High-Profile Sexual Abuse Epidemic

[CliffFletcher]

It's obvious to anyone who has been following him in the last few years that MacDonald's latest attempt to go mainstream is doomed to fail. His natural element is a cynical old guy on an obscure podcast pushing people's buttons without any regard for how the rest of the world feels about it. The only reason for him to go on a show like the View is to take the piss out of the hosts and subvert the whole enterprise, like he did last time he was on it and kept going on about Bill Clinton being a murderer. That was the same appearance when he commented out of the blue that Bill Cosby had never been accused of doing anything untoward, a reference to Cosby's predations long before anyone else in the entertainment was willing to speak out about the man's reputation.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

It's obvious to anyone who has been following him in the last few years that MacDonald's latest attempt to go mainstream is doomed to fail. His natural element is a cynical old guy on an obscure podcast pushing people's buttons without any regard for how the rest of the world feels about it. The only reason for him to go on a show like the View is to take the piss out of the hosts and subvert the whole enterprise, like he did last time he was on it.

David Letterman is backing his Netflix show, so it has a chance.

[CliffFletcher]

Makes you wonder if Dave Chappelle will have to go on the defensive over his comments at a recent show about CK and the women he masturbated in front of.

Spoiler!

[bigtmac19]

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/...-magazine.html

New essay just published, in New York Review, written by Jian Ghomeshi.

[troutman]

Howard Stern has been doing Les Moonves puppet show reenactments all week.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Link to the essay.

https://www.nybooks.com/articles/201...tions-hashtag/
Interesting piece. Doesn't appear to read like someone begging for forgiveness but he definitely expresses regret. Doesn't read like he's just looking for pity but his life definitely sounds like it ####ing sucks (and maybe deservedly so).

All in all I think it is just an interesting view from someone who did some terrible things to women, likely wasn't quite the monster the media made him out to be and is now paying the ultimate price for his behaviour. It wouldn't even matter which of the accusations were true, he's going to forever be known for the stories we read in the media.

I don't feel sorry for him but I think he's likely correct about just how bloodthirsty the media gets for a juicy story like this and how far they're willing to go to get readers. It makes any apology seem hollow. "Yes this woman is telling the truth but that other woman is lying" would be suicidal PR strategy when the scandal was at its peak.

[Harry Lime]

Gomeshi was before the hysteria, and was so toxic that he managed to be one of the first that celebrity culture refused to protect.

I know that his behavior extended beyond what he went to court for, but he only addresses the women who took him to court.

This guy is a Weinstein level scumbag, who targeted women in regular walks of life as well as those he bullied from his media position.

Deserves no forgiveness, and doesn't even own up to his actions and ask for forgiveness. Instead this 'woe is me' story. The guy should have trouble getting a job as a garbageman, not given a book deal.

[bluejays]

I dunno. I thought he was a scumbag at the time, and certainly you wouldn't want him dating your sister, but I do wonder how much of what he did was because his ego grew (as weird as it sounds)? At the time this was all happening, I was thinking to myself that there's no way all these women could be making this up and he's guilty as charged. During the trial I felt the same way daily. Then the holes were poked in a few arguments and you seen that some women were out to get him for a variety of reasons, but he was still to me a villain because of how he treated them in private. The roughness of it all really bothered me to no end. Then you read about how he had all this power in the office because he was the moneymaker, and it gets you even more angry. But then you read this piece, and undoubtedly it was written to partially be a bit of a sob story, but in our justice system if a person is not guilty, should they lose the ability to make a living? Even if he was found guilty and did time, should he not have the ability to reintegrate into society and make an honest living? I did read some humility in that piece, and just because he didn't go down the complete road of asking for forgiveness, he was humble about what he learned, and it's almost guaranteed he'd never do the same thing again. There really isn't the perfect thing he could say to make it all better, but no matter what he said some groups out there would certainly say that's not enough. There was one publication that said something like, "he hasn't reached out to the people he hurt to make it better". How the heck is he supposed to do that, and would you as a victim want some guy who was found not guilty to reach out to you? I thought it was a well enough written piece in fairness to him.

[bigtmac19]

https://www.thecut.com/2018/09/jian-...oks-essay.html

A rebuttal/response to the article from one of his former girlfriends.

[Cole436]

Originally Posted by bigtmac19

https://www.thecut.com/2018/09/jian-...oks-essay.html

A rebuttal/response to the article from one of his former girlfriends.

This essay is where I struggle with the #metoo movement.

The systemic abuse that women suffer from men needs to be brought to the surface and these abusers need to be brought to justice for their abuse and crimes.

But then what? What happens once the public has its reckoning with these people? Do they continue to live in exile and we are to believe that they will always be the person who they were in the past?

For someone like Gomeshi is it out of the question that he's learned, grown and changed in these four years? Should we just accept that the person that he was is who he always will be?

I can understand the victims not forgiving their abusers, it's completely understandable. But to not give them the chance to use (a lot of) time to become better people? I struggle with it.

[Amethyst]

People don't usually change, especially well into their adult years. I think it's nothing more than Gomeshi feeling sorry for himself. I saw his original FB post on the topic before the first accusations came out and he was going on a full attack. I doubt the court case humbled him. I think he is just trying a different approach to repair his reputation.

[Jiri Hrdina]

His victims have to live with what he did the rest of their lives...why shouldn’t he

[Cole436]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

His victims have to live with what he did the rest of their lives...why shouldn’t he

I'm not saying he shouldn't. In no way am I advocating that these men shouldn't face the appropriate punishment. I'm trying to articulate that if years have passed and these men are seriously trying to change and face their actions, isn't that worth something more than just saying they're trying to manipulate public perception?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

His victims have to live with what he did the rest of their lives...why shouldn’t he

It’s a matter of what is a fair punishment.

If he was looking for a job in an office and was being denied as result of this I think I would be opposed. A person shouldn’t be made unemployable from unproven allegations and even when someone is convicted of a crime they shouldn’t be unemployable forever.

However with Gomeshi his reputation was how he made his money. He had some skill as an interviewer but really it was his celebrity and the platform provided to him by the CBC that made him his money. There is no obligation for the public to support him anymore. And if the public doesn’t support him than a media company shouldn’t give him a platform.

Essentially if having Public Trust is a key aspect of your position than violating that trust will cost you more than other careers but at the same time a violation of public trust shouldn’t prevent you from holding all jobs.

[bluejays]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

His victims have to live with what he did the rest of their lives...why shouldn’t he

I guess it comes down to what level of justice is appropriate for something like this when he wasn't officially found guilty. I believe in the justice system, and sometimes bad people fall through the cracks, but he lost a very good amount of money and his ability to make a living though he was not guilty. In the public's eye, he is guilty. But that's also a slippery slope as say one day you or I were accused of something we didn't do. Should we lose our ability to make a living? The answer is simple for me and that's no. This isn't a serial killer here either, where you know the guy will re-offend. Everyone is sometimes out for blood, and our society has to come to terms with moving on after justice has been administered through the courts. After hearing what happened in trial, I wouldn't fork out money to subscribe to him on a podcast for example, because I don't agree to his lifestyle, but at this point I do think he should have the ability to support himself however possible.

[Jiri Hrdina]

He didn’t lose his ability to make a living
Maybe he lost the ability to be a celebrity and make as much money as he once did
But he can probably go get a regular job
I’m fine with his actions having consequences for his life
It sure as hell did for the people he victimized

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Cole436

I'm not saying he shouldn't. In no way am I advocating that these men shouldn't face the appropriate punishment. I'm trying to articulate that if years have passed and these men are seriously trying to change and face their actions, isn't that worth something more than just saying they're trying to manipulate public perception?

This quote makes it seem he’s not trying to change but rather remains an egotistical sociopath

“One of my female friends quips that I should get some kind of public recognition as a MeToo pioneer,” he writes. “There are lots of guys more hated than me now. But I was the guy everyone hated first.

[CliffFletcher]

There are two issues at work here.

Many people do not recognize our justice system as sufficient to deal with bad sexual behaviour. Consequently, we resort to punishing this behaviour with inconsistently applied social sanctions, on which we have no consensus.

Unlike judges and our legal system, most people aren't disposed to apply context, nuance, and proportionality to these sanctions. So whole realms of bad behaviour are subject to the caprices of outrage culture.

It's hard to see how any of this will sort itself out to our collective satisfaction. Will we see formal extra-legal sanctions enforced by companies like Facebook and Google? Could that bring about legal defense for those targeted, with lawyers and PR teams fighting to overturn them? Will we see shaming weaponized as a routine part of politics and entertainment? When you look at the possibilities, you understand why we developed a formal legal system in the first place.

[Itse]

If you're outed as violent criminal, that will hang over you for the rest of your life, especially if you're a celebrity. Nobody really sees a problem with that person's career being over, it's a very human reaction from other to shun that person.

Yet for some reason when it's violence committed by a man against a woman presented in the #metoo context, people see a problem. It's almost as if violence isn't as bad if it's in a sexualized context.

I don't get. Gomeshi has a long history of violence. His career should be over.

[Cole436]

Originally Posted by Itse

If you're outed as violent criminal, that will hang over you for the rest of your life, especially if you're a celebrity. Nobody really sees a problem with that person's career being over, it's a very human reaction from other to shun that person.

Yet for some reason when it's violence committed by a man against a woman presented in the #metoo context, people see a problem. It's almost as if violence isn't as bad if it's in a sexualized context.

I don't get. Gomeshi has a long history of violence. His career should be over.

I don't think anyone is disagreeing with this point.