He’s no longer available. Zak is back, baby!
Maybe I’m missing something, but if they are actually into kiddie porn, i can’t see how changing their name is going to help them any.
What you’re missing is that, no, the group as a whole is not into kiddie porn. They’ve had that name for close to 30 years, and only right now, when their drummer (who was a relative newcomer to the band, only joining in 2014) was arrested for child pornography, is that even a topic.
BTW, the name came from when a right wing politician said “Music is the new pornography.” They’re a good band. Neko Case was in them for a while. Sorry to hear their new drummer is a perv.
The drummer has been with them for 10 years, how many gigs in how many cities did he indulge in consuming child sexual abuse material and not a single person suspected him?
The band could be guilty by association of minimizing the serious issue of perpetrating sexual advances on children by people in their organization. You just don’t know. And further minimizing the seriousness of sexual abuse on children by carelessly calling it “ kiddie porn” as if it was an acceptable genre of adult pornographic tastes. This should be in the pit not cafe society as if it were a highbrow topic
For the record, I only used that term in response to @puzzlegal, who used it.
I have a friend whose husband was selling child sexual material. She only found out because he was ignoring their shared business for his “other stuff”, and she snooped on his computer. (And then she turned him in and lived in fear that he’d discover she had done so until he was incarcerated.) But anyway, it’s not necessarily obvious that a person you know is doing bad things. Even a person you know very well. I wouldn’t assume anything inappropriate about the other band members.
Still, i feel like having a band member for ten years who was actually involved in child porn (if you don’t like the phrase “kiddie porn”, which i really don’t think anyone reads as an acceptable genre) is a problem for a band. Completely ignoring the band’s name.
You do? You’re okay with calling child sexual abuse material child porn too? You really don’t get it.
How about you explain it then? Because I don’t get it either.
No, i really don’t. I see “kiddie porn” and think of depraved people abusing children.
Pornography is by adults for adults.
Kiddies are not consenting porn actors. Call it what it is. Child sexual abuse, for the pleasuring of deviant criminal scumbag adults. When adults consume child sexual material they are exploiting kids.
But child porn is different for you? Kiddie child baby toddler wtf is the difference?
We all know that. Nobody sees the phrase “Kiddie Porn” or “Child Pornography” and is confused about what is being discussed. Maybe you don’t personally like the euphemisms, but they have the same connotation as child sexual abuse. But if this is a hill you want to die on, carry on.
No, i used that term because i thought it was “kiddie” you objected to. And i was trying to be polite to your sensibilities. As you say, i really don’t get it.
I don’t think they are euphemisms. Creating and consuming child pornography are two specific forms of child sexual abuse. There are other forms of child sexual abuse, too.
Whatever you call it, it seems to me that it’s very problematic for a band to have a member, someone who has been part of the band for ten years, who engaged in that.
It may be jocular and therefore offensive to you, same as the term “kiddie-diddler.”
But just adding “porn” to something doesn’t “normalize” it. Snuff porn hasn’t been normalized. Crush porn (expensively-shod women’s feet filmed killing small animals) isn’t normalized.
Imagine “milf porn” or “gay porn,” and your mind can envisage something perhaps not to your tastes but still not impossible to visualize. Then respond to “kiddie porn” and the average person’s mind revolts at the suggestion it put up an image. It doesn’t matter what it’s called.
Frankly, I find the euphemisms more evil: “barely legal,” “Lolita’s” (not at all Nabokov’s intention - he envisioned the pedo/ephebophile as the ultimate unreliable narrator), “Crumpet,” etc.
“Porn” = an appeal to the libido, neutral to its proclivity. When the whole Robert Maplethorp thing was in the news, my art buddies were against both Jesse Helms and Maplethorp’s overhyped legacy, because porn hits you in the face for the first second, then fades without resonance - the opposite of good art.
Magazines are full of “food porn, Forbes has photo spreads of “CEO porn.” Television indulges in “torture porn” of graphic violence (while eschewing shots of grown men kissing). As fucked up as that is, nobody besides the depraved accepts child sexuality served for their own gratification as normal.
Time for Raffi to take back that apology?
Everything seems problematic these days. They’ve had the name for thirty years, it strikes me as a bit silly to change it now. I feel the same way about Lady Antebellum and the Dixie Chicks. I don’t think many people’s opinions of either band were altered by the name change.
Agreed. I don’t know why people in this thread are acting like the name somehow caused their now-ex-drummer to be a pedophile or that it’s an endorsement of his activities.
Fans of the band understand the name has been around for 30 years and that this drummer has only been with them for the last few albums. But for most people, they’re hearing for the first time about a band called ‘New Pornographers’ in a news story about one of the members being arrested for child pornography.
No way the band survives that with its original name intact.
I’ve always thought AC Newman was tempting fate by keeping that name.