Horrible abusers in the music industry - R Kelly verdict [title edit by MNHQ]

[RickJames]

Well, R Kelly is off to jail. Thank goodness. He was evil! But he made some great music. Like Chris Brown, Michael Jackson and to a certain extent James Brown. Ike Turner, Phil Spector, Gary Glitter.. even David Bowie was after it in the 60's. Jon Bonham they were all at it. Either or both abuse of women and children. Even that chap from Kasabian beat his wife up. It seems to be a thing. Loads more examples possible.

AIBU to expect that despite the enjoyable music they created/ sang on they shouldn't be played on commercial/ public radio anymore. Maybe if we protested then (im not innocent, I know it would be purely for the money) record companies would insist on non-criminal behaviour. In much the same way that say, for example, Siemens or Haringey Council would as employers.

Part of me feels like the music should stand for its musical value. A larger part of me feels like 'this is why we can't have nice things' and we shouldn't tolerate any part of their legacies.

AIBU?

And yet we see movies by Weinstein. No banning, no withdrawal, no removal odd, no?

All heroes have feet of clay. If the lid ever comes off the music industry it will make all other scandals look like a walk in the park.

Weinstein was a producer. It’s hardly his creative legacy, so you’d be cutting off the income and air from the people who actually made it because of who funded it. And then you’re of course not driving a Mercedes,using BASF tapes or chemicals, buying Bally shoes etc. Samuel Pepys and George Orwell were pretty awful fuckers. Are we burning books too?

@CanofCant

That's incredible. Really disappointing attitude.

I think if you banned bands who had committed dodgy acts you’d have very little music to chose from, underage groupies were / still are a frequent occurrence for many many bands, especially in the 70s.

@longwayoff do you work in the music industry? (The BBC have been trying for over a year to make a follow up to their music industry expose. They have tried and tried to dig dirt and didn’t manage to get anything- hundreds of women lying and too scared to talk about what happened 20 years ago, or the reality doesn’t fit the narrative?)

@isleofrum I think the difference is that the Weinstein connection isn’t instantly visible in the same way. He’s not actually in the films.

Is there a case to be made for avoiding abuser products while they’re alive but then resuming use once their dead?

This would avoid them profiting off their music, art etc during their lifetimes but then also allows for music etc to be enjoyed. As a previous poster said, lots of artists have had unsavoury lives and committed abuse and crimes so would this drawing of a line allow a compromise?

*They’re

Are we going to “lift the lid” on tv presenters and ban those great bastards because of Jimmy saville, frank bough and his coke n jokers, Ant and his “prescription” drugs and drink driving, Philip Schofield etc etc?

I was talking about this with my sister the other day and reading interesting conversations on comments sections of social media regarding Ian Watkins. I think lost prophets is the only band I absolutely cannot listen to and will turn off if they come on (unlikely though). I loved them when I was younger, but I cannot disassociate the music from Watkins. I'm not comfortable with some others but it's not at the forefront of my mind when the music starts iyswim?

@ohfook

It's a hard one. I stopped listening to the lost prophets after it all came out about Ian Watkins. I loved that first album but I couldn't see past the crime if that makes sense - and I do understand that it's unfair to the other people who made the album but it's marred for me now. Yet I do still listen to The Rum Jacks.

I think I agree with you, but I know I'm guilty (with the rum jacks) of separating the art from the artist too. I wonder if subconsciously it's because of how I view the different crimes - ie paedophilia in unacceptable but dv is a bit more common place? Either way I think your point is interesting and valid and has given me a bit of food for thought.

I also mourn the fact I can't listen to the Lost Prophets anymore - I loved that album so much and agree that perhaps its the nature of the crime that for me makes me unable to separate it as art and i don't wish to listen to it anymore. Which is strange because I don't have quite the same revulsion hearing Billie Jean and yet MJ was accused of similar crimes - is it because he wasn't convicted, but then you feel was that to do with money and power talking... Or is it because establishment is comfortable with MJ and continue to play it so I don't feel the same revulson as I do with Lost Prophets I don't know the answer to this issue - but it does make me feel uncomfortable and it should be discussed like this

Yeah shouldn't be played. I shudder every time I hear Michael Jackson's crap.

@AtillatheHun

Good point. I think how I see music as different is that with books or movies or consumer products, I actively choose to engage with them. So if I read Orwell, I know he was "a nasty fucker" and I'm mentally prepared for that. Or I just don't read it if its too obnoxious for me.

Music gets blasted at me in shops, on TV commercials, sports events etc. I often don't get a choice. I've chosen to go and buy a pint of milk or watch a football match but I haven't chosen or consented to have to listen to Gary Glitter or MJ.

Maybe a compromise could be keeping the music out of public broadcasting but still being available to buy for those who don't mind about the crimes. In much the same way that many dodgy books are available to buy but not really spoken about or promoted.

@WotgunShedding there was a big furore over a G Glitter song being used in Batman (?) a few years back. Turned out that he didn’t receive a penny anyway based on the deals he’d done previously. There are of course a lot of band members / c writers who suffer badly from that approach too - I have felt very sorry indeed for the othe members of Lost Prophets who must need a lot of therapy to deal with having lived so closely with Watkins (not that they can actually afford it on the basis of having had their income entirely cut off). Poor sods. They must have lived cheek by jowl on tours for years.

@StylishMummy

I would ban their music from being paid and also pay a portion of royalties to rape/victim charities.

Women-only music is clearly the way forward, Aretha Franklin never raped anyone

I've just seen her bio film, Respect. I was shocked to see that she was being raped by one of her churches gospel singers, and had her first of 2 children with him when she was about 12. Her preacher father seemed to turn a blind eye.

There is a documentary on Sky at the moment called Look Away about the sexual abuse of women and girls in the music industry in the 1970s and 1980s - Steve Tyler and Axl Rose don't come out of it looking good at all, plus others. Give people a bit of power and influence, access to young women and girls, and an industry that's making huge amounts of money and it's a recipe for disaster. I'm just sad it took so long to bring R. Kelly to justice - his crimes have been well known for a good decade or two at this point.

For years, I’ve shuddered at the intro to R. Kelly’s ‘Bump and Grind’.

“My minds telling me no
But my body…
My body’s telling me yes”
🤮🤮🤮

@RickJames

David Bowie (and his wife at the time), apparently, had a 14 year old girlfriend. It's fairly well documented although when I googled, some Internet scrubbing seems to have taken place.

He also went through a phase of keeping all his wee in the fridge but I suppose he was only hurting himself with this habit. I believe it was when he lived with Iggy Pop in Berlin.

Iggy's MN AIBU would have been fantastic- AIBU to think my flatmate shouldn't be using our fridge to store his wee?

You do realise you're just repeating a load of scrambled up gossip here? That's why you think the internet was 'scrubbed'. It's a shame people can't stick to actual established facts.when it comes to sexual offences. R Kelly, Gary Glitter and Ian Watkins were properly investigated and convicted. That's why they were banged up, and David Bowie wasn't.

And come on, just because someone is good at something doesnt mean they are perfect. Imagine, David Johnson is such an excellent gas boiler fitter, all his crimes against children are rendered null, let's celebrate Dave! It just wouldn't happen!

Umm, my plumber actually is called David Johnson, assuming you've just made up that name? Like Joe Bloggs or Freddy Pumpernickle?

Back to your original post - no I don't think they should be played. Everytime a MJ song comes on I change channel!

No Attila, I don't work in the industry. Good luck to the BBC,
zafferana, above, sums it up pretty well. When I see parents pushing their children towards the voracious jaws of 'entertainment', it makes me shudder. When these offenders say they 'don't remember' someone, they probably really don't remember. Who remembers what they pick up off a conveyor belt that brings anything you might want?

I agree OP, abuse was rife- and still is.
People like Freddie Mercury- all that glam rock era was particulary bad.
I can't listen to music from that time.

Yes good news that R Kelly is going to get handed justice, but apparently the maximum sentence he can get is just 15 years

Why is it that sentences for sex offences are comparably so lenient. Thinking of all the lives he's ruined, if I had my way he would be locked up until death.

@WotgunShedding

Is there a case to be made for avoiding abuser products while they’re alive but then resuming use once their dead?

This would avoid them profiting off their music, art etc during their lifetimes but then also allows for music etc to be enjoyed. As a previous poster said, lots of artists have had unsavoury lives and committed abuse and crimes so would this drawing of a line allow a compromise?

I think the problem with this is that it doesn't end with the person.

MJ for example... there is no way his family, entourage, staff etc did not know what was going on. They were at least complicit in his crimes and probably even facilitated them. His estate is still profiting from his legacy and therefore those who were complicit are also still profiting.

I find it very hard to separate the man from the music and find it odd that you can still find his music on streaming platforms and I'm surprised that Thriller Live is still so popular. I cannot imagine going to that show and sitting through the performance and enjoying it knowing what we know. I realise people will say that he was never convicted but I mean, come on.