rolling #metoo thread for sexual harassment in the music industry so no one misses out when artists we don't give a fuck about like Tim Westwood and Bassnectar get caught

I fixed the behavior in myself, but she never returned, and that's the price you pay when you fuck up. we're on friendly terms again though, on social media, just not in each others' lives. but I'm glad I'm not hurting them anymore.

yeah, thanks for saying that ... I had a relationship when I was about 19-20 where I was really horrible to my partner and the current status is basically that. sometimes I see him post on mutual friends' social media and wish that we were friends and could banter and chat outside of that context ... but, that ship has sailed.

and before we completely parted ways, we were in this pattern that he described as "like Charlie Brown and Lucy with the football" where I would apologize and say that I would be better, but then continue the shitty behavior

As someone who has witnessed a lot of the culture around these issues evolve, I want to note that simply ejecting the abusive person from the culture and their lives is often not the way to go, particularly in cases where the abusive person isn’t famous.

Reason? Firstly, it does reflect a carceral mindset wherein people cannot change their behaviors and become better, less abusive people. I have a friend who was credibly accused of consent violations relating to rough sex and BDSM, and when he came to his senses, he quit drinking, started intensive therapy, stopped going to shows, and started working with RAINN. He was still run out of town, but he’s continued working on himself and these issues in his new location. I find the accusations against him despicable, but I also am not sure permanent exile is the right thing to do in his case, for example.

And then there’s another guy, who was accused of straight up sexual battery by multiple women, and he was run out of town— only to then do the same thing to women in his new location.

I’m still not sure myself as to whether a one size fits all solution can work in these cases, because there are certainly instances of people changing their behaviors and lives for the better, and banishment allows for an out of sight, out of mind mentality that both discards this possibility as well as the possibility that banishment makes the abuser more likely to commit abuse in their new context.

Reason? Firstly, it does reflect a carceral mindset wherein people cannot change their behaviors and become better, less abusive people.

yes, this. i think circumstances matter. I think on an individual level, if the victim chooses not to give the aggressor a second chance, that's perfectly valid. and I understand distrust and suspicion remaining years after the behavior aberrates.

but sooner or later, if you shun someone who seems interested in redeeming themselves and taking away their livelihood, it can lead to a kind of social recidivism.

magnitude and foreknowledge I guess matter too. like I legitimately didn't realize my behavior was shitty until several different people called me on it, and I looked at it from the outside.

but hard to argue someone who is assaulting/gaslighting women isn't aware.

complex issue for sure

a kind of messy example of this and how it can backfire, this year's Fringe Festival, there is a known graphic designer/actor/occasional producer in town that multiple women came out and said was abusive, including two of his ex-fiancees. so every year, one of his exes makes a 'Cancel List' for Fringe where she implores people to not only boycott any show he's affiliated with (acting in, producing), but any tangentially involved (including people who use him to create their show poster, some of whom might not all have been aware of the accusations.

one of the shows who made this list this year actually had no involvement from the accused, but was misidentified publicly as such and added to the boycott list, and this lead to a whole bit of drama* with people accusing each other of 'gaslighting', and lots of bad blood.

(*I'm a self-hating theatre person).

what should she do instead

I keep writing and deleting things here because I don't know how to gently express concerns about context and emphasis without necessarily disagreeing with anything in theory

xpost maybe wait to confirm he's actually involved before spreading rumors? try and reach out to the people who bought his posters to see if they were aware?

i was already boycotting the dude because I hated him from pretty much the moment I met him so it's no skin off my back.

why should she have to do that work

sounds like everyone else has failed

because in the case of the first one, the person she accused of being involved w/ him was an LGBTQ+ POC performer putting on a show about body positivity, and had the false message reached far enough, she could have significantly ruined this person's first show as a producer?

in the case of the second, because assuming everybody knows something when the only way the message has spread is Facebook, some of the performers are from out of town or part of the social circle and actually legitimately don't know, and they'd probably be glad to stop working with the guy if they were tipped off rather than lose thousands of dollars on a production and be tangentially accused of enabling hate when they actually didn't know?

I mean this isn't like white people pretending systemic racism is a thing through their own ignorance. people can not be aware of things, idk what to tell you.

OK but why is he still there

isnt the question under discussion right now 'where should he be'

why is that the question under discussion? there could be a different thread maybe

idk fuck it carry on

it's always not a bad discussion to have it just feels way too advanced for a situation in which the basics are barely even established

Im not saying you're wrong!

xpost I don't expect you to know all of the ins and outs, but it was never my point that my friend shouldn't have tried to out the guy and seek to put him out of business, it was that she's hit quite a few people with friendly fire in the process due to a) not doing proper vetting first, and b) assuming intentional malice on behalf of people who might not have been aware, or *might not even be from this country*, let alone this city.

he's beyond redemption and I wish someone would finally press charges and him go to actual prison but it's doubtful

OK so all these musicians

Scott Kelly can go to Hell for all I care

I also think that, as we see cases that are more "mundane" (not to excuse Scott for what he did, but more that what Scott did is sadly quite common) and less extreme (e.g. R Kelly, M Manson), it should become more evident that abusers are generally not monsters, but are relatively average people who have done monstrous things.

? sarahell

"Monstrous" is a really loaded word for me. My experience of abusers is that abusers are relatively average people who have _had monstrous things done to them_, internalized those monstrous things as _normal_, and then done monstrous things to other people. Which is fucking terrifying because me personally, the stuff I grew up thinking of as "normal" was actually really horribly abusive and fucked up. When I talk about things that have happened to me, things that to me are just totally normal everyday parts of my life people say things like "I just can't imagine how awful that would be."

And then there’s another guy, who was accused of straight up sexual battery by multiple women, and he was run out of town— only to then do the same thing to women in his new location.

― broccoli rabe thomas (the table is the table)

I mean, I was raised Catholic. This method of addressing abuse looks VERY VERY FAMILIAR to me.

It is a challenge. Particularly in marginalized/queer spaces like BDSM spaces. Where I live, people circulate secret lists of people who have been identified as abusers, because if you repeat these accusations publicly you'll be attacked and ostracized, because the people who are on these lists are in entrenched seats of power. And that helps us who are in the know, who have access to this information, but when this all first came out, I was talking to someone in the scene and they said "Well, yeah, everybody knows this stuff." And I didn't! I'd just walked in off the fucking street and I had no idea who the bad actors were. So it's not a good way of handling things. And none of this of course really helps me feel safe given my existing abuse and trauma issues.

THIS is what I was trying to say about about Win Butler -- he could literally be anyone! Anyone with access to impressionable admirers who does not possess the (apparently) elusive quality of sufficient boner control when it comes to engaging in inappropriate behaviors AND has no idea how consent works. I was reminded of Ken Stringfellow, who did basically the same thing. In my mind I separate it as someone who is a dog (no insult to actual dogs, who I love) and someone who is deeply malevolent. A cowardly dogger who takes advantage of people and lies to cover it up ("I thought she wanted it!" I was reading her signals!") vs R. Kelly? Huge difference. In spite of their malfeasance taking very different forms, they both create immense damage in their wake, that much is for sure.

Mandatory consent training for everyone, widespread adoption of the FRIES model please.

Reason? Firstly, it does reflect a carceral mindset wherein people cannot change their behaviors and become better, less abusive people.

yeah ... I am thinking about a certain person we both know, T, and how he was run out of town and the repercussions of that one ... still continue.

In my mind I separate it as someone who is a dog (no insult to actual dogs, who I love) and someone who is deeply malevolent.

otm

After four albums and more than a decade together, Arcade Fire remains a tight family.
"Well, we've also never had drugs in our band," said Butler. "You know, there's a lot of pitfalls. We've all read the rock biographies!"
"And you take your lessons from that?"
"To be honest, I always found it so boring. I have no interest in that. In fact I find it embarrassing, like, some old rocker who is like, 'Yeah, groupies.' I actually find it embarrassing, you know?"
"Why do you find it embarrassing?"
Well, it's like seeing a drunk Santa Claus or something like that!" he laughed.

Aged like milk

One thing I can't get over about the WB situation is how he has a goddamn excuse for everything. Like how is "I was depressed and drinking to excess" even remotely a good excuse for what he did to people?! I would like to know if he has always been a dog or if he just turned into one when he starting drinking and was depressed? What an idiot.

"aged like milk" otm lol

ll otm — for me using the excuse of excessive drink and drug use has always cast the person offering such explanations in a way worse light. it's like, "yeah, not being able to exercise any self control is how you got here, so that checks out completely."

xp - i still don't understand the unsolicited dick pics urge tbh ... maybe i'm not into dicks enough? but ... i don't think that's the problem

it's a power thing. sure, if you're in a couple and you typically send each other noodz, that's fine, but i've never known someone to send one unsolicited to an acquaintance or stranger that actually thought their recipient would like the pics. it's almost a sort of perverse form of imprinting.

my g/f back in 2009 got sent two of them within a half hour by the same guy from an unknown number.

idgi either -- out-of-nowhere no-precedent genital photography seems so unnatural and there is no irl equivalent aside from flashing which we have all agreed is v bad/illegal for some time now.

well ilx's king of this is no longer posting which makes me feel better about ilx

THIS is what I was trying to say about about Win Butler -- he could literally be anyone! Anyone with access to impressionable admirers who does not possess the (apparently) elusive quality of sufficient boner control when it comes to engaging in inappropriate behaviors AND has no idea how consent works. I was reminded of Ken Stringfellow, who did basically the same thing. In my mind I separate it as someone who is a dog (no insult to actual dogs, who I love) and someone who is deeply malevolent. A cowardly dogger who takes advantage of people and lies to cover it up ("I thought she wanted it!" I was reading her signals!") vs R. Kelly? Huge difference. In spite of their malfeasance taking very different forms, they both create immense damage in their wake, that much is for sure.

― Piggy Lepton (La Lechera)

At the risk of sidetracking my personal experience is not that men are "dogs" who don't have "boner control". This is anecdotal, obviously, but for a number of decades I had the same anatomy and hormones that men have, and men saying they _have_ to fuck somebody... that's bullshit. Nearly all men have hands. If their libido gets too out of control, they can go to a goddamn toilet stall and jerk it. If a man engaging in _inappropriate sexual behavior_, there's something other than a simple failure of boner control going on.

I also don't personally find a lot of value distinguish between "genuinely malevolent" people and people who are just, I don't know, dumb ignorant horndogs. I think people should be held responsible for their words and actions. Whatever those are. If someone _behaves_ like a malignant narcissist (in the manner that, say, Win Butler is), he should be treated accordingly.

xp - i still don't understand the unsolicited dick pics urge tbh ... maybe i'm not into dicks enough? but ... i don't think that's the problem

― sarahell

I talked about this a little bit w/r/t the Jerry Sadowitz thing - my take is that it is a form of sexual abuse, one which is actively sought out and cultivated by dating sites. Dating sites don't exist to match two people up with each other. They exist to make the dating site a profit by giving men the opportunity to sexually abuse people by sending unsolicited dick pics to them.

xp I never said "men are dogs" -- I lack a better word for uncontrollably horny people who do not know how to/refuse to try to exercise sexual self control. fwiw masturbation is a form of boner control in my mind. People used to claim sex addiction and that seems to have fallen out of favor?

horndog is the full-length version afaik

(I type way too slow but xp)

I was pretty skeptical this only happened during that alleged down period for Win. Combined with the other details it seemed preposterous - what did he do, go up to his wife and get her permission to turn into a complete sex-obsessed shit to deal with his depression?

And I don't get the dick pic thing either - I don't think it's a generational thing since Win's obviously older, but it's like ever since smartphones came into being, there have been way too many people who think it's suddenly okay to flash people like some pervert in a trench coat. I think virtually every female I know on a dating app has had that happen to her, like WTF???

idk if i feel like sending one unsolicited dick pic to an adult is "abusive" ... again, just speaking for myself. there is a certain vulnerability required to do the sending tbh, which is why i find it confounding. However, if a guy flooded my phone or inbox with dick pics, or, if i said "not that" in response to a single dick pic, and then more were sent, or if i blocked the guy and he sent them from another account ... yeah, that's crossing a line.

People used to claim sex addiction and that seems to have fallen out of favor?

Always seemed to be Hollywood actors though never plumbers or bus drivers.

idk if i feel like sending one unsolicited dick pic to an adult is "abusive" ... again, just speaking for myself. there is a certain vulnerability required to do the sending tbh, which is why i find it confounding. However, if a guy flooded my phone or inbox with dick pics, or, if i said "not that" in response to a single dick pic, and then more were sent, or if i blocked the guy and he sent them from another account ... yeah, that's crossing a line.

― sarahell

they're not sending unsolicited dick pics to just _one_ person, though. it's a repeated, systemic pattern of behavior. it's a _systemic_ form of sexual abuse, and it's one that is not only tacitly permitted but _encouraged_ by the business model adopted by internet dating sites.

i don't think it _is_ an act of vulnerability to send somebody a picture of one's cock. you know, i show someone my tits there could be some very serious repercussions to that, repercussions that men just _don't face_ for sending unsolicited anonymous pictures of their penises to people on dating sites.

I think virtually every female I know on a dating app has had that happen to her, like WTF???

wtf exactly ... want to fuck? ... like, I get it in the context of dating apps. It is potentially appropriate. But like, on Instagram messenger (in the Win B context) or pretty much any other communication platform that is not focused on hooking up, it is a mystery.gif

Always seemed to be Hollywood actors though never plumbers or bus drivers.

― Buckfast At Tiffany's (Tom D.)

well it's about what you can get away with. it really is. men abuse because not only are they not _discouraged_ from abusive behavior, they are often actively _encouraged_ to abuse, that it is held up as not just normal but _normative_ behavior. i certainly was encouraged multiple times when i was younger to engage in behavior that i'd consider to be, at the least, _inappropriate_.

xp rushomancy -- i think we are operating from different definitions of abuse

I've known women who have been spammed (if that's the right word) repeatedly by the same guy. Don't know how broadly this applies, but said guy had a comically small penis, which to me indicates a combination of insecurity, self-loathing and need for approval. Plus anger, I suppose.

grower not a shower iirc

LOL at anger - "look at my small penis!! Why must I be so small??? GAH, AARRRRRGH!!!!"

penis so small he took the pic with a Motorola Razr to mke it look bigger

please tell me someone he sent it to put a clown emoji on the head of it and sent it back