Brand New Band • Page 787

Wow. I was just about to post too. I'm gonna miss everyone I suppose.

 

I think my contribution was just too much for the website to handle. It’s for the best.

 

we back now

 

wait what why? I was 100+ pages behind lol so granted things could have taken quite the turn but yeah now I feel sad that I never caught up

 

Same, I was reading through a few pages every day until I caught up. Anyone know what happened to get it deleted?

 

Lol I hit post a second time and the thread was archived. I think the universe is trying to tell me that my contributions are not needed.

 

I'm not even sure if I should bring this up, but I feel that I'm getting unfairly accused on the other thread and I was trying to make a post to prove a point. It's not that well constructed, but maybe someone more clever than me can make sense out of it:

Are we sure though? I don't like to paint stuff in broad strokes because then it turns actions like what Brand New excusable to some, see:

I have no clue which age Jagger was here, but this seems STRIKINGLY different than what Lacey were going for. It doesn't seem like she was lead on or seems traumatized or felt emotionally abused like the victims that came forward about Lacey feel.

While fucked up, it's pretty usual to see situations like this. Woman marrying while young was pretty usual back then. Hell, my grandma married when she was 15 and yes her husband was an abusive asshole that I never recognized as my grandfather, but that was sort of common place.

Once again, this seems strikingly different than what Lacey did.

Alright, this is pretty fucked up.


Source to all of this: 11 Rock Stars Who Allegedly Slept With Underage Girls

My point is, and I think Ashland was trying to brought up before, I feel like comparing Brand New with these bands is doing Lacey and Brand New a favor that they don't really deserve. The times were different and while fucked up, it was pretty much accepted back then. Back in 2000s though? Nah, it wasn't. I feel like we are giving Lacey and Brand New an way out, and I still don't think it's the same thing.

Basically, TL;DR:

Does this make sense to anyone? That comparing Lacey with rock stars from the 60s is a coup out for him and Brand New? Because to me it does. The times were different, the kind of abuse that Lacey did is different, it goes beyond physically abusing them, but also grooming underage kids, and several of them at that.

 

- Jesse is bad
- yeah but what about these people
- Jesse is still bad
- but isn’t it the systems fault
- yeah but also Jesse
- it’s not just Jesse

Repeat ad infinitum. Sprinkle in some ad hominem.

 

how is this a cop out at all? i'm saying we should condemn these artists just as we have condemned lacey.

 

The original poster deleted the SF thread. I undeleted it and closed/archived it instead. I think that period of time and the conversations in there around what happened with the band is important to save for posterity.

 

Word. Tell them all to go to hell while listening to White Lung.

 

Ah, the blame game. Thanks for the summary and saving me some time

 

I appreciate you archiving it. I would like to reminisce about parts of it, even if the past month (rightfully) makes my stomach church.

 

Jason, I feel like you can make sense out of this more than any of us around here. Isn't comparing Lacey with freaking Beatles sleeping with groupies a cop out for Brand New and Lacey? Because I honestly feel like it is. I can't put in words what is different here, but I feel like you've made this point before and I did a very piss poor job trying to express it.

 

also i read a few articles around the time of bowie's death about how a lot of the women who took place in these crazy parties and "groupie" life in the 70s wanted it at the time but as they grew up they realized how much they were taken advantage of. it doesn't matter how much they were into it at the time, these artists should have known better than to influence a developing mind

 

glad to see some people still dont understand a word of what i said.

 

As year end lists are getting released, I'm glad to see so many publications who praised SF have omitted it from their AOTY rankings.

 

none of the publications who have put out lists i would have expected to list brand new

 

At first I liked this post, but then it got me thinking:

This is again painting things with broad strokes. People regret lifestyles. It happens. It's important to know when that lifestyle happened and if there was actually abuse involved. "Oh I regret being a groupie but I was an overage woman that followed x band all around" is well, bad life choices. Not abuse. I don't know, I do feel like you are painting things with broad strokes which makes WAY easier to Brand New than it actually should. It's simply not the same. You can't compare a "groupie" regretting her lifestyle from "a few articles" you remember " to the recollections of women that were abused and groomed by Lacey since they were underage. It's whataboutism at it's best, and not really in service of the victims from the past OR the present, but more like an absolution card to Brand New since "oh well, power dynamics and groupies and lifestyle". No, you regretting your lifestyle or sleeping with band members ISN'T the same as been groomed and abused since you were underage. Painting things with broad strokes seems incredibly wrong to me.

 

Rolling Stone? I mean they even put Code Orange on there lol.

 

Oh I was totally expecting Consequence of Sound to put them in their top 15. Pretty sure they gave it an A.
Also I think Rolling Stone gave it a great review and it wasn't on their list.

 

Very pleased with that as well. They don't deserve it.

 

With respect to end of the year lists, if a publication was going to put BN on the list, but opted against it based on the information that came out, I would prefer that they acknowledge that fact rather than just pretending SF didn’t happen.

I’d much prefer a blurb or acknowledgment saying “Brand New’s Science Fiction was removed from consideration due to the revelations regarding singer Jesse Lacey’s sexual abuse of teenage fans. It is long overdue for this kind of behavior to be called out in the music industry and for bands to be held accountable. We chose to amplify the voices of the victims over that of an individual like Mr. Lacey. Please donate to RAINN or other organizations.” Something along those lines.

Take the time to make it a positive statement, rather than just total erasure.

 

This would be a good point, if it didn't ignore that a lot of those groupies were under 18 and COULD NOT CONSENT.

 

I'm not ignoring it. My point is that from my POV there's something strikingly different to the most famous type of scenarios, which is basically Almost Famous type of scenarios. Here are these girls that are underage kids that are as young as 14 year olds, taking pictures from your band, or you know, at the concerts or whatever how he found them. He persued them, went out of his way to keep these girls at arms lentgh. The first victim that came forward on Diaz posts talk about how there were other girls there at the backstage she first met Lacey and he asked for her contact. Overage girls. But Lacey took notice to her. And she was freaking 15 years old. She says that others that were there at backstage took notice and send her off the backstage just afterwards Lacey picked her contact.

I'm not saying that groupies under 18 could consent, I think that Bowie was a POS and I never even heard of that before today. I'm just saying that there's something off to me for us to paint broad strokes. I know way much about details of what happened about Lacey's situation that stuff from back then, if it makes any sense. Not sure if I could see as rape if for example that case of Jagger sleeping with a 17 year old. Age of consent there is 16, I have no clue how old he was back then but if she was 17 and he was 18, 19, I don't know. Can you understand that? I feel like information from back then are vague, while what these women are denouncing Lacey of seems very detailed.

Legit torn about this. I feel like those that "would know" are or were fans of the band, and the fact that isn't listed there seems more powerful to me. I mean, are we really acknowledging that it'd make the list IF IT WASN'T THE FACT that Lacey is an asshole scumbag sexual predator any helpful? The truth is that the more they acknowledging them, more power they are giving to them. Most of these publications already published the victims recollections. I don't feel like more it's needed, or deserved.