Talk:Catherine Ringer

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

False Rumours[edit]

If she had any health issues related to her lifestyle it should remain private. Plaqueswan (talk) 13:44, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Short career in adult films[edit]

Ringer evidently had a short stint in adult movies while young, something never denied nor denounced by her. Is this something we intentionally avoid having in her biography? -The Gnome (talk) 12:22, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Her statement on this is:

“I was the victim, from the age of 13 and a half to 20, of a narcissistic pervert who dragged me into pornographic areas, into rape. I was a young girl abandoned by parents who knew nothing about it. It must be said that we lived in a time in the 1970s – I am not the only one to have experienced this – when we said: “we are going to free ourselves”, “long live free love”. So, go ahead, you're 15, so read Emmanuelle. We're going to do as in Emmanuelle, you're going to become the slave of a guy who's 45, I'll give you to him, etc. Me, I let myself be done too, and I suffered a lot. I cried a lot. I had a lot of after effects. Well, now we also do with all that. He too had been more or less raped when he was little in Catholic schools. It is also thanks to him that I started to be a professional singer. Well, I'm not going to denounce it, however. In addition, there is prescription."[1]

Above comment added by Acousmana. -The Gnome (talk) 15:14, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Fine. But the question remains: Is there any reason, even taking into account the above, not to include this information in the biography? -The Gnome (talk) 15:14, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
it really depends on editorial predilection, is it notable? It was something she did in her teens, under duress, should we dwell on it? Any mention would be subject to WP:WEIGHT. If framed sympathetically, with consideration for context, as stated by subject, mention may be due. Acousmana 16:12, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Instead of framing the prose "sympathetically", I'd rather say that, per WP:BLP, such life episodes are to be treated carefully and without judgment, if presented, since editing must be neutral and unbiased. And it goes without saying that they're to be assigned their objectively rightful degree of prominence in the text. I'll try and work on it. Thanks for the input. -The Gnome (talk) 08:25, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK, "sympathetically," as in giving due consideration to the subject's perspective on their "life episodes," if they state they were exploited and sexually abused, it's important that we acknowledge this. It wasn't a "career" choice. Worth mentioning too that pornographers later exploited her fame as a musician, during the 80s, in reissuing material that had been out of circulation for years. Ultimately she's notable for her contributions to music, not pornography. Acousmana 12:28, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, what you describe as being "sympathetic" I actually find to be every editor's duty in such cases, i.e. to acknowledge the nature of her involvement, to point out the subsequent exploitation by pornographers, and so on. Again, worth noting is that Ringer herself never "denounced" her involvement, deeming it essentially a "mistake" of her youth to which she was led by an oppressive and abusive acquaintance. Ringer is far more notable for her contributions to music than to anything else. Yet, in biographies, we do not include information only about the most notable endeavor of the subject. -The Gnome (talk) 22:09, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
sure, it's something that should be mentioned, but weighting, relative to the coverage of her music career, should be accurate, and it's a small article right now so could very quickly end up overemphasizing her involvement in pornography. Acousmana 19:16, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Katia Rimbert (6 November 2017). "Catherine Ringer révèle avoir été victime d'un pervers narcissique dans C à vous". Télé-Loisirs.