ChatterBank0 min ago
All that Glitters . . .
34 Answers
From pop prince to paedophile, there can't have been many more spectacular falls from grace than Gary Glitter's.
So, it's good to see his rehabilitation in the music world has begun with the inclusion of his ground-breaking hit Rock & Roll - Part 11 (The Hey Song) in a new songbook.
It's titled "Guitar for Kids".
Clearly, publishers the Hal Leonard Corporation don't do irony.
Or maybe they do.
So, it's good to see his rehabilitation in the music world has begun with the inclusion of his ground-breaking hit Rock & Roll - Part 11 (The Hey Song) in a new songbook.
It's titled "Guitar for Kids".
Clearly, publishers the Hal Leonard Corporation don't do irony.
Or maybe they do.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Daily-Editor. 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.
-- answer removed --
I still like to listen to his music and I don't see why anyone else should tell me not to. Of course I don't like or agree with what he did in his private life - but that's nothing to do with his music. I get rather concerned and sickened whenever I listen to those unpleasant people who try to whip up mass hatred of individuals they happen not to like. If someone dares to voice an opinion that differs to the bigots then they are decried as obviously being as bad and should therefore also be hated. We've seen this too often throughout history when nasty and unpleasant people pick on individuals for whatever reason.
Gary Glitter served his time. For years we had to watch and listen to the skin-crawling Michael Jackson run around hand-in-hand with children, admit to sleeping with them, hear about how and where he touched them and then see him pay off their families to withdraw charges. We then had to listen to those very same inane airheads who snarl about Gary Glitter defending Jackson with "Well, that's just Michael" and "He slept with them but he was only showing his love" etc.
No one minds people having their say but what's unacceptable are double standards. If Michael Jackson's evil can be excused and his music listen to, then don't turn on Gary Glitter.
Gary Glitter served his time. For years we had to watch and listen to the skin-crawling Michael Jackson run around hand-in-hand with children, admit to sleeping with them, hear about how and where he touched them and then see him pay off their families to withdraw charges. We then had to listen to those very same inane airheads who snarl about Gary Glitter defending Jackson with "Well, that's just Michael" and "He slept with them but he was only showing his love" etc.
No one minds people having their say but what's unacceptable are double standards. If Michael Jackson's evil can be excused and his music listen to, then don't turn on Gary Glitter.
Andy you do have a point, lots of people made excuses for Jackson, sometimes I felt as though it was 'our' fault because he didn't have a proper childhood.
Thankfully I'm not a fan.
I think the issue is whether Glitter profits from this, that's what people find distasteful.
If Glitter owned a corner shop, I'd buy my papers elsewhere, because I don't like what he did, historically that doesn't judge his work, I just don't wanna be in his gang.
Thankfully I'm not a fan.
I think the issue is whether Glitter profits from this, that's what people find distasteful.
If Glitter owned a corner shop, I'd buy my papers elsewhere, because I don't like what he did, historically that doesn't judge his work, I just don't wanna be in his gang.
//I get rather concerned and sickened whenever I listen to those unpleasant people who try to whip up mass hatred of individuals they happen not to like //
Like it or not Glitter is a paedophile, its unlikley Jail has 'cured' him so I find your statement rather odd. Crimes against the vulnerable, particularly sex crimes against children are despicable and unforgivable so I am struggling to get my head around your statement.
Like it or not Glitter is a paedophile, its unlikley Jail has 'cured' him so I find your statement rather odd. Crimes against the vulnerable, particularly sex crimes against children are despicable and unforgivable so I am struggling to get my head around your statement.
"He was far far less a paedophile than Michael Jackson"
That really doesn't compute. If you only rape one person does it make you less of a rapist than a serial rapist?.
He was, what he was, when he was a singer. But trying to defend him now is wrong Andyvon are you trying to say if he moved in next door to you, youd invite him in or take him down the pub.
The facts are the facts. You can't defend the the indefensible.
That really doesn't compute. If you only rape one person does it make you less of a rapist than a serial rapist?.
He was, what he was, when he was a singer. But trying to defend him now is wrong Andyvon are you trying to say if he moved in next door to you, youd invite him in or take him down the pub.
The facts are the facts. You can't defend the the indefensible.
Avatar Image
jno
He was/is a paedophile, but was his music paedophiliac too? I don't honestly see how children are going to be endangered by playing one of his songs.
00:21 Tue 09th Nov 201
Jno by us the public funding him to have enough money to be able to reoffend more discreetly. His music may not have been paedophiliac but he is. Should he be rewarded for this?
jno
He was/is a paedophile, but was his music paedophiliac too? I don't honestly see how children are going to be endangered by playing one of his songs.
00:21 Tue 09th Nov 201
Jno by us the public funding him to have enough money to be able to reoffend more discreetly. His music may not have been paedophiliac but he is. Should he be rewarded for this?
Yes, Michael Jackson was not convicted.
Plus, as stated above, he only liked to sleep with children in his bed to "show his love".
I'm sure those ABers with young children would be perfectly happy to let them sleep in bed with 50 year old men who wanted to "show them their love" (!!!).
And the little boy who gave the graphic description of Jacko's private parts withdrew his statement after Jacko paid his parents $18m, so he doesn't count.
=0/
Plus, as stated above, he only liked to sleep with children in his bed to "show his love".
I'm sure those ABers with young children would be perfectly happy to let them sleep in bed with 50 year old men who wanted to "show them their love" (!!!).
And the little boy who gave the graphic description of Jacko's private parts withdrew his statement after Jacko paid his parents $18m, so he doesn't count.
=0/
-- answer removed --
Latest Posts
Crosswords8 mins ago
Crosswords9 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles13 mins ago
ChatterBank16 mins ago
