Wednesday, 17 October 2012

the daily mail, hypocrisy, and the stars

The Daily Mail is having a go at John Peel at the moment because he had sex with (and allegedly got pregnant), a 15 year old girl.  Peel has been open about his sexual exploits in the past, and this is nothing new. However, the implicit fact in the story is that she was only 15, under age, and should not be treated as a sex object.  But what is the other story in the same paper?  Only photographs and a statement about how fit Chloe Moretz, another 15 year old is looking.  Talk about double standards and hypocrisy.  On a similar note, Jimmy Savile is getting a (probably well deserved)  kicking at the moment due to all the allegations against him.  Non of these have been proven yet, and a lot of what l have read is hearsay, and therefore couldn't be acted upon at the time.  I wouldn't trust Savile any further than l could throw him, but l also don't believe everyone that has come forward is telling the truth, and some of the 'revelations' are just scraping the barrel   He is an easy target because he was odd and is dead, but while stars are living, it seems to be the 'strange' ones the press go for, such as Jonathan King or Gary Glitter (or in the Mail's case, BBC institutions like Peel).  What about other stars that have pretty damning evidence against them?  I'm not just thinking of Bill Wyman of The Rolling Stones, or Elvis Presley and his courting habits, but of rock gods such as Jimmy Page of Led Zeppelin, who targeted Lori Maddox when she was a child model, arranged to meet her, and started a relationship with her.  All of this while he was an international star, and Maddox was 13, possibly 14. Targeting and taking advantage?  I certainly think so.  Is it all over the papers?  Is it fuck.  There will be plenty more stars who have skeletons in their closets, and this is sometimes used as the defence of 'not everybody can be prosecuted', but some cases certainly stand out from the rest, and nothing is done, because they are 'liked,' 'cool' or 'respected'. Then you also get other stars wanting to defend them and work with them, such as with Roman Polanski, or they have some kind of power, and everyone turns a blind eye, as it seems to be with the Savile case, or the recent Penn State University one. The papers should stop chasing after the strange and dead (such as King, Glitter and Peel) and do something about the living, if they are that bothered, otherwise they can stop pretending they are. What a load of crap, and if crap and dodgy stuff is what you are into, Ed Savitz (now dead) was the man to go and see.  He certainly knew what he liked.

toodle pip

No comments: