Page 54 of 54 FirstFirst ... 4 44 52 53 54
Results 1,591 to 1,615 of 1615

Thread: Random Celebrity Headlines

  1. #1591
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Ontari-ari-ario
    Posts
    3,068
    Mentioned
    125 Post(s)
    Of course you're right. Just pointing out that the bar is set SO LOW for abusive men to "redeem" themselves that something where he doesn't even apologise — for ANY of it — is nevertheless framed as a public apology.

  2. #1592
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Kansas City, Missouri
    Posts
    2,021
    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Probably gonna get dragged for this real hard, but it's really been bothering me lately. For me personally, I don't see the point in letting some of these people's actions ruin the work that I PERSONALLY enjoy from them. Jesse Lacey from Brand New, for example. I see a fuck ton of people stating they'll never listen to Brand New again, who a few days ago would probably have an endless debate about which Brand New album is their best. I don't feel like I have to personally stop listening to this music that has been super important to me over the years just because of something this dude did on his own time. What he did is obviously suuuuper shitty and I'm never going to make excuses for it, but as for an album that literally helped me get through some of the rougher patches of my life, why should I all of sudden pretend that those albums are flawed pieces of shit?

    I don't know. Yeah it really sucks watching your public figure idols crash and burn with all of these allegations, but jesus, at this point, every famous person ever is going to have allegations about them. If we stop listening to or watching the things from all these people, will we even have any form of entertainment left for us?

    Like I said, I feel like I'm going to get dragged for my opinions here, or possibly even be labeled an excuser (which I'm not) but I don't personally feel like I'm defending these people's actions by continuing to engage in their body of work. There are certain situations where it is appropriate (Cosby for example, who spent his entire career based on fatherly advice, only for it to be revealed a sham to hide his true actions), but for instances here like Jesse Lacey, where he has genuinely spent the last ten plus years writing songs about how he's done shitty things and has already long ago sought therapy and tried to turn his life around, like... do we really need to burn all of our Brand New t-shirts?

    It's just frustrating to see so many people who a few days ago would state that Brand New is their favorite band now say that they're garbage or something. Is the band's music ACTUALLY garbage all of a sudden, or is the music still the same emotional experience for you, and that the actions of the front man are garbage?

  3. #1593
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    5,073
    Mentioned
    163 Post(s)

    Random Celebrity Headlines

    @richardp - a few ways to look at it:
    1 - a responsible consumer participating in a market thinks beyond first level "I like this product and my money will signal that I want more." You will also think about the lifecycle of that money. Where does it go? In the case of popular artists, its the direct source of the power that they probably abused in most of these allegations. Not just in the "money=power" sense but everyone/everything around them that helps shield them from consequences is primarily there due to the money cow. (Too bad we can't easily stop paying taxes to all the rapists and murderers who receive that money). So it's not consumption of the art that is the issue, but the power that you give in return. But, most people don't look that deep, so you get absolutism in both directions.

    2 - yes there are situational dilemmas that pertain to the context of the material produced. I don't know anything about that band, but maybe there is some debate about the value of the message. Nothing is ever absolute. There will always be the scale of wholistic pragmatism that must be weighed. And, hopefully, that can be done by looping back to point #1.

  4. #1594
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    9,360
    Mentioned
    734 Post(s)
    In the case of a BAND, the entire band isn't made up of that one pedo or abuser or whatever; there's a dynamic of affecting a bunch of people vs. just that one asshole.

    My husband and I were talking about this the other night re Papa John's pizza or even Domino's pizza back in the day: the Papa John's founder is getting a lot of shit (and the founder and former owner of Domino's suddenly became SUPER Catholic and pro-life), so people are / were boycotting the pizza etc. Except, these individual pizza places are owned and operated by franchisees, and they and their employees have NOTHING to do with the actions of Tom Monoghan (Domino's) or John Schnatter (Papa John's). So by punishing the asshole, you also could be punishing a bunch of innocent people who were totally unconnected to the asshole.

    We've had this discussion about guys like John Lennon (people can't reconcile his admitting that he hit his wife when he was in his late-teens, for which he apologized but for some that is not enough -- never mind that the guy is long dead and his money is going to his widow and kid and philanthropic organizations), or guys like Woody Allen (are we disrespecting his daughter who was sexually abused if we continue watching his films?)

    And, really, it's still these guys' faults for putting us and the industry and partners around them in this position of having to deal with this cognitive dissonance.

    I think if it makes you feel a bit guilty listening the music of a band whose lead singer is a pedo or whatever, then it at least indicates that you have a moral compass? But, at least you are not a victim of the actual crime; worrying about whether or not you can still enjoy the music is barely a problem, relatively speaking.
    Last edited by allegro; 11-12-2017 at 02:59 PM.

  5. #1595
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    9,360
    Mentioned
    734 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by botley View Post
    Of course you're right. Just pointing out that the bar is set SO LOW for abusive men to "redeem" themselves that something where he doesn't even apologise — for ANY of it — is nevertheless framed as a public apology.
    See, I haven't seen it framed as a public apology ... I've seen the headlines saying he "admits to sexual misconduct" or he "responds to accusations" or "acknowledges sexual misconduct" etc.

    The only people I've seen claiming it's an "apology" = SOME OF HIS FANS. "Now, see, there, he apologized. That's nice of him. Now I can rid myself of this cognitive dissonance by continuing to think he's funny etc. and I'll not be bothered
    Last edited by allegro; 11-12-2017 at 03:41 PM.

  6. #1596
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Posts
    987
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    @richardp ...When I think about the question of how we judge artists who do terrible things and whether we can separate the individual from their art, I guess I take it on a case by case basis, and I judge them based on a number of factors...

    First...Is this an individual artist or was this a collaborative project? I've specifically thought about this with the films of Roman Polanski. The guy should be ostracized from the film scene forever, but how should we look at his films in retrospect, films that were the result of many different people's talents? For example, Mia Farrow is a huge part of why Rosemary's Baby is great. I'd argue it's her best performance and that her life's work doesn't deserve to be sacrificed because of Polanski. It's not fair to punish someone unrelated. Polanski doesn't OWN the entire film. I contrast this with the poet Ezra Pound, who was a fascist who literally gave speeches cheering on the genocide of Jews. He's a "solo" artist, so I'm fine saying that we should condemn him and his work. That said, this isn't always an easy question, because a piece of art may be somewhat collaborative and yet heavily dominated by one person. House of Cards is a collaborative project, but Spacey is the center of the whole thing, so I personally couldn't watch the show and ignore him. And like Allegro said, this may or may not also be the case with certain bands.

    Second...How much of the art itself directly overlaps with the artists wrong doing? For example, I was absolutely horrified to learn that Miles Davis beat his wives. I haven't listened to his music much since learning that, and I haven't decided how to think about it. That said, instrumental jazz music really has no obvious direct relation to domestic violence, so I can at least see the potential for someone arguing that this music can be enjoyed despite the terrible actions of the artist. I'm not saying that someone is wrong for condemning the work of Miles Davis, but I'm just saying I feel that it's somewhat easier to argue for the separation of the art from the person when the art itself is so thematically unrelated. Contrast that with Louis CK, whose work addresses masturbation, and it's just too close for comfort. Like how am I supposed to tune that out or not make an instant connection between his comedy bits and his real life actions? Or, for example, I could never listen to R. Kelly's music given that I'd be listening to a bunch of sex jams by a person who is a pathological rapist/abuser of minors. I literally can't imagine a worse choice of an artist to have soundtrack your sexual experiences.

    Third...What capacity is there for complexity in this artist's work, specifically with regard to their own wrong doing? What I mean is, is this person's art still worthwhile for the sake of understanding the very thing that they did wrong? One example I can think of is the southern gothic writer Flannery O'Connor. In some of her personal letters, she wrote some fairly racist stuff. And yet I think her own fiction writing is still important for the purpose of condemning southern racism and critiquing the hypocrisy of southern culture as a whole. Her stories directly confront racism within her own culture, the passing along of racism from generation to generation, etc. So I feel like it's fair to say that Flannery O'Connor was a complicated person who, depsite her flaws, did something good by attacking the very things that compromised herself. I don't feel that this is the case with, say, John Wayne, who was a gross racist shithead and who never contributed to any piece of art that tried to address racism or that might complicate our understanding of him, so I say fuck him.

    I could write more but... I'm just trying to explain that, for me, it's a complicated thing that I judge on a case by case basis and I think about it from LOTS of different angles. And I also fully admit that some of my ideas may be wrong. My position on this stuff is far from perfect, nor is it static.
    Last edited by Mantra; 11-12-2017 at 03:34 PM.

  7. #1597
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Kansas City, Missouri
    Posts
    2,021
    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mantra View Post
    @richardp ...When I think about the question of how we judge artists who do terrible things and whether we can separate the individual from their art, I guess I take it on a case by case basis, and I judge them based on a number of factors...

    First...Is this an individual artist or was this a collaborative project? I've specifically thought about this with the films of Roman Polanski. The guy should be ostracized from the film scene forever, but how should we look at his films in retrospect, films that were the result of many different people's talents? For example, Mia Farrow is a huge part of why Rosemary's Baby is great. I'd argue it's her best performance and that her life's work doesn't deserve to be sacrificed because of Polanski. It's not fair to punish someone unrelated. Polanski doesn't OWN the entire film. I contrast this with the poet Ezra Pound, who was a fascist who literally gave speeches cheering on the genocide of Jews. He's a "solo" artist, so I'm fine saying that we should condemn him and his work. That said, this isn't always an easy question, because a piece of art may be somewhat collaborative and yet heavily dominated by one person. House of Cards is a collaborative project, but Spacey is the center of the whole thing, so I personally couldn't watch the show and ignore him. And like Allegro said, this may or may not also be the case with certain bands.

    Second...How much of the art itself directly overlaps with the artists wrong doing? For example, I was absolutely horrified to learn that Miles Davis beat his wives. I haven't listened to his music much since learning that, and I haven't decided how to think about it. That said, instrumental jazz music really has no obvious direct relation to domestic violence, so I can at least see the potential for someone arguing that this music can be enjoyed despite the terrible actions of the artist. I'm not saying that someone is wrong for condemning the work of Miles Davis, but I'm just saying I feel that it's somewhat easier to argue for the separation of the art from the person when the art itself is so thematically unrelated. Contrast that with Louis CK, whose work addresses masturbation, and it's just too close for comfort. Like how am I supposed to tune that out or not make an instant connection between his comedy bits and his real life actions? Or, for example, I could never listen to R. Kelly's music given that I'd be listening to a bunch of sex jams by a person who is a pathological rapist/abuser of minors. I literally can't imagine a worse choice of an artist to have soundtrack your sexual experiences.

    Third...What capacity is there for complexity in this artist's work, specifically with regard to their own wrong doing? What I mean is, is this person's art still worthwhile for the sake of understanding the very thing that they did wrong? One example I can think of is the southern gothic writer Flannery O'Connor. In some of her personal letters, she wrote some fairly racist stuff. And yet I think her own fiction writing is still important for the purpose of condemning southern racism and critiquing the hypocrisy of southern culture as a whole. Her stories directly confront racism within her own culture, the passing along of racism from generation to generation, etc. So I feel like it's fair to say that Flannery O'Connor was a complicated person who, depsite her flaws, did something good by attacking the very things that compromised herself. I don't feel that this is the case with, say, John Wayne, who was a gross racist shithead and who never contributed to any piece of art that tried to address racism or that might complicate our understanding of him, so I say fuck him.

    I could write more but... I'm just trying to explain that, for me, it's a complicated thing that I judge on a case by case basis and I think about it from LOTS of different angles. And I also fully admit that some of my ideas may be wrong. My position on this stuff is far from perfect, nor is it static.
    This was all great, dude. Lots of good points. I agree with the case by case logic, definitely. To continue using Brand New as an example, in the instance of case by case with this one, I personally feel like through the fact that Jesse Lacey already recognized his wrong doing years ago and has already been involved in group and individual therapy for a while now, coupled with the fact that basically their last three albums all lyrically wrestled with his own personal inner demons, there's no reason to just like all of a sudden burn all your Brand New shirts. And to reiterate my statement earlier, if the music itself wasn't trash a few days ago, why would it be trash now. It's the actions of one quarter of a whole here that people are reacting to. The other three members of Brand New helped contribute to the project just as much, and they all have families to support. Why should we all punish those guys now, because of Jesse's actions 15 years ago?

    There's obviously a lot to chew on here, but I loved everything you offered in the discussion. I'm actually really happy that we're all able to have an actual discussion here about this, as everyone on my fucking facebook seems to have the mindset that any emotional reaction to an allegation isn't immediately "NOPE IM FUCKING DONE FOREVER FUCK THIS NEVER AGAIN" is defending the actions of those accused. I think during all of these allegations on anyone, it's still important to actually weigh the worth of the person's body of work, and sort of like you stated above, how much of it overlaps with the reality set by these predators, rather than outright say you'll never listen to or watch anything by them ever again. But I get it, it's super easy to be reactionary as hell with every allegation coming out, and some of them do genuinely warrant those extreme reactions. But in terms of Jesse Lacey, who has already sought treatment long before his allegations came out, making the choice to better himself already, I would not say it's exactly necessary for Brand New to be deemed "garbage" just yet.

  8. #1598
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Posts
    987
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by richardp View Post
    This was all great, dude. Lots of good points. I agree with the case by case logic, definitely. To continue using Brand New as an example, in the instance of case by case with this one, I personally feel like through the fact that Jesse Lacey already recognized his wrong doing years ago and has already been involved in group and individual therapy for a while now, coupled with the fact that basically their last three albums all lyrically wrestled with his own personal inner demons, there's no reason to just like all of a sudden burn all your Brand New shirts. And to reiterate my statement earlier, if the music itself wasn't trash a few days ago, why would it be trash now. It's the actions of one quarter of a whole here that people are reacting to. The other three members of Brand New helped contribute to the project just as much, and they all have families to support. Why should we all punish those guys now, because of Jesse's actions 15 years ago?

    There's obviously a lot to chew on here, but I loved everything you offered in the discussion. I'm actually really happy that we're all able to have an actual discussion here about this, as everyone on my fucking facebook seems to have the mindset that any emotional reaction to an allegation isn't immediately "NOPE IM FUCKING DONE FOREVER FUCK THIS NEVER AGAIN" is defending the actions of those accused. I think during all of these allegations on anyone, it's still important to actually weigh the worth of the person's body of work, and sort of like you stated above, how much of it overlaps with the reality set by these predators, rather than outright say you'll never listen to or watch anything by them ever again. But I get it, it's super easy to be reactionary as hell with every allegation coming out, and some of them do genuinely warrant those extreme reactions. But in terms of Jesse Lacey, who has already sought treatment long before his allegations came out, making the choice to better himself already, I would not say it's exactly necessary for Brand New to be deemed "garbage" just yet.
    Right.

    I don't know Brand New's music, but there's something else to consider too: How would my response make the victim feel, and how does it make OTHER victims feel who have been hurt in similar ways? In fact, I really should have made this the very FIRST thing I mentioned, cause we have to think about this from their point of view. Like, if someone raped you or assaulted you, how would it feel to see tons of people talking about what a great person he was? How would it feel if you had already told people about what happened and they still thought the world of your abuser. To me, it's gonna feel like everyone values this person's creative output more than they value you as a human being. Now imagine instead that people are like "Wow that is fucked, I'm so sorry to hear that, man FUCK that guy forever." That would, hopefully, make you feel like the world is not an absolute fucking nightmare filled with people who don't care for each other. Hopefully.

    So yeah, that's another thing I think about. EMPATHY. How do the people who are most hurt by this feel? With the writer Flannery O'Connor, I question myself because I think, "How would a black person feel about her? If I say 'Oh I love her work' is that gonna make someone else feel like shit?" Likewise, many years ago my mom was beaten up horrifically by my father on a regular basis, and so was I. If we encountered someone who knew all about it and was like "That's terrible, but still, your dad is such a great dude! He's so funny!!" I would feel like "Come on, where are your priorities? Do you not care about what he did?" And so, when I think about whether I should be cool with Miles Davis or not, one of the things that makes me doubt myself is that I think, "Yeah, but how would how would his ex-wife feel if she was right here and she saw me jamming out to this music? What would my own mother think if I was like "Yeah, it's too bad he beat the shit out of his wife, but man, what a genius musician!" For that matter, I'm a grown man who used to get pounded and beat on as a little child, so how does it feel to enjoy the music of a man who is similar to the very person who fucked me up so much? Like, does that mean I'm full of shit? Am I inadvertently contributing to the very culture of gross, rotten masculinity that harmed me?

    And yet...we like what we like, right? I like Miles' music. I like the sound of it. I especially like On The Corner and In a Silent Way. I can't deny that they sound nice to my ears. So what am I supposed to do with that? How am I supposed to reconcile all of this fucking shit?

    Again, these are fucking DIFFICULT questions, and I don't know the right answers. This is just some of the shit that passes through my head sometimes.

  9. #1599
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    5,073
    Mentioned
    163 Post(s)

    Random Celebrity Headlines

    I need to say that the last several posts discussing the bounds of how we approach this as a society are fucking great. That's all I ever wanted with my initial Louis CK post that riled everyone up.


    Now excuse me while I pull a LCK in the corner while reading these posts again. You know... if you all are cool with that?
    Last edited by DigitalChaos; 11-13-2017 at 11:25 AM.

  10. #1600
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Kansas City, Missouri
    Posts
    2,021
    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mantra View Post
    Right.

    I don't know Brand New's music, but there's something else to consider too: How would my response make the victim feel, and how does it make OTHER victims feel who have been hurt in similar ways? In fact, I really should have made this the very FIRST thing I mentioned, cause we have to think about this from their point of view. Like, if someone raped you or assaulted you, how would it feel to see tons of people talking about what a great person he was? How would it feel if you had already told people about what happened and they still thought the world of your abuser. To me, it's gonna feel like everyone values this person's creative output more than they value you as a human being. Now imagine instead that people are like "Wow that is fucked, I'm so sorry to hear that, man FUCK that guy forever." That would, hopefully, make you feel like the world is not an absolute fucking nightmare filled with people who don't care for each other. Hopefully.

    So yeah, that's another thing I think about. EMPATHY. How do the people who are most hurt by this feel? With the writer Flannery O'Connor, I question myself because I think, "How would a black person feel about her? If I say 'Oh I love her work' is that gonna make someone else feel like shit?" Likewise, many years ago my mom was beaten up horrifically by my father on a regular basis, and so was I. If we encountered someone who knew all about it and was like "That's terrible, but still, your dad is such a great dude! He's so funny!!" I would feel like "Come on, where are your priorities? Do you not care about what he did?" And so, when I think about whether I should be cool with Miles Davis or not, one of the things that makes me doubt myself is that I think, "Yeah, but how would how would his ex-wife feel if she was right here and she saw me jamming out to this music? What would my own mother think if I was like "Yeah, it's too bad he beat the shit out of his wife, but man, what a genius musician!" For that matter, I'm a grown man who used to get pounded and beat on as a little child, so how does it feel to enjoy the music of a man who is similar to the very person who fucked me up so much? Like, does that mean I'm full of shit? Am I inadvertently contributing to the very culture of gross, rotten masculinity that harmed me?

    And yet...we like what we like, right? I like Miles' music. I like the sound of it. I especially like On The Corner and In a Silent Way. I can't deny that they sound nice to my ears. So what am I supposed to do with that? How am I supposed to reconcile all of this fucking shit?

    Again, these are fucking DIFFICULT questions, and I don't know the right answers. This is just some of the shit that passes through my head sometimes.
    I've been thinking about the empathy part all day. For instance, I am pretty positive that at the end of the year, when all is said and done, the new Brand New album will top my AOTY list. And when I start posting that online, I keep wondering who is going to be super pissed off that I put that? Is anyone going to be genuinely offended? How many times am I going to have to defend my choice? I'm sure that a few of my friends probably won't ever listen to Brand New anymore, but I just hope those same people recognize that my personal choice to not let what he did affect how I listen to the music, is not a decision that supports the accused, but one that, I guess you could say, refuses to give the accused the power over me to stop enjoying the music for my own personal reasons. If that even remotely makes sense.

    I think a lot of these allegations warrant the extreme reactions they've received, ESPECIALLY Weinstein. But please do correct me if I am wrong in saying this, but some of the situations could definitely be forgiven if the person accused has genuine interest and aspiration to right the wrong, and find growth from their own actions, you know? If you're genuinely willing to learn from your mistakes, seeking forms of therapy, and reaching out to those they've hurt in the past, if they go about it in an honest way, and not "oh I'm going to go to rehab for two weeks and be better", than we the public genuinely forgive them? Or are all of these people too far gone, beyond unforgivable?
    Last edited by richardp; 11-13-2017 at 12:24 AM.

  11. #1601
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    644
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)

  12. #1602
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    730
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by richardp View Post
    I've been thinking about the empathy part all day. For instance, I am pretty positive that at the end of the year, when all is said and done, the new Brand New album will top my AOTY list. And when I start posting that online, I keep wondering who is going to be super pissed off that I put that? Is anyone going to be genuinely offended? How many times am I going to have to defend my choice? I'm sure that a few of my friends probably won't ever listen to Brand New anymore, but I just hope those same people recognize that my personal choice to not let what he did affect how I listen to the music, is not a decision that supports the accused, but one that, I guess you could say, refuses to give the accused the power over me to stop enjoying the music for my own personal reasons. If that even remotely makes sense.

    I think a lot of these allegations warrant the extreme reactions they've received, ESPECIALLY Weinstein. But please do correct me if I am wrong in saying this, but some of the situations could definitely be forgiven if the person accused has genuine interest and aspiration to right the wrong, and find growth from their own actions, you know? If you're genuinely willing to learn from your mistakes, seeking forms of therapy, and reaching out to those they've hurt in the past, if they go about it in an honest way, and not "oh I'm going to go to rehab for two weeks and be better", than we the public genuinely forgive them? Or are all of these people too far gone, beyond unforgivable?
    I think if you like their music, then you should keep liking it. You are not condoning their actions. We talked about this in one of the other threads, maybe the jeordie white one. Separate the art from the artist. It's ok to do that. My favorite examples are Jim Morrison and Elvis. They were both womanizers who, without consequence, took advantage of underage women. While i'm sure many frowned upon it at the time, their stature in the pop culture is untouchable because of their art.

  13. #1603
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Smyrna, GA
    Posts
    5,710
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)

  14. #1604
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    644
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Why is Roy Moore "threatening" to sue? If the allegations were false wouldn't he just sue them instead of posturing?

    Oh yeah. Posturing.

  15. #1605
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    England
    Posts
    956
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by thevoid99 View Post
    Really shouldn't be surprised about either of them. The Tom Sizemore headline made me feel sick though. What's wrong with that guy?

  16. #1606
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Smyrna, GA
    Posts
    5,710
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    I feel unclean over reading about what Tom Sizemore did.

  17. #1607
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    666
    Mentioned
    29 Post(s)
    Here is the unfair side of the power lying accusers (Iím just talking about the lying ones. Iím not saying all accusers are liars.) now have:

    https://pitchfork.com/news/the-gasla...e-allegations/

    It seems that these people are lying, but it may yet still turn out to be true.

  18. #1608
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,791
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by richardp View Post
    I've been thinking about the empathy part all day. For instance, I am pretty positive that at the end of the year, when all is said and done, the new Brand New album will top my AOTY list. And when I start posting that online, I keep wondering who is going to be super pissed off that I put that? Is anyone going to be genuinely offended? How many times am I going to have to defend my choice? I'm sure that a few of my friends probably won't ever listen to Brand New anymore, but I just hope those same people recognize that my personal choice to not let what he did affect how I listen to the music, is not a decision that supports the accused, but one that, I guess you could say, refuses to give the accused the power over me to stop enjoying the music for my own personal reasons. If that even remotely makes sense.

    I think a lot of these allegations warrant the extreme reactions they've received, ESPECIALLY Weinstein. But please do correct me if I am wrong in saying this, but some of the situations could definitely be forgiven if the person accused has genuine interest and aspiration to right the wrong, and find growth from their own actions, you know? If you're genuinely willing to learn from your mistakes, seeking forms of therapy, and reaching out to those they've hurt in the past, if they go about it in an honest way, and not "oh I'm going to go to rehab for two weeks and be better", than we the public genuinely forgive them? Or are all of these people too far gone, beyond unforgivable?

    I guess step 1 is admitting to and apologising for what you did. Which is not so much happening with the cases we have heard about.

  19. #1609
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    The Part of Texas Where Motherfuckers Actually Wear Cowboy Hats and Whatnot
    Posts
    4,672
    Mentioned
    369 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by thevoid99 View Post
    I feel unclean over reading about what Tom Sizemore did.
    did you not expect it? I swear to god I've suspected him of doing something REAL fucked up for a hot minute. You can straight up see the sickness and evil in that motherfucker's face.

  20. #1610
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    644
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)

  21. #1611
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Posts
    987
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by richardp View Post
    please do correct me if I am wrong in saying this, but some of the situations could definitely be forgiven if the person accused has genuine interest and aspiration to right the wrong, and find growth from their own actions, you know? If you're genuinely willing to learn from your mistakes, seeking forms of therapy, and reaching out to those they've hurt in the past, if they go about it in an honest way, and not "oh I'm going to go to rehab for two weeks and be better", than we the public genuinely forgive them? Or are all of these people too far gone, beyond unforgivable?
    I've been thinking about this post since I read it a couple days ago and trying to think of a decent response, but honestly, I don't have a very good answer for you because these are some fucking epic questions, you know? The question of whether redemption or forgiveness or personal transformation is possible, I mean that's gotta be the subject of most literature, art, not to mention religion, psychology, etc. I don't think I can post anything that could do those questions justice.

    I used to know a guy who murdered someone back when he was a teenager. He killed a fellow teenager in a gang related crime, and then served a very long prison sentence. When I first met him he was much older, in his forties I think, and he actually had become close friends with the mother of the kid he had killed after she chose to get in touch with him back when he was in prison. Now they both work together in an anti-violence organization with a strong emphasis on restorative justice (which is how I met them). I thought it was a pretty amazing, and I feel like the guy deserves to be forgiven for what he did. But the thing is, he didn't just post an apology on facebook or whatever and hope everything would get back to normal. He has devoted the rest of his entire existence to rectifying the harm he once caused. It's a lifelong thing. And that kind of redemption takes time, years.

    With this Brand New guy, idk. I guess it's nice that he said he's been going to therapy, but still, what he did was so fucking extreme. Reading the details of it was stomach churning. We're talking about predatory behavior against minors. To me, that indicates something that's fucked up in his mind on a very deep level, and I don't think he can just apologize it away. I think it's natural that everyone is going to be horrified and feel like they'll never be able to enjoy that music ever again. And here's the thing, I get the feeling that you think people are being reactionary or maybe posturing when they claim they'll never listen to Brand New again (correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not trying to put words in your mouth), but I doubt that's true. When I say I can't stand listening to R. Kelly's music after reading about all the creepy shit he's done, it's not like there's this part of me that secretly loves the music but I'm forcing myself to pretend I don't out of some obligatory sense of moral duty. I very genuinely can't listen to that music without thinking "Predator. This is the music of a predator. I am listening to a creepy predator singing about sex. Fuck." The thoughts are just pounding through my head. It's not some calculated, performative reaction. It's a visceral response that I truly can not help. And I think a lot of people who are saying they'll never listen to Brand New again are feeling the same way. You just know that post that Tony made in the Brand New thread came from the heart because he is genuinely disgusted. People can't just turn their brains off and pretend they don't know what they do. The connection has already been burned into their mind. They press play and hear the voice of a predator. And even though he's apologized and talked about getting therapy, I don't think that's enough to offset the magnitude of what's he's done and erase connotations that Brand New's music now holds in their minds.

  22. #1612
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Montreal, QC
    Posts
    2,486
    Mentioned
    92 Post(s)
    You can now add Mark Schwahn to the list of alleged predators.
    He was the showrunner for One Tree Hill and now The Royals.

  23. #1613
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    666
    Mentioned
    29 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Deepvoid View Post
    You can now add Mark Schwahn to the list of alleged predators.
    He was the showrunner for One Tree Hill and now The Royals.
    Clear lines are going to have to be drawn. Shoulder touching? I think that depends on what kind of shoulder touching. My female friend often touches my arms or shoulders. I think the person who wants to touch should ask.

  24. #1614
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    9,360
    Mentioned
    734 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by cashpiles View Post
    Clear lines are going to have to be drawn. Shoulder touching? I think that depends on what kind of shoulder touching. My female friend often touches my arms or shoulders. I think the person who wants to touch should ask.
    Trying to give shoulder massages to coworkers, or petting the hair of coworkers, is inappropriate at work. Since the 80s, anyway. I wouldn't personally call that "predatory," but it's definitely not appropriate and these days falls into the "harassment" category for making people feel uncomfortable.

    Here is the EEOC (U.S.) definition of sexual harassment: https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/publications/fs-sex.cfm

    The basic rule, now, is to remember that you are in a professional environment.

    Here's AT&T's employee policy re sexual harassment, which was a pretty big deal when they issued it back in the 80s: http://www.nytimes.com/1986/11/09/bu...-t-policy.html
    Last edited by allegro; 11-14-2017 at 06:04 PM.

  25. #1615
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Kansas City, Missouri
    Posts
    2,021
    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mantra View Post
    With this Brand New guy, idk. I guess it's nice that he said he's been going to therapy, but still, what he did was so fucking extreme. Reading the details of it was stomach churning. We're talking about predatory behavior against minors. To me, that indicates something that's fucked up in his mind on a very deep level, and I don't think he can just apologize it away. I think it's natural that everyone is going to be horrified and feel like they'll never be able to enjoy that music ever again. And here's the thing, I get the feeling that you think people are being reactionary or maybe posturing when they claim they'll never listen to Brand New again (correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not trying to put words in your mouth), but I doubt that's true. When I say I can't stand listening to R. Kelly's music after reading about all the creepy shit he's done, it's not like there's this part of me that secretly loves the music but I'm forcing myself to pretend I don't out of some obligatory sense of moral duty. I very genuinely can't listen to that music without thinking "Predator. This is the music of a predator. I am listening to a creepy predator singing about sex. Fuck." The thoughts are just pounding through my head. It's not some calculated, performative reaction. It's a visceral response that I truly can not help. And I think a lot of people who are saying they'll never listen to Brand New again are feeling the same way. You just know that post that Tony made in the Brand New thread came from the heart because he is genuinely disgusted. People can't just turn their brains off and pretend they don't know what they do. The connection has already been burned into their mind. They press play and hear the voice of a predator. And even though he's apologized and talked about getting therapy, I don't think that's enough to offset the magnitude of what's he's done and erase connotations that Brand New's music now holds in their minds.
    All great points here. Earlier I was talking with my girlfriend about Jesse's allegations, and it starting veering into talking about how we both know Jesse Lacey isn't the only one who has now been known to have predatory behavior towards their fans in the pop-punk scene back in the day. Obviously we weren't just openly assuming every pop-punk musician has acted this way, but we could remember quite a few rumors and instances of allegations online about musicians in the scene. Pete Wentz was on record about dating an underage girl, and even wrote songs about it in Fall Out Boy, if I remember correctly. And we both could remember hearing instances of the singer of Taking Back Sunday doing things as well as dudes in New Found Glory (who, if I remember correctly actually had a band member get busted for child pornography), Lostprophets (obviously) and Say Anything, to name a few . So we started talking about how many other pop-punk bands engaged in the exact same type of behavior as Jesse. This whole scene was born on these young ass white dudes who all started around like 18 years old or so, and developed all these fanbases of suuuuper young girls. You put a bunch of insecure and unstable young dudes in a position of power like that, going out and feeling like they can literally do whatever the fuck they want with the world in their hands. As we were talking about it it started dawning on us how that whole genre is possible steeped in behavior just as bad. So again, we started discussing like, is it the nature of the scene and being so young with no consequences that drove him to the behavior? Or was there a much much deeper underlying issue underneath the surface.

    Like has been said countless times throughout our discussion, there are just so many extremely hard and uncomfortable questions that you have to confront when trying to wrap your head around something like that.

Posting Permissions