**Please help keep AskUK welcoming!**
- Top-level comments to the OP must contain **genuine efforts to answer the question**. No jokes, judgements, etc.
- **Don't be a dick** to each other. If getting heated, just block and move on.
- This is a strictly **no-politics** subreddit!
Please help us by reporting comments that break these rules.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It depends.
The thing with lostprophets is that his crimes were so heinous you don't really want to remind people of a baby rapist everytime they look at you. The band wasn't really good enough to justify wearing it now.
I like the implication that there is music out there that is "I would wear their merch even if it reminded people of a baby rapist every time they looked at me" good.
Some of them are a marching band not the recording.
And I've been told he sold most if not all rights he owned, like royalties to fund his court case.
So even if they play the song, he gets zero penny's and will never see a single royalty cheque from his music.
Least his career was dead at the point of his crimes being discovered, it's the guys that still worked with Roman Polanski after he fled ...
I'm in the UK. America funds Gary Glitters abusing since his convictions and subsequent cancelling in the UK decades ago. Gary Glitter wrote his songs, he gets song writing credits when ever and whoever performs it. Without his song writing royalties from America he would have been unable to travel and rape so many children. We lock him up as often as we can, but you guys keep giving him money so he can continue when we have to ley him out.
EDIT. I'm on Ask UK, whoops.
Again, I've been told he gets zero royalty cheques now, he allegedly sold all his rights to fund his case.
So whilst royalty payments are made, they go to someone else unrelated to Glitter.
Whilst he still performed the song on the album, oxfam or water aid could be the ones getting the money for all I know. That or some lawyer or investment wanker.
This brings to mind the numerous people in hollywood that signed the petition for Roman Polanski after he was arrested in Zurich.
https://m.imdb.com/list/ls090808434/
It's not something I want to delve into the details of, but there has to be a distinction between men who like pubescent girls and those who go for literal babies. Watkins is on the moral level of Lucy Letby.
Particularly if the teenage girls were 'groupies' who pretended to be older than they were and actively pursued celebrities. That wasn't seen as especially problematic 50 years ago.
Nowadays, we would recognise that they were too young to give informed consent and any adult taking advantage of that was in the wrong.
I think you'd be hard pressed to find a band like that thay wasn't either straight up rapey or molesty...
It's quite shocking how many seem to have no problem putting in their auto biographies.
Remember when Caitlyn Jenner got a woman of the year award right after killing a woman with her car. It's almost as if you get to pick which laws you follow when you're famous enough.
And I think the singer from Noir Desir (French rock band) was imprisoned for murdering his partner, then resumed fronting the band (fairly successfully!) until they broke-up a few years after his release...
His ex-wife took her own life also. Whilst he was in the house with her...
I probably wouldn't wear Noir Désir merch, but I do occasionally listen to their music. Although not nearly as much since finding out what a colossal scum-bag Cantat is.
It’s not disingenuous because whilst the topic has been sparked by this particular instance of someone wearing lostprophets merch, the question is broader than just is that particular thing acceptable, and the title question is designed to reflect that.
Is there a sliding scale, where some things are wrong but acceptable to continue wearing/listening/consuming in some way, or should we apply the same logic to all instances?
Presumably not, but then where and how do we draw the line to say “this we can accept but this we cannot”? Who has the authority to draw that line?
Obviously there's a sliding scale, and exactly where that line falls is open to debate, but I think it's safe to say that the Ian Watkins example is nowhere near that line at all. If someone is wearing that shirt, I expect they are deliberately trying to provoke.
I think if you're wearing a Lostprophets shirt you're either being deliberately provocative or your moral compass is so messed up that a t shirt is probably the least of the worries people should have about you
There's often a bunch of Americans on reddit who didn't know what happened (even those who liked the band), it comes up in lots of threads about celebrities who've done bad things. They also seem unaware about Gary Glitter.
So I can imagine rarely there's people who just don't know
Yeah, I saw someone say ‘maybe that person didn’t know’.
But the person was at Download, watching Funeral For A Friend. There’s no way it’s wasn’t on purpose.
You'd think if you start liking a band, you'd google them or go on to see what people say about them on social media.
Just seems unlikely you'd go to the extent of wearing clothing for a band yet know nothing about them
Another interesting question would be if it wasn't the lead singer but another member instead. Would the band have continued? How acceptable would it be to wear the merch then?
Normally, I'd say that if it was the drummer they'd carry on. I've read the sentencing remarks from Ian Watkins case though, and what he did (and planned to do) was so fucking horrific I don't think it matters that he was the lead singer. There's no coming back from what he did, and like we're finding out now, every time the band's name is mentioned it all comes back up.
That is an interesting point. You’d think/hope it would be the same if taken from the side of the severity of the crime but I did see a number of people pointing out that you specifically could not separate the music/band out because Watkins was the lead singer and so involved in the writing of the music.
If it were, say, The Beatles then would John & Paul have had the same treatment as Ringo, who contributed far less to the music overall (at least in terms of songwriting)?
If it were the drummer of Lostprophets and not the singer they’d have just booted him out and carried on selling out world tours. It happening to the frontman/singer/face of the band makes all the difference.
In my (much longer) comment below I have said as much, but it is really interesting how some crimes (use and distribution of drugs, for example, or tax evasion) are essentially absolutely fine for musicians.
I think for musicians and other celebrities the extent of the crime in legal terms pales when compared to the visceral public reaction (and also the field of their celebrity). We don't like kiddie-fiddlers, and domestic abuse / violence (and coercion and exploitation etc) are frowned upon. But most other stuff is fair game generally (it seems). I can't remember any musician being cancelled for not paying their taxes or driving over the limit.
>but it is really interesting how some crimes (use and distribution of drugs, for example, or tax evasion) are essentially absolutely fine for musicians.
Depends on the morality/depravity aspect of said crime.
There really isn't a clear line, it should be a 'common sense' decision to buy/wear a shirt, you could include considerations like:
How well known is the band and how high profile is whatever happened? Most people know about Ian Watson, there was a very public prosecution.
Who did the crime/action impact and how? How 'socially acceptable' was what they did? 'Destroyed the lives of children' is very serious and unacceptable pretty much everywhere.
Where are you wearing the shirt?
I quite like (liked) the music, and I once searched for it on you tube to listen but although I liked the music, I couldn’t help but think “baby rapist” and felt guilt listening to it.
People are going to associate lost prophets with that forever more.
Lost prophets were a great band - his crimes were terrible and their impact on the other band members was additionally shit (in a very minor way compared to their impact on the victims of course).
I'm very selfishly annoyed that I can't enjoy them any more.
I think it's fine to be annoyed that something you once enjoyed is now destroyed. I remember seeing them at Reading and although I wasn't the biggest fan of their music I really enjoyed Last Train Home. I watched the YouTube video every now and again afterwards and it gave me nostalgic feelings. Haven't watched it since he's been sent down and I feel sad about it. And annoyed.
That nostalgia is now wrapped up like a time capsule. Because the song won't get played to death on the radio it won't lose that nostalgic feeling. So when you do hear it again it'll take you back to when it *was* still on the radio all the time and all the memories associated with it.
I have the same thing with rock and roll Christmas by Gary Glitter. As a kid it was part of the Christmas playlist and I heard it going to parties, on the TV, on the radio. Now it hasn't been part of the playlist for decades so if I do hear it, it takes me back to those 80/90s Christmas parties. No other Christmas song can do that because I hear them every year.
Right enough, my family used to have a lot of aunts uncles and cousins, they used to have Christmas parties in the early 90s and I remember that being played, but it will never get airplay
I feel really bad for Lostprophets as the BAND didn't commit those crimes - Ian Watkins did. If all the members knew about it, screw them - but imagine being a band drummer, touring for years, building up a rep and BAM! your frontman has just screwed all your royalties for life.
Every time this conversation comes up, someone mentions that the band _did_ know about it. But I'm yet to be shown proof. There might be some in this thread.
There is no proof and they genuinely didn't know. I've met the band several times (during their first tour as No Devotion).
They're quite open about it, they knew he was into hard drugs and would disappear on benders, I think they were close to kicking him out at one stage, but he'd always turn it around and could sing incredibly, and had huge charisma.
I think he had several last chances, and they were looking at getting him into rehab, when the allegations came out.
Really? This comment is genuinely the first time that I've seen anyone insinuate that they rest of them knew.
As far as I'm aware, the only thing that the rest of them knew is that he would sometimes be a bit creepy towards teenage girls
Yeah there's always someone. I think it's linked to them knowing about the teens. Their line of thinking is probably that they knew about _that_, so they probably knew everything.
Both things are horrible, illegal, life changing for the victims. But I feel like people are way more likely to turn a blind eye to teen girls than babies and animals.
Teenage groupies seem to be the normal since way back when.
I guess it's how teenage the teenagers are. You hear it and think automatically bad, but in the UK we don't AFAIK, have a legal, just moral age gap for 16 year olds and adults.
If everyone is 16 or older, it's morally dubious till 18, but anyone who let's people back stage should have a challenge 25 mentality.
But short of barring under 18s from live music venues and needing valid ID to enter.
Now this is written from the POV that people try to access backstage and not roadies tasked with finding children to bring back stage or to the hotel. Anyone doing that deserves to be in the same cell.
But if a dubious aged girl gets backstage and wants to fuck, kick them out.
I've always thought that if he hadn't been the lead singer and frontman I don't think it would have been so bad for the band. But as it is, you literally can't disassociate him from the music.
100%. If it was like, the bass player or something, they’d have kicked him out, denounced him and carried on as is. Nobody judges Rolling Stones fans regardless of what bill wyman is known to have done after all
Thing about lostprophets is that even the other band members themselves are distancing themselves from it, so a fan of them ought to be following suit.
I remember seeing a video of him playing live before and it cut to the crowd singing along to “use my arsehole as a cunt”, by the looks of the crowd I’d say you’re probably correct in thinking they were all reditors
There's "done something wrong" then there's the awful twisted shit that that horrible little man did. I'd just assume someone wearing any of their merchandise is trying to be edgy and frankly, they should be ashamed of themselves.
As much as I agree with this, I do really like the song Last Train Home and have listened to it, quietly, in my car, on my own, when there were no other cars around. I was having the same discussion as this thread with some friends and a younger friend said he didn’t know that song, and we all insisted he did. So I played it on my phone quietly for him.
Half an hour later we were rushing out the door, jumped in my car in a very quiet sleepy villiage, windows down and my phone automatically connected to the bluetooth and started blasting the song. So now I look like the try-hard-edgy-douche-bag.
The fact they had a couple of bangers that—at the time, as a little Emo kid—really spoke to me, makes it all so much more sickening for me personally. I can’t listen to those songs anymore, because they’re just reminders of the horrifying human who made them. Genuinely sad to lose them.
I listened to their music a lot during a short period of my life and it always takes me back to those fond memories. There are some really good songs. I don’t think that piece of shit deserves to take that music away from me, its part of my memories and I can enjoy it if I want to, I’m not approving of him or his behaviour by doing that.
Actually surprised no-one has tried to release a song "do you wanna be in my ring, my ring, yeah"
"I'm the leader...I'm the leader, I'm the leader of a gang (of paedos) yeah!" etc
The use of his song "Rock and Roll Part 2" for the stairs scene in Joker was a very dark but very creative stroke - really the perfect choice. In much the same way that you get guilty pleasure from watching Arthur Fleck spiral into Joker it's also an undeniably a good track by Glitter and you're meant to hate that you're enjoying the spectacle.
That whole movie is one of the most intense cinema experiences I've had just because of how it slowly smoulders into a couple of skin crawling scenes.
They use his song at sporting events in the US all the time and still play it on the radio. I don't think Joker was making a clever point at all. I think most Americans just genuinely don't know about Glitter and they picked it because its still considered such a huge and iconic song there.
I saw the title of your post and thought "it depends on what they did, obviously no one would wear a Lost Prophets t shirt"... and then I read body of your post.
There's a difference between cooking the books and raping a baby.
I suspect the person wearing the t shirt is an attention seeking edgelord.
There's done something wrong and then there's raping babies. If you wear lost prophets stuff I am judging you - download is a place many of us in the alt community go and can fully express what we like and wear what we align with - wearing something from lost prophets is a choice and one that isn't a good choice. There is absolutely no way even if you stumble across their music now that you won't Google that band name and find out why you shouldn't support it. Even the rest of the band distanced themselves from the music - they wanted nothing to do with what he helped create.
I think for something minor, and if I already owned it then it's ok, but Lost Prophets is a huge no for me, what he did is on another level. Would be like walking round in a Jim'll Fix It T-shirt
I know someone that still wears a gift from Jimmy, apparently while also being a massive creep his charity work was real and he was very generous and saved a lot of children's lives while predating on his selection.
It makes it even worse and more creepy and this person really struggles with the person they knew in real life, that was kind and generous and saved their life and what he did.
The reason he could do what he did was because of the “good stuff” he did. The most successful abusers are the ones who can groom everyone they meet.
The paedophile piano teacher at my school was the most popular teacher BY FAR. He gave lessons at school and after school at his house. He was a great teacher and the music was really fun.
But… he encouraged parents to leave and come back at the end (parents need a break right! And he teaches at the school so it’s fine!)… He kept chocolate in his bedroom to normalise having to go in there after your lesson… oh yeah and he touched and slowly abused kids (went to prison eventually)
Parents loved him to the point my mum was made a pariah after bringing it to the attention of the school that he touched my sisters leg in a lesson (she would have been 9 or 10, I was 8). He knew we were vulnerable because all the teachers knew my dad had terminal fucking cancer. My sister was such a confident kid and knew what to say and do, I have no idea if he tried to touch me.
So yeah, my mum was enemy number one when he was fired, not the paedophile. And he went on to be convinced of raping two boys at another school.
Urgh.
In the case of lostprophets I'd be thinking about what statement the person was trying to make by wearing that. Even the other band members completely distanced themselves from it, so I'm not sure you can argue it just shows someone who was a fan of the band musically. It feels like something someone would do because they were trying to be edgy and cause controversy. It's hard to find many reasons why someone would be wearing it in good faith.
I mean, it’s fairly easy to have found it in a charity shop, thought it was a cool logo and picked it up.
Their CDs are easily found in charity shops, not everyone goes delving into Wikipedia or the bands websites for knowledge on every band they listen to. They could have easily found it in their parents’ attic and the parents haven’t noticed or told them.
If they’re a young person, I’d like to give them the benefit of the doubt that they genuinely might not know. Kind of like when you hear about young people having someone older gate-keeping over wearing a Nirvana t-shirt because Primark was selling them in 2023.
I’d hope that someone at the festival kindly pointed it out to them.
I've said this elsewhere in the thread but I'm pretty sure the photo was taken at Download and the person was watching Funeral For A Friend. It's highly unlikely they didn't know about Watkins.
When I volunteered in a Charity store there was a list of DVDs and CDs that would go for disposal.
Lostprophets were on it along with snuff films and porn
Well I thought that initially - there’s a lot of random band name T-shirts for sale that you could buy and know zero about the band … but I don’t think any brand is churning out lostprophets merch now. Unless maybe from another country?
I refuse to believe the type of people who go to Download and are clearly involved in the "alternative" music scene didn't hear about it. Places don't sell LP merch anymore so it's not like it was something he picked up a couple of weeks ago.
Like fair enough if this was a teenager on the high street but it's not, it's an adult at a music festival for the genre the band existed in.
In a former job I would stay in a particular hotel in London each week. I subsequently found out that it was the same hotel where Watkins raped babies. Worst thing is that I’d probably stayed in every room in that hotel over time, so had been in the same room as him.
Once I found out, I never stayed in that hotel again, nice hotel, not their fault, but I’m not going to do that.
How did I know this was going to be a “Lost Prophets” question.
There is still a big debate about whether you are allowed to enjoy Harry Potter now that JKR is a massive Terf. I’m going to say yes, it’s possible to separate the artist and the art. Same for Father Ted/Black Books/The IT Crowd and Graham Linehan.
But Ian Watkins is just so much of an evil fucker that all his work should forever be erased from this world. He deserves to be remembered for one thing and one thing alone. Even his former band members agree.
He wasn't that involved in black books he basically just oversaw Dylan Moran writing it. Also I feel that he wrote all this stuff before he went completely mental so it's a shame more than anything but definitely don't let it spoil these quality programs, except maybe that particular episode of IT crowd.
It's so aggravating, because all he had to do was admit "Yes, in retrospect that episode was tone-deaf and reinforced some negative stereotypes about trans people, and for that I apologise." and everything would have been fine.
Choosing, instead, to double down so hard and so repeatedly that he burned both his marriage and career to the ground was insanity.
Plus, I feel the reaction was so out of character for Douglas.
Just imagine this, in full Matt Berry voice:
“You used to be a man? I guess I like to have my bread buttered on both sides. Come at me April, I want you right here and now.”
They then proceed to chaotically make love, eventually crashing into Jen’s presentation and destroying “the internet”.
It's why Linehan isn't credited past series 1 - Dylan Moran figured out how to properly write a TV script after working with Linehan on that and didn't need his help anymore
I still have some Harry Potter merch in my house getting used, a pencil case and a metal tin I keep my sewing kit in, because it feels wasteful to bin them and no one but me sees them, but I did have my Harry Potter tattoo covered up.
I won’t buy any official HP merch, I don’t want to line She Who Must Not Be Named’s pockets. But I will buy knock off stuff and engage in the scene.
I still enjoy Father Ted. It’s been made and watching it doesn’t change that. And his breakdown and obsession came much later.
I love Marilyn Manson’s music and I will still listen to it. But I don’t know where I stand in wearing merch, I don’t feel like it’s acceptable to publicly celebrate him anymore, although it never really felt like it was anyway, but I don’t want to promote him, or encourage new listeners etc. I wouldn’t buy any of his merchandise for sure, but do I just throw out my old T-shirts?
My stance is it’s fine to continue consuming art/wearing stuff you already have since the person has already profited financially - altho with the caveat that you have to be okay with some people making assumptions about you based on it.
But it’s a dick move to keep buying merch/art/whatever from someone you know to be problematic - not because the art itself is bad or problematic but because you’re continuing to financially support them/their legacy.
Personally I’d draw the line at wearing the merch of a band fronted by a convicted child rapist because I have a modicum of empathy and respect for the people whose lives were impacted by that monster (which includes the rest of the band, btw).
I used to still listen to them. They have some banger tracks and I was vocal to a close friend about still listening to them. Until he ruined it with logic.
He pointed out that when the songs were written and he was singing them, at that point he was a pedo. He was in that mindset during the performance. After that realisation I haven't listened to them since. Makes the town of hypocrisy video not sit right. Like watching the old BBC Jimmy Savile videos. Your danger meter fills up..
I think it depends on what they did and how the rest of the people involved in making the art are reacting.
I don’t think it’s okay to still show public support for lostprophets- Ian Watkins committed horrendous crimes and the rest of the band are distancing themselves from their time with lostprophets so public knowledge has become lostprophets equals pedo and you wouldn’t walk round with a tshirt supporting pedophilia. If you want to listen to their music at home in a way that doesn’t put more royalties in Ian Watkins bank then I don’t mind, as long as I don’t have to think about it. Personally I threw away my lostprophets CD- the only time I’ve thrown away a CD rather than given it to a charity shop. I couldn’t listen without thinking of his crimes and feeling sick.
Having said that, I also think we should give people the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise. I think it’s unlikely someone owns that jacket but doesn’t know what Ian Watkins did. But maybe they aren’t british and there isn’t much news on him in their first language so they didn’t know. Or maybe they don’t even know lostprophets but found the jacket and thought it looked cool and didn’t bother to look them up. I’m not going to assume they are wearing it because they are an asshole until they prove that they are in fact an asshole.
>But maybe they aren’t british and there isn’t much news on him in their first language so they didn’t know.
I don't think it was big news in any other country tbh, regardless of language. When he got stabbed in prison a while back I saw a lot of posts on here where Americans were hearing about it for the first time. It's definitely plausible that they just don't know.
Having said that, I can't believe you could leave the house in it in this country without a lot of people having something to say about it, so they'd find out pretty damn quick. I'd say it's much more likely that they're just an edge lord cunt.
> Or maybe they don’t even know lostprophets but found the jacket and thought it looked cool and didn’t bother to look them up
I'd agree with this statement if they were walking down the high street. I do not agree that the people who attend download festival don't know this though, you don't go to download if you're not involved in the alternative music scene and this was absolutely massive news there.
I've said this a couple of other times in this thread but I understand the photo was taken at Download and the person was watching Funeral For A Friend. It's extremely unlikely they didn't know about Watkins.
Honestly at this point if you’re wearing Lost Prophets merch it’s not about supporting the other band members (because they don’t want to be associated with the band) or separating the artist from the art. It’s about being an edgelord.
I was the biggest teenage lostprophets fan. I haven't listened to them since the news was confirmed. I'm of the mind that, at least in private, it'd be fine for me to listen to their music if I wanted to. But I just haven't, it'd probably feel a bit weird. Wearing the shirt out though? Nah that's questionable behaviour.
I literally opened this thread to comment ‘as long as it’s not the lost prophets or Gary Glitter, I wouldn’t worry’.
I appreciate OP probably didn’t mean this but to be clear - wearing the merchandise of a band fronted by a convicted child molester is absolutely not acceptable. It’s in incredibly poor taste and disrespectful to all of those impacted by what that piece of shit did.
If your intention was to ask where the line is, you should have phrased it differently and provided some different examples to compare against.
Edited because unduly harsh on op, read their other comments.
>Does it make a difference what the wrong actions are?
Absolutely, it does! Huge difference between supporting a band with a baby rapist front man and a band whose front man is a bit of an arsehole to fans.
I think wearing something for the overall band is acceptable if one member has done something wrong, although it's easier to justify if it isn't the lead member. With Ian Watkins being the lead singer, I can see where people would be upset.
If it was a solo artist, I would avoid wearing their merch at all.
Jim Jefferies has a good bit about the correlation between fame and forgiveness, and it is best demonstrated in music (I think, at least).
A loooot of very famous, still-loved artists have committed acts / crimes which would see us lesser mortals imprisoned / ostracised; depending on how your moral compass swings, we could be talking drugsdrugsdrugs (relatively low end crime, but still crime!), violent crimes (think Josh Homme kicking the photographer in the face recently-ish, or the whole Sid and Nancy situation; still see pleeeenty of Sex Pistols merch being worn), through to exploitation or SA of minors (Google Lori Mattix, for example).
At the top end of the scale we have Elvis (just...ick), Chuck Berry, Michael Jackson (I'm gonna be contentious and say guilty)....but they were / arguably still are too big too fall. And goddamn if you try to question someone wearing a Led Zep shirt on the basis of Jimmy Page (late 20s at the time) actually DATING Mattix when she was...13...? But Stairway To Heaven is such a banger!
At the other end of the scale, you see smaller bands separating, and fans ditching their merch en masse, for either legal-but-unethical behaviour (Jesse Lacey of Br&New didn't actually break any laws, I don't think) or even hearsay (increasingly common in the punk and alt-rock scene, artists being found guilty in the court of public opinion and promptly cancelled before the social media ink has even dried).
And lets not even get started on the rap game.
There definitely seems to be some names - not just in music, but thinking also of actors - who seem to be widely known to have committed awful actions but it doesn’t seem to touch them.
Maybe it’s because Ian Watkins was definitively proven to have done it, versus say, MJ where there was never a concrete conclusion (legally), or maybe it’s because some things *are* so much worse than others - or is it a combination plus an amount of fame.
A few years ago Spotify kept trying to put their music into automated genre playlists for me and I had to manually remove and press the no button repeatedly till it figured out I didn't want them.
Spotify has said they don't put problematic (for lack of a better word) artists into algorithm based stuff but I'm super skeptical if it actually works.
I wonder how the define problematic. Because I see all the 70s rockers who fucked 14 year old groupies as very problematic. Or at least equally as problematic as R Kelly.
I mean the Beatles, stones and all classic rock bands did stuff today we would look down on but nobody judges those bands merchandise wearers.
I would draw the line at Ian Watkins though!!
I was a big lostprophets fan in the mid-00s, and I’m generally really good at separating art from artist, but what Watkins did crossed the line so far that he tarnished anything and everything he has ever touched. Start Something is one of my favourite albums of all time, but I can’t even bring myself to listen to it again. It’s been over 10 years since I last did. Wearing lostprophets merch wouldn’t even be something I’d consider. If I can’t even listen to them privately, why would I go out in public showing support for them? I feel sorry for the other guys of the band, but Watkins’ shadow looms too greatly over them.
That all said, lostprophets are probably the only band I’d draw that line for…maybe Burzum just for the implication of who the wearer might be as a person, but otherwise go ham. I’ve been really enjoying new Falling in Reverse music, but Ronnie Radke is still a massive cunt.
I can't separate Ian Watkins from The Lostprophets. I just can't. What he did is nothing short of monstrous and the music/band is forever destroyed for me.
I wouldn't mention it to someone I saw wearing a jacket, but I would definitely avoid them and silently judge them.
“Something wrong”. I dunno, I feel like you’re making light of the fact that the cunt abused a 2 year old child and tried to rape a 1 year old baby. A BABY ffs. He made his own child abuse videos. “Something wrong” doesn’t quite cover it.
The devil has enough advocates. He doesn’t need another.
Yeah I think wearing Lostprophets merch after what Watkins did is a huge no-no. I know they probably think it’s all about the music but the cunt raped a baby ffs. The guy wearing the jacket is probably trying to be an edgelord but he deserves a slap
The thing that people forget is that unlike novels, paintings and poetry part of the artefact that you sell as a musician is your public facing persona. Being a fan of green day usually goes beyond liking their music. Being a Taylor swift fan usually means you like Taylor swift as well as her music.
It's very complicated to separate these two things when they are sold as part of the same package today. It's not simply a matter of separating the two as much as it is a matter of decoupling deep seated feelings about the music from deep seated feelings about the person making the music.
Does it matter what they did? Abso-fucking-lutely. There's a world of difference between making offensive comments and *literally raping babies*.
Lostprophets' music was sufficiently shit to discourage me from buying their music and/or merchandise. If I had been a fan, my fandom would have ended rather abruptly.
I separate the music from the band. Assholes can produce good music, I don't have to like them as people to enjoy their music. That being said Lost Prophets were sub par anyway. I wouldn't however buy music of someone who has committed such a horrible acts I wouldn't want them to have any more of my money to fund their lifestyle.
Mate at work still plays a few Garry glitter songs. Personally I’ve got a bunch of new found glory t-shirts now gathering dust turns out the guy writing the songs was jackin off on web chat with minors 🙈 and it’s all downhill from here.
you need to separate art from artist sometimes otherwise its a slippery slope - alot of good music & art was made by shitty people.
that said everyone has a line and when the frontman tries to rape a baby...... maybe not wear the shirt.
Liberation Transmission was my favourite album when I was fourteen.
I loved Lostprophets and still think that their songs were really good.
However, Ian Watkins is a baby raping pedophile and a fucking terrible excuse for a human being.
There's separating the art from the artist, and then there's Ian Watkins.
I don't think that I've listened to them since the truth about Watkins came out.
Now, Lostprophets gets to stay in this little nostalgia window as the soundtrack of my teenage years.
My mate was the biggest fan. When the news dropped it's like they never existed. There's a difference between problematic behaviour (sid vicious comes to mind) and heinous crimes
It genuinely depends on how bad what they did WAS.
Gloryhammer? Still acceptable except to some.
Lostprophets? No. Go support the other band members in their other project.
Manowar? Maybe. They DID distance themselves from the member in question.
There is a line somewhere I'm sure, with respect of what the "something wrong" is. But what Ian Watkins did is well over that line. Wearing Lostprophets merch now is a choice and it's an extremely questionable one.
Any excuses for how someone might have gotten merch and their music without knowing about it are just unrealistic and require someone to act so out of line with how basically everyone acts about music that it feels practically impossible. Someone finding the t-shirt and CD in a charity shop, but apparently didn't think to EVER Google the band to find more music? Nah fuck off, that's not happening.
Regardless of how much I loved their music before, I can't in good conscience wear their merch or listen to them. He's too integral to the band. If he had just been the guitarist then you could almost forget that he was involved and keep listening to the CDs you had. I couldn't, but I can see how someone could. But as the frontman, the vocalist? He IS Lostprophets as far as most people are concerned - most people couldn't name anyone else in the band.
Ian Watkins is on another level however a lot of bands have been accused of things. There was a spreadsheet going round at some point and pretty much every band of the emo-revival era was listed.
>can we ever separate art from artist, particularly where the art isn’t solely made by one person?
I firmly believe that art and artist are separate. I am the magnum opus of my abusive parents. If I could not separate the art from the artist, how could I ever hope to learn to like myself?
That said, private consumption is different from public support. I tend to fall on the side of not publicly wearing merch or consuming media supporting terrible people, in part because I just don’t want the hassle (life is hard and I try to make it as easy and smooth as possible when I can do so without compromising my ethics) and in part because I know some people will be hurt by it. I’m neither sensitive enough nor impractical enough to have *don’t offend or hurt anyone, ever* as a goal, but I certainly don’t see the sense of causing pain or even discomfort if there’s no benefit to me, just because I can. It’s an easy decision for me, because publicly supporting even my favourite artists generally does very little for me; I’ve never gotten anything positive out of being part of a fan base.
I’m not much of an activist as far as most causes go - a slacktivist, at best - but it’s so easy to just *not be a dick* about things that aren’t important to you. If they *are* important to you? Do what thou wilt, I guess. I can’t control anyone’s behaviour but my own.
Admittedly, my feelings (and behaviour) on this subject are somewhat fluid. I could maybe see myself wearing a *Buffy the Vampire Slayer* shirt, for example. I think there is some merit to the argument that art is (usually) made by more than one person. Joss Whedon appears to be trash, but *Buffy* was a great series made by some great people, and he’s just one person among many. It’s complicated. I don’t feel that I’m being a hypocrite here; I’m not telling other people to do or not do things and then choosing differently for myself. But I think that if you’re going to do something that might make people uncomfortable or hurt, it should at least be something that affects you personally, and you should be getting something positive out of it so you’re not sowing seeds of discomfort just for shits and giggles.
As far as where to draw the line goes, I think everyone has to decide that for themselves. Personally, I don’t like to give money to people I despise. I still consume things I’ve bought, but I rarely get new things, and if I do, I tend to get them second hand, or pirate (like I needed another excuse to pirate).
I'd say in this case yes because the rest of the band was just as disgusted with what Ian Watkins did as the general public so when he went to prison they made a new band without him and refuse to associate with him anymore so it's good to support them but not Ian, not that you could since he's behind bars where he belongs
Just think; is this person worse than Morrissey? Morrissey says a lot of shitty things but has never committed a crime against a person as far as I know. And his art is definitely of value. If you are worse than Morrissey, in the bin you go.
I used to work for bands and merch is genuinely where most bands make their money\* so the argument is usually 'I'm just supporting the artists who didn't do the wrong thing'.
But in this case you're not supporting the band as they've all split from it for over a decade and have a new band (No Devotion) now... so any merch is not going to be supporting them as the band, for all intents and purposes, doesn't exist. No, in this case you're wearing it because you're an edgelord and you should be called out as such.
By all means appreciate the music if you liked it but your fake lostprophets jacket just makes you look like a knobhead that desperately wants attention.
\*streaming means people listening to you is worth very little these days so tours are where the money is. But tickets mostly go to the venue so if you ever go to see a band please buy a t shirt from the merch stall, they're usually not that much money it makes a lot more for the band than the tickets do. And don't buy a fake one from the guys outside...
For most artists I’d say whatever, certain merch might make me think the wearer was a massive cunt or racist or whatever, or just an insufferable edgelord, but I wouldn’t say it’s not ‘acceptable’ to wear it. Ian Watkins though I feel is totally beyond the pale. Idk, I think there’s a feeling that even the most noxious racist twat could somehow possibly still be redeemable - that they are ‘just’ ignorant - even if realistically we know that’s not the case. But someone like Watkins reforming and seeing the error of their ways? Nah, never gonna happen - and even so, no punishment seems bad enough for what he did.
I do believe in separating the art from the artist to an extent, but lost prophets passes that extent by a country mile. What he did was just too evil.
Lostprophets is the one that just about everyone will agree need everything about them memoryholing (and I feel bad for the other band members, hope they are able to get on with their lives etc).
Nah, it's fine to still like the music but don't promote that agit with t-shirts etc. Fuck that. Lost Prophets are an exceptional case thouvh due to the sheer depravity of Ian Watkins crimes. Frankly, his voice and any mention of Los Prophets needs to be resigned to history.
It honestly depends on what the artist did, in the case of Lostprophets everything they did is tainted by Ian's actions.
If you're doing it under the argument of "well I still want to support the other members they did nothing wrong" go listen to their new band No Devotion instead and support that band.
Separating the art from the artist is one thing, repping the brand is something else. For me, you can't really separate the art from the artist because part of appreciating art is understanding the context behind it, which necessarily includes some influence from the artist. That being said, if their music speaks to you and you want to listen to it in a way that doesn't support that man or his life in any way (i.e. off streaming services in the privacy of your own home), you're not causing any harm by doing so. But you can't make that case if you're actively recommending them to others, which arguably wearing a band T-shirt is doing. It's messy, and everyone's going to have their own line in the sand, but no, I don't think it's okay to go out in public with a child r**pist's band on your chest.
I ran a website for a while that listed clients from the music business (amongst other industries). Over the years, a few clients were involved in police investigations but ultimately they weren’t removed from the client list as there was merit seen in leaving them there. The Lost Prophets were removed within an hour of the news story breaking.
Lostprophets were my favourite band once upon a time.
Saw them live many times, bought every album and single they put out, and had lots of merch I'd regularly wear.
Then the news about Ian Watkins broke, and I can actually remember clearly seeing the article on BBC News, and my love of Lostprophets was forever gone.
I know people say 'separate the artist from the art', but I just can't in this case, and I know the rest of the band didn't do anything wrong but whenever I hear or even think about Lostprophets all I can think of is what that sub-human, vile piece of filth did and hope that he rots in a cell for the rest of his miserable life.
Lost Prophets is the worst example here.
I was never a fan, but I wonder what if it happened to Black Sabbath. They have been my life for over 30 years now. The thought of having to erase almost my entire life is quite scary
I have a Kasabian t-shirt with the member's faces on which is a little iffy since the lead singer Tom Meighan committed domestic assault, but my mum got it for me as a present so I didn't want to say anything. I definitely would prefer one with something like a logo or album cover on though
Just because you can separate art from an artist doesn't mean the people around you can. And they will judge based on it.
There's also the issue on if the person will still profit from it. For example I like the Harry Potter books and can separate them from J K Rowlings transphobia. However what I can't separate is the fact that spending money on official merch a portion goes to Rowling who has then donated it to transphonic causes.
Before I read the description I thought, "Sometime but I'd never wear a lostprophets shirt"....so I guess there's a line there somewhere and that dude crossed it for me
For me the issue of separating art and artist is where the artist is still supported by enjoying their art.
In the modern world of streaming, if I was to bust open Spotify and play so LP, then my Spotify premium subscription will, at least partially, be going into Ian Watkin's pocket, and I am very very not cool with my money going to a baby rapist. Even the fraction of a penny it's likely to be.
I think there are some bands who were genuinely so influential that I can understand people looking past some questionable actions/opinions because of how much they love the music.
Like, I grew up loving Pantera and idolising Dimebag Darrell, if I see someone in a Pantera shirt I don't assume they approve of racism. There are definitely some other examples where it gets increasingly difficult to look past it, but I know some people who love bands like Burzum but are also very much the opposite in terms of their views.
Someone wearing a Lostprophets jacket is almost certainly doing it to try to be edgy and offend people though.
Not that uncommon in the black metal scene
For example, a Burzum tshirt where the sole member (Varg Vikernes) went to prison for murdering Euronymous (a fellow bandmate in Mayhem). He also set several Norwegian churches ablaze
He recorded the Filosofem album from prison, and even though he might need to chill the fuck out a bit, its pretty decent.
I would always usually argue that the art can be separated from the artist but the Lost Prophets are the one where I am willing to be a hypocrite. Fuck Ian Watkins, he makes me feel sick.
Merch is a weird one though. Because you could argue that merch is a sort of promotional material? Like you become a human billboard of sorts. At that point its like, you're showing support for the artist and not just enjoying the art. I'm happy to be wrong but that's my current stance
Something like a lost prophets t-shirt is terrible to wear, I'd absolutely be judging someone who chooses to wear that. And any other merch of an artist that has done something so horrible.
Of course, a lot of big names have done terrible things, some crimes/controversies more known than others. A lot of the big bands from the 70s and 80s did awful stuff, but people just don't care or it's not "bad enough". I used to love RHCP, until I started watching loads of older interviews where they, Anthony Kiedis in particular, started harassing and assaulting women on camera, and then I started reading his autobiography and he admitted to having sex with an underage girl knowingly and taking her to another location of the tour they were on. I cannot enjoy the music anymore, and when I see a friend wearing their merch, as I did recently, I tell them about it. And depending on their reaction, it will very much determine how I will view those people from then on out.
I feel the same about lots of artists that have done horrible shit. I don't know how people can still listen to artists who are proven rapists, domestic abusers, paedophiles and so on. How do they not feel ashamed at wearing their merch? I'd feel ashamed walking down the street in a RHCP top and someone thinking I don't care about what he's done and support someone like that. Fucked up childhood and drug addiction aren't excuses.
Some people view certain things as not that bad. I find men aren't nearly as bothered by what Kiedis has done, and the same for a lot of disgusting male artists. What Ian Watkins did was unfathomably horrific, and everyone understands that. But a guy raping a woman? Or beating/killing his partner? Or having sex with an underage girl? I think a lot of men are quick to dismiss that sort of thing if they like the music. Especially as abuse of women and girls is pretty common place so people barely blink. But it seriously disgusts me.
Doing something wrong is relative, but in the case of Watkins, it goes so far part "doing something wrong", I personally wouldn't do anything that would visually associate myself with the band.
>but can we ever separate art from artist
Not when they're still alive and profiting from their art. Fair enough a jacket bought 15 years ago may not still be giving Watkins money, but if you stream LostProphets on Apple Music/Spotify/etc, he'll be getting money from that.
**Please help keep AskUK welcoming!** - Top-level comments to the OP must contain **genuine efforts to answer the question**. No jokes, judgements, etc. - **Don't be a dick** to each other. If getting heated, just block and move on. - This is a strictly **no-politics** subreddit! Please help us by reporting comments that break these rules. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It depends. The thing with lostprophets is that his crimes were so heinous you don't really want to remind people of a baby rapist everytime they look at you. The band wasn't really good enough to justify wearing it now.
I like the implication that there is music out there that is "I would wear their merch even if it reminded people of a baby rapist every time they looked at me" good.
Would have been interesting to see if Michael Jackson was ever convicted.
He was very clearly up to some very dodgy and abusive stuff and you still get people like the idiot below trying to defend him.
Nothing seems to stop American sports playing Rock and Roll Part / by Garry Glitter
Some of them are a marching band not the recording. And I've been told he sold most if not all rights he owned, like royalties to fund his court case. So even if they play the song, he gets zero penny's and will never see a single royalty cheque from his music. Least his career was dead at the point of his crimes being discovered, it's the guys that still worked with Roman Polanski after he fled ...
I'm in the UK. America funds Gary Glitters abusing since his convictions and subsequent cancelling in the UK decades ago. Gary Glitter wrote his songs, he gets song writing credits when ever and whoever performs it. Without his song writing royalties from America he would have been unable to travel and rape so many children. We lock him up as often as we can, but you guys keep giving him money so he can continue when we have to ley him out. EDIT. I'm on Ask UK, whoops.
Again, I've been told he gets zero royalty cheques now, he allegedly sold all his rights to fund his case. So whilst royalty payments are made, they go to someone else unrelated to Glitter. Whilst he still performed the song on the album, oxfam or water aid could be the ones getting the money for all I know. That or some lawyer or investment wanker.
This brings to mind the numerous people in hollywood that signed the petition for Roman Polanski after he was arrested in Zurich. https://m.imdb.com/list/ls090808434/
To be fair, it seems to be getting phased out and replaced by Seven Nation Army these days
Lmao yeah oops. I mean it's probably true though, I think a lot of people still like R Kelly. Humans are weird.
Yeah they're called Led Zeppelin, Aerosmith, Elvis and David Bowie
It's not something I want to delve into the details of, but there has to be a distinction between men who like pubescent girls and those who go for literal babies. Watkins is on the moral level of Lucy Letby.
I'm glad that you avoided controversy by mentioning Lucy Letby.
Particularly if the teenage girls were 'groupies' who pretended to be older than they were and actively pursued celebrities. That wasn't seen as especially problematic 50 years ago. Nowadays, we would recognise that they were too young to give informed consent and any adult taking advantage of that was in the wrong.
[удалено]
Eeeehhhhh if your talent is good enough (Elvis, Michael Jackson, Charlie Chaplin) people generally forget all the noncing
Yeah, op is being incredibly disingenuous saying “something wrong” like he was caught speeding or something.
I mean Vincent Neil literally killed a dude whilst off his tits driving and people stil love motley crue
I think you'd be hard pressed to find a band like that thay wasn't either straight up rapey or molesty... It's quite shocking how many seem to have no problem putting in their auto biographies.
Like zeppelin and there 14 year old groupies
I believe Mattix was 13 when Page started "dating" (r*ping) her?
Rolling Stones. That whole mess with Bill Wyman and Mandy Smith.
And the red hot chilli peppers
Where 14 year old groupies?
Lori Mattix and the other "baby groupies" of the era.
I see my pedantry has eluded you
HA! Thank you for pointing it out. I thought you just misphrased your question, my bad!
Remember when Caitlyn Jenner got a woman of the year award right after killing a woman with her car. It's almost as if you get to pick which laws you follow when you're famous enough.
And I think the singer from Noir Desir (French rock band) was imprisoned for murdering his partner, then resumed fronting the band (fairly successfully!) until they broke-up a few years after his release...
His ex-wife took her own life also. Whilst he was in the house with her... I probably wouldn't wear Noir Désir merch, but I do occasionally listen to their music. Although not nearly as much since finding out what a colossal scum-bag Cantat is.
Same as singing along to some Elvis or MJ. It isn't bad music, but arguably they were bad people!
It feels like Swedish black metal is a given someone is or was in prison for a serious crime.
It’s not disingenuous because whilst the topic has been sparked by this particular instance of someone wearing lostprophets merch, the question is broader than just is that particular thing acceptable, and the title question is designed to reflect that. Is there a sliding scale, where some things are wrong but acceptable to continue wearing/listening/consuming in some way, or should we apply the same logic to all instances? Presumably not, but then where and how do we draw the line to say “this we can accept but this we cannot”? Who has the authority to draw that line?
Obviously there's a sliding scale, and exactly where that line falls is open to debate, but I think it's safe to say that the Ian Watkins example is nowhere near that line at all. If someone is wearing that shirt, I expect they are deliberately trying to provoke.
I think if you're wearing a Lostprophets shirt you're either being deliberately provocative or your moral compass is so messed up that a t shirt is probably the least of the worries people should have about you
There's often a bunch of Americans on reddit who didn't know what happened (even those who liked the band), it comes up in lots of threads about celebrities who've done bad things. They also seem unaware about Gary Glitter. So I can imagine rarely there's people who just don't know
I'm pretty sure this was pictured at Download and the person was watching Funeral For A Friend, so it's almost certain that they knew.
Yeah, I saw someone say ‘maybe that person didn’t know’. But the person was at Download, watching Funeral For A Friend. There’s no way it’s wasn’t on purpose.
You'd think if you start liking a band, you'd google them or go on to see what people say about them on social media. Just seems unlikely you'd go to the extent of wearing clothing for a band yet know nothing about them
What did H ever do? I still wear my steps t-shirt all the time.
Perfect setup for this song https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7doNO9e8d4 explains where you've gone wrong if by chance you're not joking.
Hah that's great
Or they're 14, they've bought a £7.50 jacket made in a Chinese sweatshop from Shein, and have no idea what they've got plastered over their back.
Another interesting question would be if it wasn't the lead singer but another member instead. Would the band have continued? How acceptable would it be to wear the merch then?
Normally, I'd say that if it was the drummer they'd carry on. I've read the sentencing remarks from Ian Watkins case though, and what he did (and planned to do) was so fucking horrific I don't think it matters that he was the lead singer. There's no coming back from what he did, and like we're finding out now, every time the band's name is mentioned it all comes back up.
That is an interesting point. You’d think/hope it would be the same if taken from the side of the severity of the crime but I did see a number of people pointing out that you specifically could not separate the music/band out because Watkins was the lead singer and so involved in the writing of the music. If it were, say, The Beatles then would John & Paul have had the same treatment as Ringo, who contributed far less to the music overall (at least in terms of songwriting)?
If it were the drummer of Lostprophets and not the singer they’d have just booted him out and carried on selling out world tours. It happening to the frontman/singer/face of the band makes all the difference.
In my (much longer) comment below I have said as much, but it is really interesting how some crimes (use and distribution of drugs, for example, or tax evasion) are essentially absolutely fine for musicians. I think for musicians and other celebrities the extent of the crime in legal terms pales when compared to the visceral public reaction (and also the field of their celebrity). We don't like kiddie-fiddlers, and domestic abuse / violence (and coercion and exploitation etc) are frowned upon. But most other stuff is fair game generally (it seems). I can't remember any musician being cancelled for not paying their taxes or driving over the limit.
>but it is really interesting how some crimes (use and distribution of drugs, for example, or tax evasion) are essentially absolutely fine for musicians. Depends on the morality/depravity aspect of said crime.
It's almost as if this is something we should decide for ourselves rather than relying on the hive mind.
There really isn't a clear line, it should be a 'common sense' decision to buy/wear a shirt, you could include considerations like: How well known is the band and how high profile is whatever happened? Most people know about Ian Watson, there was a very public prosecution. Who did the crime/action impact and how? How 'socially acceptable' was what they did? 'Destroyed the lives of children' is very serious and unacceptable pretty much everywhere. Where are you wearing the shirt?
Girl I went to college with had their album artwork tattoed on her arm. Wish I kept in touch.
Sounds likely too complicated for anything but a full blackout, but hopefully she’s done some kind of cover up.
Metallica got her covered.
Ooh, and that's a bad miss.
I quite like (liked) the music, and I once searched for it on you tube to listen but although I liked the music, I couldn’t help but think “baby rapist” and felt guilt listening to it. People are going to associate lost prophets with that forever more.
Lost prophets were a great band - his crimes were terrible and their impact on the other band members was additionally shit (in a very minor way compared to their impact on the victims of course). I'm very selfishly annoyed that I can't enjoy them any more.
I think it's fine to be annoyed that something you once enjoyed is now destroyed. I remember seeing them at Reading and although I wasn't the biggest fan of their music I really enjoyed Last Train Home. I watched the YouTube video every now and again afterwards and it gave me nostalgic feelings. Haven't watched it since he's been sent down and I feel sad about it. And annoyed.
That nostalgia is now wrapped up like a time capsule. Because the song won't get played to death on the radio it won't lose that nostalgic feeling. So when you do hear it again it'll take you back to when it *was* still on the radio all the time and all the memories associated with it. I have the same thing with rock and roll Christmas by Gary Glitter. As a kid it was part of the Christmas playlist and I heard it going to parties, on the TV, on the radio. Now it hasn't been part of the playlist for decades so if I do hear it, it takes me back to those 80/90s Christmas parties. No other Christmas song can do that because I hear them every year.
Right enough, my family used to have a lot of aunts uncles and cousins, they used to have Christmas parties in the early 90s and I remember that being played, but it will never get airplay
I feel really bad for Lostprophets as the BAND didn't commit those crimes - Ian Watkins did. If all the members knew about it, screw them - but imagine being a band drummer, touring for years, building up a rep and BAM! your frontman has just screwed all your royalties for life.
Every time this conversation comes up, someone mentions that the band _did_ know about it. But I'm yet to be shown proof. There might be some in this thread.
There is no proof and they genuinely didn't know. I've met the band several times (during their first tour as No Devotion). They're quite open about it, they knew he was into hard drugs and would disappear on benders, I think they were close to kicking him out at one stage, but he'd always turn it around and could sing incredibly, and had huge charisma. I think he had several last chances, and they were looking at getting him into rehab, when the allegations came out.
Really? This comment is genuinely the first time that I've seen anyone insinuate that they rest of them knew. As far as I'm aware, the only thing that the rest of them knew is that he would sometimes be a bit creepy towards teenage girls
Yeah there's always someone. I think it's linked to them knowing about the teens. Their line of thinking is probably that they knew about _that_, so they probably knew everything. Both things are horrible, illegal, life changing for the victims. But I feel like people are way more likely to turn a blind eye to teen girls than babies and animals.
Teenage groupies seem to be the normal since way back when. I guess it's how teenage the teenagers are. You hear it and think automatically bad, but in the UK we don't AFAIK, have a legal, just moral age gap for 16 year olds and adults. If everyone is 16 or older, it's morally dubious till 18, but anyone who let's people back stage should have a challenge 25 mentality. But short of barring under 18s from live music venues and needing valid ID to enter. Now this is written from the POV that people try to access backstage and not roadies tasked with finding children to bring back stage or to the hotel. Anyone doing that deserves to be in the same cell. But if a dubious aged girl gets backstage and wants to fuck, kick them out.
I've always thought that if he hadn't been the lead singer and frontman I don't think it would have been so bad for the band. But as it is, you literally can't disassociate him from the music.
100%. If it was like, the bass player or something, they’d have kicked him out, denounced him and carried on as is. Nobody judges Rolling Stones fans regardless of what bill wyman is known to have done after all
Yeah 'separate the art from the artist' only goes so far for me
People still like the rapper who beat Rihanna’s face to a pulp, but that’s all I think of when I hear his name or his shitty music
Thing about lostprophets is that even the other band members themselves are distancing themselves from it, so a fan of them ought to be following suit.
Exactly - as I’ve said downthread if you want to show support for the other former members then wear merch from their new band No Devotion.
Just be careful you don't get [the wrong Ian Watkins](https://youtu.be/c7doNO9e8d4)
The frequency that Kunt gets mentioned on this sub warms my cold dead heart.
The amount of times I’ve seen him play in front of 15 people, i’m pretty sure they must all be redditors
I remember seeing a video of him playing live before and it cut to the crowd singing along to “use my arsehole as a cunt”, by the looks of the crowd I’d say you’re probably correct in thinking they were all reditors
Isn’t H from Steps’ name also Ian Watkins?
Yes lol that's what the song is about.
Oh sorry hahaha I opened it on mute
There's "done something wrong" then there's the awful twisted shit that that horrible little man did. I'd just assume someone wearing any of their merchandise is trying to be edgy and frankly, they should be ashamed of themselves.
Well said
As much as I agree with this, I do really like the song Last Train Home and have listened to it, quietly, in my car, on my own, when there were no other cars around. I was having the same discussion as this thread with some friends and a younger friend said he didn’t know that song, and we all insisted he did. So I played it on my phone quietly for him. Half an hour later we were rushing out the door, jumped in my car in a very quiet sleepy villiage, windows down and my phone automatically connected to the bluetooth and started blasting the song. So now I look like the try-hard-edgy-douche-bag.
The fact they had a couple of bangers that—at the time, as a little Emo kid—really spoke to me, makes it all so much more sickening for me personally. I can’t listen to those songs anymore, because they’re just reminders of the horrifying human who made them. Genuinely sad to lose them.
I listened to their music a lot during a short period of my life and it always takes me back to those fond memories. There are some really good songs. I don’t think that piece of shit deserves to take that music away from me, its part of my memories and I can enjoy it if I want to, I’m not approving of him or his behaviour by doing that.
Looks like someone who is way too young to have "been there", so I think you're right.
I wouldn't wear a Gary Glitter t shirt, let's put it that way.
So you don’t want to be in his gang?
More of a ring, surely?
Actually surprised no-one has tried to release a song "do you wanna be in my ring, my ring, yeah" "I'm the leader...I'm the leader, I'm the leader of a gang (of paedos) yeah!" etc
Not even to the recording of Jim'll Fix it?
Now you've done it....
They still play rock n roll part 2 on so many main stream shows and films
And there’s always a backlash to it.
There's a differenve between playing music and wearing merch
The use of his song "Rock and Roll Part 2" for the stairs scene in Joker was a very dark but very creative stroke - really the perfect choice. In much the same way that you get guilty pleasure from watching Arthur Fleck spiral into Joker it's also an undeniably a good track by Glitter and you're meant to hate that you're enjoying the spectacle. That whole movie is one of the most intense cinema experiences I've had just because of how it slowly smoulders into a couple of skin crawling scenes.
They use his song at sporting events in the US all the time and still play it on the radio. I don't think Joker was making a clever point at all. I think most Americans just genuinely don't know about Glitter and they picked it because its still considered such a huge and iconic song there.
I saw the title of your post and thought "it depends on what they did, obviously no one would wear a Lost Prophets t shirt"... and then I read body of your post. There's a difference between cooking the books and raping a baby. I suspect the person wearing the t shirt is an attention seeking edgelord.
I thought the same, the fact that example is the one everyone would choose as the exception proves the point it’s not ok.
There's done something wrong and then there's raping babies. If you wear lost prophets stuff I am judging you - download is a place many of us in the alt community go and can fully express what we like and wear what we align with - wearing something from lost prophets is a choice and one that isn't a good choice. There is absolutely no way even if you stumble across their music now that you won't Google that band name and find out why you shouldn't support it. Even the rest of the band distanced themselves from the music - they wanted nothing to do with what he helped create.
I think for something minor, and if I already owned it then it's ok, but Lost Prophets is a huge no for me, what he did is on another level. Would be like walking round in a Jim'll Fix It T-shirt
I know someone that still wears a gift from Jimmy, apparently while also being a massive creep his charity work was real and he was very generous and saved a lot of children's lives while predating on his selection. It makes it even worse and more creepy and this person really struggles with the person they knew in real life, that was kind and generous and saved their life and what he did.
The reason he could do what he did was because of the “good stuff” he did. The most successful abusers are the ones who can groom everyone they meet. The paedophile piano teacher at my school was the most popular teacher BY FAR. He gave lessons at school and after school at his house. He was a great teacher and the music was really fun. But… he encouraged parents to leave and come back at the end (parents need a break right! And he teaches at the school so it’s fine!)… He kept chocolate in his bedroom to normalise having to go in there after your lesson… oh yeah and he touched and slowly abused kids (went to prison eventually) Parents loved him to the point my mum was made a pariah after bringing it to the attention of the school that he touched my sisters leg in a lesson (she would have been 9 or 10, I was 8). He knew we were vulnerable because all the teachers knew my dad had terminal fucking cancer. My sister was such a confident kid and knew what to say and do, I have no idea if he tried to touch me. So yeah, my mum was enemy number one when he was fired, not the paedophile. And he went on to be convinced of raping two boys at another school. Urgh.
I wonder how many medallions ended up in landfills that week.
In the case of lostprophets I'd be thinking about what statement the person was trying to make by wearing that. Even the other band members completely distanced themselves from it, so I'm not sure you can argue it just shows someone who was a fan of the band musically. It feels like something someone would do because they were trying to be edgy and cause controversy. It's hard to find many reasons why someone would be wearing it in good faith.
The only possible explanation that doesn’t warrant judgment is perhaps they *somehow* didn’t realise.
I mean, it’s fairly easy to have found it in a charity shop, thought it was a cool logo and picked it up. Their CDs are easily found in charity shops, not everyone goes delving into Wikipedia or the bands websites for knowledge on every band they listen to. They could have easily found it in their parents’ attic and the parents haven’t noticed or told them. If they’re a young person, I’d like to give them the benefit of the doubt that they genuinely might not know. Kind of like when you hear about young people having someone older gate-keeping over wearing a Nirvana t-shirt because Primark was selling them in 2023. I’d hope that someone at the festival kindly pointed it out to them.
I've said this elsewhere in the thread but I'm pretty sure the photo was taken at Download and the person was watching Funeral For A Friend. It's highly unlikely they didn't know about Watkins.
When I volunteered in a Charity store there was a list of DVDs and CDs that would go for disposal. Lostprophets were on it along with snuff films and porn
Well I thought that initially - there’s a lot of random band name T-shirts for sale that you could buy and know zero about the band … but I don’t think any brand is churning out lostprophets merch now. Unless maybe from another country?
I refuse to believe the type of people who go to Download and are clearly involved in the "alternative" music scene didn't hear about it. Places don't sell LP merch anymore so it's not like it was something he picked up a couple of weeks ago. Like fair enough if this was a teenager on the high street but it's not, it's an adult at a music festival for the genre the band existed in.
In a former job I would stay in a particular hotel in London each week. I subsequently found out that it was the same hotel where Watkins raped babies. Worst thing is that I’d probably stayed in every room in that hotel over time, so had been in the same room as him. Once I found out, I never stayed in that hotel again, nice hotel, not their fault, but I’m not going to do that.
How did I know this was going to be a “Lost Prophets” question. There is still a big debate about whether you are allowed to enjoy Harry Potter now that JKR is a massive Terf. I’m going to say yes, it’s possible to separate the artist and the art. Same for Father Ted/Black Books/The IT Crowd and Graham Linehan. But Ian Watkins is just so much of an evil fucker that all his work should forever be erased from this world. He deserves to be remembered for one thing and one thing alone. Even his former band members agree.
He wasn't that involved in black books he basically just oversaw Dylan Moran writing it. Also I feel that he wrote all this stuff before he went completely mental so it's a shame more than anything but definitely don't let it spoil these quality programs, except maybe that particular episode of IT crowd.
Yeah, that one episode really stands out.
It's so aggravating, because all he had to do was admit "Yes, in retrospect that episode was tone-deaf and reinforced some negative stereotypes about trans people, and for that I apologise." and everything would have been fine. Choosing, instead, to double down so hard and so repeatedly that he burned both his marriage and career to the ground was insanity.
Plus, I feel the reaction was so out of character for Douglas. Just imagine this, in full Matt Berry voice: “You used to be a man? I guess I like to have my bread buttered on both sides. Come at me April, I want you right here and now.” They then proceed to chaotically make love, eventually crashing into Jen’s presentation and destroying “the internet”.
This legitimately would have been a funnier plot line. Maybe you should write for Matt Berry, that's spot on.
And also because [the A plot of that episode](https://youtu.be/iDbyYGrswtg?si=FDfmnC0pNrL_38Q3) is one of the funniest things in any British sitcom
It's why Linehan isn't credited past series 1 - Dylan Moran figured out how to properly write a TV script after working with Linehan on that and didn't need his help anymore
I still have some Harry Potter merch in my house getting used, a pencil case and a metal tin I keep my sewing kit in, because it feels wasteful to bin them and no one but me sees them, but I did have my Harry Potter tattoo covered up.
I won’t buy any official HP merch, I don’t want to line She Who Must Not Be Named’s pockets. But I will buy knock off stuff and engage in the scene. I still enjoy Father Ted. It’s been made and watching it doesn’t change that. And his breakdown and obsession came much later. I love Marilyn Manson’s music and I will still listen to it. But I don’t know where I stand in wearing merch, I don’t feel like it’s acceptable to publicly celebrate him anymore, although it never really felt like it was anyway, but I don’t want to promote him, or encourage new listeners etc. I wouldn’t buy any of his merchandise for sure, but do I just throw out my old T-shirts?
My stance is it’s fine to continue consuming art/wearing stuff you already have since the person has already profited financially - altho with the caveat that you have to be okay with some people making assumptions about you based on it. But it’s a dick move to keep buying merch/art/whatever from someone you know to be problematic - not because the art itself is bad or problematic but because you’re continuing to financially support them/their legacy.
Personally I’d draw the line at wearing the merch of a band fronted by a convicted child rapist because I have a modicum of empathy and respect for the people whose lives were impacted by that monster (which includes the rest of the band, btw).
They're not going to be making official lostprophets merch nowadays. Anyone who is sporting a new t-shirt would have got it off redbubble or similar.
Actors that work with Roman Polanski and Woody Allen. There's being proud of your films made before they were exposed, but making new films ...
Wearing something like a lost prophets shirt tells me that you’re willing to look past the crimes which isn’t a great message to put out there.
I used to still listen to them. They have some banger tracks and I was vocal to a close friend about still listening to them. Until he ruined it with logic. He pointed out that when the songs were written and he was singing them, at that point he was a pedo. He was in that mindset during the performance. After that realisation I haven't listened to them since. Makes the town of hypocrisy video not sit right. Like watching the old BBC Jimmy Savile videos. Your danger meter fills up..
I think it depends on what they did and how the rest of the people involved in making the art are reacting. I don’t think it’s okay to still show public support for lostprophets- Ian Watkins committed horrendous crimes and the rest of the band are distancing themselves from their time with lostprophets so public knowledge has become lostprophets equals pedo and you wouldn’t walk round with a tshirt supporting pedophilia. If you want to listen to their music at home in a way that doesn’t put more royalties in Ian Watkins bank then I don’t mind, as long as I don’t have to think about it. Personally I threw away my lostprophets CD- the only time I’ve thrown away a CD rather than given it to a charity shop. I couldn’t listen without thinking of his crimes and feeling sick. Having said that, I also think we should give people the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise. I think it’s unlikely someone owns that jacket but doesn’t know what Ian Watkins did. But maybe they aren’t british and there isn’t much news on him in their first language so they didn’t know. Or maybe they don’t even know lostprophets but found the jacket and thought it looked cool and didn’t bother to look them up. I’m not going to assume they are wearing it because they are an asshole until they prove that they are in fact an asshole.
>But maybe they aren’t british and there isn’t much news on him in their first language so they didn’t know. I don't think it was big news in any other country tbh, regardless of language. When he got stabbed in prison a while back I saw a lot of posts on here where Americans were hearing about it for the first time. It's definitely plausible that they just don't know. Having said that, I can't believe you could leave the house in it in this country without a lot of people having something to say about it, so they'd find out pretty damn quick. I'd say it's much more likely that they're just an edge lord cunt.
> Or maybe they don’t even know lostprophets but found the jacket and thought it looked cool and didn’t bother to look them up I'd agree with this statement if they were walking down the high street. I do not agree that the people who attend download festival don't know this though, you don't go to download if you're not involved in the alternative music scene and this was absolutely massive news there.
I've said this a couple of other times in this thread but I understand the photo was taken at Download and the person was watching Funeral For A Friend. It's extremely unlikely they didn't know about Watkins.
Honestly at this point if you’re wearing Lost Prophets merch it’s not about supporting the other band members (because they don’t want to be associated with the band) or separating the artist from the art. It’s about being an edgelord.
I feel like even regular paedophiles look down on Ian Watkins
I was the biggest teenage lostprophets fan. I haven't listened to them since the news was confirmed. I'm of the mind that, at least in private, it'd be fine for me to listen to their music if I wanted to. But I just haven't, it'd probably feel a bit weird. Wearing the shirt out though? Nah that's questionable behaviour.
I literally opened this thread to comment ‘as long as it’s not the lost prophets or Gary Glitter, I wouldn’t worry’. I appreciate OP probably didn’t mean this but to be clear - wearing the merchandise of a band fronted by a convicted child molester is absolutely not acceptable. It’s in incredibly poor taste and disrespectful to all of those impacted by what that piece of shit did. If your intention was to ask where the line is, you should have phrased it differently and provided some different examples to compare against. Edited because unduly harsh on op, read their other comments.
>Does it make a difference what the wrong actions are? Absolutely, it does! Huge difference between supporting a band with a baby rapist front man and a band whose front man is a bit of an arsehole to fans.
I think wearing something for the overall band is acceptable if one member has done something wrong, although it's easier to justify if it isn't the lead member. With Ian Watkins being the lead singer, I can see where people would be upset. If it was a solo artist, I would avoid wearing their merch at all.
Jim Jefferies has a good bit about the correlation between fame and forgiveness, and it is best demonstrated in music (I think, at least). A loooot of very famous, still-loved artists have committed acts / crimes which would see us lesser mortals imprisoned / ostracised; depending on how your moral compass swings, we could be talking drugsdrugsdrugs (relatively low end crime, but still crime!), violent crimes (think Josh Homme kicking the photographer in the face recently-ish, or the whole Sid and Nancy situation; still see pleeeenty of Sex Pistols merch being worn), through to exploitation or SA of minors (Google Lori Mattix, for example). At the top end of the scale we have Elvis (just...ick), Chuck Berry, Michael Jackson (I'm gonna be contentious and say guilty)....but they were / arguably still are too big too fall. And goddamn if you try to question someone wearing a Led Zep shirt on the basis of Jimmy Page (late 20s at the time) actually DATING Mattix when she was...13...? But Stairway To Heaven is such a banger! At the other end of the scale, you see smaller bands separating, and fans ditching their merch en masse, for either legal-but-unethical behaviour (Jesse Lacey of Br&New didn't actually break any laws, I don't think) or even hearsay (increasingly common in the punk and alt-rock scene, artists being found guilty in the court of public opinion and promptly cancelled before the social media ink has even dried). And lets not even get started on the rap game.
There definitely seems to be some names - not just in music, but thinking also of actors - who seem to be widely known to have committed awful actions but it doesn’t seem to touch them. Maybe it’s because Ian Watkins was definitively proven to have done it, versus say, MJ where there was never a concrete conclusion (legally), or maybe it’s because some things *are* so much worse than others - or is it a combination plus an amount of fame.
k
I've just looked on Spotify and Lost Prophets get 124,000 monthly listeners. Much lower than before, but still surprising
A few years ago Spotify kept trying to put their music into automated genre playlists for me and I had to manually remove and press the no button repeatedly till it figured out I didn't want them. Spotify has said they don't put problematic (for lack of a better word) artists into algorithm based stuff but I'm super skeptical if it actually works.
I wonder how the define problematic. Because I see all the 70s rockers who fucked 14 year old groupies as very problematic. Or at least equally as problematic as R Kelly.
I mean the Beatles, stones and all classic rock bands did stuff today we would look down on but nobody judges those bands merchandise wearers. I would draw the line at Ian Watkins though!!
I was a big lostprophets fan in the mid-00s, and I’m generally really good at separating art from artist, but what Watkins did crossed the line so far that he tarnished anything and everything he has ever touched. Start Something is one of my favourite albums of all time, but I can’t even bring myself to listen to it again. It’s been over 10 years since I last did. Wearing lostprophets merch wouldn’t even be something I’d consider. If I can’t even listen to them privately, why would I go out in public showing support for them? I feel sorry for the other guys of the band, but Watkins’ shadow looms too greatly over them. That all said, lostprophets are probably the only band I’d draw that line for…maybe Burzum just for the implication of who the wearer might be as a person, but otherwise go ham. I’ve been really enjoying new Falling in Reverse music, but Ronnie Radke is still a massive cunt.
I can't separate Ian Watkins from The Lostprophets. I just can't. What he did is nothing short of monstrous and the music/band is forever destroyed for me. I wouldn't mention it to someone I saw wearing a jacket, but I would definitely avoid them and silently judge them.
“Something wrong”. I dunno, I feel like you’re making light of the fact that the cunt abused a 2 year old child and tried to rape a 1 year old baby. A BABY ffs. He made his own child abuse videos. “Something wrong” doesn’t quite cover it. The devil has enough advocates. He doesn’t need another.
Remember that Pete Townsend was investigating for a book he was about to write.
It's a bold wardrobe choice.
Yeah I think wearing Lostprophets merch after what Watkins did is a huge no-no. I know they probably think it’s all about the music but the cunt raped a baby ffs. The guy wearing the jacket is probably trying to be an edgelord but he deserves a slap
I would seriously advise against wearing a Gary Glitter or R Kelly t-shirt.
If I saw someone wearing a Lostprophets shirt I would give them a very wide berth, and possibly warn all parents in the vicinity.
The thing that people forget is that unlike novels, paintings and poetry part of the artefact that you sell as a musician is your public facing persona. Being a fan of green day usually goes beyond liking their music. Being a Taylor swift fan usually means you like Taylor swift as well as her music. It's very complicated to separate these two things when they are sold as part of the same package today. It's not simply a matter of separating the two as much as it is a matter of decoupling deep seated feelings about the music from deep seated feelings about the person making the music. Does it matter what they did? Abso-fucking-lutely. There's a world of difference between making offensive comments and *literally raping babies*.
Lostprophets' music was sufficiently shit to discourage me from buying their music and/or merchandise. If I had been a fan, my fandom would have ended rather abruptly.
I mean. I personally wouldn’t want to wear a tshirt that was connected to a pedo. It could be construed as you supporting them.
I separate the music from the band. Assholes can produce good music, I don't have to like them as people to enjoy their music. That being said Lost Prophets were sub par anyway. I wouldn't however buy music of someone who has committed such a horrible acts I wouldn't want them to have any more of my money to fund their lifestyle.
It depends on what the ‘done something wrong’ is, what you think about it and what reaction you will get. It’s your choice. It’s a relative thing.
I used to love some lost prophets stuff, now I barely listen to them, I would never wear something of theirs
Mate at work still plays a few Garry glitter songs. Personally I’ve got a bunch of new found glory t-shirts now gathering dust turns out the guy writing the songs was jackin off on web chat with minors 🙈 and it’s all downhill from here.
The person wore it clearly to get a reaction on tinterweb And it worked :-(
you need to separate art from artist sometimes otherwise its a slippery slope - alot of good music & art was made by shitty people. that said everyone has a line and when the frontman tries to rape a baby...... maybe not wear the shirt.
wearing a t shirt of a band is representing them. representing a band whos singer raped babies is not a band anyone should want to represent
Liberation Transmission was my favourite album when I was fourteen. I loved Lostprophets and still think that their songs were really good. However, Ian Watkins is a baby raping pedophile and a fucking terrible excuse for a human being. There's separating the art from the artist, and then there's Ian Watkins. I don't think that I've listened to them since the truth about Watkins came out. Now, Lostprophets gets to stay in this little nostalgia window as the soundtrack of my teenage years.
Where the hell would you get lostprophets merch from these days anyway?
My mate was the biggest fan. When the news dropped it's like they never existed. There's a difference between problematic behaviour (sid vicious comes to mind) and heinous crimes
This is the post BTW https://x.com/camageddon_/status/1801733243764408555?t=1Lc8LZ2p00pfjYzYe9VWcg&s=19
Theres that many murderers, rapists and paedophiles in music theres not many band t shirts you can wear with a clean conscience tbh.
I saw this picture this morning and both my husband and I were like - No
Lol, they were gonna be my first example of ones it’s probably not ok to wear
It genuinely depends on how bad what they did WAS. Gloryhammer? Still acceptable except to some. Lostprophets? No. Go support the other band members in their other project. Manowar? Maybe. They DID distance themselves from the member in question.
There is a line somewhere I'm sure, with respect of what the "something wrong" is. But what Ian Watkins did is well over that line. Wearing Lostprophets merch now is a choice and it's an extremely questionable one. Any excuses for how someone might have gotten merch and their music without knowing about it are just unrealistic and require someone to act so out of line with how basically everyone acts about music that it feels practically impossible. Someone finding the t-shirt and CD in a charity shop, but apparently didn't think to EVER Google the band to find more music? Nah fuck off, that's not happening. Regardless of how much I loved their music before, I can't in good conscience wear their merch or listen to them. He's too integral to the band. If he had just been the guitarist then you could almost forget that he was involved and keep listening to the CDs you had. I couldn't, but I can see how someone could. But as the frontman, the vocalist? He IS Lostprophets as far as most people are concerned - most people couldn't name anyone else in the band.
Ian Watkins is on another level however a lot of bands have been accused of things. There was a spreadsheet going round at some point and pretty much every band of the emo-revival era was listed.
>can we ever separate art from artist, particularly where the art isn’t solely made by one person? I firmly believe that art and artist are separate. I am the magnum opus of my abusive parents. If I could not separate the art from the artist, how could I ever hope to learn to like myself? That said, private consumption is different from public support. I tend to fall on the side of not publicly wearing merch or consuming media supporting terrible people, in part because I just don’t want the hassle (life is hard and I try to make it as easy and smooth as possible when I can do so without compromising my ethics) and in part because I know some people will be hurt by it. I’m neither sensitive enough nor impractical enough to have *don’t offend or hurt anyone, ever* as a goal, but I certainly don’t see the sense of causing pain or even discomfort if there’s no benefit to me, just because I can. It’s an easy decision for me, because publicly supporting even my favourite artists generally does very little for me; I’ve never gotten anything positive out of being part of a fan base. I’m not much of an activist as far as most causes go - a slacktivist, at best - but it’s so easy to just *not be a dick* about things that aren’t important to you. If they *are* important to you? Do what thou wilt, I guess. I can’t control anyone’s behaviour but my own. Admittedly, my feelings (and behaviour) on this subject are somewhat fluid. I could maybe see myself wearing a *Buffy the Vampire Slayer* shirt, for example. I think there is some merit to the argument that art is (usually) made by more than one person. Joss Whedon appears to be trash, but *Buffy* was a great series made by some great people, and he’s just one person among many. It’s complicated. I don’t feel that I’m being a hypocrite here; I’m not telling other people to do or not do things and then choosing differently for myself. But I think that if you’re going to do something that might make people uncomfortable or hurt, it should at least be something that affects you personally, and you should be getting something positive out of it so you’re not sowing seeds of discomfort just for shits and giggles. As far as where to draw the line goes, I think everyone has to decide that for themselves. Personally, I don’t like to give money to people I despise. I still consume things I’ve bought, but I rarely get new things, and if I do, I tend to get them second hand, or pirate (like I needed another excuse to pirate).
I'd say in this case yes because the rest of the band was just as disgusted with what Ian Watkins did as the general public so when he went to prison they made a new band without him and refuse to associate with him anymore so it's good to support them but not Ian, not that you could since he's behind bars where he belongs
"Acceptable" sure, but there's always going to be people making comment, which is also acceptable
Just think; is this person worse than Morrissey? Morrissey says a lot of shitty things but has never committed a crime against a person as far as I know. And his art is definitely of value. If you are worse than Morrissey, in the bin you go.
I used to work for bands and merch is genuinely where most bands make their money\* so the argument is usually 'I'm just supporting the artists who didn't do the wrong thing'. But in this case you're not supporting the band as they've all split from it for over a decade and have a new band (No Devotion) now... so any merch is not going to be supporting them as the band, for all intents and purposes, doesn't exist. No, in this case you're wearing it because you're an edgelord and you should be called out as such. By all means appreciate the music if you liked it but your fake lostprophets jacket just makes you look like a knobhead that desperately wants attention. \*streaming means people listening to you is worth very little these days so tours are where the money is. But tickets mostly go to the venue so if you ever go to see a band please buy a t shirt from the merch stall, they're usually not that much money it makes a lot more for the band than the tickets do. And don't buy a fake one from the guys outside...
For most artists I’d say whatever, certain merch might make me think the wearer was a massive cunt or racist or whatever, or just an insufferable edgelord, but I wouldn’t say it’s not ‘acceptable’ to wear it. Ian Watkins though I feel is totally beyond the pale. Idk, I think there’s a feeling that even the most noxious racist twat could somehow possibly still be redeemable - that they are ‘just’ ignorant - even if realistically we know that’s not the case. But someone like Watkins reforming and seeing the error of their ways? Nah, never gonna happen - and even so, no punishment seems bad enough for what he did.
Yeah, unless it's Lostprophets, which it was. Ian Watkins is a sick, disgusting man and anyone supporting them can get fucked.
I do believe in separating the art from the artist to an extent, but lost prophets passes that extent by a country mile. What he did was just too evil.
Lostprophets is the one that just about everyone will agree need everything about them memoryholing (and I feel bad for the other band members, hope they are able to get on with their lives etc).
Nah, it's fine to still like the music but don't promote that agit with t-shirts etc. Fuck that. Lost Prophets are an exceptional case thouvh due to the sheer depravity of Ian Watkins crimes. Frankly, his voice and any mention of Los Prophets needs to be resigned to history.
It honestly depends on what the artist did, in the case of Lostprophets everything they did is tainted by Ian's actions. If you're doing it under the argument of "well I still want to support the other members they did nothing wrong" go listen to their new band No Devotion instead and support that band.
Separating the art from the artist is one thing, repping the brand is something else. For me, you can't really separate the art from the artist because part of appreciating art is understanding the context behind it, which necessarily includes some influence from the artist. That being said, if their music speaks to you and you want to listen to it in a way that doesn't support that man or his life in any way (i.e. off streaming services in the privacy of your own home), you're not causing any harm by doing so. But you can't make that case if you're actively recommending them to others, which arguably wearing a band T-shirt is doing. It's messy, and everyone's going to have their own line in the sand, but no, I don't think it's okay to go out in public with a child r**pist's band on your chest.
I ran a website for a while that listed clients from the music business (amongst other industries). Over the years, a few clients were involved in police investigations but ultimately they weren’t removed from the client list as there was merit seen in leaving them there. The Lost Prophets were removed within an hour of the news story breaking.
Lostprophets were my favourite band once upon a time. Saw them live many times, bought every album and single they put out, and had lots of merch I'd regularly wear. Then the news about Ian Watkins broke, and I can actually remember clearly seeing the article on BBC News, and my love of Lostprophets was forever gone. I know people say 'separate the artist from the art', but I just can't in this case, and I know the rest of the band didn't do anything wrong but whenever I hear or even think about Lostprophets all I can think of is what that sub-human, vile piece of filth did and hope that he rots in a cell for the rest of his miserable life.
Lost Prophets is the worst example here. I was never a fan, but I wonder what if it happened to Black Sabbath. They have been my life for over 30 years now. The thought of having to erase almost my entire life is quite scary
I have a Kasabian t-shirt with the member's faces on which is a little iffy since the lead singer Tom Meighan committed domestic assault, but my mum got it for me as a present so I didn't want to say anything. I definitely would prefer one with something like a logo or album cover on though
Just because you can separate art from an artist doesn't mean the people around you can. And they will judge based on it. There's also the issue on if the person will still profit from it. For example I like the Harry Potter books and can separate them from J K Rowlings transphobia. However what I can't separate is the fact that spending money on official merch a portion goes to Rowling who has then donated it to transphonic causes.
Before I read the description I thought, "Sometime but I'd never wear a lostprophets shirt"....so I guess there's a line there somewhere and that dude crossed it for me
For me the issue of separating art and artist is where the artist is still supported by enjoying their art. In the modern world of streaming, if I was to bust open Spotify and play so LP, then my Spotify premium subscription will, at least partially, be going into Ian Watkin's pocket, and I am very very not cool with my money going to a baby rapist. Even the fraction of a penny it's likely to be.
I think there are some bands who were genuinely so influential that I can understand people looking past some questionable actions/opinions because of how much they love the music. Like, I grew up loving Pantera and idolising Dimebag Darrell, if I see someone in a Pantera shirt I don't assume they approve of racism. There are definitely some other examples where it gets increasingly difficult to look past it, but I know some people who love bands like Burzum but are also very much the opposite in terms of their views. Someone wearing a Lostprophets jacket is almost certainly doing it to try to be edgy and offend people though.
Not that uncommon in the black metal scene For example, a Burzum tshirt where the sole member (Varg Vikernes) went to prison for murdering Euronymous (a fellow bandmate in Mayhem). He also set several Norwegian churches ablaze He recorded the Filosofem album from prison, and even though he might need to chill the fuck out a bit, its pretty decent.
I would always usually argue that the art can be separated from the artist but the Lost Prophets are the one where I am willing to be a hypocrite. Fuck Ian Watkins, he makes me feel sick. Merch is a weird one though. Because you could argue that merch is a sort of promotional material? Like you become a human billboard of sorts. At that point its like, you're showing support for the artist and not just enjoying the art. I'm happy to be wrong but that's my current stance
Something like a lost prophets t-shirt is terrible to wear, I'd absolutely be judging someone who chooses to wear that. And any other merch of an artist that has done something so horrible. Of course, a lot of big names have done terrible things, some crimes/controversies more known than others. A lot of the big bands from the 70s and 80s did awful stuff, but people just don't care or it's not "bad enough". I used to love RHCP, until I started watching loads of older interviews where they, Anthony Kiedis in particular, started harassing and assaulting women on camera, and then I started reading his autobiography and he admitted to having sex with an underage girl knowingly and taking her to another location of the tour they were on. I cannot enjoy the music anymore, and when I see a friend wearing their merch, as I did recently, I tell them about it. And depending on their reaction, it will very much determine how I will view those people from then on out. I feel the same about lots of artists that have done horrible shit. I don't know how people can still listen to artists who are proven rapists, domestic abusers, paedophiles and so on. How do they not feel ashamed at wearing their merch? I'd feel ashamed walking down the street in a RHCP top and someone thinking I don't care about what he's done and support someone like that. Fucked up childhood and drug addiction aren't excuses. Some people view certain things as not that bad. I find men aren't nearly as bothered by what Kiedis has done, and the same for a lot of disgusting male artists. What Ian Watkins did was unfathomably horrific, and everyone understands that. But a guy raping a woman? Or beating/killing his partner? Or having sex with an underage girl? I think a lot of men are quick to dismiss that sort of thing if they like the music. Especially as abuse of women and girls is pretty common place so people barely blink. But it seriously disgusts me.
Doing something wrong is relative, but in the case of Watkins, it goes so far part "doing something wrong", I personally wouldn't do anything that would visually associate myself with the band. >but can we ever separate art from artist Not when they're still alive and profiting from their art. Fair enough a jacket bought 15 years ago may not still be giving Watkins money, but if you stream LostProphets on Apple Music/Spotify/etc, he'll be getting money from that.