Originally Posted by Kizzy (Post 10768984)

Why don't you at least attempt to educate yourself then?

Originally Posted by Kazanne (Post 10768985)

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.

Originally Posted by Josy (Post 10768994)

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.

Originally Posted by Alf (Post 10768997)

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.

Originally Posted by Josy (Post 10768956)

These posts are completely disgusting, you should both hang your heads in shame.

Originally Posted by Cherie (Post 10768911)

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

Originally Posted by Josy (Post 10768994)

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.

Originally Posted by Oliver_W (Post 10769004)

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?

Originally Posted by AnnieK (Post 10769013)

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

Originally Posted by Alf (Post 10768997)

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.

Originally Posted by Zizu (Post 10769007)

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

Originally Posted by Josy (Post 10768994)

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.

Originally Posted by Kizzy (Post 10769021)

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? ...

Originally Posted by Alf (Post 10769033)

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.

Originally Posted by Nicky91 (Post 10769035)

so basically your point is, sex with a minor, but with consent :umm2:

Originally Posted by Alf (Post 10769036)

Yes, what Mick Jagger did, was a crime and not right, sick in fact. But it wasn't rape.

Originally Posted by Nicky91 (Post 10769038)

it is Mick Jagger we talk about, doesn't surprise me at all

Originally Posted by parmnion (Post 10769041)

I'm glad you have found him guilty as charged just by the look of him.

Originally Posted by Alf (Post 10769036)

Yes, what Mick Jagger did, was a crime and not right, sick in fact. But it wasn't rape.

Originally Posted by bitontheslide (Post 10769040)

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.