Another Canadian Icon Sullied (2014 Jian Ghomeshi sexual assault discussion)

God I hate advertising wankspeak.

What's this all about then?

Jian Ghomeshi Fired by CBC, Gonna Sue

Jesse Brown @JesseBrown · 47m 47 minutes ago
What I have learned about @jianghomeshi after months of investigation will be reported responsibly as soon as possible. Patience please.

I've been hearing murmurs of "widespread gossip" but I have no idea what any of this is about

Is anyone going to spill the beans about what's going on? Surely the journo community must have a clue.

I remember reading this a while ago: http://www.xojane.com/it-happened-to-me/non-date

Being sleazy can't be the reason to get fired from the CBC?

Gawker's story and comment section have some dirt.

https://twitter.com/ryantologist/status/526439911998881792

yeah i'm fearing something really ugly happened.

Jian's answer to all this

Dear everyone,
I am writing today because I want you to be the first to know some news.
This has been the hardest time of my life. I am reeling from the loss of my father. I am in deep personal pain and worried about my mom. And now my world has been rocked by so much more.
Today, I was fired from the CBC.
For almost 8 years I have been the host of a show I co-created on CBC called Q. It has been my pride and joy. My fantastic team on Q are super-talented and have helped build something beautiful.
I have always operated on the principle of doing my best to maintain a dignity and a commitment to openness and truth, both on and off the air. I have conducted major interviews, supported Canadian talent, and spoken out loudly in my audio essays about ideas, issues, and my love for this country. All of that is available for anyone to hear or watch. I have known, of course, that not everyone always agrees with my opinions or my style, but I've never been anything but honest. I have doggedly defended the CBC and embraced public broadcasting. This is a brand I’ve been honoured to help grow.
All this has now changed.
Today I was fired from the company where I've been working for almost 14 years – stripped from my show, barred from the building and separated from my colleagues. I was given the choice to walk away quietly and to publicly suggest that this was my decision. But I am not going to do that. Because that would be untrue. Because I’ve been fired. And because I've done nothing wrong.
I’ve been fired from the CBC because of the risk of my private sex life being made public as a result of a campaign of false allegations pursued by a jilted ex girlfriend and a freelance writer.
As friends and family of mine, you are owed the truth.
I have commenced legal proceedings against the CBC, what’s important to me is that you know what happened and why.
Forgive me if what follows may be shocking to some.
I have always been interested in a variety of activities in the bedroom but I only participate in sexual practices that are mutually agreed upon, consensual, and exciting for both partners.
About two years ago I started seeing a woman in her late 20s. Our relationship was affectionate, casual and passionate. We saw each other on and off over the period of a year and began engaging in adventurous forms of sex that included role-play, dominance and submission. We discussed our interests at length before engaging in rough sex (forms of BDSM). We talked about using safe words and regularly checked in with each other about our comfort levels. She encouraged our role-play and often was the initiator. We joked about our relations being like a mild form of Fifty Shades of Grey or a story from Lynn Coady's Giller-Prize winning book last year. I don’t wish to get into any more detail because it is truly not anyone's business what two consenting adults do. I have never discussed my private life before. Sexual preferences are a human right.
Despite a strong connection between us it became clear to me that our on-and-off dating was unlikely to grow into a larger relationship and I ended things in the beginning of this year. She was upset by this and sent me messages indicating her disappointment that I would not commit to more, and her anger that I was seeing others.
After this, in the early spring there began a campaign of harassment, vengeance and demonization against me that would lead to months of anxiety.
It came to light that a woman had begun anonymously reaching out to people that I had dated (via Facebook) to tell them she had been a victim of abusive relations with me. In other words, someone was reframing what had been an ongoing consensual relationship as something nefarious. I learned – through one of my friends who got in contact with this person – that someone had rifled through my phone on one occasion and taken down the names of any woman I had seemed to have been dating in recent years. This person had begun methodically contacting them to try to build a story against me. Increasingly, female friends and ex-girlfriends of mine told me about these attempts to smear me.
Someone also began colluding with a freelance writer who was known not to be a fan of mine and, together, they set out to try to find corroborators to build a case to defame me. She found some sympathetic ears by painting herself as a victim and turned this into a campaign. The writer boldly started contacting my friends, acquaintances and even work colleagues – all of whom came to me to tell me this was happening and all of whom recognized it as a trumped up way to attack me and undermine my reputation. Everyone contacted would ask the same question, if I had engaged in non-consensual behavior why was the place to address this the media?
The writer tried to peddle the story and, at one point, a major Canadian media publication did due diligence but never printed a story. One assumes they recognized these attempts to recast my sexual behaviour were fabrications. Still, the spectre of mud being flung onto the Internet where online outrage can demonize someone before facts can refute false allegations has been what I've had to live with.
And this leads us to today and this moment. I’ve lived with the threat that this stuff would be thrown out there to defame me. And I would sue. But it would do the reputational damage to me it was intended to do (the ex has even tried to contact me to say that she now wishes to refute any of these categorically untrue allegations). But with me bringing it to light, in the coming days you will prospectively hear about how I engage in all kinds of unsavoury aggressive acts in the bedroom. And the implication may be made that this happens non-consensually. And that will be a lie. But it will be salacious gossip in a world driven by a hunger for "scandal". And there will be those who choose to believe it and to hate me or to laugh at me. And there will be an attempt to pile on. And there will be the claim that there are a few women involved (those who colluded with my ex) in an attempt to show a "pattern of behaviour". And it will be based in lies but damage will be done. But I am telling you this story in the hopes that the truth will, finally, conquer all.
I have been open with the CBC about this since these categorically untrue allegations ramped up. I have never believed it was anyone's business what I do in my private affairs but I wanted my bosses to be aware that this attempt to smear me was out there. CBC has been part of the team of friends and lawyers assembled to deal with this for months. On Thursday I voluntarily showed evidence that everything I have done has been consensual. I did this in good faith and because I know, as I have always known, that I have nothing to hide. This when the CBC decided to fire me.
CBC execs confirmed that the information provided showed that there was consent. In fact, they later said to me and my team that there is no question in their minds that there has always been consent. They said they’re not concerned about the legal side. But then they said that this type of sexual behavior was unbecoming of a prominent host on the CBC. They said that I was being dismissed for "the risk of the perception that may come from a story that could come out." To recap, I am being fired in my prime from the show I love and built and threw myself into for years because of what I do in my private life.
Let me be the first to say that my tastes in the bedroom may not be palatable to some folks. They may be strange, enticing, weird, normal, or outright offensive to others. We all have our secret life. But that is my private life. That is my personal life. And no one, and certainly no employer, should have dominion over what people do consensually in their private life.
And so, with no formal allegations, no formal complaints, no complaints, not one, to the HR department at the CBC (they told us they’d done a thorough check and were satisfied), and no charges, I have lost my job based on a campaign of vengeance. Two weeks after the death of my beautiful father I have been fired from the CBC because of what I do in my private life.
I have loved the CBC. The Q team are the best group of people in the land. My colleagues and producers and on-air talent at the CBC are unparalleled in being some of the best in the business. I have always tried to be a good soldier and do a good job for my country. I am still in shock. But I am telling this story to you so the truth is heard. And to bring an end to the nightmare.

that was longer than i thought sorry

"campaign of vengeance" is the big bullshit red flag for me, that and the cultural namedrops.

yeah my own personal bullshit red flag is 'painted herself as the victim'.

i can imagine a tyler perry from gone girl figure going 'talk about the passing away of your father, people will like that'.

lol people have been throwing Tanner Bolt refs at this all day on Twitter, even before the statement came out

Never listened to him, hated his band, interesting story.

everything hes ever done has been complete and total garbage and hes an example of the worst, most smug aspects of the canadian cultural nomenklatura

i mean at best he liked to beat up woman while he fucked them which idk

everything hes ever done has been complete and total garbage and hes an example of the worst, most smug aspects of the canadian cultural nomenklatura

bring back sounds like canada

piya chattopadhyay is one of my least favorite cbc broadcasters. she's filled in on cross country checkup a lot recently.

We joked about our relations being like a mild form of Fifty Shades of Grey or a story from Lynn Coady's Giller-Prize winning book last year.

Yeah that line had me rolling my eyes out. The Star seems to be the one with the details. Several assaults against several women. Good riddance.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/10/26/cbc_fires_jian_ghomeshi_over_sex_allegations.html

The three women interviewed by the Star allege that Ghomeshi physically attacked them on dates without consent. They allege he struck them with a closed fist or open hand; bit them; choked them until they almost passed out; covered their nose and mouth so that they had difficulty breathing; and that they were verbally abused during and after sex.

^ welp, three different women agreeing on this kind of clinches it, imo

super bummed at how many people i casually know seem eager to get on a 'its unfair for the nba to punish donald sterling for something he said in private' tip for a dude whos only accomplishment is having a terrible radio show. btw this and the mayoral election just feeling tired of this city

The women, all educated and employed, said Ghomeshi’s actions shocked them.

"not prostitutes"

Owen Pallett slam dunks Ghomeshi's ass:
https://www.facebook.com/speccy.oxen/posts/10154776501860075

Wow.

A very brave & honest response.

Seems like everyone in Canada has a friend at the CBC or in the Toronto music scene who's all "no surprises" about this (I have). Yet despite tons of "let's be clear what this is about..." pieces in the last couple of days, this is the first I've seen from someone who really knows the guy, whose scene & fans overlap and is part of the same cultural establishment. Think there are really people who are bummed about it and reluctant to abandon Ghomeshi because they really liked his show. But this piece can maybe put it in perspective for some of those folks.

amanda palmer, noted fucking moron, weighs in: https://twitter.com/NotAllBhas/status/526745505863581696/photo/1

this is exactly how charisma works and why it is so hard to catch sexual abusers or even just regular bullies.

the state of BDSM in Canadian law

http://m.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/the-ghomeshi-question-the-law-and-consent/article21315629/?service=mobile

I've seen questions raised about that Globe piece (although I freely acknowledge that the author is an expert on the law and I am far from being one). The author does not cite the case she is referring to. Assuming she was talking about this case (R. v. J.A.), the ruling might not have stated exactly what she says it did ("when it comes to BDSM – or at least its more intense versions – the law doesn’t actually care about consent"): http://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/7942/index.do

I'll quote a friend's summary, which seems to be supported by the text of the ruling afaict:

the defendant was convicted of assault for having inserted a dildo into the anus of his wife after erotically asphyxiating her into unconsciousness. She had consented to the asphyxiation, but not the dildo insertion. The lack of consent for the latter was the basis of the assault conviction. No where does the ruling declare that one cannot consent to assault for purpose of erotic pleasure. The SC did not, for example, charge JA of assault for the act of asphyxiation for which he had obtained consent

(Wikipedia summary: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._v._J.A.)

This seems like a good breakdown of his PR and legal strategy:
http://business.financialpost.com/2014/10/28/jian-ghomseshi-lawsuit-cbc/

TL/DR: He will drop the lawsuit. His team knows the lawsuit can't be won. It's only been filed to let him push his version of events and to intimidate other women from coming forward.

So cynical, what an ass.

It looks bizarre until you realize that what the lawsuit is really about isn’t winning in court: It’s about Ghomeshi being able to say whatever he wants in legal documents with total protection from being sued for libel himself, while intimidating women from going public with allegations of assault at Ghomeshi’s hands.

Now he eats humble pie

New interview, not one of the three in the article, and #5 on Current tomorrow.

http://www.cbc.ca/asithappens/features/2014/10/29/jian/

Brutal.

Transcript up on Gawker. Holy shit:

And when we were at his house it was fine, he put music on and I was looking at his living room and he had some interesting things in there, and again, we were flirty. But in that flirting he grabbed my hair again but even harder, threw me in front of him on the ground, and started closed-fist pounding me in the head. Repeatedly. Until my ears were ringing. And I started to cry.

Interviewer: Did you struggle?

Woman: No I was in shock. When you get hit in the head, everything rings and it's hard to do anything but try to... there was no conversation about anything and he didn't ask me if I liked to be hit, he didn't ask me... I wasn't expecting it, and he hit me repeatedly.

Interviewer: On the head?

Woman: On the head, on one side of my head over and over. And I'm on the floor and I'm in tears and he said, "You need to go."

I didn't say much at all, I got in a cab and cried all the way to my friend's place. I didn't even go home, I was a mess. I went to my friend's place and stayed at her house and cried all night.

Someone's gone public: Lucy DeCoutere

https://twitter.com/TorStarEditor/status/527631997045600256

Ugh.

8.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/10/29/jian_ghomeshi_8_women_accuse_former_cbc_host_of_violence_sexual_abuse_or_harassment.html

Hunh. Didn't know this:

"DeCoutere, who, when she is not acting on the television show, is a captain in the Royal Canadian Air Force in New Brunswick"

Tcote just posted this on Twitter:

Check out the @bigearsteddy account. These Jian Ghomeshi allegations were out in plain sight. Months ago.

https://twitter.com/bigearsteddy

The suit/quote pics in that article are weird imho - xxpost

ILX and its thread naming practices.

Female artists get thread titles like "cash cow or evil bitch" or "lauryn hill: still crazy" basically just for existing.

A well-known male media figure beats and abuses AT LEAST eight women, and it's "an icon sullied"? Really?

You ever want to think about either your thread title choices, or the thread titles you choose to revive to discuss what stories, a little more, maybe?

Branwell, I changed the Lauren Hill thread title a few months ago. Thought I changed the Cash Cow title at the same time, but apparently not. I'll ask for suggestions next time that thread gets bumped on its own.

As for this one, I totally agree that the thread title soft-pedals the conversation topic and would be okay with changing it to something else. You all sort that out and I'll make it happen.

To your credit, you did change that title. But to ILX's shame, it took ten years, in some cases, of those titles being created and standing as they were.

I mean, I'm trying to think of some word that encapsulates the ILX-meme-ness of e.g. "This summer's biggest racist" - but it says something about the English language that we don't really have a slur that indicates a man who serially assaults women. (I mean, there's "wifebeater" but all reports seem to indicate this guy feels comfortable doing it to strangers.)

I need to not be on this thread, because this topic makes me seriously angry. But I would really prefer if a title were chosen that indicated the seriousness of the topic.

Thanks in advance.

p.s. I just searched "courtney love" and no, "cash cow or evil bitch" has not been changed - and to even find that thread, you have to wade through 2 pages of search results calling her crazy, ugly, unflattering, etc.

I do think in that light, that ILX can do a little better than "sullied" for a guy who viciously assaults and batters women, then pro-actively smears them all over the press to save his 'reputation'.

you should take it up with the person who revived this thread rather than starting a new one

I agree that he's done a lot worse than sully his name, and I agree with changing the thread title now that Ghomeshi is the main topic (I was about to say dominant). As for this being the thread where it was revived to discuss Ghomeshi, at that time, we didn't know anything about what had happened, only that he'd been fired and was preparing a legal case of some kind. There was speculation that he might have said something politically offensive. This was the thread where the topic had been already planted, and there are few enough Canadians on the board that even as further details began to come out, it would have been hard to foresee it becoming something of much wider interest, warranting its own thread. In other words, I think you make a good point in pushing to have the title renamed, but I can excuse it not having been done much sooner.

'politically offensive' = what I meant to say was politically controversial, i.e. offensive to Conservatives

this thread is 8 years old Bran

Frogs:

You ever want to think about either your thread title choices, or the thread titles you choose to revive to discuss what stories, a little more, maybe?

I dunno, "consider the history of all ILX thread titles before creating/reviving a thread" seems a bit over the top. I believe the Moxy Fruvous thread was bumped as well as initially it was a bunch of "what's going on here?" instead of rushing to judgment (as we're all free to do now)

this thread is 8 years old Bran

And it seems like the title - about a different issue - was meant ironically?

Oh shit. I didn't even realize this guy was in Moxy Fruvous.

The name also includes a heavy metal umlaut, again hinting at the satirical when naming a band because though Moxy Früvous was known for crossing a very wide range of genres, heavy metal is not a genre most listeners of Moxy Früvous would associate with the group, thereby creating humor.

yeah I previously dubbed Moxy as the least likely band to ever use the word 'fuck'. obviously you can't tell a thing about a person based on the music they create but still, wow

I'd rather see the word "sullied" than "beats women viciously" when I click my SNA, me. That it's a double standard is otm of course

I've read a lot of pieces either saying outright "we'd all heard about Jian," or "many of us have Jian stories," or things along those lines. So does this mean there are people out there, many people, who knew or suspected he was doing this stuff and just stayed mum? Or winked about it with friends? Because for all these people who supposedly knew his MO, or thought him a major creep, there were apparently many victims who knew nothing and were lured in by his charms. Did he seek out people who had no idea? Or was part of his power trip knowing that people know about him?

I don't know the ins and outs of BDSM relationships, but how do these people meet? Is it just a matter of serially assaulting women until you find one who likes it? Or who you think likes it? Or does them not liking it have something to do with the relationship?

Read this by Dan Savage: http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2014/10/29/interviews-with-two-women-who-dated-jian-ghomeshi

It goes into BDSM and how what Jian does is much different.

Don't know how many of you were affected and how deeply by this the last couple days, but many people I know in Toronto/Montreal have been completely fucked up by the public- and media- response. The way male-culture has responded, the way Jian's celebrity has coloured the discussion, not to mention how many survivors have been triggered into remembering that situation where nobody believes them. Three friends had panic attacks yesterday, ugh

@ Josh, most of the people I knew, the level of knowledge we had was basically the same level of knowledge that was exposed in that xojane piece, that he came on too strong and had lame pickup lines. Slimy stuff but nothing indicative of violent behaviour

I've read a lot of pieces either saying outright "we'd all heard about Jian," or "many of us have Jian stories," or things along those lines.

I wondered this too. Many people are saying "it was an open secret" but I guess it wasn't to these women

there's a difference between kink and assault as others have said.

Is it just a matter of serially assaulting women until you find one who likes it?

Josh, do you know many gay men?

ie, everything is easier since web.

i'm sure most people saying they heard rumours had no idea if there was much validity until very recently.

That Stranger hypothesis does seem like my "hit first, ask later" theory, which is deeply fucked up.

The psychology of much of this is totally foreign to me. I suppose I can see folks wanting to be degraded, or abused, to some extent. Or perhaps fantasizing about that. But who but a psychopath fantasizes about hitting someone? I guess it's a chicken and egg sort of thing - how would you know you liked to be hit or choked if people did not hit or choke, or vice versa - but I just can't square it.

One of the comments in this piece about the bear Twitter account:

Turned the bear around...that's where the camera was folks. The tweet says he had an extensive video library of his misdeeds. The cops should get those videos and arrest the little shit.

xpost to Branwell etc. As the thread-reviver, just want to say I do not disagree with you, but as jmmm mentioned, the revive happened before we knew anything about it. I doubt that anyone, even those who had heard what a sleazy reputation he had (I didn't hear this prior btw), would have suspected this.

This is a guy who starts his show with a and cloyingly sincere and concerned editorial about some world event was or Canadian cultural moment with suitably atmospheric musical accompaniment, searches for meaning in all of this & questions our identity in the world as Canadians. Basically does a spoken word version of Moxy Fruvos Gulf War Song EVERY FUCKING DAY then BAM, in the studio today its my great pleasure to introduce Zarqa Nawaz and Phoenix.

No way would I have thought this was what it was all about. My actual hunch was that he had gone too far on his editorial about the Ottawa shooting as a fuck off to the CBC, in a fit of serious depression about the death of his dad. So, yeah, change the thread title, it isn't appropriate. But your anger at ILX or any of the posters here is misplaced.

But your anger at ILX or any of the posters here is misplaced.p

otm. And thanks for the explanation, anything.

Er, everything. Fuck!

Wow.

You know, "I chose this thread to revive before the full details was known" was a perfectly adequate explanation.

Going on to tell me how I should feel, and who I should reserve what emotions for is seriously not OK, deeply patronising and about as far from "OTM" as possible.

I would have expected way better from you, how's life.

All I'm saying is not to be angry at each other.

The only person whose anger you can control is your own, right?

Going on to tell me how I should feel, and who I should reserve what emotions for is seriously not OK

he said your feeling of anger was misplaced in this instance. while the difference is admittedly subtle, his statement was descriptive, while your characterization is that it was prescriptive. it wasn't.

I can't be the only 29 y/o music-liking Ontarian who had to be reminded who Moxy Früvous are. I've probably heard them before, but it's amazing to me that they were Canadian platinum.

I do strenuously try to block out Can-rock and comedy rock and Canadian comedy rock.

I had seen their albums around but never heard of them (American). I just checked out a video and basically they are the Barenaked Ladies, right?

basically yeah

Now now, let's not sully any more Canadian icons.

Not my favourite Canadian comedy rock band of that era by any means (Corky and the Juice Pigs) but I did see Moxy Fruvous live way more times than necessary round about 1993ish (my wife liked them, we lived at the University in a town where few touring bands and they played often) and they were a good live band. These were They had some shtick that was fun and impressive. Once I heard their debut album I completely soured on them and don't think I've heard a song since.

Not my favourite Canadian comedy rock band

Uhhhhhhh

the venn diagram of "women who've had time for moxy fruvous" and "women who've had time for me" disturbed me before all this

dunno if i would have heard of them otherwise

Canadian comedy rock: a synthesis that is worse than the sum of its parts

I cannot objectively tell you which is better: "Be My Yoko Ono" or "The Only Gay Eskimo".

the images that the star is using seem kinda interweb tone-deaf to me

http://www.thestar.com/content/dam/thestar/uploads/2014/10/29/1414636065605.jpg.size.xxlarge.promo.jpg

there are several like that in the story - it's like they're memeifying all the statements from the parties in the story

http://www.thestar.com/content/dam/thestar/uploads/2014/10/29/1414636024601.jpg.size.xxlarge.promo.jpg

yeah you'd think he was joel osteen pitching wisdom or something

It's almost like they're goading the seedier parts of the internet into turning this into another meme pic ("I don't know what happened, I never saw a thing" - Big Ears Teddy)

and yes, I'm sorry about that

I can't tell if Josh was being tongue-in-cheek about BDSM, but no, this is not at all how that works. The point is that the person who is subordinate holds the real power. They might have all kinds of physical or verbal things going on that make it look like they're subject to abuse, but they can stop it at any time. It's a reversal of the power dynamic.

With Ghomeshi, it really looks like he's a guy who is in a position of privilege and power and he's just doing what he wants without establishing any sort of precondition. If you're being physically or emotionally abusive without definitive consent and boundaries, and you're in power before things even begin, then you're just taking advantage of your position.

I guess I'll still rep for that first Moxy album but man did they blow everything on it

well, I mean a week ago I would've. I'd be way too creeped out by it now.

A few thoughts on this matter:

- in Canada there is no such thing as consenting-to-violence, so even if Jian had these women sign notarized consent forms it wouldn't have made a difference.
> I don't agree with this law, or maybe I do? but so many people certainly break it, with consent, which makes Jian's donning of that particular defence that much more disturbing, as it implicates family and friends who work in/engage in BDSM.

- physical and sexual assault claims are notoriously difficult to prove in court, and proceedings are intensely degrading to the victims; my mother, who works with battered women, says "filing charges" should be the second-least preferable resort (with staying silent being the least preferable).

What is intensely dispiriting to me (aside from the obvious) is the insistence all over the web that Jian needs be charged/proven guilty before anyone can pass judgement, as if people are incapable of dealing with systems of physical and sexual violence without the justice system getting involved.

Been interesting seeing a lot (hardly all) of clowns who had been going just like that either settle into quiet begrudging acceptance of what went down or else went into self-flailing mode shrieking that they were 'betrayed' by Jian's Sunday statement.

I'm frustrated that people needed the movie version of events instead of the journalism version

I can't be the only 29 y/o music-liking Ontarian who had to be reminded who Moxy Früvous are.

You might be just a little too young. They were huge for a minute in the mid-90s, with heavy MuchMusic play. I'm 35 and went to a school with a Gifted programme; I had to hear frequent singalongs of "The Drinking Song", "King of Spain", etc.

Fairly recently, some high school friends were posting the MF version of "Green Eggs and Ham" on FB.

Idle checks on his FB page show his 'likes' numbers steadily dropping. Not precipitously dropping (yet) but the spiral is in play.

There's a FB campaign to defriend him - a link going around that tells you which friends like him and you're supposed to ask them to defriend!

MF's actual moment in the sun, when they got lots of plays on Much Music etc was 1992-93. All the famous songs mentioned here (King of Spain, Green Eggs, Drinking Song, the one about Authors, Gulf War) were all on their 1992 demo cassette, when that was a thing in Canada- the Barenaked Ladies did an indie cassette that went gold. Their debut album which came out more than a year later had re-recordings and everyone was tired of them by then (plus the other, worse material of course). Why am I telling you this fact? To establish that you would have to be at least sentient by 1992 to have experienced their heyday.

Meantime Amanda Palmer has gone "Uh I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO." Kinda.

https://www.facebook.com/amandapalmer/posts/10152576179293375

Man, I know appearances are deceiving etc. but it's still tough to square this whole story with the guy who sang "My Baby Loves a Bunch of Authors".

xxpost -- Yeah I first heard of them thanks to the said tape in, I think, early 1993; a friend of mine down here had it and was all geeked out over it (in more than one way).

Annnd his (I gather) longtime PR firm has dropped him

https://twitter.com/rockitpromo/status/527926831572602880?lang=en

The point is that the person who is subordinate holds the real power.

But isn't there an inherent contradiction here? That what the person dominating gets out of it is thinking they have the real power? At least, I can see what you're saying applying to, say, a professional, like a pro dominatrix, where it is clearly a fantasy arrangement. But in the context of real world relationships, I just don't see how this can work without someone getting hurt, literally or figuratively. You need someone really hitting, or hurting, or whatever, to whatever degree, for there to be a sub under the illusion they have the "real" power. The sub can (or should) be able to stop things before things go too far, but the job of the dom is ... to push things too far, for real. Someone can say stop, but someone still has to hit or hurt first. It seems an untenable imbalance.

Plus another public statement:

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/reva-seth/reva-seth-jian-ghomeshi_b_6077296.html

Would not be surprised if there are plenty more ahead.

Re: Amanda Palmer remaining neutral on this - even if that's her attitude, does she REALLY think Ghomeshi is going to walk out on a stage in Toronto next week? Fucking hell. They'd need the police there.

Maybe he can do penance as a living statue.

you could poll which line from that palmer post is the most tone-deaf

if you've been following the news, he's become a lightning rod in the past couple days.

i see all your thoughts and it is my personal style to never shut down a conversation or run away from the fire: a philosophy that often (as you've seen before) lands me in hot water.

sorry for the mixed fire/water metaphor....haven't had my coffee yet.

ironically (poetically?) enough, i am spending my days, as we speak, at bard college making a musical with a bunch of students that deals directly with the painful aftershocks of sexual abuse, rape culture and lack of communication. and i'm about to publish a book about how communication and openness trumps anger, hate and fear. these things can't be coincidental.

so to sum-up, she's awesome, she's not sure what ghomeshi is other than talked about but be nice she hasn't had her coffee and isn't it amazing how the stars have aligned

and please buy my book, available for preorder on amazon

completely empty bunch of words she's put together. anti-meaning, even.

And one of her other guests is Bob Lefsetz...

Yup.

also she's offered two responses in the comments. to someone suggesting his presence would be disturbing and an insult to his victims, she responded "i hear you." to someone who told her to take a nap and stay hydrated, she responded "will do. i'm actually about to take the day off with my husband. for his birthday. wish me many cuddles."

so fans of hers disturbed by the allegations get nothing more than "i see you have typed words" while she asks for a hate-free zone and cuddle wishes.

i realize "amanda palmer is a narcissist, film at eleven" is old hat but I'm still amazed she can keep up the shtick in the face of ANYTHING

I believe that Amanda Palmer's relationship with her fans is extremely dysfunctional. I'm not being rhetorical or joking on any level. I think it is a serious co-dependent/narcissist relationship that does no-one any good.

she says "I hadn't been raped" but I'd disagree with that assessment based on what she described happened.

(that was w/r/t the Reva Seth article)

It's understandable that AP would have a hard time with speaking truth-to-power, given her own history

Whatever it's called, she paints a clear picture of why someone would rather just say "bad date, move on" than turn it into a criminal charge, and how ordinary a thing that is in our world.

Josh, I think wiser people than myself can answer your questions, there. Like an entire community with a rich history that probably exists, should you choose to read about it instead of conjecturing.

Google pretends it is a submissive, getting off on people telling it what to do, but we know who has the real power.

Navigator has dropped him now: http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/10/30/jian-ghomeshi-navigator-pr_n_6078334.html

Talk about a sign he is TOTALLY radioactive. Even if their hands were forced.

I am so glad! That of all the interesting debates this situation could have stimulated (the use and abuse of power by well-connected media men; the ways in which female communities protect and fail to protect women from predators; the lines between BDSM and abuse, and the known and oft-identified how creepy-doms often use 'BDSM' as an excuse to cover abuse) ILX has now chosen to dwell on and discuss the single most salient and interesting and important aspect of this whole mess!

Indulging its collective grudge-crush on Amanda Palmer!

I am so relieved that we have identified the ~real~ menace here.

^Activist Zero for the next backlash

sucks that you have Eazy akm mh Josh in Chicago doug watson and Ned Reggett killfiled

wait who is Ned Reggett

I don't have any of those people killfiled. But I don't think it's a stretch to say that actually, ILX's relationship with 'Amanda Palmer' is 'deeply dysfunctional'.

xp

Maybe I've forgotten the name and the address
Of everyone I've ever known
It's nothing I Reggett

I have no interest in her but idk she's an asshole who says dumb shit to the internet in order to get precisely this kind of response, I'm not surprised ilx has a thread to point and laugh (like that lefsetz guy). A few posts itt noting that a famous person with lots of loyal fans just publically defended a rapist doesn't seem that off too me

*to

There is no violent, abusive action of a man so horrible, so repugnant, that the good people of ILX cannot find a way into deflecting onto criticism of a woman. (Any woman will do, but ILX is particularly obsessed with AP.) If a male celebrity has done a violet, repulsive, horrible thing, cherchez la femme! This is the true, appropriate target for your criticism, rather than male violence itself.

Reggetts, I've had a few

Nearly all of this discussion here has been revulsion at Ghomeshi, and I don't think anyone would have bothered with Amanda Palmer at all if she hadn't previously booked him for an appearance in Canada next week. When this came up on Sunday, she gave an initial statement saying the appearance was still on; now that more people have come forward, and given that this would have been Ghomeshi's only scheduled public appearance at all in the near future, it's not surprising that there's been a further statement from her. That the statement seems to be a bit of flailing on her part is kinda her burden to bear; the vast majority of commenters ON the Facebook post have been urging her to drop him from the appearance.

Meantime, more background info:

http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/behind-the-cbcs-decision-to-fire-ghomeshi/article21396998/?service=mobile&click=sf_globefb

And more about the PR decisions:

http://m.thestar.com/#/article/news/gta/2014/10/30/jian_ghomeshi_dumped_by_pr_firm_over_lies_sources_say.html

It's a little interesting/surprising to compare the discussion here and on my FB feed, where most people have accepted that he is guilty by now, with the comments section on even a recent CBC story on this issue: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/jian-ghomeshi-allegedly-choked-beat-n-b-woman-with-belt-1.2818879

Plenty of commenters still regard this as a vengeful smear campaign by the CBC to get back at a former employee who is suing them and are question the credibility of the women who are making these allegations. I'm usually hesitant to assume someone's guilt in these sorts of situations but, at this point, when eight different women have come forth with similar allegations, and two have put their names to it, I find it pretty hard to not believe them.

Is it possible that AP has kept him on the 'show' 1) because he has some explaining to do and 2) if she sacked him off, she'd still have to pay him?

(bear in mind I know not what the 'show' is)

"... are questioning the credibility ..."

jeet heer thinks about the "political economy" of JG

https://storify.com/JeetHeer1/the-political-economy-of-jian-ghomeshi

has she made up her mind to keep him on the show?

Someone was giving Queen Latifah shit for dropping Bill Cosby as a guest just as/because of renewed rape talk making the rounds, saying she should have kept him on to call him on his shit. But had she kept him on, she still would have gotten shit. At this point I sort of want AP to keep this asshat on whatever her show/panel thing is she's doing, just to see what happens, how it further reflects on him and her. Given the response in the post comments and given his day by day increased notoriety, I can't imagine he can stand on a stage without someone at the least shouting him down, at the most throwing something at his head. And I'm curious how she carries herself, too. Obviously Amanda Palmer thrives on self-righteous defense, but clearly that isn't working in this case (again, judging by fan responses to her comments). Or maybe nothing will happen. Or maybe he will drop out.

I think AP should drop out, and Jian and Bob Lefsetz should take turns interviewing each other until everyone leaves and/or one of them drops dead. Maybe they can get Gene Simmons in the mix, too.

Ghomeshi being dropped by his crisis management firm makes me wonder whether firms like that have anything equivalent to attorney-client privilege. Are clients protected if they disclose lots of illegal activities? It seems like there might me a strong incentive against disclosing more to the firm than you have to, or more than what's already in the media.

there's undoubtedly non-disclosure agreements but i can't imagine publicist-client privilege has the same legal standing as attorney-client

in this case there'd be no point to putting his publicists on the stand anyway. a lot of what they could say would be hearsay, and it's unlikely ghomeshi is confessing to the victim's accounts as someone else comes up with the defense he posts on facebook. those rationalizations are clearly his own.

If a male celebrity has done a violet, repulsive, horrible thing, cherchez la femme!

If it had been Mark Kozelek wandering into the situation even tangentially, the reaction would have been identical.

his PR people have (anonymously) told reporters that he lied to them

Palmer confirms Ghomeshi will now not be at the show:

https://www.facebook.com/amandapalmer/posts/10152578178708375

good, though i'm curious if ghomeshi was even planning to attend otherwise at this point

Yeah tcote was wondering on Twitter if he's even IN Toronto. I'd heard some rumor he's lurking in LA.

WELP.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/10/31/jian_ghomeshi_showed_cbc_video_of_bondage_beating_sources.html

Extending some of the Globe and Mail stuff from this morning. But more excruciatingly.

I can't tell if Jian earnestly thinks he's done nothing wrong and that hitting women without their consent is all just fun and games, or if he's cynically exploiting BDSM as a craven defense.

Functionally that's not a useful distinction, really, but I'm curious as to whether he's an opportunistic sociopath or just someone who's always had a poor grasp of the concept of consent who has never been forced to change.

christ, i would think calling a meeting with your employers and giving them your sex tapes would be grounds for firing alone

He might be pathologically deluded, or trying to prove that.

Another rep dumps him:

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/10/31/jian_ghomeshi_dumped_by_agent.html

I think Dan Savage's theory yesterday was right, that he may have thought (like a misguided frat kid) he was getting consent through being forward with his actions and seeing if they resisted.

Savage:

The woman with whom I spoke is having a difficult time squaring the Jian Ghomeshi she knows with the Jian Ghomeshi she's read about this week.

But I think I can square the two Ghomeshis.

The woman with whom I spoke doesn't live in Toronto. She and Ghomeshi flirted via text and Skype for weeks before finally meeting up to have sex. And in that time—over those long weeks of flirting—a mutual interest in BDSM was established (file under "lucky coincidence") and she consented to the things Ghomeshi was floating in their texts and chats. The woman who was interviewed on As It Happens, on the other hand, lives in Toronto. Ghomeshi flirted with this woman in person. And instead of telling her what he was into—instead of talking with her about BDSM—Ghomeshi chose to show her what he was into: He grabbed her hair in the car and asked, "Do you like this?" When she hung out with him again, when she came back to his apartment with him, Ghomeshi concluded—erroneously and self-servingly—that the answer to the question he asked her in the car was yes. Yes, she liked it. Yes, she liked it rough.

This part from the Star story is REALLY interesting:

By early October, with Ghomeshi still doing his show five days a week, CBC and Navigator thought the storm had passed, sources say.
Two weeks ago, podcaster Brown tweeted that he was working on a “monster” story that would be “worse than embarrasing for certain parties”. Brown has told the Star that he was referring to a different story, and it had nothing to do with Ghomeshi. Sources connected to CBC and Navigator said they now understand this to be the case.
But when Brown’s tweet came out, Ghomeshi’s concern over imminent publication prompted him to ask for a meeting with CBC late Thursday, Oct. 23. At that meeting, according to sources, he presented “material that we had not seen before.”

So basically if Ghomeshi hadn't reacted as he did...something might still have come out eventually (one would hope) but we wouldn't be talking about it now.

Also, slight addition:

https://twitter.com/JesseBrown/status/528302819397632000

Small clarification to @_kevindonovan. Story suggests Big Ears tweets started my investgtn in April. I was contacted by a source in March.

http://canadalandshow.com/article/exclusive-cbc-stonewalled-snowden-story-says-greenwald

the story brown says he was talking about. apparently journalists should subtweet more often.

if you've got a bunch of stories that are going dry, just tweet "oh man the other shoe has dropped, watch out you-know-who" and see who freaks out

I know there's a world of difference between "explaining" and "condoning" but jesus christ, Dan Savage of all people should know better than to float that kind of bullshit.

I still don't buy it. Creepy-Dom (the guy who gets an actual kick out of the act of violating people's consent boundaries, and uses BDSM as a cover for it) is such a known figure even in the tiny bits of the kink communities that intersect with my world.

The amount of 'benefit of the doubt' you'd have to extend the guy to believe that kind of story. Just... no.

But I guess I shouldn't be surprised at yet another example of Dan Savage being RONG! about things.

my god it's a irl "fly, all is discovered" (http://forums.theregister.co.uk/post/1485798)

Well, there's also this in the next paragraph of Savage's post:

But the only explanation that reconciles the stories of the now four women who claim they were assaulted by Jian Ghomeshi with the story of the one woman I spoke to today is this: Ghomeshi isn't a safe, sane, and consensual kinkster. He's a reckless, abusive, and dangerous one who has traumatized some women and lucked out with others.

That is, admittedly, less bad.

(To be fair, I did not read the full thing because I do my best not to give clicks to Dan Savage.)

We might as well post his update after the other interviews came out as well

UPDATE 2: As I continue to read more about Ghomeshi... I now think my interpretation—my attempt to reconcile the experience of the woman I interviewed with the allegations of the eight women who now report being assaulted by the radio host—was entirely too charitable.

I love that a tweet and his own narcissism brought him down.

If he didn't assume everyone was talking about him, he wouldn't have panicked and set the whole domino chain in motion.

I also love that he was done in by his own strategy of "getting ahead of the story" and "controlling the narrative". A strategy that people were calling "brilliant PR" at the beginning of the week.

It's like a movie or something - such a perfect tight little chain of events all set in motion by his own fatal flaws. Self-immolation by his own celebrity.

I don't love any of that, like at all. So far the reported cases seem under-par compared to most VAW cases. Were he not in this bizarre position of trying to lie his way out of a reparable situation, were he willing to reach out to his victims and make public apologies and movement toward treatment and reparations, I dunno, it might not be such a chilling clusterfuck

Noticed idly that Ghomeshi's Facebook likes have dropped by close to 10,000 over the last couple of days, due doubtless to the 'takebackthelike' campaign going around. Still a LOT there but that was near to one-tenth of his total. Wonder if it'll keep going.

well you gotta figure people aren't religiously performing facebook-like maintenance

sorry didn't mean to sound gleeful about such an awful story - just take some sadistic satisfaction in him being the agent of his own downfall

that his trying to control people and situations is exactly what made him lose it all

"under-par compared to most VAW cases"

what

punching ppl in the head
nonconsensual vaginal penetration
choking

"under par"

I guess he hasn't killed anyone

Yeah, I too was curious about what that particular usage was supposed to signify?

I'm doubtful that Brown's being honest in saying that the tweet was referring to a different story. I don't know why he would lie about that, but it seems like an unlikely coincidence. I think the story was going to come out soon regardless.

nonconsensual vaginal penetration

Eh what? Is this true? I haven't read that. Where is that?

As for "under par" I'm not trying to trivialize anything, that was exactly the term used by my friends-who-work-with-battered-women when we talked about it, i.e. he didn't break limbs or burn anyone or put anyone in hospital.

I said "friends" but I mean my mom, who cares, that's her field. Having read the Star report she was pretty sure no charges would stick if he'd gone that route

It's in Reva Seth's account. I will not quote it here.

http://m.huffpost.com/ca/entry/6077296

I'm doubtful that Brown's being honest in saying that the tweet was referring to a different story. I don't know why he would lie about that, but it seems like an unlikely coincidence.

did you see the article he claimed he was tweeting about? not impossible he'd think the cbc hiding snowden shit was noteworthy

Oh, no I didn't see that. Thanks.

It's in Reva Seth's account. I will not quote it here.

*facepalm* fuck this guyyyyyyy

fgti, words & usages have a context. The clinical assessment by a professional made within an informal context may be inappropriate or need qualification & explanation when used in a different context.

Anyway Reva Seth herself seems inclined to downplay the severity of the violalence, and makes the point that othing would've stuck had she reported it:

I didn't do anything because it didn't seem like there was anything to do. I hadn't been raped. I had no interest in seeing him again or engaging the police in my life ... as a lawyer, I'm well aware that the scenario was just a "he said/she said" situation. I was aware that I, as a woman who had had a drink or two, shared a joint, had gone to his house willingly and had a sexual past, would be eviscerated.

(sry, on phone)

Aaaaand 15 minutes later:

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/10/31/jian_ghomeshi_showed_cbc_video_of_bondage_beating_sources.html

Toronto police have confirmed that two women have come forward with allegations against Jian Ghomeshi and are investigating.

fuck this guyyyyyyy

√

@ Branwell no no for sure, Mom Tie's comments were only speculative

Man even if all this guy did was show entirely consensual and nonviolent sex tapes to his bosses/co-workers he should probably have been fired. I think someone upthread said this already but how did he think that would help him save his job? (Likely answer appears to be "he is a sociopath".)

And now...

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/10/31/moxy-fruvous-jian-ghomeshi_n_6084860.html

when you've lost moxy fruvous . . .

Good Good interview with Jesse Brown. on breaking the story with a newspaper instead of independently.

I really enjoyed his CBC show Search Engine back in the day (2009 or so) and hadn't heard about Canadaland until this week.

One quote in that interview:

What has it been like working with Kevin Donovan?
That’s a work in progress, and so far, we’ve gotten the story out and we’re continuing to get it out. You’re talking about a relationship that’s unspooling as we speak, so I don’t think I’m going to talk about that right now.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/01/jian-ghomeshi-i-dated-him

And...fail:

https://twitter.com/SethAbramovitch/status/528953604787277824

As was noted elsewhere, this story actually ran on their website on Oct. 19th before everything broke into the open, but running it NOW in the print edition = uh.

o_0

This will surely endear him to millions and save the day for him:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSkjqK4SdP8

Ha Had no idea until reading the comments on that video that this guy was the one Billy Bob Thornton did that infamous interview with.

moxy fruvous had fans?

See above. They were briefly massive in Canada.

No, I mean, I get that, but...

sounds like he's trying to remember "magical misery tour" by national lampoon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVDpPX37fkU

I forgot about the National Lampoon bit, but I immediately thought of Lennon.

His band was so awful, there's a temptation to turn this back on himself, but contempt for your audience is never good. (Almost never, anyway. Dylan in '65 probably had good reason to hate the people who hated him for moving on. Moxy Fruvous was not Bob Dylan in 1965.)

The guy is almost definitely a monster but this video mostly seems like inebriated goofing around tbh.

who are our remaining unsullied canadian icons? besides kate beaton and john k. samson

NoMeansNo seem like pretty stand-up dorks

Mr. Dressup and Glass Tiger's Alan Frew. That's it.

wendel

Bobby Orr

Radio Free Vestibule

excuse me, this thread is no longer about other icons per buckling to neo****ism

A little more background

http://on.thestar.com/1t4WlM2

If some Gordon Lightfoot scandal breaks, the thread is still ready. -xpost

What a great scene, in Ned's link.

hold on - i don't think they were ever even close to "massive" at any point! they had a crappy single that, defying all reason/logic, got popular and a good amount of airtime. and then that was abut it, no?

Bargainville went platinum in Canada. The s/t went gold. (Source: http://musiccanada.com/gold-platinum/#!/gp_search=moxy%20fruvous). I remember MM play for "Stuck in the 90s", "King of Spain", and "My Baby Loves a Bunch of Authors". I might have been overexposed to nerds who loved them, though.

I mean, I said "briefly massive". Def not an enduring success like the Hip or BNL.

I heard "Authors" on some book podcast. It totally sounded like some poor man's Bare Naked Ladies or TMBG junk.

Yeah, I generally agree. I wasn't really advocating for their musical greatness.

"My Baby Loves a Bunch of Authors"

Is this a rip of "I Love My Baby Cause She Makes Good Scupltures"?

If it is, it's only in the title and not anything else, least of all overall quality.

Just wanting to make sure the dinner scene Ned linked to doesn't get lost:
http://on.thestar.com/1t4WlM2

Whenever the perennial "worst lyric ever" Des'ree conversation comes up I always think of the following drive-by-shooting:

Buy a new Gameboy!
For the fun and the fashion
Or just for the passion
Back in his day job this afternoon
Unlikely to move down to Cuba soon
Reluctant to find he's
Stuck in the 90s again

The weighting of the meter on those lines is a fucking genocide

Good lord those are awful lyrics, thank God I don't know the song.

"My Baby Loves A Bunch of Authors" is inspired by the big International Festival of Authors at Toronto's Harbourfront Theatre; at least I suspect it is. The sample line "Spilt some dressing on Doris Lessing/These writer types are a scream!" should show you how, uh, juvenile (I feel I am being kind here) MF were.

Having lived in Toronto for so long - all through the 90s and most of the 00s - I wonder how many people I knew in turn knew someone, etc. This is what upsets me, nearly as much as what happened - those who knew, but because he was in a great position of media power, didn't do anything.

Those lame threats he made to the reporter in that article (You should be very careful. I have a long memory.) are the talk of someone so secure in his power that he thinks he won't ever actually take a fall.

i honestly have zero recollection of any song that wasn't "King of Spain"!

wow... dyslexia kicked in and i originally mistyped that as "Kings of pain"

"Stuck in the 90s" is one of the 4-5 MF songs I still like. I think they've done worse lyrics than that though. I'm thinking of "Soon I'll be 30/I don't want to be 30/I've got some big plans/Goodwill has some big hands/With each new computer screen/The world tells me I'm more green" From the same song no less.

xpost -- There's a little black spot on the sun today
I threw Jian G up there.

i think he's obviously a huge narcissist... all the stuff about him talking about how "fat" he is really speak to that

Living in Toronto, knowing a lot of people in media, music, and book worlds, I'll say the whole "everyone knew" meme that's snowballing is getting pretty blown out of proportion. Most people I've talked to this week seem to be in the same boat as me - everyone knew he was a sleazy pick-up artist type but the idea that he did anything non-consensual, violent, or in the workplace is coming as a total shock to most. Not saying that some people knew a lot more (obviously we know this is true NOW) - just this idea that everyone knew everything is crazy.

Not everyone knew everything, but in the first conversation I had with someone about it (after the firing, before the statement), I heard a second-hand account that included some rather evocative details indicating that JG's habits were widely known at least throughout the CBC - not unlike the account given in Jesse Brown's latest podcast (which is very much worth a listen).

can we go back to where dude called a special meeting with his bosses to show them some homemade porn

xp
Maybe so. CBC people I know, including people who worked with him, were completely and sincerely surprised. Anyway if this gives people pause about what more might be going on when they think someone's just a garden-variety pig that's probably a good thing in the long run.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/11/03/students_were_warned_away_from_q_internships_professor.html

He was dropped by the Polaris music prize today.

When is Billy Bob Thornton going to make a statement?

i'm guessing he realizes the fragility of his glass house when it comes to the treatment of women

I doubt Billy Bob is even aware of this story, since even if he has himself on Google alert anything about JG is buried under dozens of "OMG BBT on BBT!" Articles this week

oh i dunno, i'm sure one of his fellow boxmasters has said "lol remember that dj in canada? get ready for this..." to him over the last week or so

Billy Bob is probably on some "I was never in a band" shit at this point

wrong

http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/the-615/6288944/billy-bob-thorntons-boxmasters-101-records

from the interview i wouldnt be surprised if BBT and the other boxmasters had never actually exchanged any spoken words

lol whoever did that article clearly followed the "rules" - not a single intimation that BBT does anything but play music that the world enjoys.

Twitter is calling for Norm MacDonald to fill the CBC spot, I for one am 100% for this idea

macdonald should RT some of that stuff, help get the word out

If only this story had broke a few months earlier, we could've heard Norm MacDonald interview Streisand.

Replacing Jian with a guy from the Mike Tyson show---great idea!

Those lame threats he made to the reporter in that article (You should be very careful. I have a long memory.) are the talk of someone so secure in his power that he thinks he won't ever actually take a fall.

Not necessarily. That account suggested he was nervous, so he might well have known that trying to be intimidating was the best of the severely limited options he had left.

Phew at this

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2014/11/jian_ghomeshi_allegations_i_wasn_t_surprised_to_hear_them_does_that_make.html

You should have written that in the first person once you realized how horribly pretentious and fake distancing what you wrote turned out to be.

ez snappin

xpost for real. just trade the sunglasses for a loaf of bread and be done with it

true confessions: at first I read the byline as Carl Newman and I was like noooo

yup, my first thought was how false-distancing and gross the second person stance is. it's fine for short hypotheticals, but in long pieces? no, I am not in the press or music or interview worlds and I have no stake in this. I'm not even Canadian, so I am certainly not the "you".

the point of the second person is to aid in universalizing about the phenomenon which afaict is the entire pt of the piece.

put yourself in the shoes of the bystander who does nothing. on the other hand, shouldn't there be more emphasis / exploration of / better understanding of what can be done? it does seem a little shrugged-off and self-excusing in that dept.

not feeling the universalizing

The universalizing makes him a twat.

(You contacted Jian to tell him you were writing this piece and get his comment, but he did not respond.)

You. Did. This.

Huh. Did not expect this response to Carl's piece.

Honestly, I am not in a life/career track that requires a strong social network or publicity in order to keep my career viable, so I can't relate to that part of it. The Catholic church analogy seems forced, unless being on the wrong side of the CBC or Canadian journalism landscape is going to send you to eternal damnation.

Serious question, is there anything you can do if you find out someone you know beat up one of their exes? Not being rhetorical here, curious what people say.

Are they still a violent person? Have they sought out therapy, restitution (if warranted), or anything that would redeem them? Is there anything you can do for the ex, even if it's making sure your friend never gets near them again? Although it certainly wasn't the case here, it's worth determining if it was a mutually violent relationship, and if so, making sure your friend doesn't seek that out.

He's not with anyone at the moment so it's hard to tell whether he's still violent. He's never aggressive with me but different aspects of a personality can of course emerge in different situations. This ex was with him before I knew him, I've only known him just over a year, not all that long but long enough that he's more than a mere acquaintance. I don't actually know the ex personally, found out through a mutual friend. Not sure how to react.

with caution and understanding

i think you guys are misreading the carl wilson piece rather dramatically

it's not about universalizing

it's about him accusing and interrogating himself. the "you" is him.

s1ocki OTM

I bet you all hated the book Bright Lights, Big City

fuckin jay mcinerney accusing all of living it up in 80s new york! i dont think so pal... that aint me

I was just disappointed that it wasn't a Choose Your Own Adventure

well yeah, it's him, but that doesn't mean the second-person works!

good on him for the introspection

Ed the Sock had to weigh in? https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=905268966157574&id=157629434254868

unless the mcinerney ref is meant to say Carl Wilson couldn't analyze his own feelings due to an extended cocaine binge or w/e

This is becoming such an education in Canadian pop culture

I like Carl a lot, but his writing often has clarity issues, and I don't think he's really helping himself here with the second person.

Carl Wilson latest Canadian to be sullied, by his own handwrit!

I think Carl's piece works. Maybe a little cutesy at first glance, but I agree with Slocki - he's using it to a definite effect. First, to put the reader in his shoes. I don't think you need to be so literal about the specifics of the story to relate - unless you've never in your life turned a blind eye to dubious shit, in which case you're better than I. Second, he does it to examine his own actions from a remove. To write it as 'I did this' and 'I did that' would allow him to justify his actions and squirm out of taking responsibility. By writing it as "you", it's almost like he's an outside observer who can actually be tougher on himself than "I".

At least that's how I'm reading it - but I have a lot of time for Carl Wilson.

I came to the exact opposite conclusion! I think the "you" his far more squirmy and distanced. But, yes, I get what he's trying to say, in his clumsy way.

Sorry, you "is" not his

yeah - I totally hear you, I was put off at first but then tried to roll with it and it seemed to make sense to me by the end.

the thing that's getting me more than the style is what I mentioned upthread, the "we all knew" meme may come from a noble impulse but I think it's not a truthful idea that "we all" should have made the leap from "I knew this guy was uncool with women" to "I knew this guy is assaulting women".

I don't know, maybe I'm just projecting my own ignorance onto other

Fwiw that piece was very heavily edited by legal

wait, are you CW?

He told me it probably wasn't going up but then there it is. I loved it but I love Carl's style

So u guys all heard stories about ghomeshi
Who else have u heard about
Provide details here before the Toronto star

Don't end up like carl

I just understood him to be a self-important douchebag who somehow transformed himself from a member of a sub-sub-sub-Barenaked Ladies knock-off comedy band into a smarmy public radio host that everyone thought was pretty awful. A social climber who tried to glom on to genuinely creative people who treated him like His show got decent guests so people listened despite him, not because of him. I'd heard he was a schmuck to women - but given how openly obnoxious and narcissistic he was in general - as part of his PUBLIC persona, that wasn't surprising. If I'd heard he was nice to women or men or small animals, that would have been surprising. To hear he was a jackass was not surprising. I guess I had no idea what people were really saying when they said he was bad to women - it went much further than I could have imagined. It's like he camouflaged his true horribleness in a lot of low-level horribleness.

Seems that it's become part of the narrative that he was a skilled and beloved broadcaster yet almost everyone I know can't stand him and I'm sure most of the country never listened to him even once.

yep, exactly.

ha i thought you were talking about carl for a second and i was like HEY WAIT A MINUTE

ha ha, yeah that swaggering prick LOL

FWIW, Carl posted on FB explaining his choice of the second person; as I'm not sure if he intends that to be public or not I won't quote it here in full, but he spoke about wanting to avoid a first person approach that could be seen as sympathetic in favor of a second person approach that seemed more appropriate in terms of reflexivity and complicity.

The Potlicial Petard
‏@PoliticalPetard
Rumour running around CBC that the video(s) #JianGhomeshi provided to CBC were staged and involved prostitutes,nothing like creating alibi
0 replies 0 retweets 0 favorites
Reply Retweet Favorite
More
1:53 PM - 4 Nov 2014

You know, not to make light after everything, but I couldn't imagine that part of the story actually getting THIS absurd, if true.

It's shocking that someone this apparently buffoonish didn't manage to indict himself years ago.

pleeease let that be true

Jesse Brown tweeting today that he is receiving more allegations and is looking to build a team to investigate & report them all logically and ethically.

I found that twitter chain kind of baffling and a little scary. What exactly is he proposing? I know Jian's a creep, but we do have libel and defamation laws for a reason.

The teddy bear account talked about prostitutes, so...

this is it:

18. Which News Org will host the Allegation Tracker, or something like it? Please contact me.

17. I am eager for feedback & criticism on this approach and I'm open to other methods of fully reporting all credible allegations.

16. Once I find a partner org, I will ask those who trusted me with their allegations for permission to pass them on to this partner.

15. The Tracker then exists as a permanent living document of all credible allegations.

14. Allegations already reported by other News Orgs will also be added to the Tracker.

13. Allegations that meet all standards are then added to a public-facing data map that can be mashed up by chronology, type, response, etc.

12. Journalists then contact and intvu accusers, verify as much of each account as possible, put allegations to the accused for comment.

11. Users can SECURELY submit accusations, tips, or corrections. Accusers can choose anonymity or not, describe what happened, etc.

10. My proposal: a data journalism project, hosted perhaps by a traditional News Org. An online "Allegation Tracker".

9. The public interest is also penalized. Canadians must know the full # of accusations, how long this has been going on, where, etc.

8. They could be left w/ no voice unless they reveal their names or provide shocking/salacious new details.

7. The result would be a penalty for accusers who did not come forward first.

6. Newsworthiness of new allegations will, I fear, be determined by strangeness, extremity, and willingness of accuser to go on the record.

5. No CDN paper is likely to print a new article every few days announcing"x" number of new allegations, esp. if similar to past allegations

4. I do not have the resources at this point to investigate, seek comment, and report each claim myself in a timely manner.

3. If the allegations are credible, each must be reported to the public.

2. Each allegation must to be investigated, and in each case, the accused must be given opportunity to respond.

1. I need help solving a problem. More people are sending me more allegations.

What follows is an open letter to my fellow journalists.

(those are the Jesse Brown tweets)

Brown's in over his head. I think he's losing it a bit talking about building an "Allegation Tracker". I get that he's probably getting overwhelmed by Jian horror stories right now, but this proposal feels a bit loony.

Eh, not that over his head, he's just attached a grandiose name to "set up a secure dropbox and maybe set up some data viz", which are projects he may not be personally able to do as an independent/freelancer but a news organization with IT resources would handle.

yeah maybe so - it just feels like the 18-point explanation and hopped-up language all feels a bit manic

especially for a guy who got 80+ grand in donations BEFORE he broke a huge story, and is reporting this story in partnership with the Toronto Star. Maybe set up some meetings with "News Orgs" before you start tweeting out the plans for the Death Star.

brown going heer

From that interview posted upthread, his relationship with the Star may have deteriorated, so he would need somewhere else to continue to the store with libel insurance. Call Ira Glass?

To continue the story, that is.

And now...

http://m.thestar.com/#/article/news/canada/2014/11/04/ghomeshi_was_focus_of_complaints_during_york_student_days.html

Ghomeshi . . . was well known on campus and would often play bongo drums in the stairwell

that detail jumped out at me also

Stairwells of Your Mind

http://www.thestar.com/content/dam/thestar/uploads/2014/11/4/1415155531647.jpg

Couple random insomnia thoughts:

1. According to the Star piece, Ghomeshi minored in women's studies at York. I find this absolutely chilling, don't you?
2. I don't live in Toronto but I know people who do. Roughly two years ago I can recall Ghomeshi coming up in conversation (innocuous topic like "which radio hosts do you like or don't like") and immediately the topic turned to something like "My friend went on a date with Ghomeshi and said he ____________" (non-violent but comical and unforgettably odd sexual thing). There was some general eye rolling at the table as if this was not the first time they'd heard this story or a story like it.
3. Around the same time I remember reading a profile puff piece about Ghomeshi and recall remarking on what I assumed was the author's desire to lead the reader in the direction of Ghomeshi's personal life. "Ghomeshi says he's happy being single hint hint and lives alone in his Rosedale townhouse. Hint hint." I just assumed this to mean he was gay in a Rick Mercer kind of way (definitely very gay but the elderly and rural people sort of ignore that and like him anyway because he's not too effeminate or whatever).
4. Moxy Fruvous were fucking execrable. I'm trying to form a thought about Much Music, the 90s, the CRTC, CanCon, and the general state of Canadian music in the 90s but I can't really put it together.
5. Another thought I can't quite put together about how Canadians are so desperate to cling onto our pathetic little music and arts'n'culture circuit that we'd rather harbour a sex offender than ask tough questions. What the fuck was the CBC doing this whole time?
6. Has Radiohead recalled the Q theme music yet?
7. I don't think Jesse Brown is "losing it." There is a very good point lurking in these tweets about how "allegations will, I fear, be determined by strangeness, extremity, and willingness of accuser to go on the record." This more about what is considered newsworthy at this stage of the story, and in general about the escalating sensationalism surrounding any story of this nature (see Rob Ford, where each new story had to be crazier than the last).
8. But I think Jesse Brown's proposed "allegation database" already has a name and it's called "the police."
9. Maybe our faith in federal institutions and police departments is not so hot, eh.
10. Ghomeshi is 47. FORTY-SEVEN. That's, let's say, 30 years worth of sex crimes. It's pretty easy to think of this guy as a swoopy-haired college indie bro, but he is ALMOST 50.
11. Moxy Fruvous. That shit was awful, I mean it. If you listen closely the signs were all there.
12. English-language Canadian journalism seems to be undergoing a bit of a revival. I checked out of English Canada about ten years ago because of the lack of critical debate about, well, anything, but the past year has shown some gutsy, gusty stuff.
13. Margaret Atwood and George Stromboulopoulos. What's up with these two? Better call Jesse!

Yeah, your second point

I can recall Ghomeshi coming up in conversation (innocuous topic like "which radio hosts do you like or don't like") and immediately the topic turned to something like "My friend went on a date with Ghomeshi and said he ____________" (non-violent but comical and unforgettably odd sexual thing). There was some general eye rolling at the table as if this was not the first time they'd heard this story

I've had this conversation, word for word. I would mention the "comical and unforgettably odd sexual thing" here, but, you know, libel

Really? Even now?

troy mcclure.jpg

Just being careful.

Jianstories typically ranged from recounting his pathetic pick-up lines for lols, to legit stories about him copping feels and getting slapped. Statements like If you listen closely the signs were all there are super frustrating to me because like should I start being suspicious of every individual I know who makes shitty music and is awkward with their quarry

Statements like If you listen closely the signs were all there are super frustrating to me because like should I start being suspicious of every individual I know who makes shitty music and is awkward with their quarry

OTM

Treating women like "quarry" maybe a tip-off.

Another thought I can't quite put together about how Canadians are so desperate to cling onto our pathetic little music and arts'n'culture circuit that we'd rather harbour a sex offender than ask tough questions. What the fuck was the CBC doing this whole time?

I don't think this is something specific to the Canadian cultural community. We have seen it happen, sometimes to more extreme levels, in the BBC, in Hollywood, in US pro sports, in the Catholic church, in the Boy Scouts, ... From what I've gathered, in this case, most people had heard rumours of things or possibly had some awareness of JG's general sleaziness but didn't know the full extent of the situation or have evidence of something actionable.

I don't know what you guys want from this, like, is this some kind of "how did we not see the signs" self flagellation, or is this a genuine request of "how do we get advance warning of other guys like this / stop this from happening again" ?

But yeah. Treating women as if they are objects for sexual consumption is kind of a tip-off. As is... y'know, the one thing I have taken away from reading things like Shroedinger's Rapist and predator theory and The Gift Of Fear is this: when men make small boundary violations, it can almost always be taken as a test for how you will react to larger boundary violations.

If a guy is 'copping feels and getting slapped' instead of laughing and giggling about it, why not stop and interrogate what it might say, that consent means so little to this guy? Watch for guys that ignore boundaries, and ignore consent on small, laughable, 'no big deal' things. Because lord knows that is a lesson that women have to learn, often under the threat or reality of getting assaulted.

Like in orbit says, it's not 'awkwardness' that is the problem here. It is treating women as if they are no more than 'quarry'.

The more powerful angle of Carl's piece was the comparison of this seemingly small scene (Canadian media/entertainment industry) to something a lot bigger (the Catholic church). xp

11. Moxy Fruvous. That shit was awful, I mean it. If you listen closely the signs were all there.

Could you explain this? I understand if you don't like the music (not a whole lot do these days) but where exactly were the signs?

I used "quarry" because it was non-gendered tbh, gay men not off the hook for shitty music and bad behaviour

Fair enough, I was taking a bit of a long shot there bc it could have been just a bad choice of words...but rather than, like, normalizing that kinda pursuit behavior, maybe do start to take it as a sign that all is not well w that person. And I don't nec mean like criminally but just, let's call out shittiness in other places so we're not so SURPRISED! when someone turns out to be a monster after doing monstrous things.

Amongst my circle of friends, I think there is a great deal of "what does this say about ~us~?" going on amongst males-who-date-younger, causing these dudes (and myself too) to look hard at their relationships and concern themselves with where that desire and where the agency to act on it is coming from.

That seems potentially helpful and a positive result, kudos to those ppl. I hope they follow where those questions lead even when it gets uncomfortable, because the end result is always gonna be "dismantle patriarchy."

sure this has been mentioned before but Canadian libel laws are much stricter than US ones, iirc? do these kind of laws lead to people like JG getting away with this kind of shit for much longer, as all of the people who "knew" about him were afraid to go on the record without iron-clad evidence. His first play after all was a 20 million dollar lawsuit.

same thing with that weird old tv guy in the UK. A million stories came out--after he was dead.

His first play after all was a 20 million dollar lawsuit.

I'm not sure re the bigger question about libel laws but this was a 50M lawsuit for wrongful dismissal, not libel, and was argued to be a strategic move with little legal basis: http://business.financialpost.com/2014/10/27/jian-ghomeshis-cbc-lawsuit-is-hopeless-even-if-hes-telling-the-truth/

ahh, well: On that Canadaland podcast, they said the only reason they were able to go forward with the story, even after the firing, was because JG went public about sexual violence in that Facebook post. Otherwise they'd have been subject to libel laws.

xxxp Well, I said I "think" there is a lot of that sentiment. Not much discussion, but I am tracing it in their reactions. How can you talk with a friend in their 40s about acknowledging that a portion of their dates with twenty something women has been a direct result of the fact that they're published or handsome or own a car or a boat?

Umm I might not be the right person to answer that question since I'd probably start yelling those exact words at them in a bar or something.

I started typing something out, but I realised that this is not something I particularly want to get into, in public, on ILX, because it involves taking a lot of stances that are very open to misinterpretation.

I think it's generally good if men interrogate the power gradients and dynamics that may be behind their sexual preferences.

But I think the reverse process - of noticing a preference and drawing conclusions of being-a-monster from those preference is troubling at best.

Rather than fall into slut-shaming (sluts of every gender) or casual sex-shaming or pick-up shaming, it's always better to focus on issues of consent. Yes, part of that is noticing that power dynamics do warp the issues of consent. But it is a lot harder to notice issues around consent, and treat "girls keep slapping him" not as a giggle or a joke at how inept a guy is, but a sign that something is deeply wrong with his entire approaches towards his potential partners.

noticing a preference and drawing conclusions of being-a-monster from those preference is troubling at best.

Not saying this--I'm saying that if ppl start to categorize active enjoyment of power imbalances as a troubling approach to women/other people, I think it would profoundly change what kind of conversations they can have around romantic/sexual relationships and where their "power" derives from.

Yeah, I'm not disagreeing with you, but this is why I don't want to have this conversation here.

A lot of the stories coming out and past descriptions of JG's public, non-radio persona really remind me of people I've known with undiagnosed mental health issues who don't really code as gay/straight/bisexual but have very vague, self-centered views of sex where sexual preference is more for fulfillment of a dysfunctional social interaction than it is for the actual act

Seriously unhelpful, mh, seriously unhelpful.

I didn't mean that as a response to your/io's recent posts and missed that line of conversation. Whatever is going on in this abuser's head has nothing to do with how it actually affects others and that's the important part, but the speculation about who/why he's abusive is not relevant to the discourse of how to stop this behavior, in that trying to narrow it down to a particular sexuality or community is about finger pointing.

This isn't about straight people, gay people, people into bdsm. It's about abuse.

So yes, I'm agreeing it's not the conversation to be had here -- it's not about why he does it, it's about why he's continued to do this and how we can make sure this doesn't happen to others.

In what way, exactly, is "this abuser's behaviour reminds me of mentally ill's people behaviour" supposed to be salient or helpful at all?

I have no idea about his mental state -- that may have been a bad angle, but I meant to say his reasons are all about _him_ and not his status as a member of any particular identifiable group. People elsewhere are seeing allegations that he harassed/assaulted men in the past and trying to pin it down to something. It can't be pinned to anything other than him.

The culture that let this keep happening can definitely be characterized, though

Err...insert something about narcissism and borderline personality disorders & other common diagnoses of abusers here? Those are personality disorder diagnoses, yes?

there's a societal idea that the onus is on the individual to determine their own problems and address them to be a responsible, functional person in society but that completely breaks down when we let people of privilege do whatever they want. abuser-blaming is correct. abusers abused, you blame them, it's the correct assignment of blame. but that can't be the end of it.

I would not directly blame anyone who had the idea that something bad was going on with JG's social relationships, but I would question why as a society it's seen as more of a risk to question behavior than it is to let it slide. it'd be nice if we could point to things that seem like abuse and ask if something weird is going on without it coming back on us, even if the answer is no.

How can you talk with a friend in their 40s about acknowledging that a portion of their dates with twenty something women has been a direct result of the fact that they're published or handsome or own a car or a boat?

― fgti, Wednesday, November 5, 2014

p sure this applies at all ages.

also owning a car seems like a pretty low bar tbh. aim higher, canadian youngs.

;_; I don't own a car

I feel you Branwell. Me I would much rather have a onversation about dating-up and dating-down and power dynamics therein on another thread than think about Jian for even a second longer

xp: car vs. synth arsenal.

From that interview posted upthread, his [Jesse Brown's] relationship with the Star may have deteriorated, so he would need somewhere else to continue to the store with libel insurance. Call Ira Glass?

Not a great sign for Jesse if he can't maintain a working relationship with the Star for more than a week after his first byline.

but to be clear - I think Brown is doing really important work and I hope he can keep doing it outside (or in limited partnerships with) establishment news-gathering organizations... More concerned for him dealing with the aftermath of a story that ended up being even bigger than he expected, and I'm seeing some signs that - to me - seem worrying. Wasn't impressed with the Q staffer interview on the podcast this week, and that Tweet thread on the "Allegation Tracker" seems a bit hasty and odd. But I agree he is making some interesting points about the shelf-life of a story, sensationalism, and new models for sorting through anonymous allegations. I'm probably being too hard on him.

11. Moxy Fruvous. That shit was awful, I mean it. If you listen closely the signs were all there.

eg. King of Spain - all about an acclaimed guy with a dark secret. And if you examine an edited version of the lyrics, well it's clear as day:

"Oh... my unspeakable wife...getting it all on video...My people say "how are you such a genius"...I don't even give a care...Got problems?...You phone me...I creep...Under my own volition I took a change of position...drool...remember...now I eat humble pie"

CBC filed a motion to dismiss Ghomeshi's suit and take it to arbitration

http://www.newswire.ca/en/story/1440289/cbc-files-notice-of-motion

http://gawker.com/do-you-know-another-jian-ghomeshi-dont-stay-quiet-tel-1654408511

max/gawker make play to give people an outlet to bring powerful abusers to light

That Gawker move is disgusting.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/11/05/jian_ghomeshi_hires_lawyer_who_defended_exattorney_general_michael_bryant.html

“As criminal lawyers we represent people who have committed heinous acts. Acts of violence. Acts of depravity. Acts of cruelty. Or as Jian Ghomeshi likes to call it, foreplay,” she said to the crowd of about 450 lawyers, including judges of both the provincial and superior court where his case might be heard if charges are laid.

Makes one wonder about the actual date when Henein Hutchison LLP were brought onboard.

The Gawker thing is really gross.

What do you do with gossip? The answer is: You tell us.

We know some rumors, but the more sources we have, the better off we are. Has that beloved comedian who likes to force women watch him jack off done that routine with you? Has the conservative journalist with a drinking problem hit you or your friend? Has the aging punk legend boasted of his passed-out "conquests"? You can email us at t✧✧✧@gaw✧✧✧.c✧✧, or me at m✧✧@gaw✧✧✧.c✧✧. We can assure anonymity.

It's been a minute since we had a good old-fashioned witch hunt.

Bryan Singer's the last one I remember from Gawker.

The Bryan Singer one was pretty awful. We hear he likes 'em young! Almost barely legal young men who look like twinks!

yeah while i don't really feel like defending a powerful dude who swears his people carded every aspiring actor at his sex parties gawker could cut down the lip-smacking excitement

Huh. Any connection in terms of 'we're taking this kind of thing seriously now' or...?

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/11/05/2_liberal_mps_booted_from_caucus_over_personal_misconduct_allegations.html

https://twitter.com/totallyslutsky/status/530103481718550528

1. According to the Star piece, Ghomeshi minored in women's studies at York. I find this absolutely chilling, don't you?

When a guy tells you that he majored or minored in women's studies, it is your cue to gtfo of there and take all the women within view with you. #1 predator trick to ingratiate yourself into progressive communities.

xp ohhh s1ocki

Guy in my wife's women's studies class was taking it for the second time, even though he passed the class first time. Yes, he was a creep who a number of the other students ended up filing complaints about.

wtf

liberal co-eds can't resist this one weird trick

omg s1ocki

Gawker's move not entirely without precedent:
http://rt.com/usa/larry-flynt-scandal-million-909/

When a guy tells you that he majored or minored in women's studies, it is your cue to gtfo of there and take all the women within view with you. #1 predator trick to ingratiate yourself into progressive communities.

― kate78, Wednesday, November 5, 2014 3:18 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this seems like a practical move in the near term & but really pretty sad overall :-/

11. Moxy Fruvous. That shit was awful, I mean it. If you listen closely the signs were all there.
eg. King of Spain - all about an acclaimed guy with a dark secret. And if you examine an edited version of the lyrics, well it's clear as day:

"Oh... my unspeakable wife...getting it all on video...My people say "how are you such a genius"...I don't even give a care...Got problems?...You phone me...I creep...Under my own volition I took a change of position...drool...remember...now I eat humble pie"

― everything, Wednesday, November 5, 2014 1:31 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

There's also "My Baby Loves a Bunch of Authors" which—although one of the other MF guys sang lead on—euphemizes sexual humiliation at the hands of a more cultured and intelligent woman. By the end of the song the male narrator has resignedly adopted literary habits as well, although disingenuously, as a means of retaining sexual access to "his baby."

I may be wrong, but like his Q essays, I don't think he wrote those songs. Maybe the only redeeming thing one could say about him these days.

fucking maniac: http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2014/11/12/ghomeshi_video_showed_womans_bruises_cracked_rib.html

This guy sounds like a psychopath. I hope they never turn up any bodies.

Christ

More specifically, I hope there aren't any bodies.

obviously he's a fucking sicko and delusional - but how did his lawyers go along with this plan to show his bosses evidence of injury as support of his version of events? how would "I cracked this girl's ribs and she loved it" even work to disprove allegations by another woman? it's all completely demented.

I know, right?

Wasn't there some talk about how putting all this stuff out there gives him the right, under Canadian law, to potentially say things about his accusers that does not count as slander? It's seems so insane, but maybe this is him prepping for slash and burn defense, which fits the MO of a lunatic, like people who represent themselves in court just so that can ramble and rant on the record.

yeah I don't know how his lawyers were on board with that, especially since you can't prove "I never had non-consensual sex" even if you show one video of totally consensual vanilla sex to your boss

even if that question can be answered, I would not want to watch someone try to prove that answer with pictures.

yeah i think dragging his bosses through that is itself grounds for firing

"You know what's going to happen next, right? It's nearly finished, that's a clue"

I've known lawyers dumb enough to think that could have been a good idea.

I wonder if he made the video(s) at least in part as a (delusional) form of "insurance," with a view to exonerating himself if and when he got into the legal trouble he so richly deserves.

Maybe this has been covered already, but is it true that in Canadian law there is apparently no such thing as legal consent to sex that causes bodily injury? Someone was saying that the other day. If so, the video(s) are even more inexplicable in terms of anything rational.

A law professor wrote an article in the Globe that made that claim. However, I was not convinced by it. From upthread:

http://m.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/the-ghomeshi-question-the-law-and-consent/article21315629/?service=mobile

― Van Horn Street, Tuesday, 28 October 2014 17:42 (2 weeks ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I've seen questions raised about that Globe piece (although I freely acknowledge that the author is an expert on the law and I am far from being one). The author does not cite the case she is referring to. Assuming she was talking about this case (R. v. J.A.), the ruling might not have stated exactly what she says it did ("when it comes to BDSM – or at least its more intense versions – the law doesn’t actually care about consent"): http://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/7942/index.do

I'll quote a friend's summary, which seems to be supported by the text of the ruling afaict:

the defendant was convicted of assault for having inserted a dildo into the anus of his wife after erotically asphyxiating her into unconsciousness. She had consented to the asphyxiation, but not the dildo insertion. The lack of consent for the latter was the basis of the assault conviction. No where does the ruling declare that one cannot consent to assault for purpose of erotic pleasure. The SC did not, for example, charge JA of assault for the act of asphyxiation for which he had obtained consent
(Wikipedia summary: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._v._J.A.)

― EveningStar (Sund4r), Tuesday, 28 October 2014 20:04 (2 weeks ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Right, thanks. That analysis does indicate that the "consent is irrelevant in sex that causes physical harm" thing is either spurious or else perhaps selectively applied, according to what sorts of criteria I wouldn't know; anyhow it lends a bit of credence to -- or at least doesn't undermine -- the notion that JG may have had some kind of self-serving "long game" in mind with those videos. Ugghgh.

http://static.music.cbc.ca/v2/userprofiles/56/56107/images/radio_2_morning_program_16x9_620x350.jpg

it lends a bit of credence to -- or at least doesn't undermine -- the notion that JG may have had some kind of self-serving "long game" in mind with those videos. Ugghgh.

― augh (Control Z), Wednesday, 12 November 2014 19:45 (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i don't know, I think he just made a lot of sex videos, and he had one partner that he beat up who was willing to support his version of events and when he got freaked out that the Star was going to run their story, he went with his nuclear option which was to show those videos to his bosses in a desperate attempt to "prove" it was possible for extremely rough sex (even resulting in cracked ribs!) could be consensual. I don't think it was part of a grand scheme, it was just a panicked last-ditch effort by a narcissist who actually believed people would see this stuff and get behind him.

Exactly how have you gone through life if you find yourself as an adult showing your boss video of someone you beat up in a sexual encounter because you think it will help you retain your job?

I don't want the wanton stupidity to overwhelm the monstrosity of the accusations but I honestly don't understand how this dude has enough brainpower for his involuntary body functions based on the actions he is deliberately making.

At least Savile wasn't (etc)

If he meant what he said in his PR statement about a single ex-girlfriend calling and rallying others against him, maybe he thought, well, if I can show that it was consensual with that one vindictive ex, then it'll all go away.

I don't think it's stupidity, it's just narcissism. He believes his own schtick - even in his FB message, he says some might find what we were about to hear about his sex life "enticing"! He honestly believed his bosses would see what he saw in the tape - evidence that women couldn't get enough of him.

Reminds me of that horrifying scene in "Auto Focus" where Greg Kinnear and Willem Dafoe are just sitting on the couch, shooting the shit as they beat off to some sex tape they recorded. They've gone so far into the realm of the weird and perverse that they don't even recognize what they're doing as aberrant.

That reminds me of one of Status Quo's 'on the road' tales. (delete "they recorded", subst "film" for "tape", that's it)

even in his FB message, he says some might find what we were about to hear about his sex life "enticing"!

OTM!!!!! the way he dropped that word in the middle of "strange" and "weird, normal, or outright offensive" was a major head scratcher/red-flag

His perception of the number of people who are aroused by nonconsensual, brutal assault is clearly off.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/11/13/jian-ghomeshi-tips-allegation-tracker_n_6136136.html

http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/antisocial-personality-disorder/basics/symptoms/con-20027920

http://www.cbc.ca/dnto/features/2014/11/21/post-ghomeshi-cbc-sook-yin-lee-on-what-its-like-on-the-inside/

Hmm, this is making the rounds:

https://twitter.com/IoannaCBC/status/537305268632424448

yikes. if CBC paid him off there will be a lot of angry people out there over tax dollars going to Ghomeshi, and the implication that this he's being bought off to stay silent about who in management knew what when. this will be ugly.

it isn't ugly now?

yes.

ok good, looks like ghomeshi is paying out:

Ioanna Roumeliotis ‏@IoannaCBC 1m1 minute ago
@idle_chitchat withdrawn with cost means #JianGhomeshi side pays all legal fees incurred

Wonder how his malpractice suit against his attorneys will go.

He hadn't done anything with them for a while but his Facebook and Twitter accounts have been deleted too, it seems.

quite possibly bullshit but

shinan govani ‏@shinangovani 33m33 minutes ago
Unconfirmed, but whispers that Ghomeshi was arrested this morning.
0 replies 104 retweets 23 favorites
Reply Retweet104 Favorite23

http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/newsreleases/30572

Hardly actual equivalents but:

Oscar Wilde's libel suit against Queensberry, its failure and his resultant prosecution: tragedy.

Ghomeshi's suit against the CBC, his withdrawal and now surrender: farce.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/jian-ghomeshi-charged-with-sexual-assault/article21788631/

Or, more substantially:
http://torontopolice.on.ca/newsreleases/30572

As linked above by Brio.

@jlancasterCBC 38s39 seconds ago
Ghomeshi will appear in #toronto court this aft. Appears he will likely be granted quick bail. Surrender was negotiated.

He's got a hotshot lawyer and will probably never see the inside of a cell.

Surrender was negotiated.

Is that a normal thing?

I'm wondering if it implies that he was possibly outside of their jurisdiction or something, maybe outside of the country.

I don't know. 4 sexual assault charges, multiple victims, very believable and sympathetic witnesses (at least in the interviews they've given)... also notable that his family bailed him out. He has no income now and had an expensive lifestyle before his arrest. No guarantee he can afford that fancy lawyer for a long drawn-out trial. Might have to make a deal, and I don't see them letting him off without jail time - people would flip.

that was an xpost re: whether he'll see the inside of a cell

There is something sadly hilarious about this:

‏@CP24 5m5 minutes ago
BREAKING: Jian Ghomeshi's bail has been set at $100,000. Under terms of bail, Ghomeshi will have to turnover passport & live with his mother

"Now here's some warm milk."

"But...my teddy bear."

"There was never a teddy bear."

Negotiated surrender isn't that unusual if you already represented by an attorney before charges are filed.

http://i.imgur.com/0n1FO7s.jpg

the semantic difference of that text if you change that comma to a semicolon

canadian media's really hot on this super-lawyer angle
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/meet-marie-henein-the-fearless-and-brilliant-lawyer-defending-jian-ghomeshi-1.2851592
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/tight-lipped-ghomeshi-lawyer-marie-henein-leaves-no-stone-unturned/article21807585/?click=sf_globe

http://www.hhllp.ca/assets/images/HHLLP-group-new.jpg

if that's what a Canadian law firm looks like then I do believe my briefs are going north

I bet half of them are not even wearing any briefs.

Theres something about a woman defending men against rape charges that really turns my stomach. But then again I suppose criminal defense attorneys in general have to stand up for the scum of the earth.

For a price, often.

Yup, that's the job.

I mean

She also has an acerbic wit, as evidenced by the joke she made at a gala dinner for the Criminal Lawyers Association last month.

“As criminal lawyers we represent people who have committed heinous acts. Acts of violence. Acts of depravity. Acts of cruelty. Or as Jian Ghomeshi likes to call it, foreplay," Henein said, according to the Toronto Star.

Pitching for the job, right?

New overall story with further details from more victims.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/11/28/jian_ghomeshi_did_not_ask_for_consent_accusers_say.html

Trying to guess what the heck Heinen's approach would be in court. "No, really, they ALL lied and/or misunderstood."

The Fifth Estate episode is excellent. (HT to Adrien):

http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/episodes/2014-2015/the-unmaking-of-jian-ghomeshi

Heinen's job is 'damage' limitation, yeah?

The difference between five and ten years, or something.

Watched the Fifth Estate episode. I thought the interviewer was appropriately tough on the CBC's Chris Boyce. Ghomeshi himself is unwatchable during the first 10 minutes, and that's supposed to be when he was charming and likeable. (And I'm sure I would have thought so even before all this happened.)

He was "charming" and "likeable" only in that rarified milquetoast-showbiz sense where the words don't mean anything. His band was really the fuckin' worst.

he seemed like an old MTV VJ in those clips

Watched the Fifth Estate episode. I thought the interviewer was appropriately tough on the CBC's Chris Boyce. Ghomeshi himself is unwatchable during the first 10 minutes, and that's supposed to be when he was charming and likeable. (And I'm sure I would have thought so even before all this happened.)

i've never seen anything from the 1990s that seemed more dated and unwatchable than the brief clips of his band.

also, someone his band was so CANADIAN in the worst possible way, i had to turn it off lest i become irreversibly biased against that fine nation.

someHOW

They were awful, no argument, but I can think of any number of precocious American novelty bands just as unbearable. We probably even learned it from you.

the intellectual smugness seems, if not exclusively then at least strongly canadian.

We Canadians do love our literacy (I don't know any MF.)

did he actually do literary stuff on Q? It looked like a bunch of Hollywood press junket interviews w/ whoever was filming in Canada at the moment

each episode opened with a spoken essay/monologue (usually ghostwritten by a producer and not Ghomeshi)

ugh I just realized the downfall of Ghomeshi means we'll be getting even more Strombo content, as he's the only prominent, "hip" personality they've got left (that I'm aware of)

oh wait, he left to do hockey coverage, nvm, bullet dodged

clemenza, I think it's that those kind of bands (Barenaked Ladies, Moxy Fuckwads, Crash Test Dummies) may irk some Canadians more than similar bands do in the U.S. because of the relative amount of media support they got. It's probably largely due to Cancon, probably also that they seemed tailor-made for the CBC (i.e. tidy, 'clever', 'folky'), and also there's just a general media-borne inferiority complex where if you're Canadian and some media outlets give you attention then omg see we don't suck, etc.

Kevin O'Leary could do a show called "The Cold, Hard Truth", consisting of a rapid-fire series of seconds-long interviews with celebrities about how much money each makes, interspersed with "cha-ching!" sound effects and the O'Jays. Oh - I guess he left for CTV, didn't he? It's a tough biz.

the intellectual smugness seems, if not exclusively then at least strongly canadian.
― I dunno. (amateurist)

Intellectual smugness? I'm pretty cognizant of Canadian stereotypes, and if that's the way the rest of the world sees us, I'm all for it. I always thought we were viewed as meek, overly polite, self-deprecating, etc. You mean intellectually smug like...the McKenzie Brothers?

when I liked They Might Be Giants some people on usenet recommended MF but I never was interested

sorry clemenza - I misread "we" and "you" up there and thought you were American.

Intellectual smugness? I'm pretty cognizant of Canadian stereotypes, and if that's the way the rest of the world sees us, I'm all for it. I always thought we were viewed as meek, overly polite, self-deprecating, etc.

Canadian character is really complicated imo because that self-deprecation is key, but in Canadian interviews there's almost always this intentionally-deflating quality to the questions - the vibe is mistrust of the subject imo

TMBG should be the beginning, and the end, of this kind of music.

I think it's less intellectual smugness than the idea that a certain level of social and academic knowledge are just part of being in the public sphere. American anti-intellectualism comes from a different social place, so the Canadian version is always going to seem a little smug or at least judgmental.

Luckily, Canadians are starting to come up with their own Fox News versions and are getting into electing unintellectual types so we'll have parity eventually.

did he actually do literary stuff on Q? It looked like a bunch of Hollywood press junket interviews w/ whoever was filming in Canada at the moment

Thought it was pretty common for Q to feature a recently published poet or playwright or journalist?

And usually somewhat arty-but-accessible indie musicians; never thought of it as primarily a Hollywood-oriented show

of course my impressions are from that 5th Estate doc featuring a montage of JG interviewing Morgan Freeman, Barbara Walters, Billy Bob, Donald Glover, Ken Jeong, Adele, etc.--though there was Mike Watt and a bunch of unrecognizable pale dudes who probably used to hang out with Arcade Fire.

maybe he had Anne Carson on a lot too idk

Ghomeshi interviewed tons of authors on Q - Atwood in particular really seemed to love him. He was also supposed to have hosted the televised Giller Awards this year (like the Canadian Bookers awards babsically), and he also hosted the popular "Canada Reads" series where authors and others champion a book, and was a regular interviewing authors at the International Festival of Authors. Also wrote a memoir and was working on his second book for Penguin... so yeah, he had very deeply ingratiated himself into the Cdn literary world.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/dec/02/-sp-jian-ghomeshi-sexual-harassment-cbc-ignored

yet another really depressing answer to the question "why don't people report harassment?"

when I liked They Might Be Giants some people on usenet recommended MF but I never was interested

the only reason I know Moxy Fruvous exist is bcz a tiny, fierce group of ppl on a.m.tmbg repped for them

there seemed to be a microgenre of "shit that only TMBG fans who don't like music also like". Mike Viola is the only other one I can think of.

"shit that only TMBG fans who don't like music also like"

thanks for articulating something I always suspected! it's like, hey, I like TMBG but don't really like music, except for this handful of really horrible things"

xxpost "does that clarify things" really merits a beating

ugh wrong expression of anger itt. i wasn't thinking.

too late, prepare for the 40 post dogpile

yeah i only ever heard of Moxy Fruvous from TMBG fans. one once made me a mix CD with "King of Spain" on it.

the only person I knew who was into Moxy Fruvous was a baroque violinist/soprano who liked the idea of The Cure but didn't know any of their songs

...um, how exactly did that work.

not very well, actually

like, she knew all of this biographical stuff about Robert Smith but had never heard of Standing on a Beach

it was very weird

sounds like a poster to a.m.tmbg tbh

MF also sond like they belong to the genre of "annoying bands you hear on Le Show with Harry Shearer"

I think I discovered Moxy as a TMBG fan as well, though I've learned since to not take any recommendations based on they anymore. Don't get me wrong I love They Might be Giants but sometimes I feel like despite writing something like 1000 songs in their career nearly all of their reputation is based on "Particle Man" and "Istanbul". IMO they ought to be lumped in more with the good power-pop/postpunk stuff like XTC or The Jam or whatever but instead they get the 'novelty' tag that leads a lot of their fans to bands like Moxy Fruvous. Granted I can totally understand why this is the case!

Moxy Fruvous are way closer to the Barenaked Ladies if anything, in that they do (or did) have skill but ultimately made their name by being self-consciously goofy. MF really did try to be intellectual though, they did songs that referenced Pat Buchanan and Walter Cronkite, plus you've got "The Gulf War Song" which I think does scan as profound to a small segment of people. I dunno, I think I would still stand for Bargainville at least - I couldn't listen to it now given all this but at least the songs on that album were memorable!

why do these lame band fuckers just name things like "The Gulf War Song"

in fairness, "The War Song" was taken

That Guardian piece makes my blood boil. All these earnest lefty public radio people and union reps who did nothing when it mattered and stabbed her in the back after the fact.

Intellectual smugness? I'm pretty cognizant of Canadian stereotypes, and if that's the way the rest of the world sees us, I'm all for it. I always thought we were viewed as meek, overly polite, self-deprecating, etc.

When I lived in Buffalo, I did find that some people (def not all, prob not the majority) saw Canadians (which meant "Torontonians") as snobby and sarcastic, with posh-sounding accents. If someone had a Mackenzie Bros-esque view of Canadians, it was usually someone who hadn't been to Canada.

I am sure the vision is of Americans as jingoistic less-intelligent types but there is definitely an intellectual posturing in naming things like "The Gulf War Song" if you're a fucking whimsical band. I mean, it's no "The Kosovo Atrocity Song" but..

Think almost everyone ITT who has any familiarity with Moxy Fruvous (inc. myself) only really knows the first cassette/Bargainville - which covered this period, and their basing their views on King of Spain, Authors & Green Eggs and Ham. Second album which I have heard is a lot less wacky and I think onwards they were not particularly whimsical or wacky. Maybe frogbs can weigh in cos he's the only one here who seems to have paid attention to that part of their career.

Also, some context - all their early songs - the ones people know - were written for a CBC radio show with a general magazine format covering current affairs, arts, events etc. So some of them were jokey and others were more wistful - a blend that reflects the general character of CBC radio to this day. Other bands who get this kind of radio gig could easily end up with this kind of mix - though the only one I can think of right now is Instant Sunshine who used to be on BBC Radio 4. They were also a harmony group virtually the same instrumentation etc as MF that switched between whimsy with solemnity.

fair enough

...basically where I'm going is just that Jian Ghomeshi being in a band with some guy who wrote a song called "The Gulf War Song" on commission for a radio segment about the gulf war during the gulf war says fuck all about Canada, Canadians or anything else really.

jeez, I said fair enough, what do you canadians want from me

blood, maple syrup, socialized medicine

haha. Sorry, posted it without seeing your "fair enough".

yeah sorry guy

but seriously when you guys are done ameri-splaining moxy fruvous, check out that Guardian story by Kathryn Borel. It's pretty awful.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/dec/02/-sp-jian-ghomeshi-sexual-harassment-cbc-ignored

I would actually be pretty gutted if I found out that Linnell or Flansburgh were a serial sexual abuser.

And yes, the Borel story is really terrible. "That's how he is, deal with it." As always, male behavior (whether outright criminal, as here, or just obnoxious) taken as a kind of weather, subject to which women have to modify their own actions.

i didn't mean the overly-cheerful smugness was characteristic of canadians in general, just that it seems true to a certain vein of canadian music. but maybe i'm generalizing wildly from a few isolated examples.

there seemed to be a microgenre of "shit that only TMBG fans who don't like music also like".

so otm. these kids in my orbit also listened to a lot of Presidents of the USA

FWIW the three very similar Cdn groups from the early/mid 90s (Moxy Fruvous, Arrogant Worms & Corky and the Juice Pigs) all had their start producing incidental music or comedy songs specifically for radio and all produced members who ended up having a long association working for the CBC.

Of course they all work for the CBC. Around 10-15 years ago, the CBC discovered that their average listener was around 110 years old and was all, "I bet if we give some 'cool' Canadians who didn't quite make it as musicians their own shows, the kids will tune in!" Enter Jian and Sook-Yin and Buck 65 et al.

Ghomeshi and Lee always came off to me as people who are stuck interviewing and interacting with the creative class they so desperately want to be a part of. They both have an unfortunate habit of bringing things back around to themselves, "as a musician..." or "when i was in a band..." or just too much use of "I." Not about you. Move along.

V.true. See also Grant Lawrence. It's so anachronistic that their version of youth programming is all fronted by folks in their mid-40s. It's like the BBC in the 60s.

don't forget that crazy Randy Bachman kid

I have heard tell of that radio show

the clips from his CBC stuff in the fifth estate episode seem like a sacha baron cohen sketch

Bachmann was in a bona fide successful band, though, and his show is meant to be all about him. It's a nostalgia act to keep the boomers listening. Ghomeshi, Lee, etc lend the CBC underground cred (though barely) for Gen X and millennials.

Also, CBC, wtf you have two shows with "vinyl" in the title.

By the time my union rep offered to informally talk to the executive producer of the show, Arif Noorani, I felt like I was trapped in a feedback loop: I had cried in my boss’s office already, on more than one occasion, because of Ghomeshi’s behaviour towards me. A couple of days later, Noorani called me in for a meeting, and told me that [/b] Ghomeshi was the way he was, and that I had to figure out how to cope with that[/b].

(my emphasis). I have had similar happen to me. An old (near retirement), drunken work colleague in a public service role, almost grabbed my arse once in passing, and said "nice arse love". I complained to HR - the same HR lady who only days earlier had given us all a harrasment/workplace behaviour talk!!! - and she said "oh dont worry about old Bill, thats just how he is".

Six months after I left that job (unrelated to that minor but irritating incident) I heard from an ex workmate that she'd had to resign, by effectively being hounded/bullied out, because she'd lodged an official sexual assault case against a (different) work colleague. The across the board reaction from the other staff/management was "but so and so is such a nice stand up guy! You must have it in for him! How dare you, you slanderous whore!". Until she was shamed into running away basically.

Fuck you, fuck you, fuck you corporate and business world. Fuck you.

Just read that Borel piece. Is anyone else from the CBC going to get fired for this shit or what? So infuriating.

That they straight up lied about her ever having spoken to union/management, is staggering. But I believe it. Ive seen that shit happen first hand. They will cover this stuff up at all costs.

i was kidding about randy bachman fitting in with the 90's failed musicians

I always thought Sook-Yin Lee was more known for being a 90s MuchMusic VJ than for being a 90s musician? I don't know if I've actually heard her music.

I only know her for being Chester Brown's ex-girlfriend in his autobiographical comics

(xpost) Bob's Your Uncle. I just vaguely remember them. I think they were arty and pretty bad.

grant lawrence really doesn't fit w sook yin buck 65 jian crew just to come unnecessarily to his defense.

he's been there since 95, 96ish david wisdom days and he's not a smug jerkoff

buck 65 is all right??? but unsurprisingly super boring. no idea who listens to non classical cbc 2 programming.

I think Lee also had a few solo albums and Neko Case covered one of her songs.
I grew up in a US state bordering Canada and when I was a teenager, we started getting MM. I remember thinking she was such a shitty interviewer then. Maybe we can blame CTV for starting this trend?

yeah, I didn't think Buck was too bad for a radio 2 drive-time show.

Never Forget

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DiscDrive_(radio_show)

DiscDrive was an afternoon show on CBC Radio 2 hosted by Jurgen Gothe. It played a mix of classical, traditional bluegrass, jazz, and commentary. It was on the air between 1985 and 2008.

The name is a pun since the program is playing discs while listeners are driving home from work during the afternoon rush hour.

During the broadcast aired on February 19, 2008, Jurgen Gothe alluded to a discussion that the show was to end soon. He indicated that the program would go on throughout the spring and summer (of 2008), but after Labour Day he would be hosting a new program. This cancellation of the show was later confirmed, and the final broadcast date was August 29, 2008.[1]

you guys have been so CANADIAN in your polite disagreement with amateurist's dumbass posts

imagine if he'd gone on the jimmy savile thread and called, say, mumford & sons' smugness the quintessential english trait

Six months after I left that job (unrelated to that minor but irritating incident) I heard from an ex workmate that she'd had to resign, by effectively being hounded/bullied out, because she'd lodged an official sexual assault case against a (different) work colleague. The across the board reaction from the other staff/management was "but so and so is such a nice stand up guy! You must have it in for him! How dare you, you slanderous whore!". Until she was shamed into running away basically.

i believe stories like this 100%. not only b/c i know people who have experienced similar kinds of harassment, but b/c myself and other people i know have gotten a similar reaction when we've filed grievances of other kinds. it's amazing how unwilling people are to "rock the boat," even if you're just asking them to follow their stated policy. people you bring the grievance to will get mad at you for "putting them in this situation."

it's even more appalling that in borel's case she got the same reaction from her union rep, who is supposed to be precisely the person who will stick up for her when management isn't. there needs to be some kind of reckoning at that union as well as in CBC management.

there needs to be some kind of reckoning at that union as well as in CBC management.

― I dunno. (amateurist), Tuesday, December 2, 2014

there has been a reckoning! they investigated themselves and came out smelling like a rose. does that clarify things?

(xxpost) Our legendary forbearance.

Second album which I have heard is a lot less wacky and I think onwards they were not particularly whimsical or wacky. Maybe frogbs can weigh in cos he's the only one here who seems to have paid attention to that part of their career.

Well from there they alternated between more serious, folky music and clear novelty stuff. The former is really boring and I can hardly remember anything about it, the latter is generally obnoxious and smacks of "please give us work"; though somewhere in the middle they did an album called You Will Go to the Moon which felt like an attempt to integrate bits of the alt-rock Soul Coughing sound into their work and it wasn't horrible.

That said if one were to compile a 'greatest hits' or whatever type album it would probably be like 75% Bargainville, they really did blow it all quite early

on offense all but jesus christ who gives a fuck about this serial rapist's horrible band that no-one will ever listen to again

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIeB3n4r1-o#t=101

it's like if the cosby thread was nothing but extended analyses of his jazz records

No, it's like if the Cosby thread contained lengthy discussions of the character of Dr Huxtable and weighing up the impact and cultural importance of the Cosby Show. Which it does.

Moxy Fruvous and The Cosby Show are nowhere near comparable in terms of cultural significance, at all. Seriously. Not a bit.

basically I'm 100% agreeing with you anyway:

...basically where I'm going is just that Jian Ghomeshi being in a band with some guy who wrote a song called "The Gulf War Song" on commission for a radio segment about the gulf war during the gulf war says fuck all about Canada, Canadians or anything else really.

― everything, Tuesday, 2 December 2014 14:25 (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I think it's interesting that a number of posts express their disdain for Ghomeshi's artistic output. Is it possible that negative public sentiment could fuel the anger which leads to such messed up sexual expression? As a public figure he must have known that people he may have admired thought he was uncool. To a certain extent I imagine the reason he was so valued by CBC was not just his young audience appeal, but his middle-of-the-road edginess (ie. slick haircut, waistcoat) was also appealing to the older demographic which must form a large part of the CBC audience. CBC wouldn't want to go with someone too edgy for fear of scaring off these older viewers. Who cares if the uncoolest people in the world (old people) like you? But having your contempories think you suck would really sting.

I don't know but there are tons of stories of his creepiness pre-Moxy Fruvous (groping people, dorm meetings on campus to warn women about him, etc.) The Star reported on it.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/11/04/ghomeshi_was_focus_of_complaints_during_york_student_days.html

sorry - i was being unfair there.
it's just this story that's getting me angry - particularly Borel's account right now. there's nothing wrong with what you were all discussing, and of course you should talk about whatever you like.

i also think that the moxy fruvous "ethos" is another dimension of how this guy whose persona of a chipper, intellectual, feminist was kind of a smokescreen for his entitled, abusive behavior. -- something that seems to have been in place as far back as his college days, as that article linked above reveals.

I don't think Moxy Fruvous was especially a target of "negative public sentiment" prior to this story.

The general attitude towards Ghomeshi and his radio show was about the same as the public sentiment towards Moxy Fruvous - most people had never heard of them and most people who have didn't like them much. CBC R1 has a pretty tiny market share - from memory it's something like 0.6% of the population. He's never been like eg. Don Cherry or Cathy Jones - well-known even outside of their broadcasting niche. Basically if you are not part of a particular Canadian Arts & media community OR an avid CBC Radio listener, you've never have heard of him.

xpost
That is true, in that they were a completely insignificant and forgotten joke band. They hadn't done anything in over 15 years, and were never very popular or well-regarded.

actually here's a pretty great and representative take on how most people saw moxy fruvous during their brief time as cbc radio darlings, by a young Naomi Klein:

https://www.facebook.com/notes/mick-sweetman/hilarious-naomi-klein-takedown-of-moxy-fruvous-in-1992/663942677052457?pnref=story

Am surprised to hear that R1's market share could be that low.

This 2011 article puts it much higher, close to 10% in five urban markets, #1 in Vancouver: http://www.cbc.ca/revenuegroup/cbc-radio-soars-with-spectacular-november-ratings-in-key-canadian-markets.html

that's 10% of radio listeners, not the population.

but yeah - those are healthy ratings

Market share is always calculated relative to the actual market of radio listeners, isn't it? I mean, the guy wasn't Wayne Gretzky but he was in a band with a platinum-selling album and hosted one of the more popular radio shows in the country. I don't think we need to underplay his level of success now.

Thing is, there's been a fair bit of Savile comparison, but to me this has closer parallels to Ian Watkins of Lostprophets.

This thing of having sexual urges that are beyond the understanding of mere mortals, and that this is why they have that 'entitlement' to it. In their minds, obviously.

No.

already been posted/discussed upthread, but this is the most important MF song:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSkjqK4SdP8

on a related note:

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/music/ex-cake-drummer-15-years-child-molestation-article-1.2031717

ex-cake drummer's other band was called the panderers.

I don't see this having parallels to watkins at all...did people know about Watkins (maybe they did)?

I took the comparison more to mean "who the hell had heard of either JG or IW before this happened", but I may be wrong.

Mark didn't say anything at all about the anonymity of the country's highest-rated radio host or the singer of a multi-million selling band

commonwealth fite

He was never the country's highest rated radio host.

no wonder he got away with it then

sic you work in an industry that means you'dve heard of JG. I sure as shit never heard of him or this band.

sic you work in an industry that means you'dve heard of JG

a) incorrect
b) I was specifically referred to his level of known-ness in another country in another hemisphere on the other side of the planet
c) neither of these have anything to do with the fact that Mark said nothing about Ghomeshi's level of public profile in Canada

was

just as well it doesn't matter whether antipodeans possessing varying numbers of passport stamps have heard of jg

Well, I wouldn't know about his level of public profile.

Maybe I was meaning about how if they were not famous or in any kind of 'prestige' or, ahem 'celebrity', they would not have that facility or urge to actually do those things..

Maybe yes, maybe no, I don't know

you might want to consider that repeatedly equating rough sex with literally raping and murdering babies might be slightly over the top, and offensive to normal humans who respect consent

hair-pulling is not the thing people are objecting to re: Ghomeshi's behaviour over the last two decades

OK, one: I was not equating, two: Murdering?

Also: Repeatedly equating? I made one post regarding the two people's sense of entitlement. Not the specific things they did.

This thing of having sexual urges that are beyond the understanding of mere mortals

Let me be the first to say that my tastes in the bedroom may not be palatable to some folks. They may be strange, enticing, weird, normal, or outright offensive to others.

also if killing a baby would have technically been charged as something other than murder in Wales, idk, also don't actually want to know or investigate

Myquestion back there was: Did he kill a baby? If so, yes that renders my 'comparison' as wrong.

...so your comparison is right, because the youngest girl he actually managed to rape was 5 years old?

I did say I wasn't comparing his 'acts'

The accounts of witnesses, sexual partners, mothers of children involved and fan posts going back years before the arrest indicate that Watkins' "sexual urges beyond the understanding of mere mortals," in your words, included raping babies, killing them, and hooking them on hard drugs.

The accounts of consensual and reluctant partners alike indicate that Ghomeshi's "sexual urges beyond the understanding of mere mortals," in your words, extend to rough hair-pulling, choking, and hard hitting.

Ghomeshi is being internet-tried ITT for two decades of violating people's personal boundaries, exploiting his position in the workplace, deliberately failing to obtain consent, performing physical assault, seeking out women who would be subservient to his self-regard, and being a sleazy creep. You are saying that wanting rough sex is the problem with him.

Watkins pled guilty in actual court to raping children at least as young as five.

I'm going to restate

No.

― the incredible string gland (sic), Thursday, December 4, 2014 7:37 AM (2 days ago)

and leave the discussion alone

Fair enough, I'll accept no. I think you have misunderstood me, and that post does not represent what I said or meant.

But I am prepared to leave it at that.

jesus, could the CBC be bungling this any worse?
http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/busted-the-toxic-cbc-environment-that-abetted-jian-ghomeshi/

I think that's the third time Anne Kingston has basically rewritten that same article for Macleans since the beginning of November.

They are screwing up in more ways that can be counted, but I think many, many employers would bungle it just as badly. Very sadly.

Anyone care to guess how sales of AKG headphones are doing these days?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ex-cbc-radio-host-jian-ghomeshi-pleads-not-guilty-to-sexual-assault-charges-1.3252077

Anyone following the trial? Dude's lawyer seems deadly.

Half-following. I get the feeling yesterday was a bad day for the prosecution because of those e-mails.

Both witnesses fared poorly. Only one to go. Feels like he's going to get off.

There's a thing in the Toronto Star today where they ask a buncha lawyers how they think it's going. They're all saying the case has crashed & burned.

Oh shit, I didn't know that there's only one witness left.

Really sucks that any continuing interest in an abusive male from a victim after an assault is still seen as a silver bullet in court. I fully expect him to get off unless the next witness made a clean break with him after the assault.

It's not that they had later contact with him afterwards, it's that they appear to have lied in court about having later contact. So they are unreliable witnesses in a he said/she said situation.

Man. Similar story with the third witness.

TW (assault): http://canadalandshow.com/article/why-did-jian-ghomeshi-keep-lucy-decouteres-letter

Xps. Ah, thanks for clearing that up, everything.

That link is super gross, what an absolute monster this dude is.

interesting piece: http://torontolife.com/city/crime/marie-henein-jian-ghomeshi-lawyer/

ya, not going well for the prosecution would be an understatement.
i feel like everyone i know made up their minds well before this trail ever started and having any kind of middle-of-the-road opinion is going to get me screamed at.

well any kind of middle-of-the-road opinion involves discounting the accusations of over 20 women.

have you got a middle-of-the-road opinion about Cosby?

I'd be open to hearing a middle-of-the-road opinion, actually, especially given how badly the prosecution is doing. I tend to be an 'innocent until proven guilty' sort of guy but I find it hard to believe that JG is not guilty of at least some serious wrongdoing in this case for the reason that Jim gave: the sheer number of accusers. Still, I'd like to hear another side.

well any kind of middle-of-the-road opinion involves discounting the accusations of over 20 women.
― Cornelius Pardew (jim in glasgow), Tuesday, February 9, 2016 12:12 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

have you got a middle-of-the-road opinion about Cosby?
― Cornelius Pardew (jim in glasgow), Tuesday, February 9, 2016 12:13 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this is the bullshit i'm talking about.

makes it impossible for me to want to talk about it. sorry i don't have a fucking pitchfork out.

and i pretty much feel the same as sund4r. there's no way he hasn't done some/a lot of these things. i just can't wrap my head around the behaviour/testimony of his accusers. it's not going well for the prosecution, but at the same time – i haven't seen defense prove that these women we never assaulted.

You don't have to have a pitchfork out - although opining on the internet has fairly low-stakes so it doesn't really matter either way what we think of Gomeshi. He is receiving a fair trial in the only courts that matter, and with such a strong defense lawyer may never be convicted of anything.

But there is a serious issue at play here which is the general societal eagerness to dismiss accusations of abuse and sexual assault made against men - even in cases where there are multiple women making the accusations. This despite the fact that crimes of abuse and sexual assault committed by men are common, and false accusations are relatively rare.

There's really a fairly easy calculation to make here: do I believe over 20 women? or do I believe one man: Jian Gomeshi? That's not a hard decision for me to make.

I don't find the accusers behavior that hard to fathom. Every woman I've ever known who was abused by a dude they were dating/in a couple with has continued to see them after the first incidents of abuse. I mean as a man I find it hard to put myself in their position and understand that dynamic fully, but it fits with what I've seen around me in the world.

the victims trying to communicate to make sense of it and come up with a context where they could plausibly come forward explains a lot

Yeah, I have no trouble understanding why someone would: i) stay in contact with someone after an abusive incident (denial, still processing, self-esteem, hope someone will change, all sorts of possibilities, ...) and ii) feel motivated to deny it afterwards, even under oath. It is making it very hard for the prosecution to show that any of the violence was non-consensual, though.

i heard a J.G. anecdote from a friend in public radio. It was ... not a flattering story.

i dunno. i can't make sense of it myself. (plenty of friends on facebook have been posting pieces about how this is sort of a normal thing, but most seem to deal with people in long term relationships that evolved into abusive ones)

xpost - hmmm, so i'm curious.

If he does get off, I have to believe he'll be an absolute pariah as far as Canadian media go. Are there precedents to suggest otherwise? I can think of people who came back from behavior that could be brushed off as embarrassing but relatively inconsequential, but with him it's obviously a whole different thing. Compounded by the fact that, by all accounts, he was hated even before the accusations became public.

Trial over; decision on Mar 24