After a lifetime of direct experience with my society getting it 100% wrong (wmd, covid, russiagate, and more specifically the metoo era witch hunts) i am very skeptical of Russell Brand as a sexual predator.
I will be happy to take a look at whatever evidence is made available, but there are myriad reasons to be skeptical and almost zero to trust.
I would imagine from the tone of your writing that you would consider this outlook a problem.
I like Russ Brand and will stop liking him if I'm convinced he is a legitimate predator, but the level of evidence needed to convince me has grown to such a level that (barring video / audio) would have to be "beyond a reasonable doubt"
It's almost like someone, somewhere, had the radical idea of "innocent until proven guilty" as a standard of justice where the accusers are inherently at a disadvantage as they need to prove the claims as opposed to the mob mentality you *seem* to be tacitly endorsing...
I appreciate your reminder to tread with caution and preserve an open mind. I have followed RB for the better part of the last two years. He'd have to be one hell of an actor to be faking the level of compassion, fairness, and commons sense reasoning he presents in his nightly broadcasts. While I have no idea what he does in his private life or the details of his admitted years of poor judgement, he has been candied about his misgivings. But the most telling reasons to believe Russell do not come from Russell himself. No one who is alive and breathing can refute the coordinated censorship campaigns between government and media currently running rough shot over democracies world wide with major voices of opposition being attacked in the most grievous ways. Russell like other successful podcasters are a threat to the mainstream because they are on the way out. It's so obvious it's laughable. But regardless of my opinion, our laws are built upon the premise of innocent until proven guilty. Somehow this crucial aspect of justice has been the victim of our Orwellian culture. Now the public assumes guilt by accusation, and twistedly puts the burden of proof on the accused.
I suspect that this truth-insistant attitude of yours is part of why you avoided contracting the brainworms that have infected so many of the "anti-woke".
It seems to me with politically and socially-charged stories like this (seems to happen frequently these days) the stakes are much higher for the liars and disinformationists, for them the appearance of legitimacy is everything, since they don't have the truth on their side. Everything that affects that appearance is seen as threat to a whole movement and everyone who supports it. Unfortunately for the public discourse, the truth with allegations like these may never be settled. For my money the loudest protests are for those trying to maintain their legitimacy, not get to the truth.
Helen,
After a lifetime of direct experience with my society getting it 100% wrong (wmd, covid, russiagate, and more specifically the metoo era witch hunts) i am very skeptical of Russell Brand as a sexual predator.
I will be happy to take a look at whatever evidence is made available, but there are myriad reasons to be skeptical and almost zero to trust.
I would imagine from the tone of your writing that you would consider this outlook a problem.
I like Russ Brand and will stop liking him if I'm convinced he is a legitimate predator, but the level of evidence needed to convince me has grown to such a level that (barring video / audio) would have to be "beyond a reasonable doubt"
It's almost like someone, somewhere, had the radical idea of "innocent until proven guilty" as a standard of justice where the accusers are inherently at a disadvantage as they need to prove the claims as opposed to the mob mentality you *seem* to be tacitly endorsing...
Love your writing,
Kurl
Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. I mean by that, until the appeal process is exhausted.
I appreciate your reminder to tread with caution and preserve an open mind. I have followed RB for the better part of the last two years. He'd have to be one hell of an actor to be faking the level of compassion, fairness, and commons sense reasoning he presents in his nightly broadcasts. While I have no idea what he does in his private life or the details of his admitted years of poor judgement, he has been candied about his misgivings. But the most telling reasons to believe Russell do not come from Russell himself. No one who is alive and breathing can refute the coordinated censorship campaigns between government and media currently running rough shot over democracies world wide with major voices of opposition being attacked in the most grievous ways. Russell like other successful podcasters are a threat to the mainstream because they are on the way out. It's so obvious it's laughable. But regardless of my opinion, our laws are built upon the premise of innocent until proven guilty. Somehow this crucial aspect of justice has been the victim of our Orwellian culture. Now the public assumes guilt by accusation, and twistedly puts the burden of proof on the accused.
I am not one for conspiracies but this does have an air of the manufactured.
I await evidence
I am thankful for this reminder to not pass judgment or solidify an opinion until all of the evidences in.
I suspect that this truth-insistant attitude of yours is part of why you avoided contracting the brainworms that have infected so many of the "anti-woke".
No surprise when I heard. There had been mumblings around the comedy circuit for years. 🤷🏽♀️
I like this very much. Minor point spell judgment without the e (just trying to help
The one time I happened upon him, my scumbag-radar, which rarely does me wrong, was alerted #justsaying
Great, good for you, the men are always allowed their presumption of innocence, why don’t the women get presumption of truth?
In case of interest, Mary Harrington (UnHerd) comes at this from an interesting angle: https://unherd.com/thepost/could-russell-brands-defenders-and-accusers-both-be-right/
It seems to me with politically and socially-charged stories like this (seems to happen frequently these days) the stakes are much higher for the liars and disinformationists, for them the appearance of legitimacy is everything, since they don't have the truth on their side. Everything that affects that appearance is seen as threat to a whole movement and everyone who supports it. Unfortunately for the public discourse, the truth with allegations like these may never be settled. For my money the loudest protests are for those trying to maintain their legitimacy, not get to the truth.