Talk:Scotty Bowers

come on

was a handsome, well-endowed and personable ex-marine

Is one of the single silliest claims in a lead ever conceived of. It is, at best, pure puffery, and at worst, indicative of a wanton disregard for the difference between fact and opinion. Collect (talk)

But is it un-true? What's silly about it? "Handsome, well-endowed, and personable" account for about 85% of why he should have a Wikipedia article. I can see that Scotty is not a subject you might be interested in but for the rest of us, this claim in the lead is quite OK. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pascalulu88 (talk • contribs) 19:23, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

a 'Hollywood pimp'?

I quote from the article: 'George Albert "Scotty" Bowers (born July 1, 1923) is a former Marine who, from the 1940s to the 1980s, was a Hollywood pimp.'

I hesitate over whether we are justified in putting it exactly that way. I get that he presents himself as a sort of unpaid pimp. However, I wonder if we get even that much information basically from him. And if so, well, I'm not sure I believe that Bowers was bosom buddies with the glitterati, the Hollywood A-List, the wealthiest producers, and the biggest celebrities. I could go on, but just talking about Bowers makes me tired. Let us suppose, then, that I believe every word of his accounts of three decades of having sex with — or arranging others to have sex with — some of the biggest names of Hollywood's Golden Age — Cary Grant, Vincent Price, Edith Piaf, Spencer Tracy and the Duke of Windsor. Nevertheless, in the end, here is what I find as the definition of a pimp:

'a man who controls prostitutes and arranges clients for them, taking part of their earnings in return'

Note that we could indeed refer to wiki itself for an entry about 'Procuring (prostitution)':

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procuring_(prostitution)

Scotty Bowers may be many things, we might, informally call him an 'ultimate hustler', or a 'Hollywood legend' or maybe 'Hollywood fixer', a 'sexual Zelig', etc. I am stipulating that all of it is true, for example it is, shall we say, true, that as he claims, for instance, he set Hepburn up with 'over 150 different women.' I reflect here, upon the rules of engagement for reporting celebrity gossip, on wiki. The sexual shenanigans of movie stars were a currency for tabloids stretching back to Hollywood’s earliest days. While I am reflecting upon this, I will keep my question as simple as possible -- what is the definition of a 'Hollywood pimp'? I mean, if we were calling him a 'sexual rainmaker to the stars' or whatever, then okay, it means whatever you want it to mean. My point is not that I want to be able to watch Mutiny on the Bounty. I mean, sure, that is a point, or more generally, maybe I enjoy old movies, but it's not my point of emphasis. Similarly, maybe I have a soul. But this is not my point.

My point, is that somebody who supported himself through prostitution, bartending and working as a handyman, is not maybe precisely a 'Hollywood pimp'. It's simple, I think that even by his own account, he wasn't a pimp.DanLanglois (talk) 08:30, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Scotty Bowers

There is a need for a correction to Scotty Bowers Wikipedia page there is no way l can see that the majority of film biographers would agree with Bowers. Concerning the love lives of stars in the past there needs to be more of a balance in putting the alternative point of view in place. Referance to biographies that contradict him in key passages as well as the Katherine Hepburn estates saying they did not believe it; as well as a check list of Wikipedia sites of stars in the book being cross referenced show many of his stories are made up. Andrew Dock 65 (talk) 23:47, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Why? Like in the article, mentioning that the claims are disputed and by whom should should suffice. And if you still feel so, why don't you do it? I personally think this suggestions literally comes from what the article mentions, not accepting the truth about Hollywood's "myth machine". --2001:16B8:260A:9500:8DE6:2E86:73F3:C79 (talk) 11:16, 10 October 2019 (UTC) (UTC)

"Whore"

@Afterwriting: A book entitled "Whore Stories..." was removed from "See also." Whore = prostitute, ergo a book about "whores" is a very justifiable 'reference.' Bowers was involved with prostitution for his entire adult life. So the title has been restored. Just noticed that a specific page was cited, presumably mentioning Mr. Bowers. Tapered (talk) 10:47, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

@Tapered: The "See also" section is for links to other Wikipedia pages, see MOS:SEEALSO. If something significant is at the specific page, then it needs to be added as a citation at the relevant place in the article. --John B123 (talk) 16:14, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Correct. "See also" sections are only for links to other Wikipedia articles which have some kind of connection. Afterwriting (talk) 02:24, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Gotcha! Tapered (talk) 04:37, 21 August 2019 (UTC)