New York has a similar statute that was recently employed by singer Casandra “Cassie” Ventura in her case against Sean Combs. She filed a sex-trafficking and sexual assault lawsuit against the music mogul in 2023, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, just days before the expiration of a lookback window.

If "similar statute" and Sean Combs is brought up when people talk about you? You might need jesus!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] etherphon@piefed.world 2 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Absolutely. Yes. Every time. The problem is this was over 50 years ago and who is sure about the facts anymore about what happened at all. I am just saying, it was not uncommon for teenage girls to throw themselves at rock stars in that time, yes they should have absolutely turned them down, but I think there has to be some personal responsibility somewhere as well, even though minors can't give consent. I suppose it has to come down to a case by case basis, but if there are groupies who regret being groupies and are looking to get paid 50 years later that's kind lame too.

[–] Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

it was not uncommon for teenage girls to throw themselves at rock stars in that time,

Adults vs. Children?

even though minors can't give consent.

Your burning up!!!

Look. A minor is a minor,I believe 21 should be the legal adult marker.

If what the people are saying is false, then you have discovery. However, if he is 25 sleeping with someone 15, then "she is throwing it at him" is the new "she had on red panties"!

[–] etherphon@piefed.world 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Adults vs. Children?

Yes. It's not exactly like it was a secret either, it's celebrated in many songs, books, movies, biographies, autobiographies. I'm sorry to say but those girls were LITERALLY throwing their panties on stage at these guys sometimes... and doing crazy stuff to get back stage. I'm not saying any of it is right, but it was a thing and a different time and all that. Idk really, it's a tricky subject. I was not alive at that time but it seemed like something that was kind of like.. looked the other way at a lot. Anyways, I always thought a lot of those guys were creeps and had no idea what made them attractive to begin with but then again look at the situation we have today. Fame I guess.

[–] Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 3 days ago

You're out!

The "she wanted it" is not a strong defense when talking about sex between a minor and adult.

Do you understand what it means to have power over someone?

[–] elfpie@beehaw.org 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Can you explain what you mean by personal responsibility?

The way I see it, on one side, the law is the law. I can list every valuable thing in my house and put it on a sign in front of my house that also says I don't lock the doors. Or put a sign saying I'll skin them alive if anyone tries to steal from me. Neither sign will change the law and make me more or less culpable.

On the other side, we are discussing morality more than law here. In Brazil, having sex with someone at 15 is not illegal. Do you think it's OK? Do you feel the need to defend the act? Just have your opinion and stand your ground, whatever it is.

[–] etherphon@piefed.world 1 points 2 days ago

Of course I don't think it's okay, but I do understand nuance, and I do understand times change, what was acceptable at some point is not acceptable now. People see things in black and white all the time now. If there was some kind of coercion or drugging or something then yes, by all means, but if this person was a groupie who went out of her way to get backstage to meet a rock star, lied about their age and 50 years later needs some money, then it's dumb. I'm not defending the act so much as hating on people looking for easy money.