Tell Me :
Talk
Good note to close this ridiculous thread on imho.
... I think the question put to us was more like:
why are WE 'all over it '?
Nonsense.
If it was ever "news" it was the type that should last like a day.
Gossip at best and slander at worst is what it turned into.
People speculating on what two consenting adults may or may not be doing together, sexually, is not news, it's gossip. And repulsive. That's "why".
Trust The Mail to get their facts wrong.
Mick does not live in Richmond, Jerry Hall does.
Mick's London home is in Chelsea... Cheyne Walk. He's owned it for about 8 years.
Edith Grove is nearby of course.
Boredom
Yes, it does. It helps to alleviate boredom.
Are we all really that interested? Surely this thread wouldn't be so popular if we weren't all so **** bored atm!
Fair enough, since if the thread were closed, you could not give your viewpoint on the topic like you have done.
AS BV noted, people are obviously interested in discussing this even though others are not.
It doesn't bother you when people post about Ronnie's kids or what Keith's daughters are doing or sorts of things about their private lives. It's a Rolling Stones fan board, people are going to talk about their private lives. Is it just sex and dating that you think should be taboo? Why can't consenting adults talk about such things?
Nothing else new to talk about although I wish there was. The tour is over, the next tour is still in the planning stages, and the supposed new album topic has been beaten to death.
And on a different note, now former comedian/current US Senator Al Franken has been thrown in to the fray:
Senator Al Franken Accused ...
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
By next year this time there will be 100+ pages.
And a new Jagger in the cans ....
Lot of false assumptions to unpack there, champ.
I gave my opinion about the topic when it was "news".
Hasn't changed; Two consenting adults etc.
How do you know it doesn't bother me when other personal aspects of the bands lives (kids etc.) are discussed? I think their privacy should be respected, always, but if Ronnie posts a pic of his adorable twins, clearly that is different. Surely you get that(?)
Nobody's saying "consenting adults can't talk about such things". Just saying it's unseemly and disrespectful, particularly when it's all speculation and gossip. The fact that the conversation deteriorates to comparisons with others who have been accused of actual sexual misconduct (see Hairball's Franken post above) is despicable.
The fact that you take such offense at me expressing my opinion on the topic, including making false statements and assumptions, says it all about your stated desire to let "consenting adults" express their views on it.
I only take offense when people call for threads to be closed.
I completely agree with you that the thread became polluted with discussion of Weinstein, Spacey, et al, all of which has nothing at all to do with the MJ discussion. Nothing at all. One is abuse, the other is, as you say, the lives of consenting adults. Mick Jagger's social life is going to be discussed, it's not unseemly or disrespectful. But you are 100% correct that people are wrong to bring up that other stuff as if there's any connection.
A bit odd comment.
I don'think there is nothing wrong to talk about this rock star's 'private life'. I mean one can do and have whatever moral judgments and stances in regards to Jagger's 'love life' from the base how it 'looks like' (how authorities like Daily mail reports that- do we have any other info?). I am sure Jagger's 'life' doesn't look quite right if the criterion is, say, the way of life is supposed to go in some safe and sure middle-class Stockhom suburb, in where the only 'right' behavior is based on the model of the people living at there. I am sure if some neighbour would be hitting 74 and picking up some 22 years old girl, he would be damned toughly... The 'society' would not like that... And this is only the world of civilized, damn educated and secular Northern Europeans... Think of the location would have been some redneck Southern US state, in where the holy spirit of Jesus, rebel yell, and eveyrything just... prevails....
Anyway, it doesn't really matter. People can have their moralistic takes, and project whatever they they want to judge from the base on their own values... And that's cool. An easthetic matter, as I argued earlier. Good to talk about. We are different.
But another, altogether another thing, is something some people here - unfortunately - do. They want to associate mr. Jagger to some criminal actions he has never accused of or associated with. I guess one might not like mr. Jagger's way of life, his women or relationships or whatever (a moral concern), but as far as still we live in a world of some kind of justice (some of us still at last live in countries to be proud of honouring 'legality'), it is low and sickening to even start 'speculating' in terms of like that (criminal charges, actually), no matter how 'public animal' the target is. I don't ask any censorship, but just common sense, some sort of inner sense of justice (a legal concern).
It saddily looks like that there are some people who really want to confuse those two different - moral and legal - concerns I described above. (Personally, I tried to exemplify this with the point I made in some other Stones site, but unfortunately my point just hit too hard home, and people couldn't see the moral of it, just being shocked of my words.)
- Doxa
Edited 9 time(s). Last edit at 2017-11-16 23:36 by Doxa.
Sorry MisterDDDD - wasn't making any comparisons as I did say "And on a different note...".
There has been an ongoing discussion of all that other stuff throughout this Jagger thread, but you're right - it doesn't belong here.
_______________________________________________________
PS - Having just read back a bit through this thread, it's become evident that you were also discussing others who have been accused of sexual misconduct .
Seems a bit hypocritical of you to call me out and try to claim I was comparing Franken to Mick.
Surely you weren't making any despicable comparisons of George H.W. Bush to Mick?
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2017-11-17 01:06 by Hairball.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
Midnight Toker
()
Date: November 16, 2017 02:37
It should not be newsworthy or any ones business when two consenting
adults of legal age date or get married.PERIOD.
adults of legal age date or get married.PERIOD.
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
MisterDDDD
()
Date: November 16, 2017 02:44
Quote
Midnight Toker
It should not be newsworthy or any ones business when two consenting
adults of legal age date or get married.PERIOD.
Good note to close this ridiculous thread on imho.
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
Rokyfan
()
Date: November 16, 2017 03:19
The social lives of celebrities should not be in the news? What planet do you live on? When consenting adults of legal age get married or date and one of them is Mick Jagger it is going to be news. PERIOD. No matter who he is dating. Don't let it bother you.Quote
Midnight Toker
It should not be newsworthy or any ones business when two consenting
adults of legal age date or get married.PERIOD.
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: November 16, 2017 04:21
Agree Rokyfan - ANYTHING Mick Jagger does is news.
Whether it's attending a football match, communing with a very old tree in London, or dating someone - the press are always all over it!
Mick's favorite tree
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Whether it's attending a football match, communing with a very old tree in London, or dating someone - the press are always all over it!
Mick's favorite tree
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
Aquamarine
()
Date: November 16, 2017 07:10
I'm trying to imagine being famous enough that the press reports on my favorite tree. 
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
Rockman
()
Date: November 16, 2017 07:17
what about lavatory or cemetery ....???
ROCKMAN
ROCKMAN
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
RoughJusticeOnYa
()
Date: November 16, 2017 13:34
Quote
Hairball
Agree Rokyfan - ANYTHING Mick Jagger does is news.
Whether it's attending a football match, communing with a very old tree in London, or dating someone - the press are always all over it!
Mick's favorite tree
... I think the question put to us was more like:
why are WE 'all over it '?
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
Stoneage
()
Date: November 16, 2017 15:06
There seems to be an urge for censorship here among many. A kind of moralistic view on the matter saying that we should all keep quiet about this rock star's private life although it's news material all over the world.
I wonder why?
I wonder why?
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
RoughJusticeOnYa
()
Date: November 16, 2017 15:14
Quote
Stoneage
There seems to be an urge for censorship here among many. A kind of moralistic view on the matter saying that we should all keep quiet about this rock star's private life although it's news material all over the world.
I wonder why?
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
MisterDDDD
()
Date: November 16, 2017 15:37
Quote
Stoneage
There seems to be an urge for censorship here among many. A kind of moralistic view on the matter saying that we should all keep quiet about this rock star's private life although it's news material all over the world.
I wonder why?
Nonsense.
If it was ever "news" it was the type that should last like a day.
Gossip at best and slander at worst is what it turned into.
People speculating on what two consenting adults may or may not be doing together, sexually, is not news, it's gossip. And repulsive. That's "why".
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
jlowe
()
Date: November 16, 2017 15:54
Quote
RoughJusticeOnYaQuote
Hairball
Agree Rokyfan - ANYTHING Mick Jagger does is news.
Whether it's attending a football match, communing with a very old tree in London, or dating someone - the press are always all over it!
Mick's favorite tree
... I think the question put to us was more like:
why are WE 'all over it '?
Trust The Mail to get their facts wrong.
Mick does not live in Richmond, Jerry Hall does.
Mick's London home is in Chelsea... Cheyne Walk. He's owned it for about 8 years.
Edith Grove is nearby of course.
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
bv
()
Date: November 16, 2017 17:23
Every day I check this thread there are two more pages, so it must certainly be a topic of great interest. By next year this time there will be 100+ pages. I can't understand why some ask for this thread to be closed. It is like saying the newspapers should not print stories I don't care about. If you don't care about this thread, why do you bother to post a request about closing it? I just wonder why.
Bjornulf
Bjornulf
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
dead.flowers
()
Date: November 16, 2017 17:25
I have a weakness for trees too. Cool fellows they are.
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
ycagwywpmd
()
Date: November 16, 2017 17:27
Quote
bv
Every day I check this thread there are two more pages, so it must certainly be a topic of great interest. By next year this time there will be 100+ pages. I can't understand why some ask for this thread to be closed. It is like saying the newspapers should not print stories I don't care about. If you don't care about this thread, why do you bother to post a request about closing it? I just wonder why.
Boredom
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
dead.flowers
()
Date: November 16, 2017 17:32
Gossip has a social function.
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
MisterDDDD
()
Date: November 16, 2017 17:40
More to make a point about how unseemly and gossipy and ridiculous the speculations are than to actually see it closed.Quote
bv
Every day I check this thread there are two more pages, so it must certainly be a topic of great interest. By next year this time there will be 100+ pages. I can't understand why some ask for this thread to be closed. It is like saying the newspapers should not print stories I don't care about. If you don't care about this thread, why do you bother to post a request about closing it? I just wonder why.
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
ycagwywpmd
()
Date: November 16, 2017 17:45
Quote
dead.flowers
Gossip has a social function.
Yes, it does. It helps to alleviate boredom.
Are we all really that interested? Surely this thread wouldn't be so popular if we weren't all so **** bored atm!
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
Rokyfan
()
Date: November 16, 2017 18:44
Quote
MisterDDDDMore to make a point about how unseemly and gossipy and ridiculous the speculations are than to actually see it closed.Quote
bv
Every day I check this thread there are two more pages, so it must certainly be a topic of great interest. By next year this time there will be 100+ pages. I can't understand why some ask for this thread to be closed. It is like saying the newspapers should not print stories I don't care about. If you don't care about this thread, why do you bother to post a request about closing it? I just wonder why.
Fair enough, since if the thread were closed, you could not give your viewpoint on the topic like you have done.
AS BV noted, people are obviously interested in discussing this even though others are not.
It doesn't bother you when people post about Ronnie's kids or what Keith's daughters are doing or sorts of things about their private lives. It's a Rolling Stones fan board, people are going to talk about their private lives. Is it just sex and dating that you think should be taboo? Why can't consenting adults talk about such things?
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: November 16, 2017 19:09
Quote
RoughJusticeOnYaQuote
Hairball
Agree Rokyfan - ANYTHING Mick Jagger does is news.
Whether it's attending a football match, communing with a very old tree in London, or dating someone - the press are always all over it!
Mick's favorite tree
... I think the question put to us was more like:
why are WE 'all over it '?
Nothing else new to talk about although I wish there was. The tour is over, the next tour is still in the planning stages, and the supposed new album topic has been beaten to death.
And on a different note, now former comedian/current US Senator Al Franken has been thrown in to the fray:
Senator Al Franken Accused ...
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
mtaylor
()
Date: November 16, 2017 20:49
Quote
MisterDDDDMore to make a point about how unseemly and gossipy and ridiculous the speculations are than to actually see it closed.Quote
bv
Every day I check this thread there are two more pages, so it must certainly be a topic of great interest. By next year this time there will be 100+ pages. I can't understand why some ask for this thread to be closed. It is like saying the newspapers should not print stories I don't care about. If you don't care about this thread, why do you bother to post a request about closing it? I just wonder why.
By next year this time there will be 100+ pages.
And a new Jagger in the cans ....
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
EddieByword
()
Date: November 16, 2017 21:06
Here's what my gran thinks anyway................[www.youtube.com]
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
MisterDDDD
()
Date: November 16, 2017 21:09
Quote
Rokyfan
Fair enough, since if the thread were closed, you could not give your viewpoint on the topic like you have done.
AS BV noted, people are obviously interested in discussing this even though others are not.
It doesn't bother you when people post about Ronnie's kids or what Keith's daughters are doing or sorts of things about their private lives. It's a Rolling Stones fan board, people are going to talk about their private lives. Is it just sex and dating that you think should be taboo? Why can't consenting adults talk about such things?
Lot of false assumptions to unpack there, champ.
I gave my opinion about the topic when it was "news".
Hasn't changed; Two consenting adults etc.
How do you know it doesn't bother me when other personal aspects of the bands lives (kids etc.) are discussed? I think their privacy should be respected, always, but if Ronnie posts a pic of his adorable twins, clearly that is different. Surely you get that(?)
Nobody's saying "consenting adults can't talk about such things". Just saying it's unseemly and disrespectful, particularly when it's all speculation and gossip. The fact that the conversation deteriorates to comparisons with others who have been accused of actual sexual misconduct (see Hairball's Franken post above) is despicable.
The fact that you take such offense at me expressing my opinion on the topic, including making false statements and assumptions, says it all about your stated desire to let "consenting adults" express their views on it.
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: November 16, 2017 21:56
I suppose everybody - Stones fans, that is to say - is interested in Mick Jagger's sexual life. I am sure it is about every true fan's right to know how is good old Mick doing in that department. But a bit more challenging thought, how to say, ackward, and a bit pervert one, is how to explain why someone interested in that field is somehow easily to associate the 'concern' that - Mick dating some 22 years old woman - with some sexual crimes involved with some well-known names at the moment. For some reason, some people here are more than eager to make that association a hot topic so hot discuss about.
I wonder their agenda. For them I only want to say 'God bless DailyMail' - what would be the world without that kind of truth authority?
- Doxa
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2017-11-16 22:15 by Doxa.
I wonder their agenda. For them I only want to say 'God bless DailyMail' - what would be the world without that kind of truth authority?
- Doxa
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2017-11-16 22:15 by Doxa.
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
Rokyfan
()
Date: November 16, 2017 22:14
Quote
MisterDDDDQuote
Rokyfan
Fair enough, since if the thread were closed, you could not give your viewpoint on the topic like you have done.
AS BV noted, people are obviously interested in discussing this even though others are not.
It doesn't bother you when people post about Ronnie's kids or what Keith's daughters are doing or sorts of things about their private lives. It's a Rolling Stones fan board, people are going to talk about their private lives. Is it just sex and dating that you think should be taboo? Why can't consenting adults talk about such things?
Lot of false assumptions to unpack there, champ.
I gave my opinion about the topic when it was "news".
Hasn't changed; Two consenting adults etc.
How do you know it doesn't bother me when other personal aspects of the bands lives (kids etc.) are discussed? I think their privacy should be respected, always, but if Ronnie posts a pic of his adorable twins, clearly that is different. Surely you get that(?)
Nobody's saying "consenting adults can't talk about such things". Just saying it's unseemly and disrespectful, particularly when it's all speculation and gossip. The fact that the conversation deteriorates to comparisons with others who have been accused of actual sexual misconduct (see Hairball's Franken post above) is despicable.
The fact that you take such offense at me expressing my opinion on the topic, including making false statements and assumptions, says it all about your stated desire to let "consenting adults" express their views on it.
I only take offense when people call for threads to be closed.
I completely agree with you that the thread became polluted with discussion of Weinstein, Spacey, et al, all of which has nothing at all to do with the MJ discussion. Nothing at all. One is abuse, the other is, as you say, the lives of consenting adults. Mick Jagger's social life is going to be discussed, it's not unseemly or disrespectful. But you are 100% correct that people are wrong to bring up that other stuff as if there's any connection.
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
Deltics
()
Date: November 16, 2017 22:26
I suspect that this thread has gone on longer than the alleged "affair".
"As we say in England, it can get a bit trainspottery"
"As we say in England, it can get a bit trainspottery"
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: November 16, 2017 23:02
Quote
Stoneage
There seems to be an urge for censorship here among many. A kind of moralistic view on the matter saying that we should all keep quiet about this rock star's private life although it's news material all over the world.
I wonder why?
A bit odd comment.
I don'think there is nothing wrong to talk about this rock star's 'private life'. I mean one can do and have whatever moral judgments and stances in regards to Jagger's 'love life' from the base how it 'looks like' (how authorities like Daily mail reports that- do we have any other info?). I am sure Jagger's 'life' doesn't look quite right if the criterion is, say, the way of life is supposed to go in some safe and sure middle-class Stockhom suburb, in where the only 'right' behavior is based on the model of the people living at there. I am sure if some neighbour would be hitting 74 and picking up some 22 years old girl, he would be damned toughly... The 'society' would not like that... And this is only the world of civilized, damn educated and secular Northern Europeans... Think of the location would have been some redneck Southern US state, in where the holy spirit of Jesus, rebel yell, and eveyrything just... prevails....
Anyway, it doesn't really matter. People can have their moralistic takes, and project whatever they they want to judge from the base on their own values... And that's cool. An easthetic matter, as I argued earlier. Good to talk about. We are different.
But another, altogether another thing, is something some people here - unfortunately - do. They want to associate mr. Jagger to some criminal actions he has never accused of or associated with. I guess one might not like mr. Jagger's way of life, his women or relationships or whatever (a moral concern), but as far as still we live in a world of some kind of justice (some of us still at last live in countries to be proud of honouring 'legality'), it is low and sickening to even start 'speculating' in terms of like that (criminal charges, actually), no matter how 'public animal' the target is. I don't ask any censorship, but just common sense, some sort of inner sense of justice (a legal concern).
It saddily looks like that there are some people who really want to confuse those two different - moral and legal - concerns I described above. (Personally, I tried to exemplify this with the point I made in some other Stones site, but unfortunately my point just hit too hard home, and people couldn't see the moral of it, just being shocked of my words.)
- Doxa
Edited 9 time(s). Last edit at 2017-11-16 23:36 by Doxa.
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: November 17, 2017 00:37
Quote
MisterDDDD
The fact that the conversation deteriorates to comparisons with others who have been accused of actual sexual misconduct (see Hairball's Franken post above) is despicable.
Sorry MisterDDDD - wasn't making any comparisons as I did say "And on a different note...".
There has been an ongoing discussion of all that other stuff throughout this Jagger thread, but you're right - it doesn't belong here.
_______________________________________________________
PS - Having just read back a bit through this thread, it's become evident that you were also discussing others who have been accused of sexual misconduct .
Quote
MisterDDDD
Also- today's headline:
Sixth woman says she was groped by George H.W. Bush. She was 16 at the time.
Read more here: [www.bellinghamherald.com]
Seems a bit hypocritical of you to call me out and try to claim I was comparing Franken to Mick.
Surely you weren't making any despicable comparisons of George H.W. Bush to Mick?
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2017-11-17 01:06 by Hairball.
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
MisterDDDD
()
Date: November 17, 2017 02:34
Quote
Hairball
__________________________________
PS - Having just read back a bit through this thread, it's become evident that you were also discussing others who have been accused of sexual misconduct .Quote
MisterDDDD
Also- today's headline:
Sixth woman says she was groped by George H.W. Bush. She was 16 at the time.
Seems a bit hypocritical of you to call me out and try to claim I was comparing Franken to Mick.
Surely you weren't making any despicable comparisons of George H.W. Bush to Mick?
Lol.
No, son.
I was "calling out" this post..
"Quote
dcba:
I bet your @ss Weinstein and serial abuser/rapist Bill Clinton had the same upbringing. Clinton's mom used to tell him "do exactly what you want in any occasions". Weinstein's ma probably suggested the same to her sons."
To show irony (look it up)
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-11-17 02:43 by MisterDDDD.
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
Stoneage
()
Date: November 17, 2017 03:13
Doxa: What I meant to put forward was the fact that there are two contrasting sets of moral here. One which (kind of...) implies that Sir Michaels's actions are immoral.
And another one claiming that it's immoral even to discuss the matter. In my view, both are equally moralistic.
And another one claiming that it's immoral even to discuss the matter. In my view, both are equally moralistic.
Re: Mick Dating 22-Year-Old in Paris
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: November 17, 2017 03:44
Trying to fix the quotes here....
Quote
Hairball
__________________________________
PS - Having just read back a bit through this thread, it's become evident that you were also discussing others who have been accused of sexual misconduct .Quote
MisterDDDD
Also- today's headline:
Sixth woman says she was groped by George H.W. Bush. She was 16 at the time.
Seems a bit hypocritical of you to call me out and try to claim I was comparing Franken to Mick.
Surely you weren't making any despicable comparisons of George H.W. Bush to Mick?Quote
MrDDDD
Lol.
No, son.
I was "calling out" this post..
"Quote
dcba:
I bet your @ss Weinstein and serial abuser/rapist Bill Clinton had the same upbringing. Clinton's mom used to tell him "do exactly what you want in any occasions". Weinstein's ma probably suggested the same to her sons."
To show irony (look it up)
Yet somehow you take the moral high ground and insinuate I was comparing Franken to Mick when it was quite clear I was not by stating "and on another note..." unless that part went over your head. Perhaps you owe me an apology?
And for the record, I'm well aware of what irony means, and please don't call me "son" again - it's patronizing, condescending, and flat out rude. Thanks in advance.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
This Thread has been closed
Online Users
Big Al , jp.M , MadMetaphoricalMax , rubyeveryday , Testify , tiffanyblu , Tonstone , Topi , voodoodrew
Guests:
1507
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10