#age of consent (1969)

[gradexmovies]

[klaus1964b]

Helen Mirren & James Mason 1969 in 'Age of Consent'

[beautiesofbygoneeras]

Helen Mirren Appearing In, "Age of Consent," 1969.

[pampinoscaryt2]

Helen Mirren Nude / Age Of Consent / 1969 / GIF

[angelstills]

Age of Consent (1969)

[erstwhile-punk-guerito]

[artmialma]

Norman Lindsay (1879-1969)

The Age of Consent 1937

[cosmonautroger]

Age Of Consent, Michael Powell, 1969

[cantsayidont]

July–August 1969. Although it's a reasonable inference, the idea that Bruce Wayne was legally unable to formally adopt Dick Grayson was actually a Silver Age retcon, added by E. Nelson Bridwell in a recap of Robin's origin in BATMAN #213. (Bridwell also makes a point of excising the various of Boss Zucco's men that Robin apparently kills in the first version of the story — which by my count may have been as many as five — but we won't dwell on that.)

The reference to obtaining "the consent of his nearest relatives" brings to mind the very interesting alternate version of Robin's origin that appeared on the ADVENTURES OF SUPERMAN radio show in the fall of 1946. (It's recounted in the latter part of the episode for September 25, 1946, kicking off a serial called "The Dead Voice" that ran from September 26 through October 16, 1946.)

In the radio version, Bruce Wayne had been friends with Dick's parents (who in this version were named John and Yvonne), and knew Dick prior to his parents' murders, since Bruce would hang around with the circus acrobats to practice his own acrobatic skills. After the Flying Graysons' fatal fall, John survived long enough to ask Bruce to take care of Dick ��� Yvonne's family was at that time trapped in occupied France, and as the storyline subsequently reveals, John was estranged from his own family for joining the circus (and I guess for marrying Yvonne, although I don't think that's stated outright).

So, in the radio version, Bruce taking custody of Dick is not a matter of his arbitrarily scooping up a random orphan, but rather Bruce taking charge of the son of his dead friends at their express request, as a kind of godfather. This is so much more logical, and so much more reasonable, than the comics version that I'm mildly surprised that it's never been picked up by the comics or other media, particularly since post-Crisis Batman stories made such a big deal out of Bruce's odyssey to develop the various skills needed to become Batman; his having befriended some circus acrobats during that journey would fit in pretty seamlessly, I think.

[aestheticdivision]

/ Age of Consent (1969)

[celebs4ltr]

Helen Mirren

[pluckyredhead]

☕️ what if I want the rant about ollie cheating now (or whenever you're up for it)

Oh good, because I mentioned it as bait and I'm glad someone took me up on it. 😂

CW: Sexual assault.

Yeah so here's the thing: Ollie has definitely canonically cheated on Dinah at least once, maybe twice depending on your definition. But the idea of Ollie as a serial cheater and womanizer comes from a story where he is raped. Which uhhhh is absolutely NOT cheating.

So for nearly 30 years, Ollie had exactly zero love interests. The closest he came was Miss Arrowette/Bonnie King (Cissie's mom), who appears in exactly 3 stories in the early 60s where Ollie only regards her as a pest...but in a 1969 issue of JLA where all the Leaguers bring dates to a carnival, he brings Bonnie because up to that point, she was literally the only woman he had interacted with besides Wonder Woman.

Also in 1969, he meets Dinah. Within a few issues, he's declaring his love:

Note that there's nothing to indicate that Ollie knows Bruce is stalling for time. He's just down bad.

Anyway, Ollie and Dinah are soon in a committed relationship and remain that way for over 20 years. Starting in the 80s, various writers introduced a couple of brief relationships with other women in Ollie's pre-Green Arrow past, but that's not cheating either - he dated them before he knew Dinah.

Then in 1987, DC introduced Shado, a Yakuza assassin and the best archer in the world, better than Ollie. Ollie and Shado have an immediate and intense emotional connection, but he is in a committed relationship, and neither Ollie nor Shado even vaguely hints at him leaving Dinah for her.

But then Shado shoots Ollie (long story), and then nurses him back to health through his injury-induced fever and delirium. And a little while after that, she turns up with a son, Robert, who looks a lot like Ollie. Dinah is suspicious, so Shado tells her that Ollie didn't cheat on her: Shado had sex with Ollie while he was delirious and thought she was Dinah, and Ollie has no memory of it and has no idea that Robert is his son.

To be clear: this was rape. The story doesn't treat it like rape, and it's clear the writer didn't understand that it was rape. To this day, no comic has acknowledged that Shado raped Ollie. In fact, when Ollie finds out about it years later, he's happy, because he wanted a biological son (this was pre-Connor).

(My feelings about Shado are complicated. I think she's a really interesting character, and I'm loath to discard her because of this one incident that was not intended to be interpreted as rape, but I also think it's really important that we acknowledge that it was rape because our culture is not good about consent. I think we can hold multiple ideas in our heads at once, like "Shado is interesting and cool" and "this is a fucked up story and male survivors should be supported and believed.")

The original comic also didn't treat it as cheating, but subsequent writers did. It didn't help that in the early 90s, there was a scene where Ollie (canonically in the back half of his 40s) is kissed by a college-age girl named Marianne who has a crush on him, and kisses her back. Dinah caught them and eventually broke up with Ollie over it (among other reasons). I think this is one of those things where some people would consider it cheating and some wouldn't, so YMMV.

Ollie was then killed off and replaced by Connor, and Connor's book was written by Chuck Dixon, who really hyped up Ollie's legacy of sluttiness (citation needed, Chuck) in contrast to Connor's virginal but definitely totally heterosexual purity. (Lollll sucks to suck, Chuck.)

Then Ollie was brought back. And as much as I love Quiver, the story that brings him back, it absolutely depicts what happened with Shado as Ollie cheating, which: NO, KEVIN SMITH. IT WAS RAPE. (Interestingly, Dinah seems to consider what happened with Marianne to be cheating, while Roy does not.)

This was also at the start of the post-9/11 era, where there was a real preoccupation with depicting heroes as deeply flawed, dishonest, and generally harmful, with feet of clay - just generally fucking up and being assholes pretty much all the time. (See Identity Crisis, Civil War.) And so Ollie then definitively cheated on Dinah, having sex with Black Lightning's niece Joanna, who was almost immediately murdered by a supervillain afterwards which was also largely framed as Ollie's fault because superheroes ruin everything. (And because Joanna was a triple threat of female, Black, and sexually active, so she HAD to be fridged.)

Dinah dumped Ollie again, and the way Ollie was talked about in the comics - and outside of them - rapidly escalated, with basically every character constantly describing him as a cheating horndog who couldn't keep it in his pants. This dovetailed with Ollie being portrayed as worse and worse in flashbacks around Connor's conception and birth - originally he didn't even know about Connor, then he knew but lied to everyone, then he was actively cruel to Connor's mother, etc.

I think the peak (or nadir) of all this for me was when Dinah told Babs she was marrying Ollie and Babs shrieked that she couldn't because Ollie was a CHEATER who had "fathered Connor with that Shado woman!" Um, Connor's mother is Sandra Hawke, Connor is a good 15 years older than Robert Jr., Ollie had not even met Dinah at that point, and I don't remember who wrote that issue of BoP but if you can't tell the difference between two entirely different Asian women, you're a racist hack.

Thanks to the New 52, this is all pretty much in the past (the New 52 had entirely different Green Arrow problems, including him being raped again but a completely different woman).

But in conclusion: yes, it's canon that Ollie has cheated on Dinah. However, he only cheated after getting a reputation as a cheater when he was in fact a victim of rape. Before that, he was a horndog, but specifically for Dinah and Dinah alone, and he was faithful. And I'm glad that the discourse on this has shifted so much in the past decade or so, because Ollie has done plenty of things we should blame him for, but this wasn't one of them.

[crookedfivefingers]

Ahhhhhhhh hello fellow tenmartha shipper!! I was wondering if you had any fic suggestions? I'm slowly making my way through the tag on AO3 and it's pretty hit or miss...

Also if you haven't checked her out yet, Haleine Delial over on FF.net is the top tier tenmartha writer and I wish she would transfer her stuff over to AO3 where it would get the attention it deserves 😭

https://m.fanfiction.net/u/1248996/?a=s&s=0&cid=0&p=1

Also also, I found a gold mine of fic on live journal over 10 years ago when I was desperately searching for content. This is a permanently open tab on my phone and hopefully you enjoy it if you haven't seen it already!

https://persiflage-1.livejournal.com/306664.html

Hiii! I've been enjoying your journey through my posts! 💜 And thank you so, so, so much for the recs—FFnet is pretty much the only place I haven't bled dry for TenMartha content, so I will definitely be looking into those!

As for my recs...

Oh god, okay, so full disclosure: I tend to only read/write smut-containing fics (unless written by a friend or specifically recommended to me), as I am an animal—so my choices are severely limited in that sense… I also don’t read “established relationship” fics, so that’s another limit. But YES. I absolutely have some recs, I apologize if you’ve already read them all!

(This is by no means a complete list)

First just want to highlight my two faves:

wandererinthefourthdimension—In my opinion, the absolute tippy-top of the best of the best TenMartha writers. (I think I've possibly love-bombed her a bit too hard in my obsession with her works, but) she is exquisite. From dynamite characterizations to possibly the hottest smut I have ever read, she is OUTSTANDING. Here are a few:

Bliss

Informed Consent (has an amazing WIP sequel)

Alive (WIP—but for god's sake, read it)

HDUC—Pretty much anything by this magical smut goddess. Good god, this person needs to be on Ao3 as well, but can only be found on FF. It's quite tragic. Here are just a few of my favorites:

Craving

Contrition

Formalities

Brilliant

Diminished

Some more excellent content:

⭐️ = Added after original post

⭐️Moon Landing by TheGoldenAge

⭐️ Five Times the Doctor Wanted to Kiss Martha Jones in 1969 [And the One Time He Did] by radiantbaby (all ages)

⭐️The Art of Surviving by Nekare

⭐️Break Us Apart, Bring Us Together by Nekare (teen)

Our Lack of Social Skills by zauberer_sirin

Time Enough for Love by nonelvis

Lust in the Dust by Pax in Paradoxo

As Hot as a Wandering Sun by lastnightagain

In Half Light by rose_quartz_cave

Of Great Consequence (self-rec; WIP)—co-written with @pax-in-paradoxo The Purpose of Repose (WIP)(If you’re not too bothered by a fic that involves Ten & Rose as well)

A Shadow in the Human Heart by augustrain (DARK as hell—heed the warnings—and not nearly as smutty as anything else I've posted here, but still so so so good; brilliantly written. It's abandoned as well, but ends at a perfectly fine place for it to end)

I hope there's at least a couple here that you've never read and can enjoy! 💜

[angelstills]

Age of Consent (1969)

[rainbowspark404]

Does k-nk and pet play belong to Pride Parades/CSD?

Cw: Talk about k-nks, f-tish, petplay, might not suitable for all ages (still nothing detailed)

What is a k-nk and what a f-tish?

A k-nk is equal to arousal. That doesn't always have to be s-xual.

A f-tish is mainly made out of s-xual acts. Most times, people say there's a difference between f-tish and k-nk.

Non s-xual k-nks

Can be anything, really. Some people, like ace people, might enjoy the dom/sub interactions without any s-xual reason. They just like the dominance part.

Some petplayers also do it for non s-xual reasons. They just like acting like a puppy and getting leashed, petted, fed, etc.

Non s-xual examples: The smell of perfume, someone wearing a uniform etc.

S-xual examples: Bondage, Voyage, sexual roleplay in general

CSD history and kink

Leather clubs, which are part of the k-nk community were in old times often a safe space for LGBTQI+ people. Sometimes even a replacement family for those who got judged for their s-xuality. They helped to fight for rights along with other LGBTQI+ people. In 1969 they helped with the Stonewall protests too.

The k-nk community also helped a lot with AIDS prevention and still do.

“What about the children???”

Honestly, I'm personally of the opinion that (young) children shouldn't go to a CSD anyway. In the end, it's still a demonstration, and children shouldn't be there.

Still, if there are children, they don't really mind k-nk gear. They probably just think it's dressing up and funny. Especially if children are raised to understand the diversity of romantic/s-xual attraction, why should they be raised to think all k-nks are wrong?

“But I had bad experiences with them at Pride”

I'm sorry to hear that. Your feelings are valid, of course. I also had bad experiences with queer people at Pride, but this doesn't make me hate all queer people. It's okay if you keep your distance, but bad experiences give you no right to discriminate against anyone.

Myth: Petplayers are attracted to animals

That's something I read a lot. However, it's wrong. If a petplayer is attracted to an animal, that's not a petplayer anymore, that's just zo-philia. Those aren't welcome in the community.

Being a petplayer doesn't equal zo-philia. It's just roleplay of two consenting adults. They're not attracted to animals. They're attracted to the power, submission/dominace, or whatever they enjoy about this roleplay. Roleplaying a mob boss doesn't make you one, roleplaying a dog doesn't make you one.

Myth: Puppies and k-nksters are ugly

Maybe you're just insecure about yourself and ugly yourself.

Any other questions?

Comment some questions or misconceptions you heard about k-nk, and I'll try my best to explain them.

I'm open for discussions as long as you stay nice, or else I'll delete the comment.

Sources

my own brain

https://csd-deutschland.de/der-csd-fetische-und-deren-instrumentalisierung/

https://freie-wuffel.eu/

https://queer-lexikon.net/2024/01/02/kink/

(Sorry they're German sources because I'm German. I can try to translate something if Google Translate doesn't help you)

[singemall-stayallnight]

Documentary With Led Zeppelin Stories

Led Zeppelin's John Bonham, John Paul Jones, Robert Plant, and Jimmy Page at the Chateau Marmont, 1969. | © Jay Thompson

Similar accounts of Led Zeppelin’s abusive behavior are given by Sharon Osbourne, in a 2012 documentary titled Sunset Strip, which is currently free on the Tubi app, and by others in the book Led Zeppelin by Bob Spitz.

In Sunset Strip, Sharon talked about how the members of Led Zeppelin would abuse and were pushy with the starstruck girls around them. Led Zeppelin is discussed by several other people in the film as well. The portion on the band starts at around 52:12. Everything that was said about Led Zeppelin in the documentary is transcribed below:

"I stayed with Led Zeppelin there (Hyatt House) a lot, and they had the entire sixth floor. They always rented out the entire sixth floor and, you know, took over." Grins

-Pamela Des Barres

"Everyone knew in Hollywood that Zeppelin were in town, and those guys were so fuckin' wild. They'd abuse the chicks. They liked to push it to see how far they can go. Burning 'em, cuttin' their hair off, handcuffin' 'em. I mean, you know, leaving them handcuffed for a couple of days in the room."

-Sharon Osbourne

"They'd ride motorcycles up and down the hallway at the Continental Hyatt House, and throw these wild, wild parties. You know, up all night, and throwing TV's out the window. All that stuff was true."

-Rodney Bingenheimer

Then, there's an old video shown, presumably from the 70s, in which three unidentified women are talking about LZ.

The clip begins by one woman saying, "Led Zeppelin did lots of stuff. Richard Cole, he took this leather strap and he started beating me, and I didn't even know him. They threw Cynthia in the swimming pool and ruined all her velvet clothes. They were really weird."

"Hostile," one of the other women chimes in.

Cuts back to Sharon

"They were probably the worst, but they were many that abused loads of people on the Strip. But that would never, ever, ever have been tolerated anywhere else but America. In America, they were like, 'Oh, do you wanna hit me some more? Do you wanna burn me? Do you wanna fuck me with a fucking, you know, rod of iron? We'll do it.' And that's, that's how it was."

-Sharon Osbourne

Rodney Bingenheimer, Jimmy Page, and Lori Mattix in Los Angeles, 1972. | Credit: Michael Ochs Archives/Getty Images

Sharon's recollections corroborate a pattern of behavior described in the book Led Zeppelin by Bob Spitz: p. 190

"Once, during Led Zeppelin's stay at the Chateau Marmont, Peter Grant wandered into one of the empty bungalows they'd rented and found a naked young woman tied to the bed by her wrists and ankles. 'I said, 'Hello, what are you doing here?' She said, 'I don't know, but guys keep coming in and fucking me.' I said, 'Oh okay, well, have a nice day.'

No one gave a thought to whether these girls were well below the age of consent. Some were eighteen, some were sixteen, some were fourteen, occasionally younger--mostly no one bothered to ask."

p. 503

"LA meant it was party time. Swan Song and Atlantic rented a fabulous house in one of the canyons and packed it with a guest list of relatively high-profile friends, everyone from Roger McGuinn, Keith Moon, and Rod Stewart to Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. It was a glittery champagne-and-cocaine affair that soon devolved into debauchery. The company pulled out all the stops, somehow sensing this might be a send-off, the last time Led Zeppelin performed in LA.

'I brought along a friend unlike Lori, a thirty-five-year-old, successful woman who knew how to take care of herself,' says Betty Iannaci. Later, Peter Grant invited Iannaci's guest to his room. 'He had come into a large quantity of cocaine and was feeling very generous.' Eventually Betty's friend wound up naked and handcuffed to the pipe under Grant's bathroom sink so that, for an entire weekend, she was at the disposal of anyone who came in. Jimmy came across her almost by accident and, in an uncustomary show of gallantry, found a key to unlock the cuffs and helped her to escape."

Led Zeppelin & Manager Peter Grant. | Source: Pinterest

When I first watched the Sunset Strip documentary, I thought if those girls were restrained and abandoned alone in a hotel room, they were sitting ducks. Any number of terrible things could've been done to them. Zep regularly threw parties at the hotels they stayed in. People would roam from floor to floor and wander into different rooms. Those girls could've been raped.

Then, I read Spitz's book and found out that is what happened. Women and girls were handcuffed or tied up, ditched, and gang raped, sometimes over the course of days. They couldn't consent. They were literally trapped. A man walks into the room and gets to do whatever he wants to whichever girl is there. And she has no choice in the matter.

The men who violated the women & girls who were physically restrained and left alone in unlocked hotel rooms are the ones solely responsible for choosing to rape. But the fact that the Zeppelin band members were restraining women & girls, then leaving them for days at a time is abusive.

Ann Wilson wrote in her review of Spitz's book that Led Zeppelin's story was one of, "rape and pillage," (among other things) and it really was. There were occurrences of statutory rape and two instances of attempted forcible rape by John Bonham.* Let's not forget the multiple incidents of violence committed by Bonham against numerous people, including women, such as the female journalist he punched in the face for smiling at him.

The degeneracy, including rape, is brought up in another review of the book:

https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/bob-spitz-new-book-led-zeppelin-the-biography.1117692/

"I thought the book was fairly well written. I’ve only read one or two other books on Zep, so a lot of the info was new to me. The best parts of the book were the chapters covering the formation of the band, which really painted a detailed picture of the late 60’s music scene. The parts of the book covering the recording sessions were also very well done. Once the 70s and the drugs kick in, the depravity and excesses were all consuming. Very difficult to come to grips with these parts as a fan. I know the text is unrelenting in its depiction of this period, but I dont think there is any other way to tell it. Unfortunately, the serial stories of drugs and rape weren’t punctuated with a few arrests and prosecutions.

Grant was a small time gangster right from the beginning, so it doesn’t surprise me how he ended up. Page hooked their destiny to a star that was inevitably going to burn out… and in a big way. Grant used force and intimidation to get his way and ended up alienating the press and US promoters.

After Bozo died from his disease, Plant was the only one to carve out a semblance of a solo career. JPJ dropped off of the map and Jimmy adopted a very low profile. I strongly suspect his musical skills were damaged by the 70s lifestyle. It is obvious after reading this book why the band would rather not discuss their history, which is extremely unfortunate. It would be nice if they could educate a new generation about one of the best bands ever. Of course, their feeble archive program doesn’t help."

-johnnyb1964, Jun 28, 2023

Led Zeppelin at the Continental Hyatt House Hotel, AKA the Riot House, on the Sunset Strip, 1973. | © James Fortune | Courtesy: modernrocksgallery.com

Sharon's statement that Led Zeppelin were, "probably the worst" reminds me of the bolded line in this comment:

https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/i-just-read-richard-coles-book-and-i-may-never-listen-to-zeppelin-again.225428/page-2

"It's interesting to contrast this thread with the controversy about Francisco Rodriguez (K-Rod), the New York Met's star relief pitcher, who was arrested for attacking his girlfriend's father and was charged with third-degree assault.

None of the sports fans I've spoken with have said, 'It doesn't matter if K-Rod punches a 53-year-old man, I enjoy watching him play, he's one of the best in the business, and his private behavior doesn't matter.' Rather, most of them are not only disgusted by his behavior, but they want him off the team.

The members of LZ weren't punching middle-aged men, but their behavior was no less reprehensible. Yes, rock and roll is (or at least used to be) about rebellion and sex and freedom, but it doesn't have to involve doing degrading things to other people. There's a difference between rowdy and mean, between hooking up with groupies and treating women like utter garbage, between being reckless and intentionally destroying other people's expensive things. All those stories about LZ's behavior aren't legendary because they're typical -- it's because they were at the extreme end of rock star behavior. They're lucky that they're not in jail, or that they weren't shot by someone whom they pissed off.

Now, despite my little rant, I'm able to enjoy my Zeppelin CDs without thinking about any of this. But I understand Zack's feelings.

My question for everyone is, is there a degree of behavior that WOULD cause you to feel like Zack? (Other than, say, the artist brickwalling his or her CDs?;)) Someone mentioned Gary Glitter…has anyone stopped listening to him? What if your favorite artist drove drunk into a schoolbus, killing a dozen 6-year-olds? Or killed his wife?"

-Matty, Aug 20, 2010

Robert Plant with friends at the Riot House. | Credit: Michael Ochs Archives/Pixels

They were other bands behaving badly at the time, but Zep's bad behavior still stands out. I'm unaware of Bonham ever expressing guilt or apologizing for any of his atrocious actions, but as I said in a previous post, I believe the other three former members of LZ see various things differently now and have changed for the better. They certainly have much to feel contrite about, though.

More than one person on here has said they want to maintain a balanced view of Led Zeppelin and not overlook the wrong they've done. Well, here ya go. These are additional glimpses into the foul side of Led Zeppelin's history.

*Ellen Sander went into detail about the attempted gang rape she experienced at the hands of John Bonham and another man. That all four members of the band attacked her is a persistent rumor surrounding Zeppelin, but Bonham was the only LZ band member involved in the attack.

Trips is mostly inspirational — and, as in her chapter on the Plaster Casters of Chicago, iconic groupies known for making casts of various rock legends’ penises — also massively entertaining. But the book doesn’t shy away from the dark side of rock life. One chapter chronicling a 1969 U.S. Led Zeppelin tour starts as a triumphant road movie and ends as a horror film. Sander writes that, when she went to say goodbye to the group and their entourage on the last night of the tour, she ended up in physical peril.

'Two members of the group attacked me, shrieking and grabbing at my clothes, totally over the edge,' she writes. (Sander now specifies that the aggressors were John Bonham and a member of the band’s entourage.) ' I fought them off until [manager] Peter Grant rescued me but not before they managed to tear my dress down the back.'

Reached through a representative, Led Zeppelin declined to comment on the incident. Though in Mick Wall’s 2008 Zeppelin bio When Giants Walked the Earth, when asked about Sander’s account by the author, Page replied, 'That’s not a false picture.'

Sander recently took some time to reflect on that traumatic night, which she calls 'the nadir of that whole arc of experience with Sixties rock & roll.'

So, regarding the Zeppelin incident, I only want to discuss it insofar as you’re comfortable with it.

I’m totally comfortable with any aspect of it, so just go ahead. It was a long time ago. I believe I have healed from that, many times over.

The account in the book is fairly brief. Could you set that scene for me and recall what you remember happening?

You know, we’d been on the road together. I’d been at recording sessions in New York and they had a date at the Fillmore. I had a certain timespan on the tour and I wasn’t going to see them again. I saw the show at the Fillmore. It was splendid, and I went backstage to say goodbye and got attacked.

It was [a member of the band’s entourage] and Bonzo and I don’t know who else. I know it wasn’t Jimmy [Page] or John [Paul Jones] because they were in the corner just flapping their heads. It was only an instant. It couldn’t have been more than 20 seconds, or something like that. Then Peter Grant just sprang up from his seat and just picked them up by the cuff and pulled them off me. They came at me from the front, I crossed my arms over myself, and I turned my back, and I had on this dress, that was tied in the back. The top of it was tied in the back, and they just ripped that down, but I still kept the dress up because I had my arms crossed over my front. And there I stood with the back of my dress torn and Peter said, “Why don’t you take my car home?” So we went downstairs in the back, and he put me in his limousine, and I went home, shaking. I don’t know if I was frightened or if I was angry or both, but I was just shaking. I was terrified.

I just never thought that would happen. I knew about the behavior with the groupies ’cause they would talk about it all the time, and I’d see a little bit of it. What I saw, I wrote about. I was kind of like, 'That’s just with them, but I’m different. I’m a reporter. I’ll do my story for Life magazine. I won’t be vulnerable to that.' And I was.

So just to clarify, this was basically in front of a room full of people?

It was backstage, so it wasn’t all that full. It was the band, the road crew and Peter Grant, maybe a couple other people, but those weren’t very big rooms upstairs backstage at the Fillmore East. I just came in to say goodbye. I wasn’t coming in to hang out. I just wanted to say, “Goodbye. It’s been exhausting but wonderful working with you and best of luck, you’re great, thanks, goodbye.” And I was going to go home and start writing — well, I had a bunch of notes. And that was that.

Would you say that it was John Bonham who was the primary aggressor?

No, it was [the member of their entourage]. And then Bonham was right on it, but it was [the other man] who, I think, started it and then as soon as he encouraged it, then Bonham.

I don’t know where [Robert] Plant was, but I saw Jimmy Page and I saw John Paul Jones. And Jimmy Page was just, like, holding his forehead going, “No.” And John Paul Jones just kind of turned his face to the wall, like he always did. He was always apart from them. He was never into their orgies.

And you said the person who broke it up was …?

Peter Grant. And he was a big guy. Really, he could pick up 220-something guys and just lift them up and put them down. So you know, as it turned out, I was never in any real danger, but I didn’t know that.

So the entire Zeppelin road piece was written after that incident? I think you wrote that you took a year off.

Yes. I decided not to write a piece that would promote them. And plus I was having trouble having any emotional distance from it, which I hope is understandable.

Of course.

My editor was very understanding. I just backed off, and I got busy with a lot of other stuff. And then a year later I was looking at it, looking at my notes and going, “You know what? I’m putting this in the book.”

In terms of getting to that point, was it really just a process of time? Or was there some therapy, or other methods?

Yeah, it was time. You know, it’s been, what, 50 years? It was time and also that I knew that it was an anomalous event. Everybody else I ever worked with treated me very well or better.

Overall, your piece is surprisingly sympathetic to the band, in light of what happened.

Well, I mean it didn’t seem like bitterness to the point of focusing the truth elsewhere. I mean, I loved the story more than I loved them. I just took it from the notes, the way it was. Before that happened, I was very sympathetic. Empathetic maybe.

And their music, I still respect and love. The virtuosity of Jimmy Page still amazes me.

Thinking about what’s happened in so many other industries with the MeToo movement, if something like the Zeppelin attack happened today and it came to light, there would be a huge uproar about it. Do you ever wish that that cultural shift had happened earlier?

I don’t think anybody who ever heard from me or read that story, I don’t remember anybody not being upset and outraged about it. And as I say, it was anomalous. … But men with power always took sexual advantage, and all of a sudden, it’s being called into question, and it’s about time.

I mean, my 50-year-old editor at Saturday Review — my agent put it this way — chased me around the desk. And when I told her about it, I was really upset; she laughed. And I felt very betrayed that she laughed. But then, I felt like, OK, nothing bad happened, it’s just something I have to put up with — I want the gig. And he never did it again, and we never talked about it.