Read the "Stomach-Churning" Sexual Assault Accusations Against R. Kelly in Full
Options
Comments
-
Sexual assault my ass, the activities were consentual. Them girls knew what they wanted.
Most black girls like older men. While white girls like younger boys.
Doesn't mean it's OK for a grown ass man to take advantage and exploit young teenage girls. It's some sick ass ? wtf is appealing aboIut 13-14 yr olds.
he had sex with girls 14 15 16 years old. them girls knew what they wanted. Nobody was exploited.
14 in High School, girls are already engaged in sexual conduct. We're not talking 7 8 10 year Olds here.
Those girls R.Kelly was involved with, were biochemically on the cusp of womenhood .
In the eastern places of the world, they're already women. intop of all this, his interaction with those TEENAGE girls, was consentual.
Theres alot Black girls (and boys) in our communities that are actually being/been ? , but we don't talk about it.
i dont see threads expressing outrage on it, but ppl wanna have fake out rage ,over consensual sex. -
^^ Just shut the ? up
So 14/ 15 /16 year old girls can't be manipulted by a grown man? There is a reason why it's called AGE OF CONSENT.
SMH
-
^^ Just shut the ? up
So 14/ 15 /16 year old girls can't be manipulted by a grown man? There is a reason why it's called AGE OF CONSENT.
SMH
Apparently you and I were acquainted with a different breed of chicks comin' up.
You goin' at dude like the ? is impossible.
I've heard a lot of ? say they "only ? with older dudes".
And I'm not talking about 1 or 2 years older either. -
whatevathehell wrote: »Why should anybody really give a ? . yeah he was wrong but they were old enough to know what they were doing. ifit wasn't r Kelly they would have given it up to someone else..May have been another 15 years old maybe not. dude still one of the greatest contemporary r&b artists.oh and those girls ain't care about themselves
Come on son. Why do people on this site act like 15 y/o girls have grown up decision making skills. The same ? that be on here saying things like that are the ones that claim 30 y/o chicks can't think logically. Teenage girls are dumb, period. They can somewhat make good decisions when it comes to dealing with dudes their own age, but they are easily led in the wrong direction by older guys especially ones with status and money. They are kids. Yes, they should have more sense than toddlers, but it's crazy to expect them to be as savvy about things as the grown ass men that prey on them.
As for how did R Kelly get a pass? He didn't. Even looking at the article in this thread, a lot of his depravity was never really put out there like that. Most people really only know about one or two girls, and since at least one of them basically came out and said that she didn't do anything she didn't want to, people felt comfortable giving him a pass. But let's not act like this dude's image wasn't tarnished. It was. I don't think R Kelly has ever really recovered from it. And let's not act like this dude didn't do a ton of image reconstruction too. He went from having most of his singles sounding like "Bump and Grind" to most of them sounding like "I Wish." I'm not saying he stopped making the sexual stuff. I'm just saying that for a year or two he was pushing the "Please believe me, I'm not a monster" stuff. -
1. R. Kelly was tried and acquitted of sexual assault charges already. That's all I KNOW for sure. Is there any actual evidence that he did these things? If so, what is it? I really have no idea if he is guilty or not.
2. If he did do it, clearly this is sexual assault. ? outta here with this 'She was old enough to know what she was doing!' ? . There is a reason that we don't let 15 year olds smoke, drink, join the military, drive, own guns, etc, etc. Hell, we don't even let them see certain types of movies or into nightclubs. Why? Because it's clear they don't have the life skills, experience or mental-wherewithall to make decent decisions. Nothing is different here. Doesn't matter if she BEGGED him to ? her, that's sexual assault. -
mryounggun wrote: »1. R. Kelly was tried and acquitted of sexual assault charges already. That's all I KNOW for sure. Is there any actual evidence that he did these things? If so, what is it? I really have no idea if he is guilty or not.
2. If he did do it, clearly this is sexual assault. ? outta here with this 'She was old enough to know what she was doing!' ? . There is a reason that we don't let 15 year olds smoke, drink, join the military, drive, own guns, etc, etc. Hell, we don't even let them see certain types of movies or into nightclubs. Why? Because it's clear they don't have the life skills, experience or mental-wherewithall to make decent decisions. Nothing is different here. Doesn't matter if she BEGGED him to ? her, that's sexual assault.
Lol really? -
infamous114 wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »1. R. Kelly was tried and acquitted of sexual assault charges already. That's all I KNOW for sure. Is there any actual evidence that he did these things? If so, what is it? I really have no idea if he is guilty or not.
2. If he did do it, clearly this is sexual assault. ? outta here with this 'She was old enough to know what she was doing!' ? . There is a reason that we don't let 15 year olds smoke, drink, join the military, drive, own guns, etc, etc. Hell, we don't even let them see certain types of movies or into nightclubs. Why? Because it's clear they don't have the life skills, experience or mental-wherewithall to make decent decisions. Nothing is different here. Doesn't matter if she BEGGED him to ? her, that's sexual assault.
Lol really?
If I'm incorrect, please educate me. What did I miss, in terms of actual evidence? -
so watcha you saying its ok for a man of 24 with fame to ? girls in school when they are 14 to 16 and ? in their mouths
how many of you have daughters and agreeing to that then -
Sexual assault my ass, the activities were consentual. Them girls knew what they wanted.
Most black girls like older men. While white girls like younger boys.
Doesn't mean it's OK for a grown ass man to take advantage and exploit young teenage girls. It's some sick ass ? wtf is appealing aboIut 13-14 yr olds.
he had sex with girls 14 15 16 years old. them girls knew what they wanted. Nobody was exploited.
14 in High School, girls are already engaged in sexual conduct. We're not talking 7 8 10 year Olds here.
Those girls R.Kelly was involved with, were biochemically on the cusp of womenhood .
In the eastern places of the world, they're already women. intop of all this, his interaction with those TEENAGE girls, was consentual.
Theres alot Black girls (and boys) in our communities that are actually being/been ? , but we don't talk about it.
i dont see threads expressing outrage on it, but ppl wanna have fake out rage ,over consensual sex.
Smh
Neuroscience has shown that a young person's cognitive development continues well pass the age of 18 and that their emotional maturity, self-image and judgement will be affected until the prefrontal cortex of the brain has fully developed
These girls were fresh out of middle school, more than likely poor, highly impressionable, and were not able to fully comprehend the repercussions of their actions
Whereas r kelly was a grown man, over 10 years their senior, who I am sure was fully aware what he was doing could potentially land him in jail... sure the gifts of money, trips, and shoes were bribes to keep the girls quiet
There's no excuse for his actions or why he is still given refuge within the music industry
-
@desertrain10 You wasting your time, B. The ? who think it's ok to ? children can't be reasoned with, my G.
-
^^ Just shut the ? up
So 14/ 15 /16 year old girls can't be manipulted by a grown man? There is a reason why it's called AGE OF CONSENT.
SMH
Age of Consent is a man made law, ? aint biological ? .
It varies from country to country, and culture to culture.
In the U.S, in certain states, a 16 year old is the age of consent. In others, that same 16 year old will make you a ? .
Which one's right, which one's wrong?
In many cultures, the girls R.Kelly was involved with, are women and are in the beginning process of Bearing children.
All in all, the girls R.Kelly dealt with consented. They were old enough to understand .
I just graduated H.S, 3 years ago, i know how they get down.
U proably came from an era where, 15 year olds was watching barney , passing up parties to read their bibles.
I from the era where, Ive seen girls throw their boxes at teachers, ? . so i know they wanted to ? R ? KELLY.
-
Yea these ? are either pedos or trolls
-
so what we have is a bunch of people saying its ok to ? kids here? yea my ? really?
what the ? is up with you all he is ? wrong your wrong
if this was some joe on the street you would all be like lets ? him up
i cant believe you are defending it by saying its a man made law -
mryounggun wrote: »infamous114 wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »1. R. Kelly was tried and acquitted of sexual assault charges already. That's all I KNOW for sure. Is there any actual evidence that he did these things? If so, what is it? I really have no idea if he is guilty or not.
2. If he did do it, clearly this is sexual assault. ? outta here with this 'She was old enough to know what she was doing!' ? . There is a reason that we don't let 15 year olds smoke, drink, join the military, drive, own guns, etc, etc. Hell, we don't even let them see certain types of movies or into nightclubs. Why? Because it's clear they don't have the life skills, experience or mental-wherewithall to make decent decisions. Nothing is different here. Doesn't matter if she BEGGED him to ? her, that's sexual assault.
Lol really?
If I'm incorrect, please educate me. What did I miss, in terms of actual evidence?
@mryounggun
The R. Kelly tape hit the streets like the carter 3 in the early 2000s, it was everywhere. She was clearly "Not of age" and that was clearly the same crib from MTV cribs. -
^^ Just shut the ? up
So 14/ 15 /16 year old girls can't be manipulted by a grown man? There is a reason why it's called AGE OF CONSENT.
SMH
Age of Consent is a man made law, ? aint biological ? .
It varies from country to country, and culture to culture.
In the U.S, in certain states, a 16 year old is the age of consent. In others, that same 16 year old will make you a ? .
Which one's right, which one's wrong?
In many cultures, the girls R.Kelly was involved with, are women and are in the beginning process of Bearing children.
All in all, the girls R.Kelly dealt with consented. They were old enough to understand .
I just graduated H.S, 3 years ago, i know how they get down.
U proably came from an era where, 15 year olds was watching barney , passing up parties to read their bibles.
I from the era where, Ive seen girls throw their boxes at teachers, ? . so i know they wanted to ? R ? KELLY.
The females R Kelly was ? weren't from your era though. They were from the other era. And ? like R Kelly are probably part of the reason females in your era are the way they are.
-
so watcha you saying its ok for a man of 24 with fame to ? girls in school when they are 14 to 16 and ? in their mouths
how many of you have daughters and agreeing to that thenmryounggun wrote: »@desertrain10 You wasting your time, B. The ? who think it's ok to ? children can't be reasoned with, my G.
^ and this is where these discussions go on the internet.
Doesn't agree completely = Must be ? / ? / some ? .
Some conversations aren't worth having, but you don't discuss it and next thing you know, you have some ? up law that incarcerates 18 year olds for having sex with 17 year olds. -
mryounggun wrote: »infamous114 wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »1. R. Kelly was tried and acquitted of sexual assault charges already. That's all I KNOW for sure. Is there any actual evidence that he did these things? If so, what is it? I really have no idea if he is guilty or not.
2. If he did do it, clearly this is sexual assault. ? outta here with this 'She was old enough to know what she was doing!' ? . There is a reason that we don't let 15 year olds smoke, drink, join the military, drive, own guns, etc, etc. Hell, we don't even let them see certain types of movies or into nightclubs. Why? Because it's clear they don't have the life skills, experience or mental-wherewithall to make decent decisions. Nothing is different here. Doesn't matter if she BEGGED him to ? her, that's sexual assault.
Lol really?
If I'm incorrect, please educate me. What did I miss, in terms of actual evidence?
The R. Kelly tape hit the streets like the carter 3 in the early 2000s, it was everywhere. She was clearly "Not of age" and that was clearly the same crib from MTV cribs.
Where is the evidence that she was not of age? Because she looked young? I saw the same video you saw, B. You can't tell for sure that girl was not of legal age. So unless it was VERY clear that she wasn't or she held her ? birth certificate up to the camera...where is the actual EVIDENCE?
Some people feeling like, 'Damn, that girl in the video looked kinda young!' isn't actual evidence that she was not of consenting age. -
so what we have is a bunch of people saying its ok to ? kids here? yea my ? really?
what the ? is up with you all he is ? wrong your wrong
if this was some joe on the street you would all be like lets ? him up
i cant believe you are defending it by saying its a man made law
SMH. You clearly haven't been on the IC long. These ? don't care who it is, B. It being a celebrity has nothing to do with it. These ? just legitimately believe it's ok for a grown man to ? a child. -
Didnt kells marry aalyiah when she was only 15?
-
so watcha you saying its ok for a man of 24 with fame to ? girls in school when they are 14 to 16 and ? in their mouths
how many of you have daughters and agreeing to that thenmryounggun wrote: »@desertrain10 You wasting your time, B. The ? who think it's ok to ? children can't be reasoned with, my G.
^ and this is where these discussions go on the internet.
Doesn't agree completely = Must be ? / ? / some ? .
Some conversations aren't worth having, but you don't discuss it and next thing you know, you have some ? up law that incarcerates 18 year olds for having sex with 17 year olds.
I understand the sentiment, but I don't think this was the best place to try and make that point. If you got a bunch of dudes coming on here basically saying that they think it's ok for grown men to go after young teens because "the females know what they're doing" then those people are promoting statutory ? . It's not about disagreeing. That's what they are literally doing. -
mryounggun wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »infamous114 wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »1. R. Kelly was tried and acquitted of sexual assault charges already. That's all I KNOW for sure. Is there any actual evidence that he did these things? If so, what is it? I really have no idea if he is guilty or not.
2. If he did do it, clearly this is sexual assault. ? outta here with this 'She was old enough to know what she was doing!' ? . There is a reason that we don't let 15 year olds smoke, drink, join the military, drive, own guns, etc, etc. Hell, we don't even let them see certain types of movies or into nightclubs. Why? Because it's clear they don't have the life skills, experience or mental-wherewithall to make decent decisions. Nothing is different here. Doesn't matter if she BEGGED him to ? her, that's sexual assault.
Lol really?
If I'm incorrect, please educate me. What did I miss, in terms of actual evidence?
The R. Kelly tape hit the streets like the carter 3 in the early 2000s, it was everywhere. She was clearly "Not of age" and that was clearly the same crib from MTV cribs.
Where is the evidence that she was not of age? Because she looked young? I saw the same video you saw, B. You can't tell for sure that girl was not of legal age. So unless it was VERY clear that she wasn't or she held her ? birth certificate up to the camera...where is the actual EVIDENCE?
Some people feeling like, 'Damn, that girl in the video looked kinda young!' isn't actual evidence that she was not of consenting age.
Bruh, the case wouldn't have gone to court if they didn't have her actual age. Obviously, she was under age for it be charged criminally. -
mryounggun wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »infamous114 wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »1. R. Kelly was tried and acquitted of sexual assault charges already. That's all I KNOW for sure. Is there any actual evidence that he did these things? If so, what is it? I really have no idea if he is guilty or not.
2. If he did do it, clearly this is sexual assault. ? outta here with this 'She was old enough to know what she was doing!' ? . There is a reason that we don't let 15 year olds smoke, drink, join the military, drive, own guns, etc, etc. Hell, we don't even let them see certain types of movies or into nightclubs. Why? Because it's clear they don't have the life skills, experience or mental-wherewithall to make decent decisions. Nothing is different here. Doesn't matter if she BEGGED him to ? her, that's sexual assault.
Lol really?
If I'm incorrect, please educate me. What did I miss, in terms of actual evidence?
The R. Kelly tape hit the streets like the carter 3 in the early 2000s, it was everywhere. She was clearly "Not of age" and that was clearly the same crib from MTV cribs.
Where is the evidence that she was not of age? Because she looked young? I saw the same video you saw, B. You can't tell for sure that girl was not of legal age. So unless it was VERY clear that she wasn't or she held her ? birth certificate up to the camera...where is the actual EVIDENCE?
Some people feeling like, 'Damn, that girl in the video looked kinda young!' isn't actual evidence that she was not of consenting age.
@mryounggun
C'mon my ? . C'mon. Not in court, na, you can't convict on those grounds, but you trust the justice system now? C'mon my ? . You smarter than that. Bruh, you smarter than that. -
again 14 v 24 that is a ? up situation
so you would be happy for your daughter or sister to be getting smashed by some 24 year old man being filmed and ? in the mouth yea..? and also filmed doing so
its the comment where he says it was not like the fun pam Anderson film..
it was clearly ? and call me daddy so i can give you the gift..
-
mryounggun wrote: »infamous114 wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »1. R. Kelly was tried and acquitted of sexual assault charges already. That's all I KNOW for sure. Is there any actual evidence that he did these things? If so, what is it? I really have no idea if he is guilty or not.
2. If he did do it, clearly this is sexual assault. ? outta here with this 'She was old enough to know what she was doing!' ? . There is a reason that we don't let 15 year olds smoke, drink, join the military, drive, own guns, etc, etc. Hell, we don't even let them see certain types of movies or into nightclubs. Why? Because it's clear they don't have the life skills, experience or mental-wherewithall to make decent decisions. Nothing is different here. Doesn't matter if she BEGGED him to ? her, that's sexual assault.
Lol really?
If I'm incorrect, please educate me. What did I miss, in terms of actual evidence?
We've got a 27 minute sex tape. This tape shows a man who looks like R. Kelly giving money to, having sex with, and urinating on someone witnesses testified looked to be his goddaughter, a girl who would've been around 14 at the time. All of this takes place in a sauna room that looks exactly like R. Kelly's sauna room... 15, yes 15 friends and relatives of the girl testified that the girl in question was indeed on the video
We've also got the testimony of other young women who also claimed to have had sexual relationship with r kelly
His relationship with than 15 yr old aaliyah
Enough evidence for me
-
so watcha you saying its ok for a man of 24 with fame to ? girls in school when they are 14 to 16 and ? in their mouths
how many of you have daughters and agreeing to that thenmryounggun wrote: »@desertrain10 You wasting your time, B. The ? who think it's ok to ? children can't be reasoned with, my G.
^ and this is where these discussions go on the internet.
Doesn't agree completely = Must be ? / ? / some ? .
Some conversations aren't worth having, but you don't discuss it and next thing you know, you have some ? up law that incarcerates 18 year olds for having sex with 17 year olds.
Fam, words have meanings. And words mean what they mean, not what we want them to mean, not what we want them to mean. A ? is a person sexually attracted to children. A child is a person below the age of majority or legal responsibility. So...if you have sex with a child...you're a ? . There's isn't really any interpretation needed. It's not about agreeing or not agreeing, it's just black and white in this instance.
Same with '? '. That's a person who has sex with a person without their consent. Legally, a 'child' is to young to give 'consent'. So if you have sex with a child...you're a ? . Again, black and white.
Culturally, we've taken the word '? ' and attached it to only violent grown men who prey on women. But just that doesn't mean we can simply ignore what the word actually means when it's convenient.
