View Full Version : Rock Star Mick Jagger seduced a 15 year old girl in 1977
arista
02-02-2020, 02:53 AM
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/E0EF/production/_110738575_mos-final.jpg
Flae Dawn Chung (young actress)
says he had his way
when she was 15?
[Mick Jagger seduced me when I was 15: Actress Rae Dawn
reveals how she spent night with Rolling Stone
when she was underage and he was married to Bianca
Rae Dawn reveals she and Mick Jagger had fling in 1977 while he was still married
The actress, now a 58-year-old grandmother, insists the fling was consensual
She accidentally blurted out during podcast that she had sex with Mick Jagger
She was 15 and two years under age of consent at the time,
and he was aged 33
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2020/02/02/00/24179870-7956443-No_victim_Rae_Dawn_is_pictured_as_she_is_today_She _says_she_is_o-a-1_1580601814386.jpg
[No victim: Rae Dawn is
pictured as she is today.
She says she is only speaking
out to 'own' the story after accidentally
blurting out during a podcast
that she had sex with Jagger
when she was two years under
the age of consent]
[As she rises to leave she says:
'This is my story. I can only tell it as I see it.
This is my truth. Yes, I was only 15.
But it was my body, my choice, my decision.']
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7956443/Rae-Dawn-reveals-spent-night-Rolling-Stone-underage-married.html
montblanc
02-02-2020, 05:27 AM
he's always given me a creep vibe
arista
02-02-2020, 05:46 AM
he's always given me a creep vibe
It was 1977
he was 33.
But that young girl
appears to let him seduce her?
So no Rape.
But of course she is under the legal age for sex.
arista
02-02-2020, 05:49 AM
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2020/02/01/21/24179862-7956443-image-m-6_1580593268803.jpg
[Raunchy: Jagger gets close to Rae Dawn Chong in the video for his 1985 track Just Another Night.
She later complained that he was ‘licky’ on the shoot]
..there is no consensual if she was underage, she was a child...he seduced a child...
...the title...’bonked’...seriously, Arista...you’re referring to him having seduced a child as ‘bonked’..?...jeeez...
...I wonder if you would refer to it the same, had it been your daughter who he seduced as an underage...
Mandy Smith was just 13 when she started dating former Stone, Bill Wyman. They ended up getting married.
arista
02-02-2020, 07:25 AM
..there is no consensual if she was underage, she was a child...he seduced a child...
...the title...’bonked’...seriously, Arista...you’re referring to him having seduced a child as ‘bonked’..?...jeeez...
Bonked
is a OK
Its like you say the Loo
I say BOG....................
arista
02-02-2020, 07:27 AM
Mandy Smith was just 13 when she started dating former Stone, Bill Wyman. They ended up getting married.
Yes she was Seduced as well
The Power
of a Rock Star.
Bonked
is a OK
Its like you say the Loo
I say BOG....................
...no it’s not the same at all..it has a slang definition which would imply consensual to a sexual act...and that can’t ever apply to an underage because they’re a child...just because someone was all ‘rock n roll’ doesn’t make it any other than what it was...In some cases, rock n roll abused it’s position with children...
...’the power of...’...interesting this story is side by side with the Epstein/Andrew one...
arista
02-02-2020, 07:38 AM
...no it’s not the same at all..it has a slang definition which would imply consensual to a sexual act...and that can’t ever apply to an underage because they’re a child...just because someone was all ‘rock n roll’ doesn’t make it any other than what it was...In some cases, rock n roll abused it’s position with children...
[British
have sexual intercourse.
"the young couple bonking upstairs"]
Sure but he as the 33 year old Rock Star
bonked her
Mystic Mock
02-02-2020, 07:40 AM
Well this thread has put me off The Rolling Stones for life.
arista
02-02-2020, 07:40 AM
Well this thread has put me off The Rolling Stones for life.
Thats fair enough
GoldHeart
02-02-2020, 07:43 AM
Is anyone really surprised???? :bored: , Jagger isn't the only one .
arista
02-02-2020, 07:43 AM
...’the power of...’...interesting this story is side by side with the Epstein/Andrew one...
Thats nothing to do with this.
GoldHeart
02-02-2020, 07:45 AM
Well this thread has put me off The Rolling Stones for life.
What about other rock stars ? , Let's not pretend now :notimpressed:
AnnieK
02-02-2020, 07:47 AM
It was 1977
he was 33.
But that young girl
appears to let him seduce her?
So no Rape.
But of course she is under the legal age for sex.
It is statutory rape
michael21
02-02-2020, 07:49 AM
It was 1977
he was 33.
But that young girl
appears to let him seduce her?
So no Rape.
But of course she is under the legal age for sex.
He was 33 and married
[British
have sexual intercourse.
"the young couple bonking upstairs"]
Sure but he as the 33 year old Rock Star
bonked her
...I’m not really sure what that means, why you’re posting it...’the young couple’..?...she wasn’t part of a couple, she was a child ...he was having sex with a child and you’re implying that they were a couple..?..a child is unable to give their consent to a sexual act for obvious reasons ...
...just reading on from it in the article...she woke up and Kieth Richards was standing over the bed, staring at them...it’s all very creepy and it’s completely wrong on any level and in any definition...and then she goes on to mention the #metoo movement and refers to ‘men and women’...but she wasn’t a woman, she was a child....
Kizzy
02-02-2020, 07:51 AM
Thats nothing to do with this.
Why not? anyone can have 'groupies' stars, royals and the super rich.
She may not feel she was exploited but nevertheless she was.
arista
02-02-2020, 07:53 AM
...I’m not really sure what that means, why you’re posting it...’the young couple’..?...she wasn’t part of a couple, she was a child ...he was having sex with a child and you’re implying that they were a couple..?..a child is unable to give their consent to a sexual act for obvious reasons ...
...just reading on from it in the article...she woke up and Kieth Richards was standing over the bed, staring at them...it’s all very creepy and it’s completely wrong on any level and in any definition...and then she goes on to mention the #metoo movement and refers to ‘men and women’...but she wasn’t a woman, she was a child....
Sure but
she has now stated:
[Yes, I was only 15.
But it was my body, my choice, my decision]
Thats nothing to do with this.
...the link I made was only using your words..’the power of...’...Those men having power over females Or power over children...?...what’s the power, Arista...what’s the power of a rock star....all there is, is an abuse of power...
arista
02-02-2020, 07:54 AM
...the link I made was only using your words..’the power of...’...Those men having power over females Or power over children...?...what’s the power, Arista...what’s the power of a rock star....all there is, is an abuse of power...
Sure Abuse of Power
Sure but
she has now stated:
[Yes, I was only 15.
But it was my body, my choice, my decision]
...(...it was not her body, her choice, her decision as a minor and a child...)...I can’t see how you can’t see that, Arista...do we only want the law to protect children at adult convenience...?...only on our terms..?..
Sure Abuse of Power
...thank you...abuse of power, not power of...those are completely different things...
Mystic Mock
02-02-2020, 07:56 AM
What about other rock stars ? , Let's not pretend now :notimpressed:
Who are the others? Because if so I'll be put off them as well.
Well this thread has put me off The Rolling Stones for life.You don't have to like the artist to enjoy the art.
Most people in the arts are strange, perverted, fruit cakes.
I believe Madonna was one of a host of names in Jeffrey Epstein's little Black book.
GoldHeart
02-02-2020, 08:00 AM
Who are the others? Because if so I'll be put off them as well.
Well the obvious ones being Elvis & Jerry Lewis :idc: , Also rumours Bowie did the same.
I think there's plenty of others, I'm honestly not surprised by Jagger . Those rock stars have slept with so many people ,you know they don't care if they're of legal age or not :bored: .
Mystic Mock
02-02-2020, 08:00 AM
You don't have to like the artist to enjoy the art.
Most people in the arts are strange, perverted, fruit cakes.
I believe Madonna was one of a host of names in Jeffrey Epstein's little Black book.
Madonna was friends with Epstein or a victim? I just need that clarified.:laugh:
Madonna was friends with Epstein or a victim? I just need that clarified.:laugh:I don't know, I know that her name was on a long list of celebrities that had ties with him. Jaggers name was on that list too.
Mystic Mock
02-02-2020, 08:15 AM
Well the obvious ones being Elvis & Jerry Lewis :idc: , Also rumours Bowie did the same.
I think there's plenty of others, I'm honestly not surprised by Jagger . Those rock stars have slept with so many people ,you know they don't care if they're of legal age or not :bored: .
Elvis tbf really was a different time to nowadays, or the 70's/80's where there's more research into minors maturity levels.
And I don't know much about Jerry Lewis.:laugh:
Mystic Mock
02-02-2020, 08:16 AM
I don't know, I know that her name was on a long list of celebrities that had ties with him. Jaggers name was on that list too.
:worry:
:worry:Don't worry, nothing will come out about her, she's too rich.
Elvis tbf really was a different time to nowadays, or the 70's/80's where there's more research into minors maturity levels.
And I don't know much about Jerry Lewis.:laugh:Jerry Lee Lewis married his 13 year old cousin. She still believed in Santa Claus when she married, so the story Goes.
...So far as I know, there is no link between Epstein and Madonna at all...
Mystic Mock
02-02-2020, 08:27 AM
Jerry Lee Lewis married his 13 year old cousin. She still believed in Santa Claus when she married, so the story Goes.
In that time period I'll take teen.:laugh:
Even if that is disturbingly close to Jimmy Saville level of sick.
Sick.
And why do people trying to excuse it by pointing out that others did the same as if that makes it ok?
It's illegal, its wrong, its sick.
Sick.
And why do people trying to excuse it by pointing out that others did the same as if that makes it ok?
It's illegal, its wrong, its sick.
...:worship:...indeed....if it was all a ‘spectrum’, then it would be on that spectrum alongside grooming...’rock n roll’ doesn’t change that...
...the title change...:love:...no one ‘bonked’ anyone...’bonking’ is not applicable to a child...
Sick.
And why do people trying to excuse it by pointing out that others did the same as if that makes it ok?
It's illegal, its wrong, its sick.Where has anybody in this thread excused it? And if others have done the same, what do you have against them being exposed too?
Bonking is a perfectly acceptable word, you are not God.
...if you’re referring to me..then I’m not God, no...it doesn’t take God or a god to know that sexual acts with children can never be consensual so adult terms can never be applied...
...if you’re referring to me..then I’m not God, no...it doesn’t take God or a god to know that sexual acts with children can never be consensual so adult terms can never be applied...But you're happy for adult, sexual terms to be taught in Primary Schools, are you not? Don't you usually come out in opposition when people are saying that kids are being sexulised in Schools?
AnnieK
02-02-2020, 09:01 AM
But you're happy for adult, sexual terms to be taught in Primary Schools, are you not? Don't you usually come out in opposition when people are saying that kids are being sexulised in Schools?
Primary school kids are not taught about sex, they are taught about love and relationships. They do not use any adult terms, they are taught in simple child vocabulary. They are certainly not taught that statutory rape can be classed as bonking
Primary school kids are not taught about sex, they are taught about love and relationships. They do not use any adult terms, they are taught in simple child vocabulary. They are certainly not taught that statutory rape can be classed as bonkingBut Arista said that this girl consented.
So the crime isn't rape, the crime is sex with a minor.
AnnieK
02-02-2020, 09:07 AM
But Arista said that this girl consented.
So the crime isn't rape, the crime is sex with a minor.
Sex with a minor is statutory rape but whatever its called, its illegal
Are you actually defending the fact that a 30odd year old man allegedly had sex with a child over semantics?
...any PHSE taught in schools has equivalence in some way...I’ll leave you to your self professed trolling and baiting and letting me know what makes me happy ...
...any PHSE taught in schools has equivalence in some way...I’ll leave you to your self professed trolling and baiting and letting me know what makes me happy ...Bye
Cherie
02-02-2020, 09:15 AM
Its all very unsavory but then on another thread a recently deceased star is being elevated to God like status even though he was charged with rape of a 19 year old, so not sure why one is getting a pass, maybe Mick needs to die tragically for this to be glossed over
Bonking is a perfectly acceptable word, you are not God.Not when it refers to an illegal sexual act with a child.
But Arista said that this girl consented.
So the crime isn't rape, the crime is sex with a minor.Its. Still. Statutory rape.
Sex with a minor is statutory rape but whatever its called, its illegal
Are you actually defending the fact that a 30odd year old man allegedly had sex with a child over semantics?Again, I'll ask you, Where have I or anybody defended this? What gives you the impression I have?
This is a vile story, but it doesn't shock me. Jagger is just a tip of an iceberg.
If we ever found out the truth, my guess would be that everybody would be calling for the death penalty to be brought back.
AnnieK
02-02-2020, 09:25 AM
Again, I'll ask you, because Josy won't answer. Where have I or anybody defended this? What gives you the impression I have?
This is a vile story, but it doesn't shock me. Jagger is just a tip of an iceberg.
If we ever found out the truth, my guess would be that everybody would be calling for the death penalty to be brought back.
I'm glad you feel that way, your choice of words "arista said it was consensual and so wasn't rape" made it seem otherwise.
It's wierd that as an adult she is sort of saying that it was ok.
..there is no consensual if she was underage, she was a child...he seduced a child...
...the title...’bonked’...seriously, Arista...you’re referring to him having seduced a child as ‘bonked’..?...jeeez...
Never liked him
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Mandy Smith was just 13 when she started dating former Stone, Bill Wyman. They ended up getting married.
Never liked the Stones either ..
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
...’the power of...’...interesting this story is side by side with the Epstein/Andrew one...
So can these pervs not be brought to justice ?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
arista
02-02-2020, 09:40 AM
It's wierd that as an adult she is sort of saying that it was ok.
Bit of a Minx
as a 15 year old
arista
02-02-2020, 09:41 AM
Fair enough, but I just don't like people Policing other peoples words.
I'm quite certain Arista meant nothing sinister by using it, and he didn't need taking to task for it by Miss Virtue
Bang On Right Alf.
He was 33 and married
Didn’t stop Prince Charles screwing his mistress the day before and a few days after marrying Di
I hate the Royals apart from Di’s boys and their wives
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Sure but
she has now stated:
[Yes, I was only 15.
But it was my body, my choice, my decision]
Where were her fecking parents ??
Same applies to the 13 yr old previously mentioned
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
arista
02-02-2020, 09:45 AM
Where were her fecking parents ??
Same applies to the 13 yr old previously mentioned
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Yes Parents
lack of care
...then your thread title was bang on wrong, Arista...(...and those were your words and your own descriptive, not the media headline title ..)...it’s correctly been changed now, which was the bang on right thing to happen...
Bit of a Minx
as a 15 year old
...as a child..?..I give up...
Kizzy
02-02-2020, 09:54 AM
But Arista said that this girl consented.
So the crime isn't rape, the crime is sex with a minor.
Urgh.....
It's wierd that as an adult she is sort of saying that it was ok.
Maybe she’s been paid off .. that’s how it works isn’t it ??
That’s what allegedly happened with the recently deceased basketball legend .... allegedly
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Bit of a Minx
as a 15 year oldWhere were her fecking parents ??
Same applies to the 13 yr old previously mentioned
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ProYes Parents
lack of careThese posts are completely disgusting, you should both hang your heads in shame.
arista
02-02-2020, 10:19 AM
These posts are completely disgusting, you should both hang your heads in shame.
OK Josy
But if she was one year older
not so many problems
thesheriff443
02-02-2020, 10:25 AM
Bonked shagged fxxcked bedded, we are know what was happening from the title sex with fifteen year old.
Kizzy
02-02-2020, 10:46 AM
OK Josy
But if she was one year older
not so many problems
There has to be a cut off somewhere Arista. 15 no matter how close to 16 is still underage.
I know the times were different then, and it wasn't as taboo as it is today but it was still wrong.
Urgh.....I could be wrong, but I'm fairly sure there's a difference.
Kizzy
02-02-2020, 10:56 AM
I could be wrong, but I'm fairly sure there's a difference.
Why don't you at least attempt to educate yourself then?
Kazanne
02-02-2020, 10:56 AM
There was a lot of it about back then so I have been told by my mom ,she openly told me her and her friend used to follow groups they liked around and were excited when they actually got close to them , and although it seems very wrong in this day and age it was a different era,Jerry lee Lewis married a teenager(wasn't she 13 ?) , even today some men go for younger girls, when someone is 15 they know what they are doing and some women like older men, if no one is forced and they want to do it and they are of an age when they know what's what that is up to them . I do think anything under 15 is dodgy though , some girls do look way older than their years and I don't suppose I would be happy with my 16 year old with a guy of 33,but you cannot really stop them at that age.
arista
02-02-2020, 11:00 AM
There has to be a cut off somewhere Arista. 15 no matter how close to 16 is still underage.
I know the times were different then, and it wasn't as taboo as it is today but it was still wrong.
Of Course.
Yes times have changed
1977 was the release of Marvin Gaye's
Disco Hit
Got To Give It Up
thesheriff443
02-02-2020, 11:04 AM
Look grown men are marrying 8 year old girls with th the full backing of her parents.
Will we ever live in a world where girls women are treated equal, no
Why don't you at least attempt to educate yourself then?I'm having me breakfast.
White English girls are being raped in the tens of thousands, and the Police, Social services, and likely, politicians deliberately ignored it. Sacrificed those girls.
You wanna speak out? then speak out.
There was a lot of it about back then so I have been told by my mom ,she openly told me her and her friend used to follow groups they liked around and were excited when they actually got close to them , and although it seems very wrong in this day and age it was a different era,Jerry lee Lewis married a teenager(wasn't she 13 ?) , even today some men go for younger girls, when someone is 15 they know what they are doing and some women like older men, if no one is forced and they want to do it and they are of an age when they know what's what that is up to them . I do think anything under 15 is dodgy though , some girls do look way older than their years and I don't suppose I would be happy with my 16 year old with a guy of 33,but you cannot really stop them at that age.
I really do despair at this type of comment.
It doesnt matter if it was a different era, if there was lot of it about, if the child (yes a child) liked older men etc etc it's wrong, it's illegal, its abuse, its statutory rape and it being excused or made out to be not so bad and so on in any way at all is ****ing disgusting.
I really do despair at this type of comment.
It doesnt matter if it was a different era, if there was lot of it about, if the child (yes a child) liked older men etc etc it's wrong, it's illegal, its abuse, its statutory rape and it being excused or made out to be not so bad and so on in any way at all is ****ing disgusting.Tommy Robinson spoke out about under age girls being raped and marrying adults. He was labelled a racist by all the virtue signallers. Now calling him a racist was an excuse.
Tommy Robinson spoke out about under age girls being raped and marrying adults. He was labelled a racist by all the virtue signallers. Now calling him a racist was an excuse.Thats nothing at all to do with anything in post of mine you quoted so I'm unsure what type of reply you expect from me
Oliver_W
02-02-2020, 11:23 AM
When it comes to "Classic" Rock stars and groupies, I think the lines are more blurred than instances such as Epstein, or Hollywood creeps like Weinstein - it's not like she was forced to be a groupie, or someone with power over their career used blackmail. Jagger was probably high af at the time, should he have asked to see her ID?
These posts are completely disgusting, you should both hang your heads in shame.
What on earth are you on about ??
I’ve already slaughtered the sickos preying on the young girls but the girl’s parents are also to blame !!
We never let our 13 year old daughter out of our sight when she wasn’t at school .. and there is no way she’d have been anywhere near bladdy rock stars / back stage concerts / crazy parties at 15 either
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Niamh.
02-02-2020, 11:28 AM
Its all very unsavory but then on another thread a recently deceased star is being elevated to God like status even though he was charged with rape of a 19 year old, so not sure why one is getting a pass, maybe Mick needs to die tragically for this to be glossed overI only read about that recently. Hhmmm
Kazanne
02-02-2020, 11:28 AM
I really do despair at this type of comment.
It doesnt matter if it was a different era, if there was lot of it about, if the child (yes a child) liked older men etc etc it's wrong, it's illegal, its abuse, its statutory rape and it being excused or made out to be not so bad and so on in any way at all is ****ing disgusting.
No one said it was right Josy,I was just sayng how it was back then,from what I have been told,it was wrong but it was the norm then I believe, times move on and that can be a good thing,I was not condoning it at all, as I said I would not be happy with my 16 year old girl dating a 33 year old but if they want to do it they will, they don't care if its wrong.people are calling for 16 year olds to get the vote hence they must think teenagers are mature enough to know what the world is about and I am sure I knew at 16 having sex underage was wrong aswell, yes men take advantage, but some girls are willing to let them, I never once said t was ok.
AnnieK
02-02-2020, 11:29 AM
When it comes to "Classic" Rock stars and groupies, I think the lines are more blurred than instances such as Epstein, or Hollywood creeps like Weinstein - it's not like she was forced to be a groupie, or someone with power over their career used blackmail. Jagger was probably high af at the time, should he have asked to see her ID?
So anyone who is high should be excused of having sex with a minor? Being high profile should make these stars more aware....but they think their money and fame excuse any indiscretions....she wouldn't have looked twice at mick Jagger had he not been famous.
The age if consent in the UK has been 16 since 1865 so I don't buy it was a different era, it had still been illegal for.over 100 years
Oliver_W
02-02-2020, 11:36 AM
So anyone who is high should be excused of having sex with a minor? Being high profile should make these stars more aware....but they think their money and fame excuse any indiscretions....she wouldn't have looked twice at mick Jagger had he not been famous.
The age if consent in the UK has been 16 since 1865 so I don't buy it was a different era, it had still been illegal for.over 100 years
I didn't say it should be excused - if he hit on her in a coffee shop on a Tuesday afternoon, I'd say he's unequivocally a creeper. But when he had impaired judgement, in a situation where he expected to only meet adults, and was presented with someone who wanted sex, it wasn't unreasonable for him to assume she was of age.
Kizzy
02-02-2020, 11:45 AM
Tommy Robinson spoke out about under age girls being raped and marrying adults. He was labelled a racist by all the virtue signallers. Now calling him a racist was an excuse.
Who has said that was right?.... nobody!
The fact that you have outed yourself as totally ignorant to what contitutes as abuse are you sure these girls were actually abused?.... many of them referred to their abusers as boyfriends so that's ok isn't it? ...
What on earth are you on about ??
I’ve already slaughtered the sickos preying on the young girls but the girl’s parents are also to blame !!
We never let our 13 year old daughter out of our sight when she wasn’t at school .. and there is no way she’d have been anywhere near bladdy rock stars / back stage concerts / crazy parties at 15 either
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ProNo the parents arent to blame, the girl isnt to blame, the sicko that abused her is to blame.
thesheriff443
02-02-2020, 11:59 AM
I really do despair at this type of comment.
It doesnt matter if it was a different era, if there was lot of it about, if the child (yes a child) liked older men etc etc it's wrong, it's illegal, its abuse, its statutory rape and it being excused or made out to be not so bad and so on in any way at all is ****ing disgusting.
Talking about what was acceptable in the past and how it was viewed does not make it right and it does not make the person talking about the mindset of the past wrong.
Who has said that was right?.... nobody!
The fact that you have outed yourself as totally ignorant to what contitutes as abuse are you sure these girls were actually abused?.... many of them referred to their abusers as boyfriends so that's ok isn't it? ...Have you ever thought you are the ignorant one? And what I said was correct?
Rape is an act carried out forcibly or under a threat, or without consent.
This wasn't rape, it was sex with a minor.
You can argue about it until the cows come home, but you're still wrong.
Nicky91
02-02-2020, 12:10 PM
Have you ever thought you are the ignorant one? And what I said was correct?
Rape is an act carried out forcibly or under a threat, or without consent.
This wasn't rape, it was sex with a minor.
You can argue about it until the cows come home, but you're still wrong.
so basically your point is, sex with a minor, but with consent :umm2:
so basically your point is, sex with a minor, but with consent :umm2:Yes, what Mick Jagger did, was a crime and not right, sick in fact. But it wasn't rape.
Nicky91
02-02-2020, 12:17 PM
Yes, what Mick Jagger did, was a crime and not right, sick in fact. But it wasn't rape.
it is Mick Jagger we talk about, doesn't surprise me at all
smudgie
02-02-2020, 12:18 PM
So, she says he didn’t know she was underage, she wanted to experience being a groupie, she had been sleeping around so knew what she was doing.
They remained friends for years.
Hmmm, difficult one to prove as rape, all pivots on him knowing her age or not really.:shrug:
i'm sorry to disappoint so many people, but having lived through the 70's I can assure you all that sex with someone under 16 was considered rape then, they were not different times, it was frowned upon just as much then as it is now.
I'm very shocked at comments in this thread. It is exactly these views that allow predators like Jagger, Gary Glitter et al to behave as they do.
it is Mick Jagger we talk about, doesn't surprise me at all
I'm glad you have found him guilty as charged just by the look of him.
Jake.
02-02-2020, 12:21 PM
I'm glad you have found him guilty as charged just by the look of him.
Nicky didn’t say anything about the look of him?
Oliver_W
02-02-2020, 12:22 PM
Yes, what Mick Jagger did, was a crime and not right, sick in fact. But it wasn't rape.
If you trick a senile old man into handing over his money, it's not armed robbery but it's still theft.
If you have sex with someone who's not developmentally able to give consent, it's statutory rape.
i'm sorry to disappoint so many people, but having lived through the 70's I can assure you all that sex with someone under 16 was considered rape then, they were not different times, it was frowned upon just as much then as it is now.
I'm very shocked at comments in this thread. It is exactly these views that allow predators like Jagger, Gary Glitter et al to behave as they do.Gary Glitter was carrying on with pre pubescent children, he was a full on paedophile, although you'd like to club them all together, they're's differences.
You are making me sound like I'm defending Jagger, but I can assure you, I'm not, I hope he faces justice if he is proven to have done wrong. But we have to get things right.
If you trick a senile old man into handing over his money, it's not armed robbery but it's still theft.
If you have sex with someone who's not developmentally able to give consent, it's statutory rape.OK, it's statutory rape, but it's not rape. Again, they're not the same thing, they have different definitions.
Kizzy
02-02-2020, 12:29 PM
Have you ever thought you are the ignorant one? And what I said was correct?
Rape is an act carried out forcibly or under a threat, or without consent.
This wasn't rape, it was sex with a minor.
You can argue about it until the cows come home, but you're still wrong.
No because I'm not wrong there is an age of consent for a reason.
thesheriff443
02-02-2020, 12:29 PM
i'm sorry to disappoint so many people, but having lived through the 70's I can assure you all that sex with someone under 16 was considered rape then, they were not different times, it was frowned upon just as much then as it is now.
I'm very shocked at comments in this thread. It is exactly these views that allow predators like Jagger, Gary Glitter et al to behave as they do.
You don’t speak for everyone that lived in the seventies, next you will be saying there was no groupies.
So not going to take your experiences as life in the seventies.
Statutory rape definition: Sex with a minor. Exactly what I said.
Rape definition is different, adults can be raped.
You don’t speak for everyone that lived in the seventies, next you will be saying there was no groupies.
So not going to take your experiences as life in the seventies.
i don't speak for everyone, i speak for the law being the same then as it is now, no if's, no but's
thesheriff443
02-02-2020, 12:33 PM
No because I'm not wrong there is an age of consent for a reason.
Being willing and happy to have sex at 15 is very different from being forced to have sex at 15.
And a sentence will take the facts into account.
Burglary comes with a very different sentence to burglary with force.
No the parents arent to blame, the girl isnt to blame, the sicko that abused her is to blame.
I know !
I said that ages ago ... I’m saying that in those cases the parents should have been with them ..
Are you being deliberately obtuse ?
Would you leave your 13 yr old / 15 yr daughters alone with ANY stranger let alone a bladdy rock stars with reputations.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
thesheriff443
02-02-2020, 12:36 PM
i don't speak for everyone, i speak for the law being the same then as it is now, no if's, no but's
The law was the same but people’s mindsets were different.
Even words that were acceptable then are considered as someone being racist now.
Scarlett.
02-02-2020, 12:40 PM
Have you ever thought you are the ignorant one? And what I said was correct?
Rape is an act carried out forcibly or under a threat, or without consent.
This wasn't rape, it was sex with a minor.
You can argue about it until the cows come home, but you're still wrong.
The law calls it statutory rape.
It's rape.
Oliver_W
02-02-2020, 12:43 PM
OK, it's statutory rape, but it's not rape. Again, they're not the same thing, they have different definitions.
Like I said upthread, I think there are blurred lines in this case. I'd concede that there's an argument to be made for making a term for statutory rape in cases where it wasn't grooming or forced, but it should still be punished.
The law calls it statutory rape.
It's rape.No it isn't, it's statutory rape. That's two words, rape is one word. And it has a different definition.
Jake.
02-02-2020, 12:46 PM
No it isn't, it's statutory rape. That's two words, rape is one word. And it has a different definition.
So? What point is it you’re actually trying to make here?
So? What point is it you’re actually trying to make here?That this wasn't rape.
AnnieK
02-02-2020, 12:52 PM
That this wasn't rape.
I don't get why you're getting so hung up on it though? You said you think its disgusting etc so why spend the whole thread arguing about the semantics? She was underage, it was illegal. This is why people think you are defending it....it feels like you are trying to make it more palatable
I don't get why you're getting so hung up on it though? You said you think its disgusting etc so why spend the whole thread arguing about the semantics? She was underage, it was illegal. This is why people think you are defending it....it feels like you are trying to make it more palatableI'm not hung up, I'm just replying to posters who are trying to tell me I'm wrong. I'm absolutely cool as a cucumber.
arista
02-02-2020, 01:18 PM
The law calls it statutory rape.
It's rape.
Dia please check the first post
Rae now older stated these words
[As she rises to leave she says:
'This is my story. I can only tell it as I see it.
This is my truth. Yes, I was only 15.
But it was my body, my choice, my decision.']
thesheriff443
02-02-2020, 01:36 PM
If it was all statutory rape , you would not get people be charged with, sex with some one under the age of consent.
It happens a lot on here, when a member of the opposition sex to the the person in the thread title gives there opinion on the case that is not the same as everyone else, they get grief from others on here claiming they are defending the person responsible for a crime.
Same as if a man gives his opinion on sexism, he must be sexist because he is a man.
Scarlett.
02-02-2020, 01:56 PM
If it was all statutory rape , you would not get people be charged with, sex with some one under the age of consent.
It happens a lot on here, when a member of the opposition sex to the the person in the thread title gives there opinion on the case that is not the same as everyone else, they get grief from others on here claiming they are defending the person responsible for a crime.
Same as if a man gives his opinion on sexism, he must be sexist because he is a man.
Or its because they're arguing about the semantics of peadophilia :shrug:
Mick Jagger ****ed someone who was under age, it doesn't matter if the girl was willing, she was underage and could not give consent. I'd argue the same if it was a female teacher who'd done the same with a teenage boy.
thesheriff443
02-02-2020, 02:06 PM
Or its because they're arguing about the semantics of peadophilia :shrug:
Mick Jagger ****ed someone who was under age, it doesn't matter if the girl was willing, she was underage and could not give consent. I'd argue the same if it was a female teacher who'd done the same with a teenage boy.
You can white wash it I’m afraid it’s a crime but it falls into a different category.
Having sex with someone who is under age is wrong but even in the eyes of the law it’s falls into different categories depending on the circumstances of each case.
You can white wash it I’m afraid it’s a crime but it falls into a different category.
Having sex with someone who is under age is wrong but even in the eyes of the law it’s falls into different categories depending on the circumstances of each case.Its statutory rape. Why are people so adamant it isnt....
thesheriff443
02-02-2020, 02:08 PM
You can kill someone and it’s not always classed as murder.
I know !
I said that ages ago ... I’m saying that in those cases the parents should have been with them ..
Are you being deliberately obtuse ?
Would you leave your 13 yr old / 15 yr daughters alone with ANY stranger let alone a bladdy rock stars with reputations.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ProYou're comment read that the parents were partly to blame.
I stand by my opinion. They arent. The victim isnt either.
You can kill someone and it’s not always classed as murder.Its 2 different crimes so that's a pretty poor comparison
thesheriff443
02-02-2020, 02:11 PM
Its statutory rape. Why are people so adamant it isnt....
Because it’s not, people are charged with, having sex with someone under the age of consent or cohersing a minor into having sex.
Because it’s not, people are charged with, having sex with someone under the age of consent or cohersing a minor into having sex.Both of those are statutory rape.
thesheriff443
02-02-2020, 02:13 PM
Its 2 different crimes so that's a pretty poor comparison
No it’s not in the eyes of the law you can have the same thing happen but under different surcumstanes.
Why do people even care about name of it it just comes across like attempting to defend or make it seem somehow less horrible
You're comment read that the parents were partly to blame.
I stand by my opinion. They arent. The victim isnt either.
At least start reading comments in context then ..
This the post I was replying to ..
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200202/1e092827812707b25c0ddf49c35b12dd.jpg
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
thesheriff443
02-02-2020, 02:14 PM
Both of those are statutory rape.
The person committing the crime are not charged with statutory rape
No it’s not in the eyes of the law you can have the same thing happen but under different surcumstanes.Yes I know that.
Doesnt change the fact that Jagger committed statutory rape.
At least start reading comments in context then ..
This the post I was replying to ..
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200202/1e092827812707b25c0ddf49c35b12dd.jpg
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ProI did. Still reads the same.
thesheriff443
02-02-2020, 02:17 PM
Yes I know that.
Doesnt change the fact that Jagger committed statutory rape.
No in the eyes of the law the charge will be having sex with someone under the age of concent because even tho she agreed to have sex she was under the legal age of consent
I did. Still reads the same.
I’d already dealt with the slimy perverse offenders and then I commented that the parents were not blameless
This is my earlier post
So can these pervs not be brought to justice ?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
The Age of Consent in*United Kingdom is 16 years old. ... Individuals aged 15 or younger in*United Kingdom*are not legally able to consent to sexual activity, and such activity may result in prosecution for*statutory rape*or the equivalent local law.
Again why the hell do people seem more interested in what the crime is called rather than what he done.
Again why the hell do people seem more interested in what the crime is called rather than what he done.
I’m done
Looks like you’ve nothing else to do but go around in circles winding people up ..
Crazy thing is .... we’re all on the same team !!!’
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Kizzy
02-02-2020, 02:22 PM
Dia please check the first post
Rae now older stated these words
[As she rises to leave she says:
'This is my story. I can only tell it as I see it.
This is my truth. Yes, I was only 15.
But it was my body, my choice, my decision.']
Whose body it is makes not one jot of difference. So by that token the guys in Rotherham did nothing wrong as the underage girls in some cases were willing participants?
thesheriff443
02-02-2020, 02:23 PM
Because depending on the circumstances there would be different out comes
That’s why there are different charges.
If jagger was charged with statutory rape he would not be convicted because it does not meet the threshold for that charge
I’m done
Looks like you’ve nothing else to do but go around in circles winding people up ..
Crazy thing is .... we’re all on the same team !!!’
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ProI wasnt referring to you, calm yourself.
Because depending on the circumstances there would be different out comes
That’s why there are different charges.
If jagger was charged with statutory rape he would not be convicted because it does not meet the threshold for that chargeIt does though.
Twosugars
02-02-2020, 02:28 PM
The point is minors are considered unable to consent to sex and so law treats it that consent was not given and therefore classes it as rape.
Makes no difference how "willing" a minor is.
For an adult it is gross to hide behind putting it on the minor. Nope, only one party is fully responsible, full stop.
Jake.
02-02-2020, 02:31 PM
Why do people even care about name of it it just comes across like attempting to defend or make it seem somehow less horrible
Exactly the point I feel
I wasnt referring to you, calm yourself.
I quoted that post because you keep going on and on but never take into account anything said to you .. you must be a complete nightmare to talk to if you simply don’t listen
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
thesheriff443
02-02-2020, 02:33 PM
It does though.
The law is complex.
Sometimes cps will drop a rape charge knowing there is a good possibility of not getting a conviction instead they will opt for a lesser charge of sexual assault because there is a greater chance of a conviction.
They had sex that was Illegal but the circumstances of what lead to sex will have an impact on the charge.
By the way I don’t make the law.
I quoted that post because you keep going on and on but never take into account anything said to you .. you must be a complete nightmare to talk to if you simply don’t listen
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
I keep going on and on?
It's a discussion and I was replying to points I disagreed with.
Dont blame me because the way you worded your opinion made it sound like you were blaming the parents...
The law is complex.
Sometimes cps will drop a rape charge knowing there is a good possibility of not getting a conviction instead they will opt for a lesser charge of sexual assault because there is a greater chance of a conviction.
They had sex that was Illegal but the circumstances of what lead to sex will have an impact on the charge.
By the way I don’t make the law.
None of that matters one bit though he had sex with a minor meaning she wasn't legally able to consent, that's statutory rape.
Why do care so much to argue about the charge that would be against him?
None of that matters one bit though he had sex with a minor meaning she wasn't legally able to consent, that's statutory rape
Yeah .... you’ve said that about fifty times already .... yawn
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Yeah .... you’ve said that about fifty times already .... yawn
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ProYeah it's a forum.
Try a sleep if you're tired.
None of that matters one bit though he had sex with a minor meaning she wasn't legally able to consent, that's statutory rape.
Why do care so much to argue about the charge that would be against him?Because we want to make sure he gets sentenced and pays the correct penalty for his crime.
He’s a multi millionaire, he can afford the best lawyers in the land. So he needs to be charged with the correct crime.
Because we want to make sure he gets sentenced and pays the correct penalty for his crime.
He’s a multi millionaire, he can afford the best lawyers in the land. So he needs to be charged with the correct crime.I'm sure the authorities will be well able to deal with that without the help of TiBBers
Jake.
02-02-2020, 03:00 PM
Because we want to make sure he gets sentenced and pays the correct penalty for his crime.
He’s a multi millionaire, he can afford the best lawyers in the land. So he needs to be charged with the correct crime.
That’s down to the authorities and the judicial system, I doubt a post on a Big Brother forum is going to sway the opinion of a judge
She says "i didn't tell him my age and he didn't ask". Could be she looked older (and seemed more mature) than 15? Some 15 yr old girls I know look at least 18! :shocked:
I doubt rock stars in that era asked every girl who was 'dressing to impress them' what age they were if they didn't look at all like 15 (after all, not much separates 15 yrs from 16 yrs, the age of consent.)
It was still statutary rape by law, but it can be bit of a minefield for men if their intentions are not bad ones.
That’s down to the authorities and the judicial system, I doubt a post on a Big Brother forum is going to sway the opinion of a judgeYeah, Josy sort of said the same thing a post earlier, I didn't need it repeating, however, how kind of you to think of me.
thesheriff443
02-02-2020, 03:01 PM
None of that matters one bit though he had sex with a minor meaning she wasn't legally able to consent, that's statutory rape.
Why do care so much to argue about the charge that would be against him?
For one Josy I’m not having an argument with you I’m having a conversation with you.
But you don’t seem to understand, that if you charged him with statutory rape he would get away with it.
If I charged him with having sex with someone under the age of consent he might get convicted but that’s not gauranteed
Why do you think top lawyers get massive amounts of money, it’s because they use the correct usage of words in the courtroom that can mean the difference between prison and walking away with their freedom.
Lawyers get thousands of pounds every year for defending some the most disgusting people on earth.
Jake.
02-02-2020, 03:03 PM
Yeah, Josy sort of said the same thing a post earlier, I didn't need it repeating, however, how kind of you to think of me.
She literally said it just before I did :umm2:
Livia
02-02-2020, 03:04 PM
Forty odd years on.... let's not waste the time of the court.
For one Josy I’m not having an argument with you I’m having a conversation with you.
But you don’t seem to understand, that if you charged him with statutory rape he would get away with it.
If I charged him with having sex with someone under the age of consent he might get convicted but that’s not gauranteed
Why do you think top lawyers get massive amounts of money, it’s because they use the correct usage of words in the courtroom that can mean the difference between prison and walking away with their freedom.
Lawyers get thousands of pounds every year for defending some the most disgusting people on earth.
Yeah that's what I meant, like arguing your point about what the charge would be not specifically arguing with me.
And theres no way you can know that he would get away with it regardless of how the charge was worded.
However my point in regards to the discussion I was having with you (and others) was that the charge may be called something else (actually it mostly likely would be) but it still means statutory rape.
arista
02-02-2020, 03:13 PM
Forty odd years on.... let's not waste the time of the court.
Yes thats well past the time limit
to go to Court.
It only went Public
after Rea's recent podcast.
This went Front Page on a Sunday Daily Mail
helped them sell extra papers today.
We find out late tonight
if any other papers are going to put it Front page?
Livia
02-02-2020, 03:19 PM
Yes thats well past the time limit
to go to Court.
It only went Public
after Rea's recent podcast.
This went Front Page on a Sunday Only Paper "The People"
helped them sell extra papers today.
We find out late tonight
if any other papers are going to put it Front page?
There is no statute of limitations in the UK for crimes that would be tried in a court higher than a magistrates court. So it could still be tried even after all this time... assuming anyone wants to bother.
thesheriff443
02-02-2020, 03:31 PM
Yeah that's what I meant, like arguing your point about what the charge would be not specifically arguing with me.
And theres no way you can know that he would get away with it regardless of how the charge was worded.
However my point in regards to the discussion I was having with you (and others) was that the charge may be called something else (actually it mostly likely would be) but it still means statutory rape.
For me it means, sex with a 15 year old wich is illegal and wrong.
From my own personal experience, being arrested for attempted murder by shooting someone with a shot gun and surrender to armed police, going to court and getting told to stay out of trouble for 12 months, the circumstances mean everything and what can actually be proved.
Was once in court and the charge was read out that on a date and time a man put his hand in a woman’s vagina that she did not consent to.
Yes thats well past the time limit
to go to Court.
It only went Public
after Rea's recent podcast.
This went Front Page on a Sunday Only Paper "The People"
helped them sell extra papers today.
We find out late tonight
if any other papers are going to put it Front page?
Why on earth should he be allowed to get away with it though ??
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
arista
02-02-2020, 04:03 PM
There is no statute of limitations in the UK for crimes that would be tried in a court higher than a magistrates court. So it could still be tried even after all this time... assuming anyone wants to bother.
The Lady Rae
does not want to.
arista
02-02-2020, 04:04 PM
Why on earth should he be allowed to get away with it though ??
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Maybe because the Lady Rae
is not pushing it.
Only Confirmed it
after she let it out her recent podcast.
Maybe because the Lady Rae
is not pushing it.
Only Confirmed it
after she let it out her recent podcast.
But a offence is an offence, surely
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Calderyon
02-02-2020, 06:45 PM
Always thought Rolling Stones was overrated.
Now they are also heinous. (Well some of them at least)
Always thought Rolling Stones was overrated.
Now they are also heinous. (Well some of them at least)
If I had any of their crap songs on our PC they’d be deleted on principle
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Amy Jade
02-02-2020, 07:16 PM
Did he know she was 15?
Legally this is rape if he did or not though.
GoldHeart
03-02-2020, 01:04 AM
In that time period I'll take teen.:laugh:
Even if that is disturbingly close to Jimmy Saville level of sick.
At 13 you're a little child you're a minor , teen is being used too much as a grey area for anything goes .
You've got to ask yourself if you'd be creeped out by your own child of that age being with a grown adult then you know it's messed up.
And 15 is underage , but I'm not surprised by Jagger . As I always knew rock stars are like that , they don't care about age they just take their drugs & booze and sleep with any female with a pulse .
And in the music industry & Hollywood there's allsorts of disturbing things happening.
Mystic Mock
03-02-2020, 06:00 AM
Why on earth should he be allowed to get away with it though ??
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
This is what I'm not understanding.:conf:
Mystic Mock
03-02-2020, 06:05 AM
At 13 you're a little child you're a minor , teen is being used too much as a grey area for anything goes .
You've got to ask yourself if you'd be creeped out by your own child of that age being with a grown adult then you know it's messed up.
And 15 is underage , but I'm not surprised by Jagger . As I always knew rock stars are like that , they don't care about age they just take their drugs & booze and sleep with any female with a pulse .
And in the music industry & Hollywood there's allsorts of disturbing things happening.
I agree with you to an extent.
It's that I am more forgiving of people before the 70's era doing something disgusting like that when there was less information on Paedophilia in those days.
However the Incest part is disgusting in any recent decade.:umm2:
GoldHeart
03-02-2020, 07:30 AM
I agree with you to an extent.
It's that I am more forgiving of people before the 70's era doing something disgusting like that when there was less information on Paedophilia in those days.
However the Incest part is disgusting in any recent decade.:umm2:
So basically pre 70's era people didn't know predators existed ?? is that what you're saying? :rolleyes: . I'm pretty sure they knew but i will agree that attitudes were bizarre and ignorant back then. And things weren't taken as seriously as today.
And incest isn't exactly a recent thing as weird as that sounds.
But regarding consensual relationships with teens and adults it becomes a grey area and blurred lines, and some people like this woman who said she slept with Jagger is saying it was her choice and that she wanted to sleep with him despite being underage . So what are people meant to do with that information? .
I will never understand what a grown adult male or female would see in a child , is it manipulation? control? some fetish?. And i'm talking about the ones that know they're underage and still young.
Even hearing about 16 & 17 year old's dating 30+ age group is weird to me .
Mystic Mock
03-02-2020, 07:41 AM
So basically pre 70's era people didn't know predators existed ?? is that what you're saying? :rolleyes: . I'm pretty sure they knew but i will agree that attitudes were bizarre and ignorant back then. And things weren't taken as seriously as today.
And incest isn't exactly a recent thing as weird as that sounds.
But regarding consensual relationships with teens and adults it becomes a grey area and blurred lines, and some people like this woman who said she slept with Jagger is saying it was her choice and that she wanted to sleep with him despite being underage . So what are people meant to do with that information? .
I will never understand what a grown adult male or female would see in a child , is it manipulation? control? some fetish?. And i'm talking about the ones that know they're underage and still young.
Even hearing about 16 & 17 year old's dating 30+ age group is weird to me .
I think that predators in the past were seen as people having sex/relationship with someone below the age of 12. I could be wrong on that though as I'm no expert on the subject.
And I meant that people having an incestuous relationship past the Medieval period is bizarre to me personally as we're meant to have progressed since then.
I agree with you on why an adult would want to go with someone below 16 personally.
GoldHeart
03-02-2020, 08:07 AM
I think that predators in the past were seen as people having sex/relationship with someone below the age of 12. I could be wrong on that though as I'm no expert on the subject.
And I meant that people having an incestuous relationship past the Medieval period is bizarre to me personally as we're meant to have progressed since then.
I agree with you on why an adult would want to go with someone below 16 personally.
Yeah i remember watching an old twilight zone episode from the 60's ,where it was implied a male character who was older had feelings / fancied a woman when she was 12 or something:shocked: .
Maybe that was a reflection of the laid back attitude to the Lolita complex .
I think 16 is still young , I see 16 & 17 year olds as kids . When they're 18 That's officially a grown up , and even then they could still be mentally immature .
It's bizarre to us but some people think incest is still okay , even when their kids get sick with medical problems .
Mystic Mock
03-02-2020, 08:18 AM
Yeah i remember watching an old twilight zone episode from the 60's ,where it was implied a male character who was older had feelings / fancied a woman when she was 12 or something:shocked: .
Maybe that was a reflection of the laid back attitude to the Lolita complex .
I think 16 is still young , I see 16 & 17 year olds as kids . When they're 18 That's officially a grown up , and even then they could still be mentally immature .
It's bizarre to us but some people think incest is still okay , even when their kids get sick with medical problems .
Lolita does still have an appeal nowadays bizarrely, if we go off XVideos anyway.:joker:
And yeah that's sadly a dated element in that episode of the Twilight Zone.
I don't mind 17, I am with you that 16 is still a bit too close for comfort for me, especially if they've only just turned 16.:umm2:
And I honestly don't get how anyone can be okay with their children having medical problems because they couldn't keep it in their pants around relatives.
Kazanne
03-02-2020, 09:58 AM
Well, how do we know how accurate this story is in reality? we don't, Did he seduce her ? I cant see him having to 'seduce' anyone at the height of his fame and some girls DO wear sex with a famous person as a badge of honour and did he actually know her age ?Did she approach him etc,so many questions, I know that is all very tasteless to some of you but its a fact, we really don't know the situation, as in the Michael Jackson case ,there needs to be proof, I am not condoning what happened IF its true but really tabloid fodder is not that reliable,as for people saying "that's it I don't like them anymore",lol, I mean really ? Lets see if this is indeed factual before we condemn the guy, trial by tabloid fodder is not reliable.imo
Kazanne
03-02-2020, 10:01 AM
Lolita does still have an appeal nowadays bizarrely, if we go off XVideos anyway.:joker:
And yeah that's sadly a dated element in that episode of the Twilight Zone.
I don't mind 17, I am with you that 16 is still a bit too close for comfort for me, especially if they've only just turned 16.:umm2:
And I honestly don't get how anyone can be okay with their children having medical problems because they couldn't keep it in their pants around relatives.
And don't forget Mocky many girls will dress up in school uniforms with stockings etc,for a fancy dress etc,what message is that sending out, is it that men like schoolgirls ?
thesheriff443
03-02-2020, 10:07 AM
Older men like younger women, younger women like older men, older women like younger men, younger men like older women.
thesheriff443
03-02-2020, 10:12 AM
I can give personal example, when I was 19 I was dating a 31 year old, when I was 33 I was dating a 19 year old.
Marsh.
03-02-2020, 10:13 AM
Older men like younger women, younger women like older men, older women like younger men, younger men like older women.
I can give personal example, when I was 19 I was dating a 31 year old, when I was 33 I was dating a 19 year younger.
Thanks for that.
Entirely the same as an adult in his 30s shagging a minor. :thumbs:
Niamh.
03-02-2020, 10:17 AM
My daughter is 19, I'd be seriously concerned if she started seeing a 33 year old man.
Tom4784
03-02-2020, 03:29 PM
Gross, but sadly I doubt anything will come of it since the victim doesn't seem to want to take action against him.
It's sad that she believes she gave consent, no one can give consent at that age. The only way he comes out of this situation not looking complete bad is if he was misled about her age but what are the chances, really? He most likely knew and went ahead anyway and convinced her it was some sort of consensual thing when really, it never could be.
GoldHeart
03-02-2020, 05:52 PM
Well, how do we know how accurate this story is in reality? we don't, Did he seduce her ? I cant see him having to 'seduce' anyone at the height of his fame and some girls DO wear sex with a famous person as a badge of honour and did he actually know her age ?Did she approach him etc,so many questions, I know that is all very tasteless to some of you but its a fact, we really don't know the situation, as in the Michael Jackson case ,there needs to be proof, I am not condoning what happened IF its true but really tabloid fodder is not that reliable,as for people saying "that's it I don't like them anymore",lol, I mean really ? Lets see if this is indeed factual before we condemn the guy, trial by tabloid fodder is not reliable.imo
Yeah true , plus if people are going to boycott Jagger's music . Then what will they do about Weinstein movies?? :facepalm: .
How far do we go with that sort of thing, are people going to stop listening to Bowie? who was rumoured to be sleeping with underage people ??.
I stopped listening to Lost prophets though as when I heard the details it was disturbing , I think same applied for Gary Glitter for some people who can't always seperate the art from the person.
But it was ridiculous last year how the bandwagon of MJ got jumped on of wanting to mute him,with zero evidence and 4 hours of propaganda.
Regarding Jagger I think he was drunk & high, but I don't think he was fussy about the age of girls, doubt he bothered to check ID when he had groupies. If they dressed or looked barely legal. He probably slept with them.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.