this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2025
704 points (98.1% liked)

Political Weirdos

1067 readers
523 users here now

A community dedicated to the weirdest people involved in politics.

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BremboTheFourth@piefed.ca 33 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Being underage and pregnant might not be notable in some communities--if the father is also underage. The father being 30+ has absolutely been taboo for at least a century.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

The father being 30+ has absolutely been taboo for at least a century.

I mean, I honestly wish you were right, but that was 1975.

It was 1981 Ted Nugent released Jailbait:

Well, I don’t care if you’re just thirteen

You look too good to be true

I just know that you’re probably clean.”

He was 32 years old, and one of the largest rock acts at the time.

And Courtney Love said she performed oral sex on him when she was 12 around that timeframe. (Not really sure how to phrase that, she says it was consensual, but it was rape)

It's wasn't even an open secret, it was just open knowledge.

It's important to understand it, because that's why so many Republican voters excuse it.

[–] SparroHawc@lemmy.zip 9 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The fact that the song is titled 'Jailbait' should tell you something about the ethics of that.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Think the point is that at least for rock music scene, it was considered perfectly normal for underage groupies to get with rock stars.

Yeah it was illegal but so were drugs, and we know how famously sober the rock celebrities were of the age....

I think there was taboo unless everyone agreed the older man was "hot". If they got with underage people because they were old creepy ugly dudes that couldn't get with anyone any other way, absolutely taboo.

But if everyone thought they had a choice but happened to also include young women that seemed openly "partying" then people did likely shrug.

[–] johncandy1812@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Would Courtney Love defend her or Ted Nugent's behaviour? I don't want to victim blame but there's a portion of the population who never learned to deal with the abuses (or never had the resources) they suffered. They simply pass the abuse on to the next generation and call it a rite of passage.

We can correct for these things over time

[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 5 points 1 day ago

I think it's like any other child abuse. Some kids got it worse than others, and some even reframed it as part of a narrative where they don't see it as abuse, but it should never have happened.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Yeah...

That's literally what the original tweet is doing as well. Which is why I used Courtney as an example.

The easiest way to describe Azealia is basically the Courtney Love of the 2010's

[–] Gullible@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Every time this is brought up, I want to bring up the parody that points out how creepy they were.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah, it's weird how many Americans have a blind spot on what shit was like slightly before their time.

It was pre-internet but not really old enough to be in history books.

But its important we have an accurate view of what it's like, because the people that were 20/30 back then, are 60/70 and still voting today. Hell, with the average age of our political representativea, it's not hard to see why both parties only show interest in releasing the Epstein information, when the other side is the ones who can do it.

We need younger politicians, because those dinosaurs are literally from another time and our values don't match on several fundamental topics.

Someone in their 70s, even 60s, grew up on that culture where it wasn't considered a big deal.

[–] Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Yeah, it’s weird how many Americans have a blind spot on what shit was like slightly before their time.

It was pre-internet but not really old enough to be in history books.

American here. In high school, I noticed the publishing dates on our history books were older than the freshmen (the youngest grade in most high schools, usually 14 year old.) Those books were falling apart so bad. It was the only book we weren't allowed to take home - they were too fragile and there weren't enough for every student.

Our history classes conveniently stopped covering anything that happened in the 80s or later anyway. I had to learn about the horrors of Reagan as an adult, through my own studies. Considering how much he did to bring about the enshittified world we live in today, some part of me can't help but feel that missing that history lesson was not a coincidence.

[–] Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 2 points 1 day ago

So just to give some hope, when I was in high school, my highschool had a really cool setup for the history classes clearly designed to address this problem of history books aging poorly and not enough time in a school year to reasonably cover history. They instead broke history class into 4 separate classes that you take one each year of highschool. First year covered conflict of the first settlers and native people through to the year 1900, second year covered 1900-1950 third year covered 1950-1980 and the final year covered 1980-present, so not only did I get to learn about events like the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire and Watergate but also we talked about the War on Terror (because I was also born in the 90s) and many of Bush Jr's policies

Obviously being in public school, they took a relatively safe approach to covering some of the stickier topics (I specifically remember being royally confused when learning about the Red Scare and kinda going "wait, but what is so bad about communism?" Or the talk about Desert Storm, Desert Shield, and later the Iraq war wasn't as clear about just how pointless those wars were than they could have been. Or the talk about Reagan didn't cover so much of his devastating policies, or the Watergate scandal was basically framed as "Nixon was kinda quirky and didn't trust people!" etc.) but it at least gave an incredible baseline of historical background to understand most US policies from and a baseline to fill in with my own research later on in life (which I absolutely have! Learning more about practices of Mercantilism in the 16th-18th centuries really brings all of the colonialism and enslavement of "lesser" peoples into clarity, or learning in more depth about Nixon's and later Reagan's policies and how they influenced the modern era. How Roger Ailes worked with the Nixon and Reagan administrations and from that experience turned Fox News into the Republican party trumpet that it is today, etc. etc.)

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Lol, reminds of Trevor Moore's "Geniuses":

That’s all you got?!

That's all that's in the history book! It's one page, George Washington Carver!

Where did you get that book?!

It's mine from school!

Where did you go to school?!

Virginia... In the 1980s... why?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jx8b6RzvC_Y

Coincidentally, the Disneyland band Halyx also wrote a song called Jailbait released in 1981 which is not only a better song but was written by a woman.

Sadly, they only performed for one summer.