In terms of gender, I believe both identify as non-binary, Ben using they pronouns, and Liv using she pronouns.
I 100% support the movement towards giving a presumption of truth to people who come forward about abuse. The part that scares me is how easy it would be to destroy someone's life by abusing that presumption of truth. It's not at all hard to imagine a right-wing troll deciding to "teach some social justice warriors a lesson" by taking advantage of the community's expectation that all claims must be believed.
That's a good way of articulating some of what I'm feeling. It doesn't even have to be a right wing troll - abuse of the "presumption of truth" by anyone for any reason could be disastrous for the individuals accused. And when the community response is as swift as it has been in this case, how do we slow down and actually recognize a mistake if it happens?Originally Posted by Andyland
So, what is your solution, exactly? All I've basically seen you say is, "Oh well, sounds like it's probably true, so whatever. Losing their music career isn't that big a deal in the large scheme of things bc it's not as serious as large-scale human rights violations."
I'm honestly--no snark--trying to understand what it is we are supposed to do in these situations. The court of public opinion has seriously damaging long-term ramifications for people's livelihoods and reputations. Are we just supposed to accept that?
"See everything as an illusion, and enjoy it even though you are not of it."
~Alanis Morissette, paraphrased
This article is the best I've seen on the whole scenario -- it takes into account pretty much everything that's been said in this thread and synthesizes it in a way that I think is constructive.
Mostly I'm just annoyed by people grafting "what about innocent until proven guilty? What about beyond a reasonable doubt?" onto non-legal responses. Because the stakes are lower in the court of public opinion than they are in a criminal court, the standard of proof should be lower, same way it is in civil court.
Idk, it seems plenty obvious that at least something predatory happened here, between the now-multiple allegations and the duo hiding the allegations from their touring band and the response. I'm fine with this level of response with this level of circumstantial evidence.
It's pretty deeply life-ruining to have people disbelieve you when you open up about assault because the accused is famous and talented, too, and that's what happens in almost all of these cases. And then those people use their talent and fame (and in this case reputation for safe spaces) to prey on others. I'm fine with their careers getting tanked so long as their legal rights are respected. "Wait and see" is quietly siding against the victim.
Exactly, P. There was a lot of that "innocent until proven guilty" shit going around the Casey Affleck awards season thing. That was even more exasperating, because people were demanding a criminal trial standard of proof where the only "punishment" being proposed was his not winning a fucking Oscar.
That's why I thought Brie Larson's way of dealing with that was so brilliant. She didn't debate anyone; she just was noticeably cool when handing statues to Affleck. She made her point with subtlety and grace, and the survivor community really appreciated it. She didn't do it for the media; she did it for them.
At my core, I think we're gonna be OK.
Barack Hussein Obama
The response to the accusations has been swift, but I don't think it's necessarily because of homophobia. Many people seem to be operating under the assumption that tour members, the label, etc., know as little as we do. However, that's probably not true. Surely conversations about the issue took place and the parties involved may have determined that it does not bode well for the accused. If he's not denying life-ruining accusations, think about what he may have said that led to the choice of words used in the non-denial statement.
That statement is a perfect example of how to say that you didn't do something when you actually did it. It's weird AF.
When he woke up, the dinosaur was still there.
I think it's pretty telling that no one's coming out and saying that as people who know/are friends with Ben, they find the allegations uncharacteristic. It's like with Dr. Luke. No one you work with is saying "that doesn't sound like them at all", "I've always known Ben as someone who respected others and feel shocked by the accusations", etc? There doesn't seem to be any expression of surprise.
(nevermind)
I'm a bit confused, because I thought they were gay, but I take it the victim is a female?
I did happen to see them play live once. I didn't go to specifically see them, but they were opening for White Lung, whom I love. I did not find their music to be anything special, pretty run of the mill pop/punk. Their persona on stage was a big turn off to me. They came across as rude and obnoxious, although I guess they were trying to be funny. So my opinion of them were they were jerks who really weren't that innovative or talented.
The gig was in a very small venue, but then I noticed they sold out the Main Stage of the Black Cat which is a much larger venue. I'm not sure how they became much more successful all of a sudden. It didn't seem to be based on the quality of their music, but more about their support of gay, binary, queer and transgender issues. So if your whole appeal and brand is built on that type of political statement, I think it's fair to hold them to a very high standard of behavior and to punish them severely if they engage in any kind of abuse and violation of other people's rights.
I agree with this, but also I think that in the PWR BTTM fan community, it would be almost impossible for anyone to express such sentiments without being labelled a rape apologist.
I'm not someone who listens to much pop-punk, but I really enjoyed their songwriting, and sadly, Ben's in particular. I agree that part of the appeal was young queer folks hearing themselves represented in music, for perhaps the first time, but I don't think that's all it was.
It fascinates me that in addition to their albums no longer be sold by their record labels, their music has also been removed from streaming services. In many ways their art will cease to exist. That definitely sends a powerful message, but in some ways, it does feel inconsistent. For example, Vinyl Me Please cancelled their PWR BTTM pressing, while also offering albums by Charles Manson.
Online asshole Amanda Palmer said it's not true. So that settles it?
So finally they wrote something on Facebook about what happened. I'm not sure how convincing it is, but it's the kind of thing they should've said three weeks ago.
When he woke up, the dinosaur was still there.
So Ben's statement ain't getting great reviews.
Case in point.
At my core, I think we're gonna be OK.
Barack Hussein Obama
Reply With Quote
