Jump to content

Nobby's Old Boots

Members
  • Posts

    137
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Nobby's Old Boots's Achievements

Enthusiast

Enthusiast (6/14)

  • Reacting Well Rare
  • Dedicated Rare
  • First Post Rare
  • Collaborator Rare
  • Week One Done Rare

Recent Badges

18

Reputation

  1. Nobby's Old Boots, please. The boots are old, Nobby ain't. To be fair if we're talking about being disingenuous, the comment from you I took issue with was "You treat people like animals in a pen, they're gonna start acting like animals in a pen." Which, in a conversation about people committing sexual assault, is glib beyond belief. I said nothing about edgy bands in my reply to that, but, to quote your own post here "I suspect you surely do" know that already. The edgy thing started because some posters, including me, were a bit surprised that people were expressing their sadness about the demise of "edgy" gigs in a thread about a festival where multiple sexual assaults took place. I agree with the poster who said it's tone deaf, because it is. Edgy is too subjective a word when you could easily argue (and I know you're NOT arguing this) that the "edgy" atmosphere at the festival contributed to some horrendous acts being committed against women. Again, I'm not blaming the bands or genre of music - because I think that's a very flawed argument. We can chalk it down to a poor choice of words. Maybe don't jump to conclusions based on things you believe were "implied".
  2. I could be wrong here but I don't think the comment you quoted was blaming the music. Is anybody blaming the music? I'm not sure they are. I took it more to mean that they were surprised that people are nostalgic for more chaotic/edgy times, when the reality of what actually happened at Woodstock is far more grim and serious, and so conflating the two seems a bit tone deaf. I'm certainly not blaming the music, in fact the opposite, I'm saying that I find it distasteful when everything else is blamed for why those men acted in such a disgusting way. Having said all that, Kid Rock is a first class c*** and his comments are certainly in line with the societal issues of the day which are what led to the inexcusable behaviour.
  3. Sure, it was the festival's fault that many, many women were assaulted. That was DEFINITELY due to the conditions and nothing to do with the men who committed them. Treat people like animals in pen, they're gonna start r*ping women. Good grief.
  4. Are we calling Bill Clinton a left-wing president now? Oof. Saw the doc. Disappointing there was no real attempt to investigate the culture behind the behaviour there beyond blaming it all on Bill Clinton and Fight Club, which is laughable. And all those saying 'yeah, but there was no water, treat people like animals, they act like animals' etc - really? So that excuses the numerous sexual assaults committed, because people were forced to pay extortionate prices for water? What a complete load of nonsense. Sounds a lot like the disgusting comments from the money-grabbing dickhead in charge of the festival who essentially said 'well, the women took their own clothes off and chose to crowd surf, what did they expect?' The footage and photos of women being groped and treated in a beyond inappropriate way are really shocking.
  5. How was leaving the car park for people today? An improvement on 2019 I hope 🤞
  6. Smack bang in the middle of a historic heatwave, 3 days before the festival, they're now saying no gazebos... That extra capacity is going to be really noticeable with everyone packed in much tighter than usual. Silly alcohol limits and now this? Festival seems to be losing its soul a bit. Quite a hostile feeling from the festival before it's even started.
  7. Right, and if you were the most influential DJ of your generation who did a high profile interview where you admitted to that, and showed no remorse (although of course you already have in that post) and Glastonbury decided to name the cider bus after you, it probably wouldn't be a great idea.
  8. 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?
  9. 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
  10. 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.
  11. 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.
×
×
  • Create New...