Renaming of ther John Peel Stage - article in the Daily Hate

[Neil]

1 hour ago, Barry Fish said:

Oral sex isn't sex ? and to be honest its bit ambiguous if it was oral or penetrative sex with the 13 year old...  not that I think it matters...

The way that quote is worded implies he didn't know her age until later. 

[Nobby's Old Boots]

4 minutes ago, Neil said:

The way that quote is worded implies he didn't know her age until later. 

How are we still doing this????

[maelzoid]

9 minutes ago, gfa said:

 he's a nonce, assessment over.

 

I think this is exactly why we're having this discussion, and furthermore why there is a debate over the stage naming. While it depends on your definition of 'nonce' the point is he was not a paedophile (in the clinical sense), and he has neither been accused or convicted of any crime. Now, I am absolutely not defending him in any way with these statements, merely highlighting that actually, the assessment is not over but ongoing.

[vertigocarbon]

20 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

I don't think a single person in this thread has said "it's okay, he did nothing wrong, keep the tent", at least not in the past couple of pages. You guys are reading far too much into things.

But there's an interesting discussion to be had beyond that about how much this was/wasn't known at the time, how we're still happy to venerate the likes of the Stones or Bowie just because they've never openly admitted it, whether there is any sort of path back from this by showing and having remorse...

Appreciate that conversation isn't for everyone, but it'd be good if people didn't automatically assume that those having it were rape apologists....

there is an interesting debate to be had about historical misconduct and repentance. sadly this is isn't really one of those cases - not seen any introspection or active attempts to right his wrongs on his behalf in those quotes. plus - like he's dead and we're talking about naming a tent after him ffs we're not trying to lock him up or deprive him of his livelihood.

Edited July 5, 2022 by vertigocarbon

[Neil]

5 minutes ago, Nobby's Old Boots said:

How are we still doing this????

Sex with a 13year old is i ndisputably wrong, but knowing she's 13 and not knowing are very different things. 

Edited July 5, 2022 by Neil

[Nobby's Old Boots]

2 minutes ago, Neil said:

Sex with a 13year old is i ndisputably wrong, but knowing she's 13 and not knowing are very different things. 

How about a 15 year old?

[Neil]

Just now, Nobby's Old Boots said:

How about a 15 year old?

Same applies, knowing and not knowing are different things 

[Nobby's Old Boots]

2 minutes ago, Neil said:

Same applies, knowing and not knowing are different things 

So we're now suggesting he didn't know his own wife was 15.

Man, this thread is doing something to peoples heads I swear.

[FrancisH]

 

4 minutes ago, Nobby's Old Boots said:

How about a 15 year old?

Seen the "didn't know their age at the time" deployed for a lot of the statements he made.

Weird how he apparently managed to get fooled on age consistently over many years and many incidents.

Edited July 5, 2022 by FrancisH

[Nobby's Old Boots]

Just now, FrancisH said:

 

Seen the "didn't know their age at the time" deployed for a lot of the statements he made.

Weird how he apparently managed to get fooled on age consistently over many years and many incidents.

Yep. But realistically people know that, and they're being willingly naive in choosing to believe that a man with a history of having sex with children doesn't realise a 13 year old girl is 13. Please.

[vertigocarbon]

do find defence that you just accidently had oral sex with a 13 year old girl baffling. i mean, you can tell, right? probably more that you just didn't really care enough

[Neil]

Just now, Nobby's Old Boots said:

So we're now suggesting he didn't know his own wife was 15.

No I pointed out that from what he said (quoted above) it appears he didn't know that girl was 13.

[stuie]

9 minutes ago, Neil said:

Sex with a 13year old is i ndisputably wrong, but knowing she's 13 and not knowing are very different things. 

Oh come on.  Surely we all accept it's your responsibility to know how old someone is before sex. 

[Neil]

4 minutes ago, stuie said:

Oh come on.  Surely we all accept it's your responsibility to know how old someone is before sex. 

I. Don't disagree. 

[Nobby's Old Boots]

9 minutes ago, Neil said:

No I pointed out that from what he said (quoted above) it appears he didn't know that girl was 13.

Yes, then I asked if it's wrong to sleep with a 15 year old, and you said:

"same applies, knowing and not knowing are different things"

So now you know, that he DID know he was with a 15 year old, and you're talking about the 13 year old again.

https://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/whataboutery 

[Neil]

5 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

Tell that to the judge 😛 

We all nly have that quote to condemn him by for that particular incident, so a careful reading of it matters. 

[Neil]

1 minute ago, Barry Fish said:

I am guess if your a 25 year old bloke and you are in a situation where you are questioning if someone might be 16 or not...  Then you might want to make fucking sure of it before diving in there if you had any sort of moral compass.  Clearly Peel was a disgusting little bastard and it needs just calling out as such, tent renamed and we can all move on 🙂 

Nailed it🤣

[Neil]

10 minutes ago, Nobby's Old Boots said:

Yes, then I asked if it's wrong to sleep with a 15 year old, and you said:

"same applies, knowing and not knowing are different things"

So now you know, that he DID know he was with a 15 year old, and you're talking about the 13 year old again.

https://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/whataboutery 

I was sticking to what I'd said, rather than the different covo you wanted to have as your own whataboutery. 

[Ayrshire Chris]

Call it the solstice stage. Fits in with the festival ethos and dates . The Tor in the distance. Ideal. 

[DeanoL]

40 minutes ago, gfa said:

The issue people have is summarised by this quote from stuie. why is this even being questioned and assessed. he's a nonce, assessment over.

But this is a discussion forum. If you don't want to discuss it - which is totally fair enough - you don't have to read the thread. I disagree with some of what is being said (especially the past page or so) and it's definitely quite icky but it's literally what the discussion topic is about. If you don't think it should be discussed, there are other threads. 

13 minutes ago, stuie said:

Oh come on.  Surely we all accept it's your responsibility to know how old someone is before sex. 

Yeah, but do you think the Stones "checked IDs" of every groupie? It's almost certain that Keith Richards slept with someone underage at some point. I mean:

Yet no-one complained when they played Glastonbury. Which is presumably a combination of Peel just being weirdly honest about the whole "scene" when everyone else wanted to cover it up, and the fact you can slander the living but not the dead.

And again, I'm not seeing anyone saying we should keep the name of the tent. Just more raising the point that if we're going to say there no place at Glastonbury for those involved in this (which we absolutely should) then we should follow that through.

[vertigocarbon]

maybe an unpopular opinion - yeh we probably shouldn't venerate rock stars particularly from that era.

but there's also a big stretch between a man writing it and talking about how he did it and "it's almost certain that Keith Richards slept with someone underage at some point". maybe they have admitted it - I honestly don't know enough richards or the rolling stones to know this or not.

 

Edited July 5, 2022 by vertigocarbon

[Kizzie]

1 minute ago, vertigocarbon said:

maybe an unpopular opinion - yeh we probably shouldn't venerate rock stars particularly from that era.

but there's also a big stretch between a man writing it and talking about how he did it and "it's almost certain that Keith Richards slept with someone underage at some point". maybe they have admitted it - I honestly don't know enough richards or the rolling stones to know this or not.

 

Mandy Smith

[Nobby's Old Boots]

8 minutes ago, Neil said:

I was sticking to what I'd said, rather than the different covo you wanted to have as your own whataboutery. 

But you're doing it again. You're the one who brought up the fact he claims not to have known the age as a defense.

So my question is - if the defense is that he didn't know they're that age, then what's the defense if he DID know?

[Neil]

Just now, Nobby's Old Boots said:

But you're doing it again. You're the one who brought up the fact he claims not to have known the age as a defense.

So my question is - if the defense is that he didn't know they're that age, then what's the defense if he DID know?

I simply pointed out what his actual words imply. While others put their own take on those words, a take not supported by the words. 

[stuie]

5 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

I am guessing if your a 25 year old or so bloke and you are in a situation where you are questioning if someone might be 16 or not...  Then you might want to make fucking sure of it before diving in there if you had any sort of moral compass.  Clearly Peel was a disgusting little bastard and it needs just calling out as such, tent renamed and we can all move on 🙂 

Yes Barry.  It's nice to agree with you.