you won't be lining his pockets even if you do buy his stuff - he sold the copyright to his songs years ago

Yep, Leadbelly was convicted of murder (but pardoned and later convicted otf attempted homicide and released early - some think because of his musical ability) and are people going to stop listening to the music produced by Phil Spector (including the Beatles)?

but why would you want to seperate the man from the music? it aint that important, it aint that good, (id argue its rubbish) how can you listen to 'do you wanna touch me'? and not feel rather nausiated? ..... would you want to seperate hilter the nazi despot from hitler the man? in his job he was a mass murderer but in private he was kind to animals... i dont get why or indeed how, you can seperate glitter from gadd, its the same person.

as for other crims in music...i guess everyone has their own standards, dont listen to phil spectors music if the fact that hes a murederer offends you, john lennon has a reputation for being violent towars women, did r kelly really have sex with an underage girl?... music is littered with unperfect people, most of them and us are far from being free from at some time committing a criminal offence (speeding? anyone?) . the point about glitter is that he is a serial offender and has been for many years. he denies his guilt, he reckons hes done nothing wrong yet there are plenty of victims who are scared by him. THAT is why he is hated so much and why imho any free thinking compasionate intelligent person shouldnt be supporting him, because if his records still sell hes thinking 'they dont care'.

You could buy Let it Be...Naked and then you won't have that problem!

Oh Robbie has been suspected...

My point is that it's idiotic to not listen to somebody's music because of what they've done. If you take this through to its logical inclusion, your intake of culture would be extremely limited...but then I suspect that it is anyway.

of what?.... not little kids... thats for sure.

it depends on what theyve done doesnt it. ive said that! imho glitters the top of the pile when it comes to this as he more then anybody has been an unrepentant, prolific offender of the worst kind. id suggest its idiotic to continue to support this guy and listen to his music, after all as pop goes it was pretty rubbish.

as for suggesting my culture intake is limited.... thats ridiculous, you dont know me, you know nothing about me nor my knowlege or interest in music. a cursory glance will show you that im engaged in conversations from the saturdays, florence, modern music, retro, through to traditional folk. im currently listening to ralph vaughan williams as i relax, if thats limited then im happy to be so!

strange how we're force fed Michael Jackson despite him being put on trial for child abuse....funny old world, eh?

Well frankly I don't care. I wanted a CD of his and can separate the artist and his music from the man and his crimes.

oh i agree, but jacko was never convicted of any crime against kids.


.... thats just a conveiniant excuse, dodging responsibility but the facts are that YOU are helping him abuse kids.

Like Jordan and Katie Price or Gordon Sumner and Sting?

This old chestnut again. This thread comes around every year without fail just like Christmas. It's hilarious reading posts by so many people wetting their knickers over it

Jesus, grow up! You're treading on dangerous and wholly fascist ground...your last statement is ridiculous. It's up to me what I spend my money on. I'm hardly pinning Gary's dubious conquests down whilst he goes about his doings by buying a CD of his.

So how do you feel about Bill Wyman?

I have never posted on any site prior to this so go easy on me ! I stumbled across this thread by accident and I find it hard to believe what I am reading, the facts,of the whole sordid affair seem conspicuous by their absence in this post and the comments aimed at people who listen to their favourite music are tantamount to something out of the novel 1984 !

I find it amazing that the amount of gossip about celebrities on here has been allowed to remain unchecked.

I do not condone Mr Gadd’s actions in any shape or form, but I have followed the case and some of its ironies quite closely.

Firstly he has been convicted in two courts of law in two countries, firstly for being in possession of child pornography on his pc and secondly for committing unlawful sexual acts with a minor in Vietnam.

In the UK case he served 2 months of a 4 month sentence. In Vietnam 34 months of a 36 month sentence.

He is the lowest rated of anyone on the sex offenders register in the UK this is based on his convictions, although not a nice person he is quite clearly not a “prolific, convicted, predatory paedophile …………… with a long history of crimes against kiddies” if he were he would not acheive that rating.

With regards to his royalties, he sold his back catalogue of hits in 1996 (for over £3 million) and receives no royalties therefore from any of his work which is sold or played on the radio etc.

Whilst there may be other issues out there in respect of Mr Gadd the matters I have listed are the facts.

And would I listen to a record by The Who, Michael Jackson, Jerry Lee Lewis, Bill Wyman etc, ? Yes, because it’s a free world and a matter of musical taste.

The real losers here are any children involved in the cases, the people who purchased Glitters back catalogue and his former Glitterband whose records have also been “banned” from being played and they find it difficult to get bookings.

Well, I 'funded' a lady at a carboot sale when I brought one of his cd's.. that way I got to listen to his music (which I enjoy!) without actually funding him!

And my advice to anyone who likes and wants his music.. go on ebay or amazon and buy it his cd's.. that way you won't be funding him, even though there are those out there who think it's a punishable crime to listen to it.. or 'morally wrong' at least.

This is a difficult question to answer, Personally I like the Glam and 70s era music although people like G Glitter and Sweet just copied the style of music that my favorite band Status Quo had been doing for about a year before Glam hit.

I never really had time for Glitter i mean songs like do you wanna touch me there, there was always something wrong about that.

You're making the assumption that he's going to offend again though and no-one can predict the future.

While some people are trying to inject some sense into this thread, the majority of you are missing the point entirely.

His music was, and still is, crap!

you dont win arguments by name calling...

id suggest that i am making a totally adult decision, based on hard facts and not out of some excuse to listen to his music. the facts are that he spends money on child sex, where does the money come from?... YOU! if you continually buy his records, listen to his records, thats giving him the green light! he thinks that whilst people are doing that, they overlook or forgive his actions! .... you might be able to live with that, i cant, easy...ban him.

bill wyman?... sorry what was he convicted of? ok he had consenting sex with 1 underage girl... but thats hardly the same as downloading thousands of indecent pics of little girls and being a sex tourist abusing pre-teen kiddies.


thats what he was convicted of...isnt that bad enough?...lol. besides there was an article in the 80's about his unproven offences against children. 1 is 1 too many, or does 1 asian kid not matter to you who thinks his music is worth more then an asian kid?


best let ian huntley out then.... after all no one can say he'd rape and murder a kiddy again...


SPOT ON!

You don't get it. Bill Wyman slept with Mandy Smith...and the tabloid headlines at the time almost had a congratulatory air about them, in contrast to the paedomania of the last decade or so which the press wallows in. If this case happened today and came to light, Bill would have become a social pariah in the same that Glitter is now, as well as being prosecuted; you are aware that there is no such thing as consensual sex with an underage person in the eyes of the law? Obviously not.

Mandy Smith was far too young to be consensual, in the same way that Glitter's conquests were; both men have a history of liking girls of the same age from what I've heard, and supposedly what was found on Glitter's computer were images that he took of some of the girls he'd been with.

Both men are dirty old sods and would be far from being my ideal choice of company. But the last thing I'm going to do is smash up my radio whenever "Je Suis Un Rock Star" or "Do You Wanna Touch?" is played (not that you'll ever hear the latter on the radio these days), which I think you'd advocate. All this talk of directly funding Glitter's dodgy doings by buying his music is pathetic and very immature. It's as if you've discoverered a discarded script segment from Brass Eye's paedophilia special and chose to copy and paste it.

Do your homework. I don't condone what he did but his crimes were blown out of all proportion because of who he was. It was a forgone conclusion that he would be made an example of.

You and I both know that there are monsters out there who have done much worse and are free to do as they wish with little in the way of serious punishment by the state.

One particular person who was thought to have been a similar danger to children died last year and is now being treated as some kind of deity. Go figure.

Anyway, Gary Glitter's stuff was a huge part of my 'growing up' years so I have no hesitation in playing his music when I'm on a nostalgia trip.

Re: Buying his CD is funding his lifestyle etc.

I demand that you all give yourselves in to he police with immediate effect. If you bought an Amy Winehouse CD then you are funding her drug taking making you an accomplise drug dealer. The same if you bought something by Guns and Roses.
I could roll of a whole list of names of people that have a history of taking drugs all bought out of money that was given to them by people buying their CD, DVD or merchandising.

But Axl Rose wouldn't be one of them.

Will Gary Glitter's work forever be airbrushed from history?

It should be.. but only because its no longer relevant and lacks any merit.

If Paul McCartney, say, become a national hate figure in a similar scenario, would his work and that of The Beatles still get air play ? Yes, it would, because it has merit and influence, like the guy or not.

Its rather like saying would the JCB song still get played if the lead singer of Nizlopi became a hate figure... er.. its irrelevant, it doesn't get played any more anyway.

untrue, as the law stands a person UNDER 13 cant have consesual sex. bill wyman had 1 dalliance with a post pubescent girl ... gadd has been convicted of having sex and viewing thousands of exploititive pictures or PRE pubescent CHILDREN , not once, whom he later went on to marry, but thousands. sorry, but underage sex with 1 teenagers aint the same as rapeing (which legaly is what he did) pre-pubescent children.


no YOU do your homework...glitter was accused long before the pics on his pc...he has a history of suspected offences against children, i read an account about this back in the 80's.

and therein lies the problem. this is why i dont like 'fans of', because 'fans of' see no evil in there heros, they turn a blind eye to their misdomeanours because they dont WANT to give up listening to their music. you just know that jacko fans wouldnt have turned their back on him.... but i guess god has since intervened...lol.


EXACTLY!

I know. I doubt he'll ever be played again on UK radio but in my opinion he should be, especially on old chart shows like Radio 2's Pick Of The Pops. They conveniently pick charts where he isn't No.1 and miss him out when he's lower down. I wrote to the Controller of Radio 2 to complain about this but got no reply. I said that I'm a licence payer too and they should play all artists in old chart shows regardless of their private lives. He wasn't abusing in 1972 or 1973!! I've read that he is played in many other countries around the world though including the US and Far East . Anyway people here can still purchase his music if they like and listen to it in their own homes. Their choice to do that should be respected as I respect others' choice not to listen to it. Free world. Live and let live folks.