Jump to content
marc32137

PO - Brand New - Science Fiction

Recommended Posts

I didn’t want to write this post, but all the “trashing-records-canceling-orders because hey i’m not a pedophile” thing is becoming ridiculous and it made me want to express my opinion, as well as try to understand some points of view.
Given that Jesse Lacey revealed himself to be a total asshole beyond any reasonable doubt, I wanna discuss the role of the “victims”.  What I get reading this thread is that a 15-16 year old human being is considered adult enough to drive a car and be responsible for other people’s life, BUT not enough to judge whether or not sending naked pictures to a stranger over internet just because he sings in your favourite band is a proper thing to do. One of the victims according to the Pitchfork article claims this kind of “sick” relationship went on until she was 22-23...still unable to judge? And why these “abuses” have been kept buried for 15 years? This sex scandal thing (WAIT: you are really telling me that there are people who use their power to obtain easy sex?? Common I don’t believe you! And what about women/men who use sex to make a career? NO! they don’t exist,they are all victims) has made it difficult to tell whether a woman/man is a real victim (and I’m sure most of them are) or it’s just jumping on the victims’ train to gain some attention:"Jesse told me I was the only one and he lied, now I can make him pay!” “Kevin Spacey touched my dick 30 years ago, the creepy old bastard!”
 
For sure being a “rockstar” and using your influence in such ways is not nice, but it has always been common knowledge in rock’n’roll music so why all of a sudden, something that was known and tolerated for ages has become a crime worth of death sentence?
There’s a big difference (and we cannot just ignore it) between real abuses and taking advantage of late teenage fans (I’m not saying is ok, mind!..and it’s not even legal but neither are drugs and I have no knowledge of people trashing lou reed’s records).
 
Before letting the “go fuck/kill yourself” party begin, let me know if some points are unclear due to my poor english. Just note that I’m not judging anyone because this situation is really quite unclear to me, so most of the things I’ve expressed in my post are doubts rather than statements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, helsabot said:
What I get reading this thread is that a 15-16 year old human being is considered adult enough to drive a car and be responsible for other people’s life, BUT not enough to judge whether or not sending naked pictures to a stranger over internet just because he sings in your favourite band is a proper thing to do. One of the victims according to the Pitchfork article claims this kind of “sick” relationship went on until she was 22-23...still unable to judge?

It is easy to see it from this perspective being someone that has likely not been put into this kind of situation, the point is to not look at it from your own personal experience and what YOU would probably do, and open up to the experience they may have had.

 

These girls were mentally manipulated and coerced (at a young age where hormones are in full force and the brain is still very malleable) into doing these things that made them feel uncomfortable because it made them feel good that someone they admired was giving them attention. They most likely felt hurt during the entire span of these events but still wanted to be wanted by the person that was doing this to them (not unlike an unhealthy relationship between two consenting adults). Hindsight is, unfortunately, a requirement to see the total damage done in this types of situations as your vision is blurred and your mental clarity is compromised while you're being manipulated. 

 

It doesn't matter how long "rock stars" have been doing this and no one is trying to give the death sentence. It's still not. okay. We're talking about it now, and reiterate myself, that is better than never. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What he did was predatory, manipulative, and coercive...as well as illegal.

 

This can happen to adults. Teenagers are more susceptible. Either way its abusive. It's about power dynamics. 

 

Edit: Deafening beat me to it and in a more detailed way.

Edited by Bladewillisisdead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, helsabot said:
For sure being a “rockstar” and using your influence in such ways is not nice, but it has always been common knowledge in rock’n’roll music so why all of a sudden, something that was known and tolerated for ages has become a crime worth of death sentence?
 

there are a lot of things one could potentially speak to in your post – such as the hyperbolic use of "death sentence," stunning ignorance as to why preying on young teen girls is morally wrong even if they can operate a car, lack of familiarity with dynamics of interpersonal abuse and why the abused stay with their abusers. but i think the thing you ultimately get wrong is that this mass takedown of criminal celebrities is somehow misguided, that things should just continue they way they always were. even advancing that idea rhetorically is really disappointing, honestly. it wasn't so much a matter of "tolerating" but of covering up and threatening, of whitewashing and apology tourism, and continuing the cycle of abuse. the fact that both the legal age of consent and the exploitation and abuse of (predominantly) women has been largely ignored over the past few decades is disgusting. glad more people are finally doing something about it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shitty Rambo said:

Chill on this this. What does this have to do with race?  Those records are property the store owns and they are free to do  whatever they want with them.

 

I'm really curious as to how they could've "donated" them. Are you implying they should sell products that they find problematic for profit and donate the money to a charity? They could do that now without making a transaction they're opposing in the first place. They same applies to giving them away. They clearly don't want to be a conduit to Jesse Lacey and listeners and that's their right to do. Freedom of association.

Yes i find it pretty offensive to throw away not defective goods and even brag about it, While it could be done differently. We are different i guess.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, helsabot said:
WAIT: you are really telling me that there are people who use their power to obtain easy sex?? 
 
...For sure being a “rockstar” and using your influence in such ways is not nice, but it has always been common knowledge in rock’n’roll music so why all of a sudden, something that was known and tolerated for ages has become a crime worth of death sentence?

 

People are now much less willing to accept sexually predatory behavior than they were even a short time ago, especially where children are concerned. This is a good thing. We've for far too long tolerated (and in a not-so-subtle sense tacitly encouraged) the worst from men. As a culture, we've indulged harassment, exploitation, rape and even child abuse. We've silenced and humiliated victims, said "boys will be boys" while walking away. We've treated serious sex crimes as harmless - or at least inevitable - expressions of energetic masculinity. They are not. Our tolerance has constituted a sort of permission, and if we really want these things to stop, we've got to stop turning a blind eye.

 

Edited by conedust
rhetoric = craft

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, xfactor675 said:

Yes i find it pretty offensive to throw away not defective goods and even brag about it, While it could be done differently. We are different i guess.

 

 

They could have chosen to throw it away and leave it at that. The fact that they need to showcase it on social media shows they are trying to get their name out there and get more people talking about them. In turn they could get more business showing that they are on the side of the victims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, danoise said:

this is the store i usually go to , and a lot of the times they do have that mentality unfortunately. 

That's too bad. Not knowing anything about the store owner/employees, part of me suspected they dropped those albums in the bin gently, took the photo,  seconds later brought them back inside and at the very least blowout-priced them to go. You get to have your mini-viral moment and not lose money on the inventory,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Okami said:

I think it is admirable. They are taking a stand against what happened. Even at the financial detriment this brings to their business.

Yeah, it's much more potent to suggest that you're willing to lose money over a principle. Then again, so is smashing expensive coffee machines. If you're anywhere near environmentalist, you ought to feel dismayed at the waste of it all in both cases.

 

Sell each album and donate the proceeds to child abuse charities is way more productive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Okami said:

I think it is admirable. They are taking a stand against what happened. Even at the financial detriment this brings to their business.

Assuming they actually throw the CD's/vinyl out yes it is admirable. Announcing it on Social Media not so much.  I'm sure they will recoup their loss sales (probably 7+ BN items) with their new fan base they are hoping to acquire from the posting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m seeing people using abuse, immaturity, power and mental illness as a one sided argument.  The individuals coming forward are forgiven for any actions they committed because they were victims of abuse from 16 years old through their early twenties. They continued their behavior until around the age that the predator began his actions. Is it not possible that these predators are not victims themselves from prior abuse and it has shaped their behavior and mind set. Those that are abused as child often become abusers themselves.  Jesse has admitting to being a sex addict and has been laughed off as if it’s not a real addiction. I don’t think anyone is qualified to make a determination on which addictions are real. 10 years ago people treated drug addicts as trash but now drug addiction is seen as a “real addiction” that is proven with neuropsychology. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, armadillo01 said:

Proof that he was abused as a child himself or gtfo with your "I only have hypotheticals to argue with here" apologism. Thnx k bai.

His situation is hypothetical since I do not know him or his background nor does anyone else.  It is statistical fact that person that is abused has a higher likelihood of becoming an abuser themselves. 

 

Your response exemplifies what I am seeing. You wouldn’t ask the victim for proof but you are now asking for proof from a potential victim. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm trying to be sincere here so I apologize in advance if I can't help but veer into snark. Asking whether perhaps the victims are more deserving of culpability/scrutiny or the perpetrator less deserving of culpability/scrutiny is not playing devil's advocate or providing a thoughtful perspective that has been overlooked. It is literally regurgitating how a majority of people have viewed abuse since the beginning of time.

Adding "I'm not blaming the victim but" or "I'm not taking away the severity of what he did but" before immediately proceeding to blame the victim or take away the severity of what the perpetrator did does not relieve yourself of the burden of bearing the negative reaction you know you'll receive.

Instead of saying "Here's something no one has said or considered", preface your rant with "I know this is the same opinion everyone comes up with when they pull a theory out of thin air but, for the sake of allowing me to participate,  what if the victim is to blame/the perpetrator wasn't fully responsible/this is all actually about *your* hypocrisy?"

Ugh. I knew I'd end with snark. Sorry!

Edited by swb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for Vinyl Collective. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×