Iconic singer, 81, looking at 'all legal remedies' after son's elder abuse claim
The 81-year-old legend is set to resume her Queens Tour in the US next month and has insisted she is 'healthy and happy' despite her son's claims.
Hankerson, 49, alleged that Knight's husband William McDowell — who is 33 years her junior — was mentally and financially abusing her.
He told The Shade Room: 'I don't want my mom out on tour on a tour bus wondering where she's at.'
After this, Hankerson claimed he had filed a complaint with North Carolina's Department of Human Services and that an investigation is underway.
Knight hit back at this and reassured worried fans that her health and the tour had been 'misrepresented'.
'I want my fans and those concerned to rest assured I am doing very well for someone who has been on stage for three quarters of a century, hard to believe, right?' she told The Independent.
'I'm healthy and happy and visiting friends and family these last few months. I'm excited to get back on the road with my sisters and on stage with The Queens Tour. See you soon.'
She told People she had been enjoying her time touring and was 'excited' to get back on the road for the autumn dates.
However, Hankerson claimed that her memory is becoming a problem and that this touring is 'detrimental' to his mother.
'I did my best to give [McDowell] the space to play the role of husband and do what was in my mom's best interest, and he has not done that,' he alleged.
'Why is she working? Why is she in this situation where she's being made to believe that she has to work like this? That's really my issue with it.'
The disagreement could escalate into a lawsuit as Knight's publicist said the James Bond singer was looking into 'any and all legal remedies' for his 'defamatory comments'.
They also alleged that he 'has had no substantial contact with her'.
Hankerson retorted that he is 'absolutely' ready to take this to court to make sure he can 'really take care' of his mother.
'This has nothing to do with money for me,' he insisted. 'I'm trying to get her to stop working.'
Knight and McDowell married in 2001 after three months of dating but had known each other for around a decade.
After releasing some tracks together, the couple regularly appear on red carpets together, including when she was awarded at the Kennedy Centre Honours, AMAs, Billboard Music Awards and BET Awards. More Trending
Knight previously stated to Closer that her grandchildren and great-grandchildren 'love [McDowell] to death'.
She is mum to three children, having welcomed Jimmy and Kenya in the early 60s with first husband James Newman, who she split with in 1973.
Then she married Barry Hankerson, who is Shanga's father, the following year, but they broke up in 1979.
Knight, known for hits like I Heard It Through the Grapevine and Midnight Train to Georgia, is touring throughout this year with Chaka Khan, Patti LaBelle and Stephanie Mills.
Got a story?
If you've got a celebrity story, video or pictures get in touch with the Metro.co.uk entertainment team by emailing us celebtips@metro.co.uk, calling 020 3615 2145 or by visiting our Submit Stuff page – we'd love to hear from you.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
30 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Does James Bond have to be played by a man? Helen Mirren seems to think so
'I'm such a feminist,' Helen Mirren told Saga magazine, but there are some jobs a woman can't do. To be precise: 'You can't have a woman [as James Bond]. It just doesn't work. James Bond has to be James Bond, otherwise it becomes something else.' Mirren is starring opposite Pierce Brosnan in the film adaptation of Richard Osman's The Thursday Murder Club, in which they both play amateur sleuths in a care home. Happily, that is a unisex job. Brosnan might also describe himself as 'such a feminist' – he has never said so explicitly, but in 2019, he said a female Bond would be 'exhilarating'. However, he's now back on team men, saying: 'I'm so excited to see the next man come on the stage and to see a whole new exuberance and life for this character.' Exhilaration, excitement, exuberance: all qualities I don't think I've ever seen in any Bond, across the great gamut of maleness, from Connery to Craig. But who am I to judge? Whenever 007 gets a new pen that can poison someone from 50 paces, the thrill racing through his veins might be implied by his slightly less stern visage. Truly, masculinity is an unknowable frontier. A couple of things, before we hand the franchise over to Amazon, who bought it for more than $1bn earlier this year. The essential qualities of Bond are as follows: he can kill on command without conscience, except when he has a conscience; he is patriotic; he is irresistible to women; he favours discreetly tailored, monochrome clothing; he can drink neat spirits without becoming intoxicated; and he always introduces himself in reverse order, to people who tend to already know his name. None of this screams 'man', except perhaps the patriotism, if you understand emotionally charged nationalism as a drumbeat of the patriarchy. Having said that, women can serve the patriarchy just as well as men – look at Mirren. Sorry, that is totally uncalled for: her feminist membership cannot be revoked, at least not on the basis of her Bond opinions, since that would be handing 007 too much power in the realm of gender. On a separate point: is Bond a feminist, and if he is, does that mean it's fine for him to remain a man in perpetuity? It's a tricky one. His value system has changed so much over the 25 films, from his early 'lovable chauvinist' years to his late 'anguished quester after the truth of the self' iteration, a lesser person than myself might think the masculine ideal had itself gone on a journey since it first put on a dinner jacket in 1962. That, however, is a fruitless line of analysis, since if we were to take James Bond as too literal a representation of the changing social expectations of men, we'd have to conclude that they can be any which way, so long as they're prepared to take out a minor dictator with piano wire and have a disregard for due process. Arguably more important than any of that is what the Amazon takeover will do to the franchise, given the semi-recent history of the tech company – it invented an AI recruitment tool in 2018 that effectively trained itself to prefer male candidates; it was shown to have embedded sexism in its sports coverage, after Alexa didn't know what a Lioness was; and, according to employees, it has an office culture in which you're never not at work, which automatically excludes sane people – and come on, a lot of those are going to be women. Does this sound like a safe pair of hands to take over the management of a fictional character whose arc we would hope is going to continue to bend towards gender justice? Not really, but at the same time, if Amazon did spring a female Bond on the world, and used that as feminist-washing, proof in perpetuity that none of the sexist algorithms were created deliberately, well, that would be quite annoying. Nobody overreact, but surely what this moment in history is crying out for is a gender-fluid Bond. Zoe Williams is a Guardian columnist Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
Western Telegraph
6 hours ago
- Western Telegraph
Helen Mirren and Pierce Brosnan weigh in on James Bond
It comes after Amazon MGM Studios revealed last month that Peaky Blinders creator Steven Knight would be taking charge for the next film. Dame Helen Mirren has said that the next James Bond 'has to be a guy'. She told Saga Magazine: 'I'm such a feminist, but James Bond has to be a guy. You can't have a woman. It just doesn't work. 'James Bond has to be James Bond, otherwise it becomes something else.' 31 years ago today, Pierce Brosnan became JAMES BOND. — All The Right Movies (@ATRightMovies) June 8, 2025 The Oscar-winning actress, 80, stars alongside former 007 actor Pierce Brosnan in the new Thursday Murder Club film, a cosy crime drama adapted from the best-selling book by game show host Richard Osman. Pierce, 72, agreed with the actress about the next portrayal of Bond and told the magazine: 'Oh, I think it has to be a man.' He added: 'I wish (Amazon) them well. I'm so excited to see the next man come on the stage and to see a whole new exuberance and life for this character. 'I adore the world of James Bond. It's been very good to me. It's the gift that keeps giving. 'And I'm just a member of the audience now, sitting back, saying: 'Show us what you're going to do'.' Dame Helen previously told the Standard that 'the whole concept of James Bond is drenched and born out of profound sexism' and added: 'Women have always been a major and incredibly important part of the Secret Service, they always have been.' In the forthcoming Thursday Murder Club film, the veteran actress plays a retired spy, who is also the founder and leader of the club. Speaking about her character Elizabeth, she told Saga: 'So many women have worked in that world. She's a manifestation of a reality, that's for sure.' Recommended reading: Asked if she is a better portrayal of a spy than Bond, she responded: 'More realistic. But not so much fun as Bond!' She added: 'The great thing about a movie like this is that it reminds everyone, as an older person I have a brain. I have agency, energy, commitment, passion and intellect. It doesn't all stop when you're 40.' Brosnan said the film, directed by Harry Potter director Chris Columbus, would also appeal to anyone who likes the film series about wizardry and added: 'This is like a Harry Potter retirement home.'
The Guardian
7 hours ago
- The Guardian
Does James Bond have to be played by a man? Helen Mirren seems to think so
'I'm such a feminist,' Helen Mirren told Saga magazine, but there are some jobs a woman can't do. To be precise: 'You can't have a woman [as James Bond]. It just doesn't work. James Bond has to be James Bond, otherwise it becomes something else.' Mirren is starring opposite Pierce Brosnan in the film adaptation of Richard Osman's The Thursday Murder Club, in which they both play amateur sleuths in a care home. Happily, that is a unisex job. Brosnan might also describe himself as 'such a feminist' – he has never said so explicitly, but in 2019, he said a female Bond would be 'exhilarating'. However, he's now back on team men, saying: 'I'm so excited to see the next man come on the stage and to see a whole new exuberance and life for this character.' Exhilaration, excitement, exuberance: all qualities I don't think I've ever seen in any Bond, across the great gamut of maleness, from Connery to Craig. But who am I to judge? Whenever 007 gets a new pen that can poison someone from 50 paces, the thrill racing through his veins might be implied by his slightly less stern visage. Truly, masculinity is an unknowable frontier. A couple of things, before we hand the franchise over to Amazon, who bought it for more than $1bn earlier this year. The essential qualities of Bond are as follows: he can kill on command without conscience, except when he has a conscience; he is patriotic; he is irresistible to women; he favours discreetly tailored, monochrome clothing; he can drink neat spirits without becoming intoxicated; and he always introduces himself in reverse order, to people who tend to already know his name. None of this screams 'man', except perhaps the patriotism, if you understand emotionally charged nationalism as a drumbeat of the patriarchy. Having said that, women can serve the patriarchy just as well as men – look at Mirren. Sorry, that is totally uncalled for: her feminist membership cannot be revoked, at least not on the basis of her Bond opinions, since that would be handing 007 too much power in the realm of gender. On a separate point: is Bond a feminist, and if he is, does that mean it's fine for him to remain a man in perpetuity? It's a tricky one. His value system has changed so much over the 25 films, from his early lovable-chauvinist years to his late anguished-quester-after-the-truth-of-the-self iteration, a lesser person than myself might think the masculine ideal had itself gone on a journey since it first put on a dinner jacket in 1962. That, however, is a fruitless line of analysis, since if we were to take James Bond as too literal a representation of the changing social expectations of men, we'd have to conclude that they can be any which way, so long as they're prepared to take out a minor dictator with a piano wire and have a disregard for due process. Arguably more important than any of that is what the Amazon takeover will do to the franchise, given the semi-recent history of the tech company – it invented an AI recruitment tool in 2018 that effectively trained itself to prefer male candidates; it was shown to have embedded sexism in its sports coverage, after Alexa didn't know what a Lioness was; and, according to employees, it has an office culture in which you're never not at work, which automatically excludes sane people – and come on, a lot of those are going to be women. Does this sound like a safe pair of hands to take over the management of a fictional character whose arc we would hope is going to continue to bend towards gender justice? Not really, but at the same time, if Amazon did spring a female Bond on the world, and used that as feminist-washing, proof in perpetuity that none of the sexist algorithms were created deliberately, well, that would be quite annoying. Nobody overreact, but surely what this moment in history is crying out for is a gender-fluid Bond. Zoe Williams is a Guardian columnist Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
