Brand New Band • Page 789

or do they?

 

Jesse never acknowledged it was, the post only says that’s what his statement was

 

They called it “weird science”

 

wasn't their breakout uhhhh deja entendu

 

yeah. every username online i have is tied to this band and it sucks.

 

Josh Eppard's Weerd Science project still exists and its still not bad

 

No Grammy noms

 

Wow. I had no idea the grammy nominations were happening already.

 

Can't remember the last time I cared about the Grammy noms

They usually have one or two interesting artists in the Best New Artist category, but they're never new. Half expecting to see Portugal. The Man nominated this year.

 

they didn't

 

Code Orange being nominated is cool.

 

Guess there was too many hip hop artists to nominate a classic rock band pretending to be hip hop artists

 

Which is why like Jason said, this is important: "Tying the "wrong doing" or not specifically to an age and legal culpability I think's the wrong way to look at this". When we tie "wrong doing" to our moral standards without considering age and legal culpability means that we are blurring the line of what is wrong and right. I think that a discussion about more strict age of consent laws is worth having for, but when we start to paint things in broad strokes it makes easier for Brand New apologists say that the "wrong doing" that Lacey is guilty for is the same that most bands in the past did. It's not the case, and these victims deserve to be treated in a case by case basis, not lumping them all together.

 

didn't jason say the opposite, that we shouldn't look at this just to an age/legal way?

 

Read his post. Carefully.

 

yeah. he says that we shouldn't solely judge each case based on the age of the women. am i wrong?

 

Ok no one said most bands did this, just that other people in bands have done this, because they have, and that indisputable fact does nothing to take away what Jesse did

 

Just because Jesse didn’t physically touch anyone underage (that we know of) doesn’t mean he gets any kind of pass or any kind of different treatment. So he’s not Roman fucking Polanski. Big deal. He’s still a child predator.

 

A lateral thought process would normally lead someone to believe that if grown men in a rock band were sleeping with teenage groupies in the 70s, they probably would've been showing them their dicks on a webcam in the 00s. To repeat that there's a difference in Lacey's actions is to miss the forest for the trees.

 

He said the same what I was trying to say, but more eloquently. English isn't my first language so that probably played a part on that too. I'm a lawyer, that's my day job. I work more in civil than penal cases, but my point is that when you start to paint things with broad strokes and lumping "wrong doing" together with other cases, you are blurring the lines between what is wrong and right and that's not what you want to do.

What he is saying is very much this: "Tying the "wrong doing" or not specifically to an age and legal culpability I think's the wrong way to look at this" which in my mind it reads: you definitely can discuss each case based or not on the age of the victims, but you can't paint these cases broadly. There's a place for a discussion on changes of consent laws, but when you start to lump everything together you get the apologists saying "you see, but Beatles did it! Bowie did it! Why haven't you stopped listening to them too, huh?" and that's not how it works. Each case of abuse deserves to be analyzed in its own merit, and there're enough particularities about Lacey's case that couldn't be replicated in the past: the grooming aspect and the direct emotional abuse throughout the years being one of them.

Actually, it's more complicated than that. It's not clear if he didn't have physical sexual relationships with minors, but some of the recollections imply that yes, he did. He's Jesse Lacey, a child sexual predator.

 

Again, I have no idea what your point is. I literally said we don’t know for sure whether or not he got physical with them but it doesn’t matter because even if he didn’t he’s still a predator.

 

good lord

 

I'm just saying that is heavily implied in other accusations that didn't went for publications (I'm counting six so far) that it did go physical. My point is agreeing with you, he is a predator, but implying that he "didn't got physical" is actually not valid, it's quite probably and hinted that he did. More than once. Still a child predator regardless.

 

So, like, how much money do I have to spend to get rid of the “buy an ad” tab or at last get it moved from the menu on this site?

 

I don’t get why you are trying to condemn Lacey but saying what these classic artists did isn’t as severe. You may not mean it that way but that is exactly what is happening