Defend the indefensible - Bob Dylan.

In this thread I discovered people way too much about Bob Dylan.

Something I've never been able to forget was this brief gossip item that ran in Spin around '99 about Dylan's people reaching out to Elastica's management about bringing them aboard as a support act on the Never Ending Tour, with the ulterior motive that Dylan had seen some photos of Justine Frischmann and got really hot for her.

None of these other gossip items = child abuse, and the fact we're discussing them illustrates why the G.E. Smith testimonial is as valid as anything else right now (apparently Dylan's first manager, from the early '60s, spoke up too). That isn't anything like Phylicia Rashad standing by Cosby despite everything we know to be true in his case. All we have is a civil complaint with a shocking claim and no other real details, and the lawyers who filed it speaking to anyone who contacts them, saying (in effect) "Trust us." They're using the press to their advantage (and no doubt increase pressure for a settlement, which is their right), so it's reasonable for those whose initial reaction is doubt to respond to questions as well.

No one should feel bad for Bob. He's rich and barring any revelations he and his reputation will come through this fine. What Weberman did to him was probably worse.

Is it possible that they are going to allege some kind of long-distance phone abuse?

Someone I know (not well, my wife know her better) had fairly recent experience of him being into watching other people have sex (she didn’t oblige).
― Alba, Wednesday, 18 August 2021 18:28 (one hour ago) link

Yeah we've heard "Visions of Johanna"

The one thing the lawyers seem really specific about is "we know she was with him at the Chelsea" — so that suggests some kind of documentary evidence, a photo or something, or corroborating testimony. Unless they're Sidney Powell-ing it, in which case it could all be imaginary.

Sidney Powell-ing it,

For the times, they are a Kraken

Maybe you guys could all do a podcast about each time a beloved popular male artist was accused of rape, and you could use all the evidence you've found on the internet to vindicate them and call their accusers liars. I mean 90% of the episodes would eventually need to come down but it would be fun for awhile

Maybe 100% really but who's counting

No one's really swinging evidence around, other than the fact that it's a super well known time of his history, where he was, what he was doing, etc. If it was during his time when he didn't tour after his motorcycle crash I could see it being more believable for sure.

Also not sure 100% is accurate here, here's one famous example of a false accusation.

https://pitchfork.com/news/55965-conor-oberst-drops-libel-suit-over-rape-accusation/

I guess that podcast about Conor wouldn't have to get taken down.

Dylan's also been famous for 60 years of his life. It's a shocking claim. There also may be truth to it, which is why at least I'm so concerned about / engaged with the topic. Also, no one here (afaik) has called his accuser a liar. We do not know the accuser's story, we only how it is sketchily presented in the legal brief.

Carry on then

Like I said, just wait for more evidence to be presented. The claim gave very few details and since they don't line up with what's known, obviously there has to be more to get this to trial - so wait for more and go from there. It doesn't help that the lawyers have bad reputations, sure, but let them present their argument first.

FFS, "of course he's guilty, he's an old white guy" is NAGL either

Death to Europe and Bob Dylan.

Have you guys ever wondered why so few women post here anymore?

If so - wonder no longer!

Fuck you for that. What a disingenuous prick you are.

?? I think i’ve been pretty forthright!

In fact I’d call that accusation…. baseless!

I like Dylan enough to privately hope this isn't true, because it's deeply horrible and I hope it didn't happen for reasons selfish and not. But since it obviously *could be* true, I wonder why people engaged in sleuthing this out don't hesitate to leave this trail of posts? On a micro level, won't you feel terrible? On a macro level, he fact that a powerful, famous, and well-liked man has a legion of fans (not just here obvs) immediately on the case trying to disprove the charge without him having to do a thing sends a disturbing message to anyone thinking about coming forward with their own story.

I don't know any departed women posters, so I can't speak to their reasons, but a few have in the past explicitly posted similar sentiments to Tracer

No one here has called the accusation "baseless" (afaik). Why would we hesitate to leave this "trail of posts"? I will feel terrible if it's true, not because I discussed the charge on a board.

personally i feel terrible either way

You guys realize this is not a criminal case where authorities have investigated and decided there is enough evidence for a case, correct? It's a civil claim with a vague but devastating charge, filed by lawyers who have then been up in the press every day. If your position is that the details of the charge should not be discussed out of some sense of decorum, I strongly disagree.

Why would we hesitate to leave this "trail of posts"?

Because it will retroactively make it look like your first instinct was to side with an abuser. I guess that isn't fair, but I'm surprised it doesn't factor into people's behavior nonetheless.

I don't think you can neutrally "discuss" this charge. Or if that's too broad: I think it sends a message that people react to this news by, on their own time, searching for and posting exculpatory evidence.

It's not a "criminal case" but you thought this was a good post to make:

G.E. Smith comments as character witness

― Shallot Shortage 2021 (morrisp), Wednesday, August 18, 2021 1:37 PM (yesterday)

If he had said, "I'm not surprised, Dylan's always kind of been a creep," I would have posted that too.

When accusations about famous people surface in this day & age, they're often followed by others reporting similarly bad experiences. If that doesn't happen here, it doesn't mean there couldn't still truth to the charge. But I'd be more concerned if people *weren't* saying "that doesn't sound like the Bob I know."

Your position is apparently that only the two lawyers who filed the suit are allowed to speak.

i'd like to think that if there was evidence that implicated Dylan, we would be equally willing to post it here

"of course he's guilty, he's an old white guy"

you see it's shit like this

daily mail comment section worthy

old white guy "60s rock star"

i know it's hard when someone's work has meant a lot to you but regardless of the facts in this case is it really so hard to avoid using the exact same little turns of phrase that we have been hearing for years to defend other people whose behaviour is (now) widely acknowledged? that is what set me off initially. and is it so fucking hard to avoid the classic /r/mensrights standby "hey check out this other false accusation"? for fuck's sake

bob dylan's work doesn't mean shit to me fwiw, but your being a sanctimonious cunt to everyone on this board since your very first post does

i don't remember my very first post but my first real "incident" on here was when i had the temerity to suggest that woody allen was what he is, just throwing that out there

how's this for sanctimonious: i know people get touchy when it's pointed out that not many women post here these days but everyone knows why and some people clearly prefer it that way

"is it so fucking hard to avoid the classic /r/mensrights standby "hey check out this other false accusation"? for fuck's sake"

Was made harder when someone else said 100% of accusations are true

Nobody said that.

Have you guys ever wondered why so few women post here anymore?

― Tracer Hand, jeudi 19 août 2021 10:36 (one hour ago) bookmarkflaglink

If so - wonder no longer!

― Tracer Hand, jeudi 19 août 2021 10:39 (one hour ago) bookmarkflaglink

With respect, I wasn't waiting for a man to give me the answer.

lol

Sorry. "Maybe" 100% are true.

is it really so hard to avoid using the exact same little turns of phrase that we have been hearing for years to defend other people whose behaviour is (now) widely acknowledged? that is what set me off.

THIS would have been more helpful than a flat out "fuck you" or even the the following "is it so fucking hard to avoid the classic /r/mensrights standby 'hey check out this other false accusation'? for fuck's sake"

In those two cases, I jumped on the "they're guilty" bandwagon and regretted it. But from the perspective laid out in italics, it's easy to see how expressing that can also have consequences I don't intend or want.

Because it will retroactively make it look like your first instinct was to side with an abuser.

b/c this is still bugging me - if you go back thru the posts where I was poking online into the timeline, you'll see I was very careful to note that nothing I was finding absolutely proved that Dylan couldn't have been in NYC in April/May. Such exculpatory evidence is what I hoped to find, but it's not enough for someone online to say "this biography says he and Joan went to Mimi Farina's party upstate for the rest of April" - I want to see what is said in the text. That's why the newspaper clippings in that Twitter thread showing he and Sara visited Portugal after his May UK shows were good, but also not entirely enough.

And indeed, Isaacs is now saying “There are dates that he wasn’t touring for several weeks in April and this will all come out at that appropriate time.” So that's what they've narrowed the timeframe to - and if no one can definitely account for Dylan's activities throughout April, then it is still an open question.

Honestly I almost ordered that Chelsea Hotel book to see what the author says in full about when Dylan was there, but that seemed a bit much.

can’t imagine why anyone wouldn’t want to post on a board where ppl regularly greet each other with “fuck you” and warn against leaving an incriminating “trail of posts”

That was the very first time I've ever posted "fuck you" to anybody anywhere, and it was also in response to the first time anyone's ever posted that in my direction. As mentioned, it was needless.

I regret saying "trail of posts"; that was inflammatory.

I just meant there's a (sometimes silent) audience for our posts here, however dwindling. And my perspective is that searching for and publicly distributing exculpatory evidence—for whatever motive or however non-prejudicially—contributes to rape culture by sending a message that victims of sexual assault need to make sure their accounts of inherently traumatizing and psychologically altering experiences are airtight before coming forward. If you disagree, that's fine, but then we don't have much to talk about, so as Tracer said, carry on

i don't remember my very first post

As best as I can figure it was

tulsi is no republican, she's just a self-aggrandizing narcissist

― akm, Sunday, February 9, 2020 11:31 AM (one year ago) bookmarkflaglink

you don't have to be a republican to be fascist supporting islamophobe

― aaaaaeeeeeeooooooooooo (Left), Sunday, February 9, 2020 11:42 AM (one year ago) bookmarkflaglink

rob otm, this thread has been very weird to read

not that it hasn't tracked with the greater conversation about this on the internet, i just expect a little better of ilx, uh, lol