747
In a now deleted tweet, weirdo Azealia Banks shares that "fucking 14 year old girls was really only made a social taboo in the 1990s" (europe.pub)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/political_weirdos@lemmy.world
248 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 16 points 1 year ago* (16 children)

The father being 30+ has absolutely been taboo for at least a century.

I mean, I honestly wish you were right, but that was 1975.

It was 1981 Ted Nugent released Jailbait:

Well, I don’t care if you’re just thirteen

You look too good to be true

I just know that you’re probably clean.”

He was 32 years old, and one of the largest rock acts at the time.

And Courtney Love said she performed oral sex on him when she was 12 around that timeframe. (Not really sure how to phrase that, she says it was consensual, but it was rape)

It's wasn't even an open secret, it was just open knowledge.

It's important to understand it, because that's why so many Republican voters excuse it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    The fact that the song is titled 'Jailbait' should tell you something about the ethics of that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago*

    Think the point is that at least for rock music scene, it was considered perfectly normal for underage groupies to get with rock stars.

    Yeah it was illegal but so were drugs, and we know how famously sober the rock celebrities were of the age....

    I think there was taboo unless everyone agreed the older man was "hot". If they got with underage people because they were old creepy ugly dudes that couldn't get with anyone any other way, absolutely taboo.

    But if everyone thought they had a choice but happened to also include young women that seemed openly "partying" then people did likely shrug.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    ...

    Are you one of those people who thinks legality and ethics are the same thing?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Laws are written by people, in part, to enshrine ethics.

    No, not all laws are about ethics, or even about what is just and right. But that's the basis of the system.

    It's unethical to commit statutory rape, and people have agreed with this sentiment enough to make it very illegal, to the point that you risk jail time for committing it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    When at least one of the marriage partners is under the general marriage age, the marriage is considered underage. Sixteen states completely ban underage marriage: Connecticut, Delaware, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Michigan,[2] Rhode Island, Washington,[3] Virginia,[4] New Hampshire,[5] Maine,[6] Oregon,[7] and Missouri.[8] The other states may require the underage partner to obtain either parental consent, judicial authorization, or both, or rely on "exceptional circumstances". The minimum underage marriage age, when all mitigating circumstances are taken into account, commonly ranges from 15 to 17. Five states do not allow a person over 21 to marry an underage person. As of April 2024, four US states do not set any minimum age for marriage.[9]

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_age_in_the_United_States

    Here's another tidbit:

    Georgia raised its age of consent from 14 to 16 in 1995 as did Hawaii in 2001. Colorado lowered its age of consent to 15 in 1971, after it lowered the age of majority from 21 to 18 years.

    So....

    It continued I to the 90s like Azeala said, and I agreed...

    Right?

    Like, you're saying legality and ethics goes hand in hand, and this shows that it was legal in some places, so following your logic, it was also ethical in those places until the laws change

    Because if not I legitimately don't even understand what point you're trying to make.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Okay, now you're getting into semantics. I will remind you that the song is titled Jailbait, which means statutory rape. And if you look at the lyrics, the song is written pretty clearly from the point of view of a sleazeball.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

    Would Courtney Love defend her or Ted Nugent's behaviour? I don't want to victim blame but there's a portion of the population who never learned to deal with the abuses (or never had the resources) they suffered. They simply pass the abuse on to the next generation and call it a rite of passage.

    We can correct for these things over time

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    I think it's like any other child abuse. Some kids got it worse than others, and some even reframed it as part of a narrative where they don't see it as abuse, but it should never have happened.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago* (4 children)

    Every time this is brought up, I want to bring up the parody that points out how creepy they were.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Yeah, it's weird how many Americans have a blind spot on what shit was like slightly before their time.

    It was pre-internet but not really old enough to be in history books.

    But its important we have an accurate view of what it's like, because the people that were 20/30 back then, are 60/70 and still voting today. Hell, with the average age of our political representativea, it's not hard to see why both parties only show interest in releasing the Epstein information, when the other side is the ones who can do it.

    We need younger politicians, because those dinosaurs are literally from another time and our values don't match on several fundamental topics.

    Someone in their 70s, even 60s, grew up on that culture where it wasn't considered a big deal.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Yeah, it’s weird how many Americans have a blind spot on what shit was like slightly before their time.

    It was pre-internet but not really old enough to be in history books.

    American here. In high school, I noticed the publishing dates on our history books were older than the freshmen (the youngest grade in most high schools, usually 14 year old.) Those books were falling apart so bad. It was the only book we weren't allowed to take home - they were too fragile and there weren't enough for every student.

    Our history classes conveniently stopped covering anything that happened in the 80s or later anyway. I had to learn about the horrors of Reagan as an adult, through my own studies. Considering how much he did to bring about the enshittified world we live in today, some part of me can't help but feel that missing that history lesson was not a coincidence.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    So just to give some hope, when I was in high school, my highschool had a really cool setup for the history classes clearly designed to address this problem of history books aging poorly and not enough time in a school year to reasonably cover history. They instead broke history class into 4 separate classes that you take one each year of highschool. First year covered conflict of the first settlers and native people through to the year 1900, second year covered 1900-1950 third year covered 1950-1980 and the final year covered 1980-present, so not only did I get to learn about events like the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire and Watergate but also we talked about the War on Terror (because I was also born in the 90s) and many of Bush Jr's policies

    Obviously being in public school, they took a relatively safe approach to covering some of the stickier topics (I specifically remember being royally confused when learning about the Red Scare and kinda going "wait, but what is so bad about communism?" Or the talk about Desert Storm, Desert Shield, and later the Iraq war wasn't as clear about just how pointless those wars were than they could have been. Or the talk about Reagan didn't cover so much of his devastating policies, or the Watergate scandal was basically framed as "Nixon was kinda quirky and didn't trust people!" etc.) but it at least gave an incredible baseline of historical background to understand most US policies from and a baseline to fill in with my own research later on in life (which I absolutely have! Learning more about practices of Mercantilism in the 16th-18th centuries really brings all of the colonialism and enslavement of "lesser" peoples into clarity, or learning in more depth about Nixon's and later Reagan's policies and how they influenced the modern era. How Roger Ailes worked with the Nixon and Reagan administrations and from that experience turned Fox News into the Republican party trumpet that it is today, etc. etc.)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent