X

Create an account to continue reading.

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles
For unlimited access to The Spectator, subscribe below

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles

Sign in to continue

Already have an account?

What's my subscriber number?

Subscribe now from £1 a week

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
 
View subscription offers

Already a subscriber?

or

Subscribe now for unlimited access

ALL FROM JUST £1 A WEEK

View subscription offers

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Login

Don't have an account? Sign up
X

Subscription expired

Your subscription has expired. Please go to My Account to renew it or view subscription offers.

X

Forgot Password

Please check your email

If the email address you entered is associated with a web account on our system, you will receive an email from us with instructions for resetting your password.

If you don't receive this email, please check your junk mail folder.

X

It's time to subscribe.

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access – from just £1 a week

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
X

Sign up

What's my subscriber number? Already have an account?

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Your subscriber number is the 8 digit number printed above your name on the address sheet sent with your magazine each week.

Entering your subscriber number will enable full access to all magazine articles on the site.

If you cannot find your subscriber number then please contact us on customerhelp@subscriptions.co.uk or call 0330 333 0050.

You can create an account in the meantime and link your subscription at a later time. Simply visit the My Account page, enter your subscriber number in the relevant field and click 'submit changes'.

Please note: Previously subscribers used a 'WebID' to log into the website. Your subscriber number is not the same as the WebID. Please ensure you use the subscriber number when you link your subscription.

Coffee House Culture House Daily

David Bowie had sex with underage girls. Is that creepy or cool?

15 January 2016

1:52 PM

15 January 2016

1:52 PM

Though I adored David Bowie as a teenybopper, I felt that one would have had to have a heart of stone not to laugh at the lush smorgasbord of lachrymosity that accompanied his death earlier this week. I said as much in a short blog on these very pages. Soon I was trending on Twitter, and from the comments you’d have thought that I’d shot, cooked and eaten Shergar the Racehorse.

But I stand by what I said. Like Princess Diana and Nookie the Bear before him, Bowie was not some selfless saint; he was a sharp-eyed, ambitious creature who once floated himself on the Stock Market in the 1990s, and sold himself for the advertising shilling – when already a millionaire many times over – in 2006 to a bottled water company.

I strayed upon the Facebook page of the excellent feminist essayist Louise Pennington, who had already been driven to distraction by grieving trolls. Her crime had been to remind us that David Bowie, in the first flush of global fame, had had quite a lot of sex with underage girls in Los Angeles. In one notorious case, he had helped himself to the virginity of a 13-year-old named Lori Maddox, who went on to act as sperm receptacle/muse to other rock stars. She was part of the so-called ‘Baby Groupies’ circle. Ever practical, my first thoughts were not ‘What a cad!’ but ‘O my days, the tabloids will be all over this as soon as the tears have dried, and there’s just no point in his fans (of which I was the most fervent in my early teens) burying our collective heads in the sand. WE NEED TO GET OUR STORY STRAIGHT!’ After all, it can’t be a crime when rubbish entertainers sleep with children, and all fine and dandy when great ones do. A bit of rigour never goes amiss.

[Alt-Text]


Looking back, I remember I had heard about the ‘Baby Groupie’ scene when I was practically jailbait myself and had just joined the New Musical Express. One of Bowie’s foremost forelock-tuggers, a fellow hack NME hack who now likes to think of himself as a feminist, had said to me snarkily one day ‘In L.A, you’d be considered over the hill at 17. You’d only be useful for driving your younger sisters to clubs!’ I thought of myself at 13; would I have had sex with Bowie, given the chance? You bet! Do I think it was creepy Bowie had sex with 13-year-olds? Without doubt. (In such situations I find myself very grateful for the old F Scott Fitz quote ‘The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.’) Mind you, youth is a fickle jade.

Lori Mattix said many years later ‘You need to understand that I didn’t think of myself as underage. I was a model. I was in love. That time of my life was so much fun. It was a period in which everything seemed possible. I saw the greatest music ever. I got to hang out with some of the most amazing, most beautiful, most charismatic men in the world. I went to concerts in limos with police escorts. Am I going to regret this? No. Besides, I had been the last virgin in my high school.’ It is always a mistake for feminists to strip women they do not agree with of agency, and seek to paint them as confused poltroons suffering from good old ‘false consciousness’, as when Chrissie Hynde claimed culpability in her sexual assault by a biker gang as a teenager and was roundly scolded by the sisterhood. It could be argued – as in the case of Lori Mattix – that it is not at all feminist to demand that individual women falsify their feelings about their experiences in order to fit in with the prevailing orthodoxy on any given women’s concern.

Still, it’s a creepy old business, and the creepiest thing about it is the silence from broads who should know better, but who cannot bear to let anything get in the way of their hero’s canonisation. Really, you’d have thought that recent events in Germany would have taught we enlightened people the folly of ignoring unpleasant truths in the hope that they’ll waft away on a candyfloss-scented breeze.

A lot of the feminist writers currently wearing black for Bowie have teenage daughters. Would they have thought it a blessing for David Bowie to bag their beloved girls virtue when she was a kiddy? Just because you don’t have all the answers doesn’t mean you can’t ask any questions. And mine is this: under some circumstances, would you excuse, worship, deify a man who has knowingly had sex with children, if he had created music which you passionately believe made the world a better place? Or not?

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.


Show comments
Close