's bands in a more legacy damaging way.
There's plenty to crucify them about and much of it is not exactly hidden.
Regardless...
I love The Rolling Stones.
That's my worry, we are getting to a time where anything deemed incorrect will be censored, i can see a day in the not too distant future where it will be wrong for anyone to play this music based on the morel high ground of the likes of twitter facebook and Instagram.
We already have Mick changing the lyrics on certain songs, i wonder where it all ends up, the Stones are sexist sort of thing so must be censored etc etc.
People need to step up. Once again a small minority of loud lefties run things and decide what others can watch. The right wing needs a spokesman that we all stand behind. Boycott anyone that caters to the left wing mob. That will end this crap.
Fully agree.
Yes fully agree.
Quote
rebelhipiQuote
keithsmanQuote
RedhotcarpetQuote
stanloveQuote
keithsmanQuote
His Majesty
In time I am sure this will get round to The Rolling Stones and other 60's and 70's bands in a more legacy damaging way.
There's plenty to crucify them about and much of it is not exactly hidden.
Regardless...
I love The Rolling Stones.
That's my worry, we are getting to a time where anything deemed incorrect will be censored, i can see a day in the not too distant future where it will be wrong for anyone to play this music based on the morel high ground of the likes of twitter facebook and Instagram.
We already have Mick changing the lyrics on certain songs, i wonder where it all ends up, the Stones are sexist sort of thing so must be censored etc etc.
People need to step up. Once again a small minority of loud lefties run things and decide what others can watch. The right wing needs a spokesman that we all stand behind. Boycott anyone that caters to the left wing mob. That will end this crap.
Fully agree.
Yes fully agree.
You guys are nuts, you want a leader to tell you that having sex with minors is totally fine???
And boycott anyone that thinks otherwise.
You are out of your mind.
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
rebelhipiQuote
keithsmanQuote
RedhotcarpetQuote
stanloveQuote
keithsmanQuote
His Majesty
In time I am sure this will get round to The Rolling Stones and other 60's and 70's bands in a more legacy damaging way.
There's plenty to crucify them about and much of it is not exactly hidden.
Regardless...
I love The Rolling Stones.
That's my worry, we are getting to a time where anything deemed incorrect will be censored, i can see a day in the not too distant future where it will be wrong for anyone to play this music based on the morel high ground of the likes of twitter facebook and Instagram.
We already have Mick changing the lyrics on certain songs, i wonder where it all ends up, the Stones are sexist sort of thing so must be censored etc etc.
People need to step up. Once again a small minority of loud lefties run things and decide what others can watch. The right wing needs a spokesman that we all stand behind. Boycott anyone that caters to the left wing mob. That will end this crap.
Fully agree.
Yes fully agree.
You guys are nuts, you want a leader to tell you that having sex with minors is totally fine???
And boycott anyone that thinks otherwise.
You are out of your mind.
Thank you for your voice of sanity Rebelhipi; this thread seems to expose a somewhat surprising support of criminal behaviour, in some, and certainly a backward-thinking ugliness that while sadly still exists is changing and will ultimately leave these types to the dustbin of history.
Quote
buttons67
wont give details but i was an unwilling witness to an alleged rape many years ago.
i saw an innocent guy getting dragged through the courts and after many months justice was done. the perpetrator of the false allegations got jailed but much to the inconvenience of myself and the poor guy who done nothing wrong and had to wait a long time for the court date to be set.
today many women make false allegations, ruin guys lives and face no sanctions, yet meetoo stay quiet on that score.
they also say nothing on the horrific increase in rape crime in the city of malmo in sweden in the last 5 years and dont report who the perpetrators are and from which ethnic groups, for fear of being called racist. the facts are there, according to police reports.
so what credibilty do meetoo have, none i think.
Quote
keithsman
Now wait a minute, i must clarify, i am against censorship, ie, banning Bills new film, i am not condoning under age sex, why would you twist that around to take the higher political ground. I'm not interested in politics, i'm neither left nor right, i just don't want the day to come where the Stones music will be banned because Bill slept with an under age girl, or that Mick slept with an underage groupie in 65'
I mean where does it end, surely the meetoo movement have bigger fish to fry, leave a rock band alone, people have the right to hear their music for ever.
Quote
CaptainCorellaQuote
keithsman
Now wait a minute, i must clarify, i am against censorship, ie, banning Bills new film, i am not condoning under age sex, why would you twist that around to take the higher political ground. I'm not interested in politics, i'm neither left nor right, i just don't want the day to come where the Stones music will be banned because Bill slept with an under age girl, or that Mick slept with an underage groupie in 65'
I mean where does it end, surely the meetoo movement have bigger fish to fry, leave a rock band alone, people have the right to hear their music for ever.
One of the tougher moral questions of any era relates to how much notice you take of events in earlier times when different standards of behaviour were quite acceptable.
For example... If tomorrow (in 2019) you learnt that a famous current performing artist kept 15 slaves in dreadful conditions you'd be shocked and that would probably make you stay away from their work. Understandable.
But how many famous, significant, and much praised signatories of the American Declaration of Independence did just that!
Another example... The origin and development of digital computing (without which IORR would not exist) owes a great deal to the pioneering work of Alan Turing at Bletchely Park in WW2. These days he's praised for his work, but after the War he eventually committed suicide as a result of legal issues that he had to deal with because he was gay. (He has been posthumously 'pardoned', which rather emphasises the point.)
Different times, different mores.
I'm sure I could find other examples.
But the point is that these issues do not readily respond to binary answers of "yes that's OK, we'll continue to admire your artwork", and "No that's damnable, we'll act as if you had never existed."
Personally I am not wise enough to know the right answer, but I am just about old enough and wise enough to know that it's a very hard set of questions.
Quote
CaptainCorellaQuote
keithsman
Now wait a minute, i must clarify, i am against censorship, ie, banning Bills new film, i am not condoning under age sex, why would you twist that around to take the higher political ground. I'm not interested in politics, i'm neither left nor right, i just don't want the day to come where the Stones music will be banned because Bill slept with an under age girl, or that Mick slept with an underage groupie in 65'
I mean where does it end, surely the meetoo movement have bigger fish to fry, leave a rock band alone, people have the right to hear their music for ever.
One of the tougher moral questions of any era relates to how much notice you take of events in earlier times when different standards of behaviour were quite acceptable.
For example... If tomorrow (in 2019) you learnt that a famous current performing artist kept 15 slaves in dreadful conditions you'd be shocked and that would probably make you stay away from their work. Understandable.
But how many famous, significant, and much praised signatories of the American Declaration of Independence did just that!
Another example... The origin and development of digital computing (without which IORR would not exist) owes a great deal to the pioneering work of Alan Turing at Bletchely Park in WW2. These days he's praised for his work, but after the War he eventually committed suicide as a result of legal issues that he had to deal with because he was gay. (He has been posthumously 'pardoned', which rather emphasises the point.)
Different times, different mores.
I'm sure I could find other examples.
But the point is that these issues do not readily respond to binary answers of "yes that's OK, we'll continue to admire your artwork", and "No that's damnable, we'll act as if you had never existed."
Personally I am not wise enough to knowi the right answer, but I am just about old enough and wise enough to know that it's a very hard set of questions.
Quote
Father Ted
I completely disagree with you. Bill Wyman had sex with a child. That was as illegal and socially unacceptable in 1983 as it is now. Beyond the hardcore fan forums such as IORR, people are more than happy to form decisive yes/no answers because of the predatory and exploitative nature of such behaviour. I can see no acceptable defence here. Children are off-limits. Is that actually still up for debate in 2019?
As for your example of slavery, it was of course quite legal and socially acceptable to own slaves in the 18th century. That does of course present a problem for people who hold a candle for statesmen such as George Washington and makes it very difficult to reconcile their radical, revolutionary politics with such a racist and evil practice.
Quote
Father Ted
I completely disagree with you. Bill Wyman had sex with a child. That was as illegal and socially unacceptable in 1983 as it is now. Beyond the hardcore fan forums such as IORR, people are more than happy to form decisive yes/no answers because of the predatory and exploitative nature of such behaviour. I can see no acceptable defence here. Children are off-limits. Is that actually still up for debate in 2019?
Quote
matxilQuote
Father Ted
...
... the persecution of Alan Turing was wrong then just as much as it would be wrong now. So: it's not a case of "different times, different mores" but "different times, wrong mores".
Quite so,
Some things are just plain wrong, almost regardless of the legality, but there are perceived degrees of wrong.
Some behaviours which today cause revulsion for most decent thinking individuals would a few short decades ago have prompted little more than a raised eyebrow.
This doesn't excuse historic behaviour ...but it has to mitigate the degree of censure we apply to those implicated.
Quote
Father TedQuote
CaptainCorellaQuote
keithsman
Now wait a minute, i must clarify, i am against censorship, ie, banning Bills new film, i am not condoning under age sex, why would you twist that around to take the higher political ground. I'm not interested in politics, i'm neither left nor right, i just don't want the day to come where the Stones music will be banned because Bill slept with an under age girl, or that Mick slept with an underage groupie in 65'
I mean where does it end, surely the meetoo movement have bigger fish to fry, leave a rock band alone, people have the right to hear their music for ever.
One of the tougher moral questions of any era relates to how much notice you take of events in earlier times when different standards of behaviour were quite acceptable.
...
Personally I am not wise enough to knowi the right answer, but I am just about old enough and wise enough to know that it's a very hard set of questions.
I completely disagree with you. Bill Wyman had sex with a child. That was as illegal and socially unacceptable in 1983 as it is now. Beyond the hardcore fan forums such as IORR, people are more than happy to form decisive yes/no answers because of the predatory and exploitative nature of such behaviour. I can see no acceptable defence here. Children are off-limits. Is that actually still up for debate in 2019?
As for your example of slavery, it was of course quite legal and socially acceptable to own slaves in the 18th century. That does of course present a problem for people who hold a candle for statesmen such as George Washington and makes it very difficult to reconcile their radical, revolutionary politics with such a racist and evil practice.
Quote
windmelody
As I wrote earlier, Bill Wyman might have made a mistake. Mandy Smith called his behaviour "immature". Maybe she is right. Yet, he did not keep "15 slaves in dreadful conditions" nor did he rape someone. There are no allegations against him in that direction.
Quote
keithsman
I can't believe people keep missing the point of this thread, it's not about Bill being a dirty old man, or you think it's acceptable or illegal or should he be in prison, it's not about that. It's about censoring his music, or censoring Stones music by the Stones if the Me Too movement or any other liberal elite movement start going towards all those underage groupies in the 60's, where does it end, censoring history because they were bad people or tyrants, censoring anything that can be received as offensive, you end up living a life that's out of George Orwell's 1984.
I'm all for the imprisonment of all the paedophiles and abusers who have caused misery to so many for so long, but it shouldn't end in censorship of art or history, we learn from mistakes we shouldn't bury them under the carpet and pretend it never happened.
Quote
CooltopladyQuote
windmelody
As I wrote earlier, Bill Wyman might have made a mistake. Mandy Smith called his behaviour "immature". Maybe she is right. Yet, he did not keep "15 slaves in dreadful conditions" nor did he rape someone. There are no allegations against him in that direction.
We are not talking about rape. He had sex with a child. What would you do if a man was dating your 13 year old kid?
Quote
keithsman
I can't believe people keep missing the point of this thread, it's not about Bill being a dirty old man, or you think it's acceptable or illegal or should he be in prison, it's not about that. It's about censoring his music, or censoring Stones music by the Stones if the metoo movement or any other liberal elite movement start going towards all those underage groupies in the 60's, where does it end, censoring history because they were bad people or tyrants, censoring anything that can be received as offensive, you end up living a life that's out of George Orwell's 1984.
I'm all for the imprisonment of all the pedophiles and abusers who have caused misery to so many for so long, but it shouldn't end in censorship of art or history, we learn from mistakes we shouldn't bury them under the carpet and pretend it never happened.
Quote
liddasQuote
keithsman
I can't believe people keep missing the point of this thread, it's not about Bill being a dirty old man, or you think it's acceptable or illegal or should he be in prison, it's not about that. It's about censoring his music, or censoring Stones music by the Stones if the metoo movement or any other liberal elite movement start going towards all those underage groupies in the 60's, where does it end, censoring history because they were bad people or tyrants, censoring anything that can be received as offensive, you end up living a life that's out of George Orwell's 1984.
I'm all for the imprisonment of all the pedophiles and abusers who have caused misery to so many for so long, but it shouldn't end in censorship of art or history, we learn from mistakes we shouldn't bury them under the carpet and pretend it never happened.
Yet, this is not a case of censorship.
The news is that Bill's docu was pulled from the festival, allegedly (i.e. not confirmed) because "the festival received a number complaints on social media about screening the film about Wyman, particularly regarding his previous relationship with Mandy Smith".
I don't agree with the complainers, but we live in a free world, and everyone can express an opinion.
If the speculation are confirmed, let's blame the cowardliness of the festival organizers
C
Quote
keithsman
I can't believe people keep missing the point of this thread, it's not about Bill being a dirty old man, or you think it's acceptable or illegal or should he be in prison, it's not about that. It's about censoring his music, or censoring Stones music by the Stones if the metoo movement or any other liberal elite movement start going towards all those underage groupies in the 60's, where does it end, censoring history because they were bad people or tyrants, censoring anything that can be received as offensive, you end up living a life that's out of George Orwell's 1984.
I'm all for the imprisonment of all the pedophiles and abusers who have caused misery to so many for so long, but it shouldn't end in censorship of art or history, we learn from mistakes we shouldn't bury them under the carpet and pretend it never happened.
Quote
Spud
In this instance how the hell does screening the Bill Wyman documentary affect the well being of others ? !
That's exactly what I mean by perspective in these issues.