No worries, Jian, about what to do now. #GamerGate has your back and wants to thank you for your support.
Of the people I have left behind me because they were violent abusers, all have retaliated.
I read this yesterday…
This seems interesting too:
Actually, it’s about ethics in radio journalism.
When I first heard about this I didn’t want to believe it, because I’ve always enjoyed his show. I’m not a regular listener, but I play CBC in the car and sometimes it is on. He has a funny, engaging tone. And I was a fan of Moxy Fruvous back in the day as well.
That said, I also didn’t want to discount the accusations and experiences of the women who have come forward. And there seem to be more and more of them. If it was one jilted ex, then I would retain my doubts. But we are talking about several women in several situations, most of whom don’t know each other.
All that adds up to asshole, in my opinion. The police are looking into it, if there is provable criminality then I hope they are able to pursue it. Even if it can’t be proven in court, I’m glad this stuff is coming into the light.
I don’t care what two (or more) consenting adults do with each other, as long as consent is genuine and everyone understands what is happening. But when one person uses another without consent, that is one of the most abhorrent acts a person can commit. Jail is too good for a person like that, but it would be a hell of a good start.
Yes, lots of ppl felt this way. Especially given his “out of the gate” denial on FB. Which initially worked for Jian, for many. Personally I had misgivings about the CBC making such a decision if what Jian had claimed was true. They wouldn’t IMO.
If everyone had known he was acting on the advice of Navigator at that time then precisely no one except GG-types and other abusers would have given him the benefit of the doubt.
When he first spoke out, it sounded like he was probably into latex gimp suits and handcuffs and maybe CBC was getting their panties in a bunch over it (I was remembering how they had nearly fired VJ/actress Sook-Yin Lee over her non-simulated sex scenes in Shortbus). I was somewhat primed to believe that CBC were being prudish squares.
Barely 24 hours later, it seemed pretty likely that he’s a very shitty person who enjoys being unpleasant and bashing people in the head. Considering the number of people coming out of the woodwork with their unsavory experiences with him, it’s puzzling that it took this long for it to get him in trouble. I guess his cutesy, squeaky-clean hipster vibe was that strong.
I’m never belting 'Stuck in the 90’s" in the shower ever again. shudder
From what I’ve read, the reason it “took this long” is that he has – or had – a position of power within the CBC. It’s analogous to why the late Jimmy Saville got away with sexual abuse, and it didn’t come out until a year after his death.
See, for example, one person’s blog post about Ghomeshi, titled “Do You Know About Jian?”
Just an update. It’s now nine women, and three of them have made statements to the police. It also appears that at least one university professor was advising his students not to apply for internships at Q, because of Ghomeshi’s reputation.
As an aging frühead, I’ve been following this story for a while. Apparently, it’s not even a surprise to some folks. This was a pretty good discussion of it:
Woops, just noticed: that article was linked earlier in the thread. Worth a second link though.
I’m surprised and disappointed. I’ve read the accounts, and it seems pretty clear to me that Jian was acting badly and he should lose his place in the public spotlight (and quite likely be subject to criminal charges).
The biggest problem I have now is: how do I relate to my back catalog of old Moxy Früvous songs? It’s a weird triggering thing - I don’t like thinking about the Jian Ghomeshi that it turns out exists in the Real World, but some of my favorite old MF songs feature his vocals in a pretty inimitable fashion.
There was also a statement issued by his former bandmates about this, more or less “we’re also surprised by this”, which seems a little unlikely. It’s hard to imagine that the other members of the band weren’t somehow aware of his behavior, and somehow remained quiet about it.
There’s that for sure, and upon further reflection, even total nobodies can get away with a remarkable amount of inappropriateness when they happen to also have outgoingness and charisma as a trait.
Looking back, I remember knowing several people who were really shitty and parasitic (and not wealthy or famous), yet they nonetheless had a big crowd of enablers who openly admitted that so-and-so owed everyone a bunch of money, had questionable bedside manners, etc, but also gushed about how they were so funny and the life of the party and awesome free spirits, so it made everything else okay.
I read the Slate article this morning and thought the choice of writing in the third person was interesting…Was that to put the reader in the writer’s shoes, or was it a subconscious way of the author deflecting blame?
I was somewhat primed to believe that CBC were being prudish squares.
That may still have been the case (although I 100% agree with the CBC’s decision). If I understand the timeline correctly, he showed the head honchos some boudoir videos expecting them to be exculpatory; but anyone involved in the BSDM world should know that for many many people, that sort of play won’t appear to be consensual no matter what the situation is. What kind of person would think that showing their bosses their homemade porn is appropriate?
The fact that my (and apparently many others)'s first impression on the first accusation was blasé and the second was not much more concerning, but as the accusations grew the mental tide turned probably gives some insight in to how this was allowed to go on for so long. It shouldn’t take 3 people to corroborate a story before we start believing the accusers.
A lot of people come to the BDSM lifestyle later in life. It’s entirely reasonable that he wasn’t into it when he was with the band.
To quote John Scalzi on the issue of Ghomeshi’s “BDSM lifestyle”:
1. There’s nothing wrong with consensual BDSM play; if that’s your thing and you can get other people to go along with it in a safe and consenting manner, then you kids have fun with that.
2. Suddenly smacking the hell out of someone and/or choking them without prior discussion or agreement is pretty much the opposite of consensual BDSM play, now, isn’t it. (Note: this is a rhetorical question. The answer is: Yes, it is the opposite.)
The rest of what JS has to say about Jian Ghomeshi is worth reading, too. The point he’s making is that what Ghomeshi did has little or nothing to do with a “BDSM lifestyle.”
(Edit - As are the comments to his post.)
Along with the eight women, a Winnipeg man has come forward as well.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.