More on some girls from Teen Datebook who got to meet our boys.

[cozyjo]

I'm just gonna put it out here and say that I question the validity of everything that was written here..well, particularly in Part One. I can't say for sure it happened or not, or to what degree..and even the boys, themselves, would say a lot of what was written in the teen mags about them was rubbish..but in reading this first part, written by a

Comments

[beagle_agent]

Cute stories anyway. I am not sure about the first report either, but on the other hand I can really imagine them being that way. The address...why not, everyone knew where the Asher's lived, so it was just a friendly thing and I am sure that IF this girl ever came to London it would have visited that place anyway. I don't think it was just invented by her...

The second story....I just stood and looked at the famous little drummer.
ROTFL.

Astrid

[cozyjo]

..just sounds strange the way she wrote he was saying goodbye to her. He sounds so inarticulate..and also, him touching her hair a lot and asking whether she had a boyfriend. Seems rather "forward" and flirtatious. Yes..the boys could be that way with the girls, but this seems a bit over-the-top, imho. I wonder of it, really..and by the comments I saw, so did a few others.

..and yeah..the "little drummer" remark. Poor Ringo. ;)

[jwllover]

they sound authentic to me--in fact, I think I posted the second one on JHP (or was it on my journal...? Can't remember).

Anyway, I think the discourse, as described, sounds so much like them.

As an aside, Paul sure had his way with the ladies, eh?

[cozyjo]

Oh..I didn't mean to imply that it was all bogus, hon'..just..Part One seemed..with that girl?..seemed kinda "off"..and the way Paul spoke to her seemed "off", too..can't explain. Just not very "eloquent". Gosh..I know that sounds terrible. I don't know if you know what I mean. :/

I was also disturbed by his forwardness, to be honest. She's only sixteen..and I felt like had she wanted to "bed" him, he would have gladly taken her up on it..so..someone even commented as much..as if to say, "WTF? She had a chance! Why didn't she take it??!!" And..I believe this was in '65..but I thought Paul didn't get engaged to Jane until '67?..around then? I could be wrong.

..and yeah, I remember that second one. I knew someone posted it, I think, to JHP. That bit with John I remember so well. Lucky girl. Our boy could be so sweet. That's why I get so mad..especially in the first part when that girl said she was surprised John was so welcoming. Grrrrrrr!

[larainefan]

Thanks for sharing, I'd never seen this 1st interview before! And reading it, it struck me as to what sounded so over-the-top (well, to me). She comes across as so Mary Sue-ish, knowing the exact length of her hair (in inches, no less), etc. I almost expected her to break out in purple prose: "Paul, with a gentle hand, lightly touched my long blond perfectly-curled tresses..."

They're on the subject of tarot and seances and George says "It's the spirit of the thing" Lol! He came up with some great lines, seemingly out of nowhere, when people didn't even think he was listening or following the conversation.

[cozyjo]

Yeah..that's just it. I mean..like I was trying to tell the others..Paul touching her hair seemingly incessantly..and her hand..and softly telling her he was engaged to Jane..and being disappointed that she had to go 'cause they wanted someone to have a "rave" with (hang out with?). I can't say it did or didn't happen, of course..but..Paul was being extremely flirtatious, imo....I think too much so.. She's just sixteen..and I mean..I felt like if this really happened, he was seriously "hitting" on her. It upsets me to think he would have taken advantage of her had she expressed interest in him in "that way". I'm not a prude..don't get me wrong..and this isn't a "diss" at Paul. I would express this type of concern with any of the boys. My whole point is, she was very young..under-aged..and it wouldn't have been right if something more happened between him and this girl...and I know I'm not imagining my "take" on it because even some people who had read this article..in their comments, they were making it sound like she was crazy for

[larainefan]

I think the Beatles were generally very careful regarding underage girls...granted, they didn't card everyone they came into contact with, but I don't regard them as predators actively seeking out very young girls. If anything, I've heard they favored female reporters, stewardesses, etc over the squealing over-excited fans. But I also think 16 and 17 was considered quite grown in those days, is 16 the age of consent in England? In America it's complicated, because one state can vary from another. Jane, was she 17 when she got with Paul? And Maureen was quite young too? Even women in the general population married so much younger then. But no, the Beatles were not child molesters or anything, if anything from what I've read they were quite protective of the very young fans in their presence.

[cozyjo]

Oh, crap, hon'..that was the very last thing I wanted to insinuate. :/ No..I would never say they were child molesters or even insinuate it!! A child molester generally is someone who does something against the child's will and they're usually much younger than 16..so..please don't even say that! D: I only brought up the concern insofar as even if these girls are old enough to have sexual relations and consent to it, at 16 (at least as far as I know), it's considered illegal for a person 18 or older to do so with them...and that's why I was disturbed at how flirtatious Paul was with the girl. I thought it was a bit much, is all..and I was hoping that, again, had she felt inclined to have sex with him, he would know better than to do so with her..that's all..and it upset me greatly when I read the reactions from a couple of commenters who seemed to encourage something happening. To me, it's wrong..that's the thing. I'm not saying the boys ever, ever did anything with under-aged girls. I'm only saying that if they ever did, it