If we sorted all works of art through a filter set to todays norms and societal standards there wouldn't be much left to consume. Its hard to think of many artists that don't have something about them that someone can object about. John Lennon was a hero of mine growing up and the reality of the man doesn't tally up with the persona, still love the Beatles and his solo output though (well most of it) because I believe that while who he was shaped his creative output the songs can be appreciated for what they are. I'm mindful that a lot of his messaging is hypocritical nonsense though but I don't need him to be a guru or inspiration just a good songwriter, singer and musician. Sane applies to Bowie, Page, Clapton, Steven Tyler etc.
While I don't agree with adults having sex with underage people, I do think that there is some distinction between rock stars that slept with underage groupies who had put themselves in their orbit, and predatory paedophiles like Watkins, Glitter and Saville who sought out infants or the disabled / infirmed to act out their sick fantasies. I personally wouldn't listen to Lost Prophets music now as Watkins crimes were so horrific that I can't separate the art from the man, still don't think the music should be cancelled though, the market will dictate its longevity naturally. It is effective, Michael Jackson was one of the most famous humans (?!?) on earth during the 80s when I was growing up, the next generation probably wont know much about him.
Who knows what will happen in another 100 years, they might decide to wipe todays artists from the history books, if anyone bothers to remember them.