Adultery sends shock waves outside the family unit, regardless of what the common opinion is. Especially if it's from enough public figures that it becomes normative ("Everybody's doing it, so why can't we?") and undermines relationships. Artists as role models, you know. (That's my main gripe with Madonna, not adultery per se, but oversexualization and self-worship.)

Yes, racism can easily cast a wide net. However, private racism (Steve Perry supposedly) sometimes hurts no one, which almost never can be said about adultery. And racism is no less human than adultery.

I agree, and have agreed, that both are bad, and yes surely adultery can affect those outside the immediate family circle but again I have to reiterate it stops there. Adultery does not go on to hurt a wide swathe of people unconnected to the perpetrator and is generally confined to within the environs of those to whom it matters and whom it affects. Racism --- let's say overt racism, because after all if someone "keeps their racism to themselves" then you really don't know that they are racist, and the whole idea of this thread is the notion that you're supposed to KNOW the artist is racist or whatever --- does. It's insidious, it's contagious and it can affect people in terrible ways.

It can also be taught and perpetuated down the generations. Someone with a racist father (or mother) is likely to grow up racist themselves and teach their children bigotry too, whereas generally, an adulterer is unlikely to encourage his or her kids to cheat on their spouses. They may take that as an example, but they may just as easily use it as a way NOT to live their lives, especially if it's hurt theirs. Racism can become a way of life, a creed even, and mostly adultery is a mistake (usually though not always regretted) and something nobody would really intend to pass on to their kids.

There's no such thing as "private racism". If you're racist it's going to affect how you treat other people.

Again, are you in some kinda fundamentalist religion? Cause if so then I would rather take my leave of this discussion, since we'd be coming from two incompatible places.

I'm not religious and have never been strongly connected to a faith.

I agree that racism often is insidious and passed down through the generations. However, if Steve Perry is the ultimate private racist, childless and non-discriminatory in his interactions with non-white people (e.g., Randy Jackson), then should anyone care?

Back to the OP: nope, the artist's personal life doesn't affect my liking their music and wouldn't prevent me from listening to it.

I do have to say, however, that I was poking around in the Megan's Law database (for registered sex offenders) and was pretty surprised to see a famous rock musician listed in there—AND doubly surprised to see he lived relatively close to me! Due to the agreement with using that database, I won't mention his name, but some of the songs he's recorded are some of my favorites and that didn't change on knowing his record.

Does it give any details about his offense? A man in his early 20's having sex with a mature-looking 17-year-old girl is very different from a 40-something man groping a 6th-grader.

You have asked a very hard question... It depends on how serious the crime is... I have absolutely no tolerance for child molesters. If my favorite musician was a child molester, I would freak out. I would stop supporting this musician.

But if I found out that my favorite musician didn't pay his/her taxes, I wouldn't be shocked. I would still listen to this musician and I would still attend his/her concerts. (I understand that this is very subjective. This is not an objective science. Who's right and who's wrong? It's very hard to answer that question. I'm just giving you an opinion.)

I was thinking about this, and I realized I want to believe the singer (of any song I much like lyrically) is coming from a similar place to me emotionally. If he or she turns out to be someone of poor character (which, for example, adultery almost always signals), that undermines the song's meaning to me. As in womanizing John Mayer churning out sentimental music because it will sell.

I really don't see any issue with liking an artist for their music alone at all. I also don't see it remotely as being a double-standard.

As far as the person in question turning out to be a rapist/murderer/child-molestor/horrible-er...did their music ever rape, murder, molest, or horrible anyone?

I personally separate myself from my work, and the two things are not at all one in the same. You can appreciate the good someone's done without focusing on the bad, just as you can appreciate anything aesthetically pleasing to you without acknowledging any flaws in the creator. If something moves you, you shouldn't be made to feel guilty or hypocritical because of this. If you take the moral "high ground" because of disagreements with the person who has created something you enjoy, then you're just missing out, plain and simple.

Sure, they shouldn't have done whatever the **** they've done, but that's their prerogative and something that can be dealt with by appropriate laws and regulations. Don't treat the musician or artist themselves any different than you would in general, e.g. don't try to become a murderer's bestie because you dig that track he laid down, but still appreciate the art.

I'm not God or Allah or whoever, and I'm not the police, so it's not my place to punish the person. I might not go out of my way to attend any concerts, certainly would not attend a meet and greet, but if I like the music, I like the painting, I like the book...that's all that matters to me.