Unreleased David Bowie song for LG7

[Defmix100 6,364]

14 minutes ago, warholastar said:

 

 

Things are much more complex than that. I don't want to sound like devil's advocate or deny the abuse of power that many powerful men demonstrate. I am glad that the finger is being pointed out today and cases of sexual violence, abuse and r*pe are brought to light. Fortunately, we live in a time we are more and more educated on the subject. The question is, do we judge the legality, the morality of the facts or the ability of a person under 18 to consent.

 

Regarding legality, the age of 18 is an arbitrary age which has been chosen by the legislative power to protect as many people as possible without giving the judge the power to arbitrate or to question their story if the qualify the act as ab*se, this does not mean that a person under 18 does not have the moral ability to consent but rather that if a person under the age of 18 files a complaint against someone with whom they would have had a sexual act at that age, the court will automatically consider it to be r*pe.

 

Disclaimer : I do not say that a 5 years old is able to consent, I say the more a teenager is close to their majority, the more they’re aware of what they’re doing. You can still be more than 18 and not able to give consent, it depends on each person’s maturity.

 

Also, you are talking about adults and teenagers as if these were the only 2 age categories which makes things more dramatic. In fact, you go from babies to children to teenagers to adults to seniors.

 

In some countries, teenagers can consent since the age of 13 (France), 14, 15 (most countries) or 16 (UK, Switzerland), would it have been moral for him to have sex with her at 15 in France and magically not at 15 in the US? Would it be called r*pe or p***philia to have sex with a 17 years old in the US and magically not on their 18th birthday? And since you consider that an underage can't consent before they’re 18, can we call it r*pe if a 17 has sex with a 12 years old? In some other countries, child and teenage marriage is legally accepted and socially tolerated, does that make it moral? I don't think so.

 

David Bowie must have been around 25 at the time, can you put him in the same basket as a 50 year old who would sleep with a 10 or 11 year old? The girl with whom had a s*xual act, who is still alive by the way, continues to say that she was consenting. By what right are we going to dispossess this woman of her own story, and lay down a definition that is diametrically opposed to her own?

 

If this woman had said that she had been r*ped, I would be the last to defend the artist, or to question the victim's word. But here we are faced with an adult woman who, 30 years later, still speaks of this moment as a good memory. This has nothing to do with what could do some male celebrities who set a whole wonderland to ab*se children, or what could’ve done some other artists as R Kelly.

 

To speak now as a fan, I am proud I have seen, even years later, the evolution that this artist had, from this period of debauchery until he found his stability with Iman, while continuing to perform his genius art, and I find it shameful to give him this label, while he is dead, or even in his lifetime considering the story of that woman. Regarding the other girl, I never heard of it, and I don't take the ''you've heard the rumors'' or ''media's just appreciate him and bc he's white and and and'', medias are money makers, they do not appreciate anyone, and of course the rumors would have been turned into facts if he was black, our societies are racist...  all I know is that no one spoke about an act that would have been done in violence, in ab*se or that would have left psychological damage. This man has done his best throughout his life and career to find love and stability and I hope he rests in peace today.

 

I have no doubt that the way you handle information comes from a noble intention to create a safe world for all, but please don't mix it up, every situation is unique, you can qualify this act as immoral if you want, I can not take it away from you, but I will always see a man who managed to find his best version, before he was buried, and it is in his footsteps that Gaga walks. She is improving day after day, she has already been foun in immoral controvereses in her early years of celebrity, when we hear about what happened with her former assistant or when we see photos of her with men in black faces, however it was a party celebrating kinks, whatever it symbolized for those men she’s been photographed with, to some people it was offensive, and I know she would take that into account today. I sincerly believe there was no bad intention from that young man, and that it wouldn’t have happened if he lived today as a 20 something year old man because it is considered immoral in today’s society, where you live mainly.

At the end of the day I just hate hypocrisy, I'm sure I'm guilty of it too but people seem to change their stance on these things depending on how much of a legend the "culptrit" is. For instance 6ix9ine is hated on this site and I think rightfully so, but he was 5 years older than the teenage girl, Bowie was 11 years older. I'd imagine if the exact same thing Bowie did was done by a different artist who people on this site didn't like then it would constantly be brought up as a disgusting act rather than a grey area.

[Gagas lil monster 2,432]

10 hours ago, warholastar said:

I'd be here for it, too bad Duncan doesn't appreciate Gaga.

For the r*pe allegation, the girl was more than 15, he was in his early 20s, and in countries like UK, it is legal.

No magic happens between the last night of your 17th year and your 18th birthday, you can be 18 and not be mature enough to consent. 16/17 is not 8 or 12 or 14

Thank you! People are too quick to cancel celebrities and blacklist their music it's a genuine problem nowadays 

[Gagas lil monster 2,432]

7 hours ago, Defmix100 said:

Kelly illegally married Aaliyah when she was 15 and didn't go to prison, he also got away with physical photo's and videos as evidence but wasn't convicted so no, evidence does not always equal prison. And I understand he is your idol, but surely you must then take this stance with every celebrity or allegation, Gaga has never provided evidence for her claims for example but I think it is fair to beleive her.

I get where you're coming from but R Kelly is in prison now. If the judge ruled him "not guilty" originally it wasnt because of corruption or anything like that its because there wasnt enough evidence. We now know that he did it, but that wasn't always known. I dont want to be controversial here but R Kelly getting away with it for so long kind of disproves that Bowie is only getting away it for being Caucasian.

All my love though and you're entitled to your own opinion 

[Big Reputation 800]

Nope, don’t like David Bowie