News1 min ago
Why?
http://
Why is this another terrible allegation? Is every groupie going to come out of the woodwork now and expect a police investigation?
Why is this another terrible allegation? Is every groupie going to come out of the woodwork now and expect a police investigation?
Answers
1 to 14 of 14
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by puzzled54. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I think there must be a lot of rock/pop stars from the 60s/70s who are a little nervous about what might come out. I recall that in the 70s it was common practice for girls, often aged around 14, to be selected as willing volunteers by the roadies to the backstage dressing rooms of big name artists.
We have just watched, on the news, the spectacle of a teacher,aged 30 odd, being extradited from France to face charges in the UK over child abduction of a schoolgirl of 15.
Your view of whether the actions of this couple were right or wrong will inform your opinions on the topic of underage sex.
It would appear, from various articles, that John Peel, in common with many of his compatriots working in the entertainment industry, took advantage of the fact that they had become an object of desire, obsession even, of fans. Now, there probably is no stopping that, nor is it an area for legislation, except to protect teenagers and children from being taken advantage of.
Technically, those under 16 are minors, and should be protected from the advances of predatory adults. It appears that Jimmy Savile, was predatory, and used his position for his own sexual gratification.
I do not think people like John Peel falls into that category. Nonetheless, he seemed quite happy to marry a 15 year old girl, and by his own account have sex with a 13 year old.This, in my view, is simply wrong - an abuse of position, and child abuse - not something to be condoned.
We all know that sexuality is plastic, and that humans do not come equipped with an on-off switch that can be used at the age of 16 - but those mature adults who have sexual relations with under-age fans are betraying those fans and betraying their own humanity, and depriving those children of their childhood.
It is simply selfish self-gratification that drives these mature adults to do what they do - after all, unqualified adoration is difficult to reject - but that is what should be expected of them.
Your view of whether the actions of this couple were right or wrong will inform your opinions on the topic of underage sex.
It would appear, from various articles, that John Peel, in common with many of his compatriots working in the entertainment industry, took advantage of the fact that they had become an object of desire, obsession even, of fans. Now, there probably is no stopping that, nor is it an area for legislation, except to protect teenagers and children from being taken advantage of.
Technically, those under 16 are minors, and should be protected from the advances of predatory adults. It appears that Jimmy Savile, was predatory, and used his position for his own sexual gratification.
I do not think people like John Peel falls into that category. Nonetheless, he seemed quite happy to marry a 15 year old girl, and by his own account have sex with a 13 year old.This, in my view, is simply wrong - an abuse of position, and child abuse - not something to be condoned.
We all know that sexuality is plastic, and that humans do not come equipped with an on-off switch that can be used at the age of 16 - but those mature adults who have sexual relations with under-age fans are betraying those fans and betraying their own humanity, and depriving those children of their childhood.
It is simply selfish self-gratification that drives these mature adults to do what they do - after all, unqualified adoration is difficult to reject - but that is what should be expected of them.
it seems Peel found willing girls (it's unclear if he actually looked for them); Savile took advantage of unwilling ones. That seems a significant difference to me.
I'd also differentiate between Peel's position - it appears he was simply fancied by girls, to whom he owed no greater duty of care than any other adult - and that of a teacher, who is in a special position of trust.
I'd also differentiate between Peel's position - it appears he was simply fancied by girls, to whom he owed no greater duty of care than any other adult - and that of a teacher, who is in a special position of trust.
probably, though I'm not sure how much he knew about anyone's age. I don't know the details of his marriage either. But broadly: if I had a 15-year-old daughter who was off to see a DJ I'd tell her to watch out for herself. It wouldn't occur to me to tell her the same if she was just off to school. So the difference in circumstances seems huge to me.
1 to 14 of 14
