Swans: Classic or Dud?

I bet at least half the woman I know have been in a similar situation at least once in their lives.

Totally! It's one of the most common scenarios as far as rape goes.

we can believe the woman, hold [ILXor] accountable, understand that rape is as common as drunk driving, and occurs in all manner of power dynamics, and is as much a product of Our Culture as it is Bad People Who Rape, and not wave our hands about "see what the courts say" or any other such bullshit. People get drunk and breach laws of consent

yep.

why is this thread still going

I think I said the same thing way upthread.

then why do you keep posting

why oh why do some people suddenly get really philosophical about the ~contingent nature of knowledge gained via discourse rather than by immediate experience~ when the subject is rape?

― goole, Wednesday, March 2, 2016 12:06 PM (39 minutes ago)

pfft, if you'd been paying any attention at all over the last decade or so, you'd know that i get "really philosophical about the ~contingent nature of knowledge...~ when the subject is" every goddam thing in the universe. it's my only shtick!

the "you're only [asking questions/failing to pass an immediate verdict] because the crime is rape" line is complete bullshit when trotted out as a knee-jerk deflection. rape allegations do attract a unique and poisonous kind of bullshit "skepticism", absolutely, but that doesn't make everyone who ever reserves judgment a fucking enemy agent.

ftr i wasn't really posting contra you in the particular, just the tendency seen generally

if someone comes up to me and says "someone just hit my car" or "someone stole my lawnmower" or "i was at a party and someone sexually assaulted me", my first instinct is to believe them. however only one of those instances has an entire subculture devoted to the idea that this particular crime is not rarely but often and perhaps even MOSTLY lied about..

okay, true, but again, that doesn't mean that anything short of full support of all allegations in every case = alliance w/ redpill assholes.

and the difference between accusing "someone" and accusing a specific person is huge. if someone i don't know comes up to me and accuses some other person i don't know of some crime, my first response is typically not gonna be to simply believe them. i'll listen, think, gather info and only then decide whether there's even a reason for me to begin forming an opinion.

like, say i'm at a party. some strange dude comes up and points out another stranger standing across the room. "that guy's name is david," he says. "seven years ago, he killed a friend of mine, took a knife and slit his throat."

what am i supposed to think? what would you?

stop

we can believe the woman, hold [ILXor] accountable

woah i wasn't following the thread too closely, is an iLxor accused or rape?

like, say i'm at a party. some strange dude comes up and points out another stranger standing across the room. "that guy's name is david," he says. "seven years ago, he killed a friend of mine, took a knife and slit his throat."

what am i supposed to think? what would you?

― contenderizer, Wednesday, March 2, 2016 9:15 PM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i don't know what you would do but i would

https://media.giphy.com/media/xu1rPrOs0xIR2/giphy.gif

immediately

woah i wasn't following the thread too closely, is an iLxor accused or rape?

No.

and the difference between accusing "someone" and accusing a specific person is huge. if someone i don't know comes up to me and accuses some other person i don't know of some crime, my first response is typically not gonna be to simply believe them. i'll listen, think, gather info and only then decide whether there's even a reason for me to begin forming an opinion.

This was covered upthread:

If I told you that someone stole my car, would you believe me? Or would you come up with convoluted theories about how I just want attention or that I dumped it somewhere for the insurance?

This is a terrible analogy, I realise, but for all the men who cry "innocent until proven guilty", I would like to point out that people believe victims of crime all the time. It is this crime that they doubt, this crime that they hound women for speaking out about.

― emil.y, Friday, February 26, 2016 12:39 PM (24 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Yes, of course I'd believe you, but that analogy doesn't work here. If instead of "someone stole my car" you told me "(specific person x) just stole my car!," I'd probably have to ask a few follow up questions before rounding up a posse.

― Wimmels, Friday, February 26, 2016 12:52 PM (5 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Even, "someone stole my car" is subject to question. Sorry, but people lie about all sorts of things, all the time. That applies to everyone in this story. The idea that we can somehow guess who's lying and who's telling the truth is insane. Unless you have proof, you don't know. I hate speculative conversations like this.

If someone said that their car was stolen, I'd have no opinion at all until I looked into the details.

I have no idea what happened. Probably nobody else does, other than the parties involved. Threads like this are like wondering about trees falling in the forest.

― dlp9001, Friday, February 26, 2016 1:02 PM (5 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

the tree that fell in the forest definitely made a fucking sound, though, is the thing

If there was a big problem with people who'd had stolen cars not being believed about that crime occuring, or being implicitly or explicitly blamed for getting their car stolen, or a power dynamic throughout social institutions biased against people who'd had their cars stolen, so that car thieves had low conviction rates, and even some people claiming publicly that car theft isn't possible... then it might be a fucking idea to acknowledge that, look at the #notallcartakers view and not add to the existing bias.

Gira has adopted this position or would have been advised to adopt this position legally regardless of the facts because he knows a lot of his fanboys will have empathy for him. And he knows it's his word versus hers. And he knows men will believe him.

I'm several degrees of separation closer to the subjects of this rape/crime/fiasco than is typical, so I'm uncomfortably forced to REDACT REDACT REDACT.

I believe Larkin. Whether or not the rape happened ten years ago or ten days ago is irrelevant. Jackie Fuchs had to wait until Fowley was dead before she felt it was time to come forward with the Ugly Truth. I think it's positive that more women are coming forward in face of what happens when the Internet becomes their last resort. Have you thrown away your Led Zeppelin records yet?

Anyway, I just unsubscribed from the Serial podcast.

oh my fucking god, dlp, YOU DON'T GET IT

like goole or ftig said, this isn't about individual opinions, the important thing is the general consensus, and we want the average general consensus when a victim says they were sexually assaulted to be 'yes, we believe you'. bc right now, rape culture - YES, RAPE CULTURE - maintains this status quo that women are sneaky bitches who manipulate men through sex.

and there was NO rapid fire back and forth - larkin's posts have been incredibly thoughtful, well considered, articulate, generous and important.

I think that just based on that last sentence (which I think is entirely incorrect) there isn't enough common ground to really discuss this.

Then why don't you stop?

fgti's last post is abt the most otm thing I've ever read here

xps then you've clearly made up your mind that larkin isn't a reliable witness to her own rape, and that her motives are highly questionable (which has already been covered up thread by someone else). it's this kind of rape-culture rhetoric that needs to be stomped on and out.

i really truly hope you - or anyone you care about - are never put in a similar situation, where so many people don't believe you've been assaulted. i wouldn't wish that feeling on anybody, bc it's horrific.

i really truly hope you - or anyone you care about - are never put in a similar situation, where so many people don't believe you've been assaulted been accused of a horrible crime you may not have committed. i wouldn't wish that feeling on anybody, bc it's horrific.

― just1n3, Wednesday, March 2, 2016 8:02 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

jesus christ why do you think you're blowing anybody's minds with the inane shit you keep posting

even after five or more spoonfeedings

Not everyone agrees with you, and people who disagree with you aren't necessarily stupid or uninformed.

As far as fgti, I'm moderately curious why you/they wouldn't identify yourself/themself as a friend of Larkin when first entering the conversation. That just seems like something I would have mentioned if it was me, rather than dropping it right before exiting the discussion.

What I'm pretty sure about is that the original accusation doesn't automatically ring true, not that it's necessarily false. I know that's nuanced, but I think people on this board are smart enough to understand the difference.

you both are completely missing the point of everyone else in this thread, and you know it, you just keep refusing to acknowledge it. you're hoping that everyone else besides you two will bow out and you'll somehow 'win' this thread by getting the last word in.

i'm more than willing to risk gira's reputation than i am to contribute to rape culture by repeatedly accusing larkin of unreliable narratives (esp when her narrative IS so believable).

Village Voice says he did it:

http://www.villagevoice.com/music/as-a-woman-who-loves-swans-i-believe-larkin-grimm-8336936

He was a guru to the article's author as well, which is an odd coincidence.

It did occur to me that if he were on trial, he'd be utterly fucked. Just quote his lyrics and it's obvious he's a monster. VV author goes that route a bit.

Weirdly, there's no Thomas Sayers Ellis thread. What's up with him, actually?

xp No one is trying to "win" anything; I think some of us are merely trotting out the old "we don't know, and neither do you" chestnut, which is a logical and reasonable and grown-up reaction to this situation. A real jury in a real world would seize on Larkin's whole "See? I'm accusing a white guy now" stuff, as well as her response in that--what are we calling it?--"puff piece" in which she seems to suggest that the split with the label was amicable. These two things alone make her far less "reliable" imo than some very reactionary and sanctimonious people here are willing to admit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOrOT2QKl30

'Reactionary'

I hope people on that jury would be smart enough to understand the difference between a rapist's artistic practice and the facts regarding the rape.

Regarding your moderate curiosity, dlp, I never blew in here with an "I'm Larkin's Friend" because it's simply not relevant. I'm friends with rapists, too. Somebody upthread stated "who would ever come forward and admit they're a rapist?" I would, absolutely, if one of my sexual partners told me publicly or privately that he felt the sex we had was non-consensual. In the aftermath of the Ghomeshi accusations, two Facebook friends came forward to state that they had, in the recent past, been accused of rape, privately, and gone through an accountability process with the people they'd raped and the community the rape had affected. They talked freely and openly about the event, the process, their feelings about the process, and their victims voiced their support for their transparency and courage in publicly admitting their crimes.

"We don't know and neither do you" = "I don't take the events that this accuser is stating as fact". Even when, in this case, the rapist admits to sex. We do fucking know, you unreasonable child. Two people, accuser and accused, have corroborated that sex happened, and one calls it a mistake, and the other calls it rape. "His penis was in me". What do you want? A sex tape?

Anyway this has nothing to do with Swans at this point, a band I've never thought to give a shit about except for Michael's exemplary production work on albums by US Maple and Larkin Grimm

Being a friend is pretty pertinent.

What is up with the accusation that kicked this all off? That seems to have vanished. US Maple>Swans we agree.

are you still arguing this?

DFTT

God, dlp, please JUST STOP TALKING.

i sort of wish there was a thread where we could talk about political strategy & tactics wrt this stuff. like whether or not it's really wise/productive to demand that all would-be allies close ranks and publicly "believe the accuser" whenever rape allegations are made. i totally get why that approach might seem attractive (compassionate, necessary, decent, etc). but the brute-force insistence strikes me as potentially counterproductive and kind of depressingly anti-intellectual besides. maybe the anti-intellectualism is politically expedient, i dunno...

this isn't the place for it, and given past experience, i can't see any thread i start on the subject going well. so, i guess that's that. ftr, i have no inclination at this point to doubt larkin's account and am kind of revolted by the not-so-subtle attempts of certain posters to cast her as a liar.

i don't get why ftgi being her friend is relevant?? i'm not her friend, i had no idea who she was until i saw ned's posts on fb about this, and i totally believe her.

the thing is, there is no culture surrounding men being accused of sexual assault but there IS a culture surrounding women being sexually assaulted and then accused of lying about it. it's called... rape culture. and you are a part of it now, even if you weren't before.

even if incontrovertible proof came out that their was proper consent, i wouldn't regret immediately and consistently believing larkin's story.

I don't think dip knows what 'rings true' means.

But then again, he should just shut up.

but the brute-force insistence strikes me as potentially counterproductive and kind of depressingly anti-intellectual besides. maybe the anti-intellectualism is politically expedient, i dunno...

it's compensatory, to be sure. it has bothered me on occasion (very very rarely) and only in cases when the accuser and accusations are obviously delusional and false, (based on personal knowledge of the person in question).

This is pretty much where dlp reveals himself to be a cheap troll & nothing more, fgti drops some very real stuff about friends in his life that have raped and that aftermath and all you do is play high school social studies class mock trial lawyer:

Being a friend is pretty pertinent.

What is up with the accusation that kicked this all off? That seems to have vanished. US Maple>Swans we agree.

― dlp9001, Wednesday, March 2, 2016 9:00 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Honestly never heard of prison abolitionism. Just been reading a little about it. I suppose most in the movement aren't in favour of scrapping it entirely?

Gira's ex-wife Siobhan Duffy, who figures heavily into Grimm's account of what happened between her and Gira, has been speaking out on Facebook in defense of Gira.

http://observer.com/2016/03/i-stand-with-kesha-why-men-should-address-musics-rape-culture-problem-right-now/

She posted a link to the article above with a note to see the comments, and sure enough, she shared her side of the story: http://i.imgur.com/ywakzna.png

"Hello. My name is Siobhan Duffy and I am Michael's ex wife. The wife married to him (together for 12 years) while Larkin and Michael worked together. It is shameful what Ms. Grimm has done. Michael is not a rapist. And we will be making a more official statement soon with proof of either her instability and her intent to ruin Michael's life work. Michael and I divorced in 2011. In 2013 Larkin wrote me on Facebook messenger (not a public post) which starts... "Dear Siobhan, I'm Sorry, I'm sorry,i'm so, so sorry for being an immature manipulative untrustworthy whore,losing my way,being constantly high, and not follwoing my conscience when you welcomed me into your home." She goes on to tell me about the drunken night of fooling around that never included coitus. And many people that worked with both Larkin and Michael reveal that she was bragging about it at the time and finding it laughable that he was afraid his wife (me) would find out. She taunted him with telling me. When she wrote to me and spoke to Michael about it, I asked him to remove her from his label out of respect of me. Larkin claims that when she confronted him with rape, which never happened, he removed her from the label. Another false statement. And this one Facebook post has brought his 30 plus career and his name into question? It seems the media does not fact check anything anymore. Making false claims of rape can ruin someone's life, but also it undermines every true report of rape. And as seen from above, Larkin is now trying to capitalize on the current hot topic of rape in the music industry. She even mentions Kesha in her FB post. Yes Larkin, you finally ogt your name in Billboard, but at what price to Michael and his family? Check your FACTS.

And I would like to add that Michael Gira is one of several men being accused by Larkin Grimm of sexual misconduct, all of whom terminated their working relationships with her. Who is the problem?"

Both, this keeps turning into more and more of a mess. Up to this point, I thought Grimm had been handling herself with a remarkable grace and clear-headedness, and to my outsider's perspective, it didn't seem like she would have any reason to lie about what happened. But this statement from Duffy really complicates things. It contradicts most of Grimm's account, and sketchier still is that a comment Grimm left on one of her posts about Duffy asking if it was safe for Gira to be around his daughter after Grimm told her Gira raped her has been deleted. Since this is the internet, naturally someone managed to take a screenshot of it...it was up for days. I remember reading it and feeling sick to my stomach. http://i66.tinypic.com/de613.jpg

"Who is the problem?" indeed

Again without wading into speculation about what the actual ~truth~ is, I would like to point out that everything in your post is circumstantial evidence or stuff about the victim's character, except "She goes on to tell me about the drunken night of fooling around that never included coitus" (Siobhan's words--significantly, this is the exact point in the letter where she stops quoting Larkin) which you have interpreted as "contradict[ing] most of" Larkin's story although it's already been made clear throughout the thread that not all parties agree about the definition of "coitus" (&, I would probably add, of "fooling around"). To then connect this to a "sketchier still" deleted (and therefore unverifiable) facebook comment, provided with minimal context (...but she deleted it, so she must be a liar!), is equivocation of the commonest sort.

Question for my fellow SWANS fans....

Regardless of how this is all going to shake out (and will we ever know the full story?), do you feel you're able to continue to listen to Gira's music objectively anymore? I honestly haven't spun any since this story broke (nor have I felt compelled to), but I was quite looking forward to the purported tour-de-force the impending album has been promised to be. Regardless of your stance on the allegations, can you listen to his music without associating all of this?

I have mostly avoided Swans and AoL music since the allegations. I have found Xiu Xiu to be an acceptable substitute

This 'proof' is really taking it's time, huh?