Swans: Classic or Dud?

Idk why they don't just skip the boring evidence stuff in trials and just move on to the English test everybody is waiting for

I know I said I was leaving this alone, but I'm sort of bemused by the fact that Siobhan Duffy's statement is being somewhat blithely written off here. As Michael's ex, she has nothing really to gain by sticking up for him at this stage of the proceedings. Moreover, having lived under the same roof with Ms. Grimm for a period of time, she has greater insight than most. Why isn't her account being taken at the same face value as Ms. Grimm's?

because she wasn't there?

because she keeps talking about all this "proof" and doesn't produce it?

alex honestly if this was like the dude from nickelback & duffy was avril lavigne are you even in the thread asking these questions?

... because she wasn't there.

xp hah

ffs, just because someone has "nothing to gain" -- which is always debatable, but w/e -- that doesn't automatically mean that they're closer to the truth of the matter!

Pretty sure Michael Gira is still father of her children (not to mention fact that he may be supporting her financially, who knows really) so I'm not sure where this concept that his ex is a dispassionate observer is coming from. Not to mention fact that her post reads like a CARBON COPY of the one from his current wife (which was posted a week ago and alleged incontrovertible proof which has thus far not materialized).

"because she keeps talking about all this "proof" and doesn't produce it?"

To be fair, that was Gira's current wife who first invoked the oft-cited "proof." Siobhan only mentioned it once.

And Robbie, if it were regarding Nickelback guy and Avril, I'd have never clicked on the link to begin with. As a longtime SWANS fan, I am, of course, bothered by this whole story. By that same token, I want to underscore that that does not immediately render me a hashtag-stamping Gira apologist. I don't know what happened. As is routinely trotted out, NONE OF US WERE THERE.

By Siobhan Duffy was the closest to being there, and certainly as invested in the proceedings as Gira and Grimm. More so than the current Mrs. Gira (whose note was pointedly more aggressive). Ms. Duffy has a history with Ms. Grimm, certainly one more intimate than anyone here. I'm just curious as to why her perspective isn't being taken more seriously, while Ms. Grimm's seems to be taken as gospel.

just...stop

I'm not suggesting that Duffy is a dispassionate observer. For all anyone knows, she could secretly thrill to seeing her ex taken down. But, she's not taking that road.

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.

idk, maybe Gira's all lawyered up or otherwise disinclined to release the "proof" that would exonerate him, but I am kinda skeptical of "Oh yeah, she sent me this ~crazy message~, here you can read the first sentence of it & I will summarize the rest for you"

She goes on to tell me about the drunken night of fooling around that never included coitus = She told me "Michael and I had a drunken night of fooling around that never included coitus", OR, She told me "Michael and I did stuff" and related a story from which coitus was notably absent, OR, She told me that something happened, but her account was incoherent & hard to follow, so I asked Michael & he said coitus did not occur, OR She made vague references to "that night" which I filled in with my own secondhand knowledge etc etc

More so than the current Mrs. Gira (whose note was pointedly more aggressive).

I'd say both notes are pretty aggressive.

xp ... and that really is the last post I'll make here on the subject, because this thread has obviously turned toxic

Also, a note that begins 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." could well be meant in a very sarcastic tone (throwing accusations back at someone who made them), and without seeing the rest of the message quoted it certainly seems to read that way.

jesus christ, are yall really this fucking stupid?

never lock this thread

lock rape apologists' abilities to post

pay every woman and survivor of assault who read this thread $1000

Can't tell if that's directed at me, but I would like to state for the record that I am exactly as stupid as the 'Swans: Classic or Dud?' thread makes me out to be

definitely not you

thanking u roxy (& bernard & just1ne)

if you genuinely can't fathom why it's deemed important to enthusiastically believe survivors in our current social climate, go study rape and trauma for a year before speaking in public on the subject again. you are making yourself look terrible, and you are doing harm.

Also, a note that begins 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." could well be meant in a very sarcastic tone (throwing accusations back at someone who made them), and without seeing the rest of the message quoted it certainly seems to read that way.

― like Uber, but for underpants (James Morrison), Thursday, March 3, 2016 4:55 PM (17 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

agreed that it could be ironic or sarcastic

that "quote" also could sound, let's say, completely fucking made up perhaps?

~moderator announcement~

Due to the number of his posts being flagged for moderation, Wimmels will be henceforth be banned from this thread.

~end moderator announcement~

ban him from the Larkin Grimm thread too btw, his post there is garbage

pretty sure he drifted in on an ill wind from an MRA board based on his reactions to her statements.

never lock this thread

lock rape apologists' abilities to post

pay every woman and survivor of assault who read this thread $1000

^^^^^^^^ yes! this is what i meant by those trying to 'win' this thread. and why, shakey, i'm NOT gonna walk away. i don't know how many more times it needs to be explained why we are believing larkin over grimm, but it seems some ilxors are just too fucking stubborn/ignorant/assholish to pay attention.

wow FP back with a vengeance!

jesus christ, are yall really this fucking stupid?

― jello my future biafriend (roxymuzak),

hope this wasn't at me

I'd imagine Roxymuzak's comment was directed at me for daring to ask a couple of questions.

But, y'know, okay. I guess an actual discussion isn't going to happen.

Multiple posters have laid out why it is important to believe people who speak out about sexual assault, but you "reasonable" people have repeatedly said that we're not answering you. THE ACTUAL DISCUSSION HAS ALREADY HAPPENED, YOU'RE JUST CHOOSING TO IGNORE IT.

xp

if you genuinely can't fathom why it's deemed important to enthusiastically believe survivors in our current social climate, go study rape and trauma for a year before speaking in public on the subject again. you are making yourself look terrible, and you are doing harm.

So, even if there are developments or nuances or added context to the story, eh? I see.

https://49.media.tumblr.com/0aa778479a7280b2e4f32a08cd7ad505/tumblr_mjd4jxZvSH1qzsq0xo1_500.gif

So, even if there are developments or nuances or added context to the story, eh? I see.

This thread is a whirlpool in a sewer. Why are you so intent on going for a swim?

So, even if there are developments or nuances or added context to the story, eh? I see.
--Alex in NYC

Alex if you think spouses/ex-spouses popping up on FB calling LG a crazy whore all the while boldly stating "proof to clear Michael's good name is around the corner just you wait" is worthwhile development/nuance/context... Well let's just say that I'd do some reevaluating if I were you.

otm. the campaign to discredit larkin grimm is the exact fucking same disingenuous dance that happens every time a woman speaks out about rape.

I didn't use the term "worthwhile," but a progression in the story it remains.

Your definition of progress wildly different from most other posters on this thread.

I realize you're in feverish rush to have the last word, Alex, but the term "progression" simply means a movement or development ... which, for better or worse, it was.

If I thought you were looking at those responses with the kind of revulsion they merit I might have more sympathy with your POV Alex.

xp you need your dome cracked

dude I like you and know this thread really upsets you but let's try to keep threats off the thread where we are talking abt victims of violence

For the record I didn't know who Larkin Grimm was a week ago, while I own just about everything Gira's done, have seen Swans/AoL/Gira live in some variation a half dozen times, but reading Grimm's original post I was struck immediately by the clear believability (and frankly maturity and overall sympathy of it) whereas every single response from the Gira camp has struck me as petty, cruel and immature. Those responses don't represent any change to the underlying narrative except to reinforce the more grotesque aspects of our culture when people (particularly women) come forward with these charges.

EXACTLY (although I owned two Grimm LPs and was a big fan already, I was a much bigger Swans fan). it's the responses that have created the big issue and subsequent discussion more than anything else - earlier upthread roxy noted how it was a textbook example of how NOT to respond to an allegation.

two classic examples of how not to respond to a possible rape victim:

only now just noticed the likely intended implication in DLP's fourth post:

New Larkin Grimm

and Wimmels' post in response to the one i'm linking here:

Swans: Classic or Dud?

teachable moments for those who are able to muster up empathy for those in this situation and want to know what not to say

I need my dome cracked???

I'm not trolling. I'm not being needlessly provocative. I'm not making jokes. I'm trying to participate in a discussion, but if it's going to devolve into insults and threats I'm out. Stay classy, ILX.

That was pretty lame, but I'm still not sure what you want to "discuss".