Bowie article pissed me off....

[SNIDELY WHIPLASH]

You couldn't even wait for dude to get cold before.....

"While I’ve been grieving over the last few days, I’ve also been buckling in for the Bowie backlash. And it came, in the form I knew it’d take: Accusations of rape suddenly trending on blogs and social media after existing for thirty years.

I know about the 1987 rape allegations that never came to anything. I also know about Lori Mattix. I’ve known about Lori Mattix for a while, because I’m a Bowie fan and I read. In the 1970s, David Bowie, then in his 20s, had sex with Mattix, who was at the time 15. She toldThrillist about the encounter last year, and she insists that it was consensual, and that she is not a rape victim."

Let’s Talk About David Bowie’s Predation (And The Online Conversation Surrounding It) - The Frisky

 

[member 1013]

sympathy post

 

[Lord Vutulaki]

sympathy post

LOL handouts just keep people down.

 

[1372]

Cocaines a helluva drug.

Amazing artist.

R.I.P

 

[Hong Kong Phooey]

Ashes 2 Ashes RIP Ziggy

 

[Lamont Cranston]

R.I.P. Bowie.

 

[1031]

There's nothing more enticing to a certain segment of people in the west than projecting their own sense of injustice on the world especially when it doesn't matter so they can be seen as a hero. The pathetic thing is that they only do it when there's no fight to be had. If you know someone like this then punch them square in the stomach.

 

[kneeblock]

There's nothing more enticing to a certain segment of people in the west than projecting their own sense of injustice on the world especially when it doesn't matter so they can be seen as a hero. The pathetic thing is that they only do it when there's no fight to be had. If you know someone like this then punch them square in the stomach.

Do you think a 15 year old can legally give consent?

 

[Disciplined Galt]

Do you think a 15 year old can legally give consent?

I think so. In Sweden and Thailand that is the case.

 

[kneeblock]

I think so. In Sweden and Thailand that is the case.

This is true. How one answers that question essentially defines how one interprets this situation. It has little to do with personal feelings of injustice and rests squarely with one's understanding of adolescent development and the law in their society.

 

[Disciplined Galt]

That being said. I wouldn't bang a 15 year old. An 18 year old and a 15 year old getting their sex on is fine in my book. A 30 year old and a 15 year old is not cool with me.

 

[1031]

Do you think a 15 year old can legally give consent?

Do you think it's worth bringing up if that same 15 year old, years later, says, she wasn't taken advantage of?

 

[kneeblock]

Do you think it's worth bringing up if that same 15 year old, years later, says, she wasn't taken advantage of?

Yes. Because the laws we have to protect children don't have anything to do with how harmed they end up being later as adults.

 

[member 1013]

This is nothing guys, Robert Plant kidnapped a 13 year old girl and kept her as his love slave.

 

[1031]

Yes. Because the laws we have to protect children don't have anything to do with how harmed they end up being later as adults.

Could you just make your point about this specific situation please? I don't want to make broad statements about the law and sexuality of people under that age of consent but I'll ask you to consider or entertain that not everything that is legal is right and not everything that is illegal is wrong.

 

[ThatOneDude]

Do you think it's worth bringing up if that same 15 year old, years later, says, she wasn't taken advantage of?

That 15 year old is a victim bro! Even if they don't see themselves as a victim, they just don't know it! She clearly needs the SJW's to save her Bowie violated body. She's so traumatized she doesn't even know it. Don't worry though, @Kneeblock and emery will save her! They will also save any and all groups who are bigoted against! So get the fuck out of their way, the Social Justice train is coming through and it ain't stopping for no one! Unless they are from a socially marginalized group, then it will stop.

 

[BeardOfKnowledge]

Yes. Because the laws we have to protect children don't have anything to do with how harmed they end up being later as adults.

So when you were 15, did you need to be persuaded into having sex? I sure as fuck didn't. I wanted it as frequently as I could have it, I drank and smoked weed from time to time.

 

[kneeblock]

Could you just make your point about this specific situation please? I don't want to make broad statements about the law and sexuality of people under that age of consent but I'll ask you to consider or entertain that not everything that is legal is right and not everything that is illegal is wrong.

I agree with your last statement about legality. My concern is principally with adolescent development and why the laws are the way they are. A 15 year old is incapable of consenting under the rubric of the law because as @JohnyHendricksBeard said, hormonally they want sex often, but emotionally and logistically they aren't prepared to deal with the consequences. If and when they do engage in sexual experimentation, it's safest for them to do so with people at or around their own age rather than older people in other developmental stages who are more advanced morally, emotionally, physically and behaviorally (ideally). This is becuse the risk of exploitation of the emotional and hormonal mayhem teens go through is much lower. More info here if you're interested.

https://www.apa.org/pi/families/resources/develop.pdf

Simply stated, young people are a ball of feelings and don't know what they don't know. As an adult in a civilized society, it's our duty to make sure children are protected from harm, which includes not mercilessly beating them, not manipulating them into delinquent behavior and not having sex with them. So what I meant by my earlier statement is that the law is oriented to check adult behavior in light of what we know about how children grow. The responsibility is on the adult, not the child.

I've worked with adolescents for 10 years (and was one once, of course) and I've seen plenty of kids who thought "what's the harm" and were driven to acts of self harm, premature pregnancy, drug use, dropping out of school, etc. Just because none of those things supposedly happened to one child during her encounter with an adult doesn't give the adult a pass. We don't not penalize drunk drivers on the basis of whether they happened to make it home safely.

 

[1031]

I agree with your last statement about legality. My concern is principally with adolescent development and why the laws are the way they are. A 15 year old is incapable of consenting under the rubric of the law because as @JohnyHendricksBeard said, hormonally they want sex often, but emotionally and logistically they aren't prepared to deal with the consequences. If and when they do engage in sexual experimentation, it's safest for them to do so with people at or around their own age rather than older people in other developmental stages who are more advanced morally, emotionally, physically and behaviorally (ideally). This is becuse the risk of exploitation of the emotional and hormonal mayhem teens go through is much lower. More info here if you're interested.

https://www.apa.org/pi/families/resources/develop.pdf

Simply stated, young people are a ball of feelings and don't know what they don't know. As an adult in a civilized society, it's our duty to make sure children are protected from harm, which includes not mercilessly beating them, not manipulating them into delinquent behavior and not having sex with them. So what I meant by my earlier statement is that the law is oriented to check adult behavior in light of what we know about how children grow. The responsibility is on the adult, not the child.

I've worked with adolescents for 10 years (and was one once, of course) and I've seen plenty of kids who thought "what's the harm" and were driven to acts of self harm, premature pregnancy, drug use, dropping out of school, etc. Just because none of those things supposedly happened to one child during her encounter with an adult doesn't give the adult a pass. We don't not penalize drunk drivers on the basis of whether they happened to make it home safely.

I get what you're saying but in THIS INSTANCE the person people want to paint as the victim, has gone on record as an adult and stated she wasn't a victim. What would you tell her?

 

[kneeblock]

I get what you're saying but in THIS INSTANCE the person people want to paint as the victim, has gone on record as an adult and stated she wasn't a victim. What would you tell her?

I don't subscribe to victimhood. That's part of the problem. There's not a clear line of distinction that puts someone in the category of victim. Victimhood is largely an emotional state and emotions are fickle. Whether someone feels victimized or not has nothing to do with someone else being a predator, which is how I characterize dudes who bang 15 year olds. Did Bowie know she was going to grow up to be okay? Did he care? That's the behavior that's not okay.

Just so you know I'm not only posting from some high horse or appealing to authority by citing what I do for a living, I experienced childhood sexual abuse and for most of my life I've always said it had no effect on me. For the most part it hasn't. It didn't traumatize me in a major way so at one point I almost wondered if it was just something normal. The older I got though, I realized that there were certain attitudes I had about sex and sexuality that had been irrevocably altered as a result of my experience. I'm not certain that those experiences made me make some of the choices I've made, but I can't rule it out. Why? Because someone older didn't care enough to just let me grow up before they did what they wanted.

And further, this girl was a groupie to the stars. She may attest that she's okay, but if you read that article, does it really sound like she has a good grasp on what was going on then or now? I mean:

THRILLIST: But did it ever feel like there was something unusual about [an adult with power, money and drugs sleeping with a 15 year old girl]?

LM: No. You need to understand that my life has never been normal. I have always been special. I always felt like the universe was taking care of me.

 

[1031]

I don't subscribe to victimhood. That's part of the problem. There's not a clear line of distinction that puts someone in the category of victim. Victimhood is largely an emotional state and emotions are fickle. Whether someone feels victimized or not has nothing to do with someone else being a predator, which is how I characterize dudes who bang 15 year olds. Did Bowie know she was going to grow up to be okay? Did he care? That's the behavior that's not okay.

Just so you know I'm not only posting from some high horse or appealing to authority by citing what I do for a living, I experienced childhood sexual abuse and for most of my life I've always said it had no effect on me. For the most part it hasn't. It didn't traumatize me in a major way so at one point I almost wondered if it was just something normal. The older I got though, I realized that there were certain attitudes I had about sex and sexuality that had been irrevocably altered as a result of my experience. I'm not certain that those experiences made me make some of the choices I've made, but I can't rule it out. Why? Because someone older didn't care enough to just let me grow up before they did what they wanted.

And further, this girl was a groupie to the stars. She may attest that she's okay, but if you read that article, does it really sound like she has a good grasp on what was going on then or now? I mean:

THRILLIST: But did it ever feel like there was something unusual about [an adult with power, money and drugs sleeping with a 15 year old girl]?

LM: No. You need to understand that my life has never been normal. I have always been special. I always felt like the universe was taking care of me.

Interesting take on victimhood; it makes a lot of sense to me. I can agree with you on much of what you said BUT where I totally disagree with you is removing any of the responsibility from the minor. Age in and of itself is not the sole determiner of intelligence, experience nor sophistication and portraying the adult in THIS example as a predator is just inaccurate. The bottom line is that she has gone on record saying that from her perspective now, she knew exactly what she was doing. With all due respect, I get the impression you are projecting your own assumptions about human behaviour on others. Biology determined she was ready for sex and she agreed, I'm not so sure legality should trump biology, especially when biology differs much less between cultures than laws do.

 

[kneeblock]

Interesting take on victimhood; it makes a lot of sense to me. I can agree with you on much of what you said BUT where I totally disagree with you is removing any of the responsibility from the minor. Age in and of itself is not the sole determiner of intelligence, experience nor sophistication and portraying the adult in THIS example as a predator is just inaccurate. The bottom line is that she has gone on record saying that from her perspective now, she knew exactly what she was doing. With all due respect, I get the impression you are projecting your own assumptions about human behaviour on others. Biology determined she was ready for sex and she agreed, I'm not so sure legality should trump biology, especially when biology differs much less between cultures than laws do.

Biology is not the sole determinant or even the primary determinant of anything at this point in our species' life. Humans are biologically "ready' for sex at 10 or 11 years old. That doesn't mean they are psychologically or emotionally prepared for it in our current social context. It's definitely worth reading through that report the American Psychological Association prepared that I linked above. And it's also worth reading her interview as it would take something of a leap to say that she is or was ever the best custodian of her emotional health.

Part of the problem of maltreatment of children (or anyone) is we take people at their word when they say they're okay. It's the same ideology that leads to "well, she won't tell." Sometimes people are genuinely okay and honestly I think it's well within the realm of possibility for a 15 year old to have had sex with whomever and not come out terribly scarred. But again, when treating child abuse or exploitation we can't argue from effect. There are certain baselines. If this was about Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton or someone who's equally a lightning rod for haterade, we'd likely have far fewer doubts, but because Bowie is sort of awesome it's harder to aclnowledge. I had to stop listening to R. Kelly over this and that sucks!

 

[Darqnezz]

I don't care what the age of consent is. I don't care how much of a hoe she was. He was a douche for being an adult and banging a 15 year old kid. Its not like she was the only (or best looking) chick throwing herself at him. He could've done the right thing, & chose not to. I also don't give a rats ass what country she lives in, or how intelligent or sophisticated she was. 15 year olds don't know shit. He took advantage, and the fact that she's still ok with it doesn't make it right. Look up Warren Jeffs. He married, had sex with, & impregnated multiple girls as young as 12. Today, almost all of them, now adults, claim to be ok with it. I guess biology would make that ok, but whats the cut off, 14, 13, 12. That's an insane argument. My daughter had her first period at 11. Biologically she should have been ready. Of course we as adults know better. Fact is, Bowie was a piece of shit. He made great music, but if I were that girls father I would've snatched his soul out.

 

[Wintermute]

The attitude of the time, her profession (groupie who bangs stars), his profession (star who bangs groupies) and whatever drugs are involved have to also be taken into account. She was a kid who wanted to fuck a star, and he probably was at the level of social development of a 15 year old at the time.

If she's OK with it, why is she bringing it up? Are media outlets now searching out any dirt and banging on her door for a sound-byte? Bowie was a rock god not a moral compass. Rock gods bang chicks, the BEST you can hope for is that they're of age, but really- she has to take responsibility for her own actions, even at 15. He wasn't a predator, they were both acting the parts of the world they were in. We can judge them now, most of us being in our offices or suburban homes 40 years later, but come on.

 

[1031]

Biology is not the sole determinant or even the primary determinant of anything at this point in our species' life. Humans are biologically "ready' for sex at 10 or 11 years old. That doesn't mean they are psychologically or emotionally prepared for it in our current social context. It's definitely worth reading through that report the American Psychological Association prepared that I linked above. And it's also worth reading her interview as it would take something of a leap to say that she is or was ever the best custodian of her emotional health.

Part of the problem of maltreatment of children (or anyone) is we take people at their word when they say they're okay. It's the same ideology that leads to "well, she won't tell." Sometimes people are genuinely okay and honestly I think it's well within the realm of possibility for a 15 year old to have had sex with whomever and not come out terribly scarred. But again, when treating child abuse or exploitation we can't argue from effect. There are certain baselines. If this was about Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton or someone who's equally a lightning rod for haterade, we'd likely have far fewer doubts, but because Bowie is sort of awesome it's harder to aclnowledge. I had to stop listening to R. Kelly over this and that sucks!

I think we will agree to disagree on the particulars of this but you've put forth a thought-out response so I feel obliged to do the same, if nothing else than to challenge (edit) MY thinking.

"Biology is not the sole determinant or even the primary determinant of anything at this point in our species' life."

I find this notion to be so completely at odds with how I see reality that I am convinced we don't even interpret these words the same way. How is biology NOT the primary determinant of our life? We are biological in our existence. Should a person's hormonal balance change then they will feel be affected and there's no two ways about it, is there? We're basically just chimps that have experienced faster cell division, i.e. our biology is the sole reason we are where we are. And, once a person hits puberty then biologically they are ready and it's not an opinion anyone needs to validate, it's just a fact.

Now, are they ready to give birth or rear offspring? That's something else and I wholeheartedly agree that a child in today's western society is NOT ready to do that.

"And it's also worth reading her interview as it would take something of a leap to say that she is or was ever the best custodian of her emotional health." I think her opinion on her life trumps yours on hers.

"Sometimes people are genuinely okay and honestly I think it's well within the realm of possibility for a 15 year old to have had sex with whomever and not come out terribly scarred."

I think this is where we really differ, I don't see the high likelihood of someone being terribly scarred emotionally from consensual sex in western society. It's sex, it's as natural as breathing and eating....maybe you have a more puritan view on this but to me it's just a weird way to think. Nonetheless, it's interesting to know that some people, maybe even a lot of people on America think this way.