In this type of situation there is only a power imbalance if the commoner allows for it. The accused doesn't wield any power when compared to similar situations in a work environment, educational environment or in a policing environment.
The Following User Says Thank You to calgarygeologist For This Useful Post:
Just to be clear Sliver you are saying that if you are on a date driving home it’s acceptable and not assault to reach across the seat and grab a womens crotch?
And it’s okay when a door opens of a person you have been on one date with to pin them against wall kissing them?
And it’s okay to send unsolicited duck picks?
Those three things seem to me to be illegal.
Well maybe the dating world has changed a lot since the fricken 1990s, but I recall putting my hand on a girl's leg and vice versa. I know for certain you could not find a woman who would suggest for a second I assaulted them, but I also have to think that most guys who make it past second base start with the old hand on the thigh trick and go from there.
Would I reach over and just grab a woman's crotch? No. No I would not. It seems like a bad move if you want anything other than a slap and doesn't sound particularly sexy, either.
Well maybe the dating world has changed a lot since the fricken 1990s, but I recall putting my hand on a girl's leg and vice versa. I know for certain you could not find a woman who would suggest for a second I assaulted them, but I also have to think that most guys who make it past second base start with the old hand on the thigh trick and go from there.
Would I reach over and just grab a woman's crotch? No. No I would not. It seems like a bad move if you want anything other than a slap and doesn't sound particularly sexy, either.
Yeah so you are agreeing that based on the woman’s recollection what he did was not acceptable.
Yeah so you are agreeing that based on the woman’s recollection what he did was not acceptable.
For sure. Seems creepy af by her description. She should cut off contact with him after that.
Am I skeptical? Yes. Again, you're talking to a guy who has been married over 20 years so maybe I don't have a clue what I'm talking about, but I just think diving straight at a crotch is universally recognized as a bad move and I'd be shocked if he didn't start at the thigh and work his way up, thus giving time for a 'no thank you.' I mean, that's obviously just speculation, but if the dude wanted to get laid you'd think he'd at least put in that modicum of effort to try to turn her on since I'm hard pressed to think any adult male with an ounce of experience thinks going straight for the bullseye with no lead up would work in any way, shape or form.
We'll never know. I'm not worried about it. Say she's 100% correct in her recollection and that's how this guy typically gets girls, okay. He's a creep. But this is small time on the scale imo. This is a 'holy fata, did that just happen? pull over this car I'm getting out.' I just don't get why this one is front page news and I have jirihrdina accusing me of shticking when we know of celebrities and rockstars doing so much worse. This is just a guy with bad moves and crappy instincts from what I can tell.
I don’t know where Win fits on the creep scale. Some of his actions might qualify as sexual assault but I can’t say for sure. What is for sure is that he’s an ####### who cheated on his wife with women who aren’t age appropriate.
He’s lost my respect and isn’t doing anything to redeem himself.
Aside from the name of the website that broke this story, are there really people with pitchforks and torches calling for his head? Other than some inevitable over the top reactions on social media of course, which are silly, but not going to be mitigated by jumping into the fray with a similarly cringey take like "it's not illegal, what's the problem?". Is it really an argument that needs to be made?
A pattern of behaviour is now public, and women can make more informed decisions about engaging with an allegedly manipulative creep.
IMO the only issue worth discussing (because it's a fool's errand to MMQB the extremely limited information in reports) is whether fans should be entitled to refunds having bought tickets before this information came to light? I suppose you could argue that criminality is the appropriate line in the sand, though it would take years for that process to play out and doesn't seem likely in this case.
I think part of the challenge here compared to a lot of artists is that AF's music is largely about sincerity/anti-consumerism/living a quality life...or for lack of a better word generally kinda 'woke' (cringe). So one could argue it's a bit of a bait+switch situation (though I also can't think of any songs/messaging that speak directly to MeToo stuff).
For sure. Seems creepy af by her description. She should cut off contact with him after that.
Am I skeptical? Yes. Again, you're talking to a guy who has been married over 20 years so maybe I don't have a clue what I'm talking about, but I just think diving straight at a crotch is universally recognized as a bad move and I'd be shocked if he didn't start at the thigh and work his way up, thus giving time for a 'no thank you.' I mean, that's obviously just speculation, but if the dude wanted to get laid you'd think he'd at least put in that modicum of effort to try to turn her on since I'm hard pressed to think any adult male with an ounce of experience thinks going straight for the bullseye with no lead up would work in any way, shape or form.
We'll never know. I'm not worried about it. Say she's 100% correct in her recollection and that's how this guy typically gets girls, okay. He's a creep. But this is small time on the scale imo. This is a 'holy fata, did that just happen? pull over this car I'm getting out.' I just don't get why this one is front page news and I have jirihrdina accusing me of shticking when we know of celebrities and rockstars doing so much worse. This is just a guy with bad moves and crappy instincts from what I can tell.
Yet you've spent your time writing hundreds of words giving him more benefit of the doubt than his accusers...
I'm also not sure why it's necessary to compare other situations. The vitriol was much stronger towards Bill Cosby, and rightly so. But then again, Cosby was not Hitler...
Yet you've spent your time writing hundreds of words giving him more benefit of the doubt than his accusers...
I'm also not sure why it's necessary to compare other situations. The vitriol was much stronger towards Bill Cosby, and rightly so. But then again, Cosby was not Hitler...
Well imo in a thread dedicated to the ongoing high profile sexual abuse epidemic it's apropos to first establish if an abuse has taken place and then to discuss the nature of the abuse and consequences of the abuse. If that's cringe to you, maybe it's a thread you need not visit? Like, I feel as though I'm super on topic and here and being respectful of how sensitive this discussion is.
The Following User Says Thank You to Sliver For This Useful Post:
Yet you've spent your time writing hundreds of words giving him more benefit of the doubt than his accusers...
I'm also not sure why it's necessary to compare other situations. The vitriol was much stronger towards Bill Cosby, and rightly so. But then again, Cosby was not Hitler...
Sorry, I responded to your second point, but sort of ignored your first.
I'm not giving him more of the benefit of the doubt. I'm saying even if their version is completely accurate, I don't think it qualifies as abuse. Like, not to be a tit, but here's the definition of abuse:
treat (a person or an animal) with cruelty or violence, especially regularly or repeatedly
I don't think there was cruelty. It doesn't sound like he targeted these women with regularity or repetition in that I don't get the sense they couldn't have iced him out and never seen him again if they attempted to do so.
Was it violent? I guess that's debatable. I can accept if you think it is, but it falls short of something I'd characterize as violent.
PepsiFree - you say to treat each situation individually. We agree. That's what I'm trying to do. If we're going to do that, though, how can there not be a scale? How can some behaviours not be worse than others and how can that not lead to different consequences being appropriate based on the behaviours?
Most people already make these evaluations individually. I’m arguing that trying to prescribe them as something universal is no better than “cancel culture” or whatever. You’re playing into the made up version of it entirely. Some behaviours are worse than others and some consequences are more appropriate than others. Guess who decides? Individuals. Not you or I, but the people that need to make the decision. And they don’t do it based on some prescribed scale of infractions with set consequences.
Today there is more information about Butler out there than there was last week. What people do with that information is up to them. Someone might decide they don’t want to date Butler or be married to him. Someone might decide they don’t want to tour with Arcade Fire. A record label might decide their image is negative enough that they don’t want to put out the next record because it won’t do well. These are all individual decisions people might make, and collectively, they might feel like one big decision, but it’s silly to pretend they’re made based on some scale of infractions with set consequences. They’re made by individuals who think for themselves.
I think pretending all these things are treated the same is really silly and nonsensical. They are very obviously not.
There is no scale because most people don’t need an external scale.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to PepsiFree For This Useful Post:
Sorry, I responded to your second point, but sort of ignored your first.
I'm not giving him more of the benefit of the doubt. I'm saying even if their version is completely accurate, I don't think it qualifies as abuse. Like, not to be a tit, but here's the definition of abuse:
treat (a person or an animal) with cruelty or violence, especially regularly or repeatedly
I don't think there was cruelty. It doesn't sound like he targeted these women with regularity or repetition in that I don't get the sense they couldn't have iced him out and never seen him again if they attempted to do so.
Was it violent? I guess that's debatable. I can accept if you think it is, but it falls short of something I'd characterize as violent.
The bolded is where I'd encourage you to give a little more reflection. Dissecting a it's easy to lose sight of the very real and complex emotions involved in any budding romance/hook-up (a pretty broad range). There's an awful lot to unpack in here, but just put yourself in their shoes for a moment.
You're kinda asking these women to time travel to the future and back to make their red/yellow/green light decision with information they don't necessarily have when you say they should have chosen red. Or you're asking them to be perpetually on DEFCON1 and doing nothing but analyzing for landmines and saying STOP at the very first sign of potential
The thing with manipulative creeps is that they are very good at hiding the fact that they are manipulative creeps...
They are also pretty good at confusing matters and manipulating after the fact, and moving in increments. Again, it's easy to look from the outside and see interaction Z as such an obvious red flag that of course it's the woman's fault for not stopping it. But that ignores interactions A through Y and that [sometimes beautiful] roller-coaster of emotions involved in a budding romance.
And a word I was looking for earlier to describe AF's musice is: Vulnerable...it's a bit hard to explain, but their music and his lyrics really lean into vulnerability.
I'd suggest you're also expecting women to navigate their lives without ever embracing any degree of vulnerability, which is simply no way to live life. And I think it's very easy for guys like you and me - who managed to find 'our person' (ie. soulmate for a cliché) 20 years ago - to forget what it's like to put yourself out there and navigate the messy world of relationships. I don't think it's nearly as easy as you suggest to determine that your potential dance-partner isn't behaving in good faith.
It's a good thing the world knows what kind of man Win Butler is. It sucks that a lot of people got hurt and will now get hurt (bandmates etc) because of his actions.
Even if the women from the articles had managed to activate their red lights exactly when you think they should have, where would things stand now?
Aside from the name of the website that broke this story, are there really people with pitchforks and torches calling for his head? Other than some inevitable over the top reactions on social media of course, which are silly, but not going to be mitigated by jumping into the fray with a similarly cringey take like "it's not illegal, what's the problem?". Is it really an argument that needs to be made?
A pattern of behaviour is now public, and women can make more informed decisions about engaging with an allegedly manipulative creep.
IMO the only issue worth discussing (because it's a fool's errand to MMQB the extremely limited information in reports) is whether fans should be entitled to refunds having bought tickets before this information came to light? I suppose you could argue that criminality is the appropriate line in the sand, though it would take years for that process to play out and doesn't seem likely in this case.
I think part of the challenge here compared to a lot of artists is that AF's music is largely about sincerity/anti-consumerism/living a quality life...or for lack of a better word generally kinda 'woke' (cringe). So one could argue it's a bit of a bait+switch situation (though I also can't think of any songs/messaging that speak directly to MeToo stuff).
When you engage with musical acts assuming their are likely things in their past you find objectionable is likely reasonable. I don’t think a fan saying I never thought he would be like that I want a refund is reasonable.
We're going to have to agree to disagree that this is a problem that needed a career cancelling over. Sounds like some adult women had a bad date to me.
If something more comes out that can be categorized as abuse then he deserves harsher consequences, but what I'm reading so far is not that big of a deal. I bet there are 50 guys in Calgary who attempted to get into some pants tonight and were rebuffed. They thought they were there and they weren't. Bfd. I kinda think they should still have jobs tomorrow and don't need the entire white knighting internet coming for their heads.
We're going to have to agree to disagree that this is a problem that needed a career cancelling over. Sounds like some adult women had a bad date to me.
If something more comes out that can be categorized as abuse then he deserves harsher consequences, but what I'm reading so far is not that big of a deal. I bet there are 50 guys in Calgary who attempted to get into some pants tonight and were rebuffed. They thought they were there and they weren't. Bfd. I kinda think they should still have jobs tomorrow and don't need the entire white knighting internet coming for their heads.
If Butlers mostly mixed left of center fanbase decides he's a creepy ######bag and they dont want to support his career and put money in his pocket that is both their choice and his fault, he should know better morally anyway at his age but beyond that he aught to have some sense of self preservation, it's not like someone with his level of fame can't get laid without being a creepy ####
The Following User Says Thank You to afc wimbledon For This Useful Post:
We're going to have to agree to disagree that this is a problem that needed a career cancelling over. Sounds like some adult women had a bad date to me.
If something more comes out that can be categorized as abuse then he deserves harsher consequences, but what I'm reading so far is not that big of a deal. I bet there are 50 guys in Calgary who attempted to get into some pants tonight and were rebuffed. They thought they were there and they weren't. Bfd. I kinda think they should still have jobs tomorrow and don't need the entire white knighting internet coming for their heads.
Don't just tell us, make sure to forward your comments to the Ministry of Official Career Cancellation!
Seriously though, if you like their music, keep listening/buying tix (you can probably get them real cheap right now). If you don't...well then it's simply gonna be up to the people who have actually been contributing to their livelihood to decide what happens next. That's capitalism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
When you engage with musical acts assuming their are likely things in their past you find objectionable is likely reasonable. I don’t think a fan saying I never thought he would be like that I want a refund is reasonable.
I don't actually have a particular opinion on the refund issue, but it's an interesting question. Is there any threshold that would change your mind?
It's Live Nation/Ticketmaster, so of course the answer is always going to be a simple "hahaha, No."
I don't have tix and I don't think I'd be clamouring for a refund if I did, but I can understand the position. Now losing Feist as a supporting act is another strike, though I'm sure there is a "card subject to change" statement in the terms.
I actually really, really like their music (top 10 fave band, maybe even top 5) and have been to a couple really memorable shows...but I always got the sense that Win was a bit of a pretentious ######, and never really factored his character into my enjoyment of the music. An attractive female friend actually told me a story a few years ago about an encounter with Win where he was uncomfortably persistent - though IIRC a big part of it was the fact that he ignored that she'd made it very clear she had a longterm boyfriend.
I don't have any time or risk tolerance for mass gatherings at the moment, but if I were fancy-free I'm not sure how I'd feel about buying tix at the moment. I doubt I'll ever stop listening entirely, but I'm gonna take a little break and see if any more news follows.
The Following User Says Thank You to powderjunkie For This Useful Post:
We're going to have to agree to disagree that this is a problem that needed a career cancelling over. Sounds like some adult women had a bad date to me.
If something more comes out that can be categorized as abuse then he deserves harsher consequences, but what I'm reading so far is not that big of a deal. I bet there are 50 guys in Calgary who attempted to get into some pants tonight and were rebuffed. They thought they were there and they weren't. Bfd. I kinda think they should still have jobs tomorrow and don't need the entire white knighting internet coming for their heads.
He’s had no consequences as of yet. He still has his job. People who agree with you are still going to buy tickets, albums, etc. People who don’t, aren’t, but such is the nature of being an entertainer. His career isn’t “cancelled” in whatever way you want that to mean.
Like, you’re basically saying that unless he breaks the law (commits abuse), nobody should be allowed to know anything about him that would impact their opinion on him. It’s dumb. And “some women had a bad date” is dumb, too. You’re better and smarter than both those positions let on, I know that for a fact.
Ryan Adam’s was accused of a lot worse and he’s released several albums in the time since and is currently on tour. Louie CK has released two specials, toured, and won a Grammy since he was “cancelled.” How long as we going to pretend this term means anything outside of “people who trade in the opinions of the public see the public’s opinion fairly drop”? Arcade Fire are still touring as of now. So what’s the issue? Because it isn’t “career cancellation.” It just seemed to be that you take issue with people having their less than flattering personal matters aired in public.
The Following User Says Thank You to PepsiFree For This Useful Post:
One thing that I find funny is that Louis CK was on Joe Rogan a couple weeks ago and even they kind of joked that "cancelled" is more commonly used in situations where people are criticized or called out and that there is very little actual cancelling.
I don't respect or watch follow Joe Rogan but I did find that funny as he was the ring leader of crying that everyone is being cancelled all the time.
Also let's stop infantilizing young adults here, the whole 'power imbalance', ' she was only 18,21,25 . . .' talk is pure garbage. If that's too young an age to let people navigate sexual relationships, rockstar involvement or not, then lets start taking away that demographic's right to vote.
One of the issues here is we no longer regard 18-21 year olds as fully adult.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
One of the issues here is we no longer regard 18-21 year olds as fully adult.
Yeah, that's sort of new to me, but based on the shocked Pikachu reactions from people admonishing this dude for going after young women I can't disagree with you.
I'd consider myself in the camp of finding 18-21 year olds as being unappealingly young and I've regarded them that way for a decade or two.
We have to be at the point where we need to be writing some new social rules down and disseminating them. There are a lot of people, I'm sure, who would avoid certain behaviours if they knew they were now faux paus.
Am I taking crazy pills or something here where I thought a 21 year old woman was fair game for a man in his 30s? Some raised eyebrows seem appropriate. Maybe a finger wave and a tsk tsk, 'you dirty dog' kind of treatment for him, but a grand public shaming? Seems like a sledgehammer response to me.
