Author Joel Williamson shared Elvis kept a group of three 14-year-old girls with him on the tour who were up "for pillow fights, tickling, kissing and cuddling when he was 22.

    • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      72
      ·
      3 months ago

      Most people weren’t even aware of it.

      The general public knowing every little detail about a celebrity’s life simply wasn’t a thing then.

      • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        3 months ago

        People wrote songs about it. Famous songs that you know the words to. People knew, they just didn’t care.

    • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      The sad truth is that it was a very common practice. Just wait until they hear about Jerry Lee Lewis.

      • TexasDrunk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        And the Grateful Dead (sure Bob, you waited while she slept outside your room every night for 3 years), Chuck Berry, Jimmy Page, Led Zeppelin, and about a hundred other groups. Hell, Kiss had the Christine Sixteen song, Jethro Tull had Aqualung, Seventeen by Winger, Into the Night by Benny Mardones, and a bunch of other songs have super uncomfortable lyrics about girls.

        That’s not even getting into well known shit bags like Nugent.

      • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        At least one of the fathers openly endorsed it. I don’t think fathers cared as much about it as you think.

  • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    61
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    Because his fame comes from an era when that kind of age gap and inappropriate conduct was handwaved away with “fRoM a GoOd FaMiLy!”

    Especially in his native southern US. Especially especially among the white folks in his native southern US.

  • actionjbone@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    As disgusting as we see it now, keep in mind that, back then, child marriage was not only condoned but sometimes encouraged in those parts of the Southern U.S.

    We’ll never know if he did it because he had a thing for young girls, or if he did it simply because it was an accepted practice.

    Regardless of why, it’s objectively terrible that he did that.

      • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        3 months ago

        Age of consent is not the same as age an adult is allowed to be with a minor. Minors should be allowed to consent to have sex, just not with much older people. Laws that prosecute, say, a 19 year old from having sex with a 17 years old, or god forbid two 14 years olds to have sex together, are absolutely draconian.

        • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          47
          ·
          3 months ago

          Actually, that’s exactly what age of consent is. The age at which you’re allowed to do things with an adult of any age.

          Romeo and Juliet (or close in age) exceptions are for the situation you’re describing, and are usually tacked onto age of consent laws as an exception.

          In Canada, there’s a pair of these. At 14 and 15 it’s less than 5 years older, and at 12 and 13 it’s less than 2 years older.

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      Fun fact: there’s no such thing as objective morality. Back in the 1920s people thought it was objectively terrible for Black people to have equal rights.

      • actionjbone@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I said it was objectively terrible, I didn’t mention morals. :)

        Harming people is terrible, whether or not social morality supports it.

          • actionjbone@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            No, but it was harmful.

            I’m talking about the objective harm of encouraging underage girls to avoid study and live their lives in the service of older men. There is nothing good that can be said about such a thing. It’s basically indentured servitude.

            • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Ok, it wasn’t seen as relatively more harmful than anything else that would cause strain in a young person’s social, educational, and professional growth. Like an overinterest in sports or gambling or books.

              • actionjbone@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                I’m not talking about how it was seen. I’m talking about how it is. There’s a difference.

                Cutting off hands was seen as socially acceptable at certain times in history, if someone was merely accused of theft. But it is horrific and terrible. How it was seen as irrelevant to it being terrible objectively terrible.

                Are you just trolling, or are you actually trying to defend some of that behavior?

                • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  I’m not talking about how it was seen. I’m talking about how it is.

                  Ok, have fun with that, because that’s not what I was talking about at all.

                  are you actually trying to defend some of that behavior?

                  Fuck you for trying to win internet points by trying to paint someone as agreeing with pedophilia. It’s fucking disgusting and you should be ashamed of yourself.

  • dumbass@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Have you not listened to songs from that era? They’re mostly about hooking up with underage girls.

      • darkpanda@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Might you be thinking of “Sweet Little Sixteen” by Chuck Berry? The guy who btw installed cameras in women’s bathrooms?

        Also, the most venerated boomer band of all time…

        “She was just 17… if you know what I mean

        Love the Beatles, mind you, but uhhhh… all of those boomer bands were like that.

        “I used to pull your pigtails And your scrunched up nose But baby you been growing And baby it’s been showing From your head down to your toes”

        Another Elvis hit, “Little Sister.”

        Again, love the King, but uhhh….

        • brygphilomena@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          For “She was just 17” Paul McCartney was only 21 when that song came out and was dating a 17 year old then. Might have written it when he was 20 and the age of consent in Britain in that time was 16. That’s only 3 or 4 years age difference. I don’t get weird vibes from that. The Beatles were young when they started.

          Neil Sedaka’s “Happy Birthday Sweet Sixteen” is one that gives me the strangest vibes.

          • darkpanda@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Yeah, I mean it’s in the context of the time,‘I never had a problem with that per se. It’s more that some folks took it out of that context and were not quite as situationally aware I guess you could say.

            Then there’s the cases of folks like Jerry Lee Lewis marring his 13 year old cousin, Elvis marrying a 14 year old, etc.

        • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          Might you be thinking of “Sweet Little Sixteen” by Chuck Berry? The guy who btw installed cameras in women’s bathrooms?

          Ah yes, that’s the one (oops).

          Love the Beatles, mind you, but uhhhh… all of those boomer bands were like that.

          Yeah, I like several Chuck Berry songs but … definitely a different take. Those songs would not fly today on the radio.

  • psion1369@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Priscilla was 14 when they met, and he managed to convince her father to let her live with him. I blame the father just a much since he knew what was going down.

    • lemmyviking@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      Not that I condone any of this, but consider that the cultural disgust of marrying a girl under the age of 18 is a more recent and modern taboo. Back then, in rural United States, it wasn’t an issue at all. Heck as a Gen X kid whose parents were from the Silent Generation, my mother married her first husband when she was 16 and he was 22. She never thought it was an issue other than she regretted marrying anyone at the age. But her parents, church, and teachers didn’t think it was a problem.

      It’s hard to believe because most people might say Elvis lived in modern society but he’s not. The 20th century was full of changes that we don’t really think about.

      • psion1369@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        I agree with you on that. And the changes still are going on. I remember in school in the 90’s it wasn’t uncommon for a college guy to date a high school girl with no real repercussion. Not saying that it was right back then, just looked at differently.

        • weariedfae@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          It was gross back then too. In the 90s the Coasties would trawl the junior high girls. 25 year old men “dating” 13 year olds. We all knew it was gross as fuck and not okay but small town cops didn’t give a fuck. Hell there was a deputy “dating” a 16 year old too.

          It wasn’t looked at differently in the 90s.

          A guy in my class knocked up a 14 year old during senior year and we basically all stopped talking to him because fucking ew, dude.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    Paedophilia seemed weirdly acceptable right up until around 2000 or so. It’s really quite surreal how commonplace it was.

    • psion1369@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I won’t say acceptable, as there were still issues and such, but it was definitely persecuted differently.

    • Noel_Skum@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      Uh… no. Baby raping has always been frowned upon as far as I’m concerned. 14 year old consensual (to the extent a 14 year old can be) groupies were a thing, in the not too distant past, but social mores have changed since then. Which is good. There’s an enormous difference between the two though.

        • Noel_Skum@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Delaware is whack, but historically age 12-15 was a reasonable (for the time) age for girls to marry. Most biblical scholars say that Mary (JC’s mother) was about 15/16 when she popped him out (assuming there is some historical fact in the story) so those ages in your country weren’t completely crazy outliers. People grew up quicker back then because people died sooner back then. Just getting to the age of 12 was an accomplishment in its self. The past was a different place. If humanity makes it a few more generations then some of the things we accept and do now will be seen as unacceptable. We are all products, to a greater or lesser degree, of the time we live in and that shapes how we see the world as it is and as it has been.

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    3 months ago

    Plenty of famous people were scumbags. Violent, racist, misogynist, beat up women, cheated, etc. From John Wayne to Frank Sinatra, they were awful human beings but people worship them.

  • Boomkop3@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    This, but also rape and other abuse was tolerated for some reason back then.

    There is also a bit of a gender disparity for who is getting help now. Women can get help a lot more easy than men, and aren’t as likely to be dismissed when they come forward.

    Lets keep pushing in the right direction

  • Lad@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Elvis was a hero to most but he never meant shit to me because the fucker was whack

    • Bob Vylan
  • yuuunikki@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Idk, but I like the song return to sender.

    Downvote all you want, itll just make me like it even more