Speaking of Bill Wyman...

[Dave W]

This infuriates me. Censorship by today's intolerant PC standards of something that happened 30-35 years ago and was legal and consensual.

Bill Wyman documentary pulled from festival over 'sex predator' protests

What's next for these mentally ill guardians of morality? Retroactive rape charges against rock stars who slept with groupies without a signed consent form?

[uwe]

The legendary guitarist met Smith when she was just 13, and he was 47. While the pair married in 1989 when she was 18 and Wyman was 52, Smith later alleged that they first had sex when she was just 14.

Posting on Facebook, one user wrote: "Someone that started a sexual relationship with a child and then groomed her enough to get her to marry him? Gross. I'll pass."

How many past empires and kingdoms were based/founded on exactly that principle?  Must we now all eradicate them from the face of our cultural history because they were "gross"? Times change, yes. But when Smith and Wyman dated, the Middle Ages were kinda already over IIRC. And I remember the press coverage at the time which was "foolish old rock'n'roller courts teenage jailbait" and Mick Jagger mocking Wyman, but the social consensus was that we were not talking about child molesting or abuse. There are 13-year-olds who aren't children any longer and there are 18-year-olds who still are. When Mandy was 18 at their marriage she didn't exactly look like she had left the pram only yesterday, but like someone who had been a young woman for a while.




Besides, Bill's son Stephen already got even and settled things. 

"Perhaps not surprisingly, Wyman and Smith are no longer in contact with each other. But just prior to the couple being divorced in 1993, things between the Wyman and Smith families took a bit of a left turn when Wyman's oldest son Stephen announced his engagement to Mandy Smith's mother, Patsy. That couple's marriage reportedly lasted two years, until their divorce in 1995."

[Chris P.]

I love that father daughter, mother son story.

I believe Mick Jagger's current girlfriend was born when he was 55 or something, so if I want a girfriend that age, she will be born in 12 years.



This is a story of people I know:

Father, widow of 49 finds a new wife, aged 39.
His daughter, aged 28, finds a man of 35.

Wife of 39 and man of 35 are brothers. Both get two kids around the same time.

So nothing to worry, no incestuous stuff, but just weird see:

Kinds if the father are half brother and half sister of their own aunt. An uncle is a grandpa too. That kinda stuff. Still all normal!

[Granny Gremlin]

How many past empires and kingdoms were based/founded on exactly that principle? 

Doesn't make it right.

Must we now all eradicate them from the face of our cultural history because they were "gross"?

No, but we must acknowledge that it was not right, and yes:

Times change

But when Smith and Wyman dated, the Middle Ages were kinda already over IIRC. And I remember the press coverage at the time which was "foolish old rock'n'roller courts teenage jailbait" and Mick Jagger mocking Wyman, but the social consensus was that we were not talking about child molesting or abuse. There are 13-year-olds who aren't children any longer and there are 18-year-olds who still are. When Mandy was 18 at their marriage she didn't exactly look like she had left the pram only yesterday, but like someone who had been a young woman for a while.

So you admit we all knew it was wrong at the time ("Jailbait").  That term also disputes this supposed consensus you speak of - I disagree that existed in the 70s (except among randy perv men).  No one stood up and said anything, but many thought it was wrong (and said so privately) as evidenced by the taunting (the old school way to let yer mates know they done f***ed up).  He WAS criticised for it at the time, decided to ignore that (he was a rock star and could get away with it).

Also as a lawyer (granted you're more biz than criminal or family law) I am appalled that you would bring up the 'mature 13 year old ' argument.  There may be some variation from person to person here but not that much and a legal line has to be drawn somewhere.  I would also argue that a 'mature' 13 year old is only so due to previous exposure to not sexual abuse per se but at least "sexual interferance."

The only thing s that have changed are that people are not tollerating it anymore and rich/famous people are having a harder time getting away with stuff like this (yes there may be some opportunism here of the blackmail/gold digging variety but don't anyone dare try that non sequitor here because we know this isn't one of those cases, and you don't make laws for the outlying cases but for the norm, which is that a grown ass man has both a power and experience/knowledge advantage over a 13-14 year old girl that can be abused to get sex, and that sex is not usually in the best interrest of the girl).  It's not as if he's being prosecuted - the people have the right to call him out on it by protesting/boycotting some stupid f***ing movie.  In my opinion, the big picture here is that he got off easy.

Like seriously, I remember being young and the boys using the word Jailbait; they wanted to do something wrong ("don't get caught, dude"), because it was cool and easier than getting laid with an of age chick who could legally consent (similar issue with getting chicks drink later, and you'd get a similar reponse from me); classic abusive tactic.  Take off your rose coloured glasses next time.  Sorry but one's right to get your dick wet does not trump hardly anything, least of all rational consent laws that have not actually changed in most jurisdictions since Wyman's time.

[westen44]

Bill Wyman's Rhythm Kings with George Harrison on slide guitar.  This was one of Harrison's last recordings.  Beverley Skeete on vocals. 

[Dave W]

Doesn't make it right.

No, but we must acknowledge that it was not right, and yes:

So you admit we all knew it was wrong at the time ("Jailbait").  That term also disputes this supposed consensus you speak of - I disagree that existed in the 70s (except among randy perv men).  No one stood up and said anything, but many thought it was wrong (and said so privately) as evidenced by the taunting (the old school way to let yer mates know they done f***ed up).  He WAS criticised for it at the time, decided to ignore that (he was a rock star and could get away with it).

Also as a lawyer (granted you're more biz than criminal or family law) I am appalled that you would bring up the 'mature 13 year old ' argument.  There may be some variation from person to person here but not that much and a legal line has to be drawn somewhere.  I would also argue that a 'mature' 13 year old is only so due to previous exposure to not sexual abuse per se but at least "sexual interferance."

The only thing s that have changed are that people are not tollerating it anymore and rich/famous people are having a harder time getting away with stuff like this (yes there may be some opportunism here of the blackmail/gold digging variety but don't anyone dare try that non sequitor here because we know this isn't one of those cases, and you don't make laws for the outlying cases but for the norm, which is that a grown ass man has both a power and experience/knowledge advantage over a 13-14 year old girl that can be abused to get sex, and that sex is not usually in the best interrest of the girl).  It's not as if he's being prosecuted - the people have the right to call him out on it by protesting/boycotting some stupid f***ing movie.  In my opinion, the big picture here is that he got off easy.

Like seriously, I remember being young and the boys using the word Jailbait; they wanted to do something wrong ("don't get caught, dude"), because it was cool and easier than getting laid with an of age chick who could legally consent (similar issue with getting chicks drink later, and you'd get a similar reponse from me); classic abusive tactic.  Take off your rose coloured glasses next time.  Sorry but one's right to get your dick wet does not trump hardly anything, least of all rational consent laws that have not actually changed in most jurisdictions since Wyman's time.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: "teenage" is a 20th century invention.

Mandy was not a child. Bill was not a "sex predator." No one was forced into anything.

The Victorians were pikers compared to today's moralistic prudes.

[Dave W]

If Bill and Mandy had still been married when Stephen and Patsy married, Bill would have been his own grandfather.

[Granny Gremlin]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: "teenage" is a 20th century invention.

Mandy was not a child. Bill was not a "sex predator." No one was forced into anything.

The Victorians were pikers compared to today's moralistic prudes.

OR it was horrible then too and we only figured it out recently.

What was normal then has no logical tie to whether it is morally sound now; history is not a precident, but something to improve upon because we know we still aren't perfect and we certainly weren't better back then.

No, Wymann is not a predator, that would imply specific intent to get underage girls (plural there - seriality as well as intent), which is not the case (as far as I know).  But it is still wrong; he done goofed here (I mean, the fact that the marriage didn't last is a point in my favour), and no amount of 'in this situation..'  type starf***ing appologism is going to change that.   Again I must stress that your desire to bust a nut does not trump this - he could have waited, like a real man (a real man being someone in control of all his faculties and that includes his lust - I mean have a wank and deal with it until she's 16 - in some jurisdictions with parental consent that is a legal marriage and once legally married the age of consent does not apply ... weird loophole and I am not sure that's right in the moral sense but at least he could claim being on the right side of the law).  That also has the added benefit of proving whether it's maybe actual love or just a young girl fetish (which is a societal disease known/accepted to be a synthetic construct but that's a whole other topic).

[Granny Gremlin]

I love that father daughter, mother son story.

I believe Mick Jagger's current girlfriend was born when he was 55 or something, so if I want a girfriend that age, she will be born in 12 years.



This is a story of people I know:

Father, widow of 49 finds a new wife, aged 39.
His daughter, aged 28, finds a man of 35.

Wife of 39 and man of 35 are brothers. Both get two kids around the same time.

So nothing to worry, no incestuous stuff, but just weird see:

Kinds if the father are half brother and half sister of their own aunt. An uncle is a grandpa too. That kinda stuff. Still all normal!

This is different - in those cases the ladies are legal adults.  We are speaking specifically of 'under age' girls as relates to age of consent laws and not just age gap in relationships (to me that can be weird, but if the people in the relationship are good then none of my business).  A totally different animal.

[Rob]

If Bill and Mandy had still been married when Stephen and Patsy married, Bill would have been his own grandfather.

[Granny Gremlin]

Actually I forgot something important:  some jurisdictions (and I assume Britain to be similar to us here in Canada because we usually are due to colonialist past).  Another loophole to consent law is if you eventually marry  - that is why  he was never charged.  But it IS a loophole.  One of the comments in the article "Someone that started a sexual relationship with a child and then groomed her enough to get her to marry him? ..." which is exactly the point.  The law (funny thing that it is) was put in place to satisfy one group (women and parents concerned about older men taking advantage of young girls) but written in a way so as to satisfy the opposite group as well (if you think you gonna get busted just marry the bitch.... I 'm sure that worked for a lot of fathers at the time as well) but speaking as the father of a girl in this day and age, it would not satisfy me - a very biblical solution, but one that completely ignores what's right and healthy for the girl.  In this context I would point again to the fact that the marriage ended in divorce.

[Dave W]

OR it was horrible then too and we only figured it out recently.

What was normal then has no logical tie to whether it is morally sound now; history is not a precident, but something to improve upon because we know we still aren't perfect and we certainly weren't better back then.

No, Wymann is not a predator, that would imply specific intent to get underage girls (plural there - seriality as well as intent), which is not the case (as far as I know).  But it is still wrong; he done goofed here (I mean, the fact that the marriage didn't last is a point in my favour), and no amount of 'in this situation..'  type starf***ing appologism is going to change that.   Again I must stress that your desire to bust a nut does not trump this - he could have waited, like a real man (a real man being someone in control of all his faculties and that includes his lust - I mean have a wank and deal with it until she's 16 - in some jurisdictions with parental consent that is a legal marriage and once legally married the age of consent does not apply ... weird loophole and I am not sure that's right in the moral sense but at least he could claim being on the right side of the law).  That also has the added benefit of proving whether it's maybe actual love or just a young girl fetish (which is a societal disease known/accepted to be a synthetic construct but that's a whole other topic).

We'll have to agree to disagree.

[doombass]

What bothers me the most is that there's rarely a parental consent unless you throw in the fame and fortune factors. Of course an underage girl tends to be dazzled by that. With parental approval on top of that it might take a few years until realisation kicks in. That said I think banning Wyman and the movie is a silly move.

[4stringer77]

His own grandpa? What bothers me is wondering how he got that divebomb sound at the end of 19th nervous breakdown. Is that even possible on a Framus bass without some  kind of studio trickery? Anybody here come close to pulling it off?

[Rob]

His own grandpa? What bothers me is wondering how he got that divebomb sound at the end of 19th nervous breakdown. Is that even possible on a Framus bass without some  kind of studio trickery? Anybody here come close to pulling it off?

A pick.