Elvis was as bad as Jimmy Saville, Talent Vs Pedophillia Debate

[bkgirl]

He had a total predilection for 13 year old girls but yet still revered...should his accomplishments transcend his reputation for pedophillia?
Discuss.

Where is the link?

Personally I think there was something wrong with my parents generation that they turned a blind eye to all the pedophilles in their midst (church, music business etc). Elvis was a mc Carthyite too - was this to get away with what he did?

I think its awful that these dirty paedo's pray on young girls, and then it was covered up or normalized.
There is nothing normal about any grown man that finds a 13yo attractive boak!

Sorry, had been listening to the radio about just what he did, mind you lots on the internet.
Albert Goldman spent 4 years and reveals a lot of distasteful stuff but it didn't please his fans..
music.yahoo.com/blogs/rocks-backpages/rock-biographys-bete-noire-in-defense-of-albert-goldman.html

www.datalounge.com/cgi-bin/iowa/ajax.html?t=9099822#page:showThread,9099822

Funny how fans always excuse these vile men!

I think it's all a bit more tricky in the States as the age of consent did vary, not sure if it's still the case now.

Case in point being Jerry Lee Lewis whose third wife was 13.

Saville went for a 9yo boy in his Jim'll fix it dressing room a newspaper article according to chat thread Savile part4.

Eeurrgh Saville & 9yo, shame he isn't still alive so the victims can get justice.

Going for teenage (post-pubescent) girls isn't paedophilia.

I think the difference between Savile and some of these other celebrities is the issue of consent. Now, having a consensual relationship or even marrying a 13, 14, 15 year old girl is wrong (see the teacher who ran off with his pupil) but is in a different league to assaulting and raping girls.

But Sam it is still vile and sick whether the terminology is correct or not.
It is not ok for a man to have sex, rape or abuse teenagers whether they are willing or not!

Lets not forget the 9yo boy!-that accusation does indeed make Jimmy saville a peadophile.

I'm not saying it is ok - but suggesting that raping a 9 year old is the same as dating/marrying a teenager (especially given the age of consent at the time) is ridiculous.

Did he forcibly rape them, and prey on vulnerable children from care homes and prisons?

Doesnt a person under the age of 16 class as a child? (genuine question) because I thought that if you had sex with someone under 16 consensual or not it is classed as rape?

Looby, it depends on where you are in the world.

A child under 13 cannot consent and so it is always rape. Consensual sex with a young person 13-15 is unlawful though I think (up to 18 if the adult is a teacher).

Oh right, what about in this country though?

Hmm have been thinking about this and for me there is no comparison between Jimmy Savile and Elvis...

But it is a grey area in the 'Elvis' situation (in my head anyway) which I'm just not sure about. JS - no question, was a sexual predator & crimes were committed. Evil, horrible man.

Elvis met Priscilla when she was 14 (I don't know of the 13 year old, although I realise a few months doesn't make much difference). In my mind it was a very different situation because, rightly or wrongly, they fell in love, she was a willing participant, they eventually married and had a legitimate relationship, etc. I do think their relationship was wrong when they met and Priscilla was underage - and it seems she was completely unprotected by those around her, from getting into a relationship she was clearly (and legally?) too young to cope with. And what that says about Elvis I don't know.

But I don't think it makes him a paedophile. Maybe it does, legally (although I don't know what the legal age was in that part of the US..).

But JS was clearly a paedophile.

In my mind there is a big difference between the two situations. Neither situation was right (morally, anyway), but I think there needs to be a distinction between somebody like JS and somebody like Elvis.

Elvis, John Peel, Jerry Lee Lewis, Bill Wyman etc - yes, I think they were wrong to have relationships with teenage girls. Young girls should be legally protected against predatory older men. But, as far as we know all these relationships were consensual and in some cases perfectly legal at the time.

Jimmy Savile groped, assaulted and raped girls and women. There was no consent, no willingness, no relationships. This is a completely different situation.

By the way, paedophilia refers to a sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children. Gary Glitter is a paedophile. If Jimmy Savile did abuse a 9 year old then he too was a paedophile. Being attracted to or having a relationship with a post-pubescent teenager is not paedophilia.

But surely if someone under 16 is legally a child and needs parental permission for things then in the eyes of the law someone who is attracted to a person under 16 should be classe as a pedophile?

I'm not trying to start an argument or anything, just trying to get things clear in my head.

I don't know if there is a legal definition of paedophilia actually - it is a medical/psychological term specifically for someone who is sexually attracted to pre-pubescent children.

A sexual preference for post-pubescent/teenage girls is actually called ephebophilia.

The age of consent in Spain, for example, is 13. In years gone by in this country, women were mothers at 14. Henry VII's mother gave birth to him at 13. King John married a 12 year old. Times change all the time.

It isn't right, of course it's not, but I agree that it is very different having a relationship with a 14/15 year old than finding children sexually attractive.

It has a lot to do with whether you are an adult in mind as well as body.

I see, didn't realise there is a different woe for teenagers, I suppose teenagers and children are different, teens have a more adult body so although still Erin I suppose it's slightly more understandable, and I hate say it but the way some teenage girls dress u CID mistake their age, u was at a family party in the summer (not close family) and there was a young girl who before talking to her thougt she was about 21, it turned out she was 13!

I meant wrong. It Erin lol

There is no legal definition of paedophilia.

For me paedophilia is a very different kettle of fish to unlawful relations with a teenager under the age of consent. Biologically a 13/14 year old who has started her periods is an adult - puberty being the key to sexual maturity. The fact that she is still considered by society to be a child is irrelevant when it comes to biological urges. Paedophilia refers to finding pre-pubsecent children attractive, not the finding of sexually mature teenages attractive.

Yeh that makes sense actually.