Celebrity Scandals

[sidcow]

1 hour ago, StefanAVFC said:

Also amazes me how he’s managed to convince thousands that he’s somehow not the establishment. He’s a millionaire who can hide his crimes using injunctions and payoffs. 

 

[maqroll]

8 minutes ago, El Segundo said:

Exactly the kind of thing I was talking about.  The fact that you earlier included Jordan Peterson in your list of right wing reprobates just shows how little research you've done into the subject. 

33 minutes ago, El Segundo said:

It’s hard to get past the impression that some have not come to the debate with an entirely open mind, or armed with any critical thinking.   There seems to be a strong bias against Brand on the basis that he’s an annoying C*** and/or expresses political and other views many don’t agree with.  In my experience it’s very typical of new Left attitudes to dismiss anyone who espouses non-mainstream views as Alt-right, Conspiracy Theorists etc  and therefore obviously a wrong’un.  Ad hominem attacks as opposed to actually coming up with some rational counter arguments.  And there’s a hint of doing likewise to other posters who present a different view as well.  I’d rather hoped VT would be better than the torches and pitchforks school of debate.   

Guilty as charged, Segundo, I AM biased against people with political/world views different than my own. I believe most of them are vulnerable to propaganda and I don't necessarily hold it against them, but I definitely hold it against people who wield power and influence, like Tate and Peterson. And I've "researched" enough of Peterson to determine that he's a vapid, conspiratorial, misogynistic  clearing in the woods and that despite that, or much more likely because of it, he's a hero to the incel-Q Anon-Alt Right-Andrew Tate crowd. Peterson provides their misogyny and conspiracy mongering a veneer of professorial respectability, which makes him even more reprehensible, *in my opinion*. Just because you don't agree with the majority of the posters in this thread, or me in particular doesn't mean we aren't applying critical thinking to how we form our opinions. 

 

 

[sidcow]

1 hour ago, StefanAVFC said:

He’s exactly what he complains about to his useful idiots. 

In his actual video he rubbishes the claims made against him by these everyday women then goes on to say something like those in power need to listen more to the little people. 

In one sentence literally doing exactly what he's complaining about. 

[chrisp65]

53 minutes ago, El Segundo said:

It’s hard to get past the impression that some have not come to the debate with an entirely open mind, or armed with any critical thinking.  

Agree entirely.

I know very little about Brand, other than he comes over as the sort of person that thrives on controversy and has an unhealthy need for attention. I wouldn’t have a clue what his politics are or have been and I certainly wouldn’t let the history of his politics colour my judgement on whether he was a sex pest.

Equally, if when this story broke you’d have asked me which VT contributor would be dipping in and out trying to be offensive then pretending to be offended, well, I’d have guessed correctly. As predictable as night following day.

I personally don’t think we’re here to ‘debate’ the veracity of women’s claims of abuse at the hands of Brand. We don’t have sufficient information on any of the parties involved. What we do know is that in the UK 2% of allegations and proven to the point of conviction. Personally, I don’t believe that means 98% of people are making false allegations. It must mean the system is loaded in some way at some stage to prevent prosecution. How that applies directly to the Brand allegations, with multiple claims investigated by journalists in tv and newspaper, I don’t know.

That people read these claims and come up with shit about princesses and mumsnet is a bit worrying. Whether its more worrying if they believe what they type, or more worrying they would write that stuff to fill a need for attention, I don’t know. Personally, I’m not sure either is a great look.

 

[DCJonah]

1 hour ago, El Segundo said:

It’s hard to get past the impression that some have not come to the debate with an entirely open mind, or armed with any critical thinking.   There seems to be a strong bias against Brand on the basis that he’s an annoying C*** and/or expresses political and other views many don’t agree with.  In my experience it’s very typical of new Left attitudes to dismiss anyone who espouses non-mainstream views as Alt-right, Conspiracy Theorists etc  and therefore obviously a wrong’un.  Ad hominem attacks as opposed to actually coming up with some rational counter arguments.  And there’s a hint of doing likewise to other posters who present a different view as well.  I’d rather hoped VT would be better than the torches and pitchforks school of debate.   

Go on then. What's your critical thinking behind multiple women making these accusations? 

[Mandy Lifeboats]

1 hour ago, foreveryoung said:

Your taking the comment out of context, obviously. I was talking along the lines of arguing with your partner, which in reality is emotional abuse. Also if you have been a promiscuous man and slept with alot of women, even if you claim them all to be consensual, you as a man now are putting yourself at risk, an so the conversation on here proves it so.

An just for the guys who like to make up stories, please don't label me on a forum, I know what I mean and it's not condoning any sort of abuse or harassment on women.

1. I was not labelling you as anything on this forum.  I stand by my comment.  Anyone who thinks most men behave in a criminal way towards women has an incredibly distorted view.  I can only conclude that they have used their own behaviour as a perverse benchmark of normality.  

2.  I accept that your posts may have been out of context, ambiguous, badly worded, mistaken etc.  But I truly found your post troubling. I perceived it as a near admission of serious criminality. If all men are at risk of false abuse accusations it's probably not a good idea to post things on a forum that MISTAKENLY suggest you have undertaken such acts. 

 

[sidcow]

52 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

1) he knew this was coming out and pivoted hard to content that is eaten up by conspiracy theorists, who are more likely to defend him than the left who he used to more identify with. These stories have likely been suppressed for years with injunctions and the like, and him becoming a Q anon, anti-vax populist who coincides very nicely with this story. 

This is an excellent point. 

There have been some very specific individual accusations laid at this feet.  How has he reacteed? How would YOU react? 

Instead of addressing the accusations he's just given a generic "it's all lies" response and then immediately jumped onto making accusations that it's all a conspiracy against him by powerful figures. 

That's just not a rational response to the situation. Why's he gone straight to that? 

Edited September 17, 2023 by sidcow

[Genie]

Just now, sidcow said:

This is an excellent point. 

There have been some very specific individual accusations laid at this feet.  How have he reaceted? How would YOU react? 

Instead of addressing the accusations he's just given a generic "it's all lies" response and then immediately jumped onto making accusations that it's all a conspiracy against him by powerful figures. 

That's just not a rational response to the situation. Why's he gone straight to that? 

That’s the classic conspiracy theorist response to everything isn’t it.

Trump, Farage, Alex Jones, Elon Musk all do the same as soon as they are in trouble.

[DCJonah]

56 minutes ago, sidcow said:

This is an excellent point. 

There have been some very specific individual accusations laid at this feet.  How have he reaceted? How would YOU react? 

Instead of addressing the accusations he's just given a generic "it's all lies" response and then immediately jumped onto making accusations that it's all a conspiracy against him by powerful figures. 

That's just not a rational response to the situation. Why's he gone straight to that? 

https://reddit.com/r/LowStakesConspiracies/s/ILOMkwL6R5

Quote

Russell Brand is moving to the right so that when the ~accusations~ finally come out he can claim it’s a witch hunt.

Interesting that people predicted this 7 months ago. 

[StefanAVFC]

9 minutes ago, sidcow said:

This is an excellent point. 

There have been some very specific individual accusations laid at this feet.  How has he reacteed? How would YOU react? 

Instead of addressing the accusations he's just given a generic "it's all lies" response and then immediately jumped onto making accusations that it's all a conspiracy against him by powerful figures. 

That's just not a rational response to the situation. Why's he gone straight to that? 

And the ultimate irony here is he is a powerful figure getting millions of views on his content. And him as the powerful figure caused hurt to ordinary people, and used his power to defend it.

[Follyfoot]

5 hours ago, sidcow said:

A lot comes down to he said/she said at the end of the day. 

It's rare a third party witnesses a rape. 

Same with these murders, so many strangulation cases are defended by she liked kinky sex. It's a really common defe. 

Has one man on here ever had a girlfriend who liked a bit of strangulation during sex. Yet to the world is full of them apparently. Prove me wrong. 

Something very close yes

[sidcow]

I have to say, if I was a really powerful illuminati type figure, I'd like to think I'd got better things to do with my time than trying to nail Russell Brand as a rapist. 

In my top 1,000 things to do with my power and influence it would be at about 5,000,000.

And if a fellow all powerful mate of mine came knocking on my door to ask me to use some of my power to assist him in his plan to drag Brand under a bus I'd look up from my plan of ways to bring down The Oil and Gas industry and tell him to stop wasting his and my time.

And in the very unlikely event that I was to use my unchecked wealth and influence to bring him down I'd have a much much better plan than some unnamed women making allegations and then not going to the police. 

I mean, if you've got unlimited access to employed Hackers and The Police in your back pocket, how hard can it be to get some child porn planted on his computer, or link a major shipment of Heroine to his name, or plant illegal firearms in the boot of his car? 

Why would anyone fanny around with such a weak story if you're rich and powerful and want to see him taken down? 

Edited September 17, 2023 by sidcow

[Seat68]

Just now, sidcow said:

I have to say, if I was a really powerful illuminati type figure, I'd like to think I'd got better things to do with my time than trying to nail Russell Brand as a rapist. 

In my top 1,000 things to do with my power and influence it would be at about 5,000,000.

And if a fellow all powerful mate of mine came knocking on my door to ask me to use some of my power to assist him in his plan to drag Brand under a bus I'd look up from my plan of ways to bring down The Oil and Gas industry and tell him to stop wasting his and my time.

And in the very unlikely even that I was to use my unchecked wealth and influence to bring him down I'd have a much much better plan than some unnamed women making allegations and then not going to the police. 

I mean, if you've got unlimited access to employed Hackers and The Police in your back pocket, how hard can it be to get some child porn planted on his computer, or link a major shipment of Heroine to his name, or plant illegal firearms in the boot of his car? 

Why would anyone fanny around with such a weak story if you're rich and powerful and want to see him taken down? 

Sound like the sort of thing a powerful member of the Illuminati would say 

[Rugeley Villa]

That’s my problem with the “They are out to get me” statement . Why would they be out to get him? 

[StefanAVFC]

Just now, Rugeley Villa said:

That’s my problem with the “They are out to get me” statement . Why would they be out to get him? 

Because he tells the truth about the world man

[AvfcRigo82]

5 hours ago, sidcow said:

Has one man on here ever had a girlfriend who liked a bit of strangulation during sex.

Yep.

 

 

 

 

 

 

...She nearly killed me when she did it!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Spoiler

 

Edited September 17, 2023 by AvfcRigo82

[ml1dch]

2 hours ago, El Segundo said:

It’s hard to get past the impression that some have not come to the debate with an entirely open mind, or armed with any critical thinking.   There seems to be a strong bias against Brand on the basis that he’s an annoying C*** and/or expresses political and other views many don’t agree with. 

Think you've managed to massively misdiagnose this one, champ. Why are you under the impression that people have made their opinions on this due to his personality or his politics?

To take an example, I greatly dislike the comedy (such as it is), the personality and the politics of Lee Hurst. However, if he were to be accused of rape then I wouldn't automatically assume that he was guilty because he's not made a whole career (such as it is) out his dogshit sexual politics, there isn't a mountain of evidence in the public domain already of his dogshit sexual politics and there isn't an entire entertainment industry who has been whispering that Lee Hurst is a sexual predator for the last two decades. 

Given with Russell Brand there is all of those things I'm one hundred per cent comfortable not giving him the benefit in the doubt in these cases. I've not come to this with an open mind. I came to it with the mind that Russell Brand is at best a sexual predator, and at worst, a rapist. And my arrival at that conclusion was just the same whether he was in his flat telling people to vote for Ed Miliband or sitting on YouTube telling people to vote for Donald Trump.

Edited September 17, 2023 by ml1dch

[TheAuthority]

I think as men we have to commit to raising ur sons to the highest standard. (I'm of course assuming that the vast majority of posters on here are male.)

I have two sons and it's vital that I teach them to respect their mothers, female friends at school and in the neighborhood. To point out and argue against any kind of misogyny especially when it's insidious in a "nudge nudge wink wink kind of way."

Beyond that, as some posters have already expressed, there is a general despair at the values we are confronted with every day. I think about 100 years ago Albert Einstein was famous and "movie stars" were considered somewhat crass. Now the majority of society worship celebrity culture and it seems anyone who is prepared to fill their face with silicon and be outrageous on TV can join the club. Those with power and influence who are prepared to abuse others, are always enabled by those around them. This goes for actors, football players, comedians, tv show presenters or any other "celebs."

In recent times the "grab 'em by the p***y" comment is still the barometer and a major turning point for me. To think that someone with such low values and such a low opinion of women could be considered suitable to lead, shows which way his cult following's moral compass points. The greatest hypocrisy of all in that saga is of course the evangelical Christians.

Brand allegedly used his power and fame to have sexual encounters with women and seemingly he did not respect women - it was to satisfy an ego driven narcissism. Until we as a society stop worshipping narcissists they are going to rise to positions of power and influence and will be allowed to be abusers.

[Stevo985]

2 hours ago, foreveryoung said:

Your taking the comment out of context, obviously. I was talking along the lines of arguing with your partner, which in reality is emotional abuse. Also if you have been a promiscuous man and slept with alot of women, even if you claim them all to be consensual, you as a man now are putting yourself at risk, an so the conversation on here proves it so.

Just absolute nonsense

[Rugeley Villa]

Brand is or should I say was a self confessed sex addict . Wonder if this has had any baring on this , if true of course.