# Jian Ghomeshi & CBC split



## TubeStack

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/10/26/jian_ghomeshi_no_longer_with_cbc.html Information “precludes us from continuing our relationship,” CBC spokesman says.


Anyone know what this is about?


----------



## Guest

Nope, but I'm looking forward to Jesse Brown's report on it: https://twitter.com/JesseBrown/status/526435684832509954 -- CanadaLand has become a favourite podcast of mine.


----------



## TubeStack

Hmm, interesting, thanks for the link.


----------



## mhammer

Earlier this week, Ghomeshi announced that he would be taking some time off in followup to his father's recent passing. GIven how often he would mention his dad, I suspect it hit him pretty hard. Of course, taking 2 weeks compassionate leave, and saying "I need some time, and I don't know when I'll be back; please wait for me", tend to elicit very different responses from management. I don't know if that was the basis of the split, but there was no indication last week that things were headed south. Today, it was announced that he would be launching a suit against the CBC for punitive damages in the millions.

I do hope this is resolved amicably and that, whether on CBC or some other venue, we get to continue hearing him interview interesting people. He's a very good interviewer, and many of his guests regularly express how much they enjoyed the interview and how refreshingly different it was from the usual. Strikes me that he's a very good ambassador for the CBC in that regard.


----------



## bagpipe

I'm looking forward to the obviously juicy reasons on why he was shit-canned. I'm a big fan of Moxy Fruvous, but I've always found Ghomeshi to be far too smug to actually listen to on his radio show.

Some wag has already created a #ghomeshigate hashtag on Twitter!


----------



## R.S.Fraser Sr.

mhammer wrote...
_"Strikes me that he's a very good ambassador for the CBC",
_
I would bet that will no longer be the case considering that

_"Ghomeshi is claiming general and punitive damages for among other things, breach of confidence and bad faith in the amount of $ 50 million" (quote from Tor Star)

Hardy har har!_


----------



## mhammer

Yeah the dollar figure suggests vengeance for something afoul. On whose part, we won't know. My niece works for "the corporation" down on front street. Perhaps she will post some inside dish.

I'm pretty certain he won't end up in Billy Bob Thornton's band, though.


----------



## TubeStack

https://m.facebook.com/jianghomeshi/posts/10152357063881750


----------



## Guest

Ghomeshi Facebook page Sunday. 


Dear everyone,
I am writing today because I want you to be the first to know some news.
This has been the hardest time of my life. I am reeling from the loss of my father. I am in deep personal pain 
and worried about my mom. And now my world has been rocked by so much more. 
Today, I was fired from the CBC.
For almost 8 years I have been the host of a show I co-created on CBC called Q. It has been my pride and joy. 
My fantastic team on Q are super-talented and have helped build something beautiful. 
I have always operated on the principle of doing my best to maintain a dignity and a commitment to openness 
and truth, both on and off the air. I have conducted major interviews, supported Canadian talent, and spoken 
out loudly in my audio essays about ideas, issues, and my love for this country. All of that is available for anyone 
to hear or watch. I have known, of course, that not everyone always agrees with my opinions or my style, but 
I've never been anything but honest. I have doggedly defended the CBC and embraced public broadcasting. 
This is a brand I’ve been honoured to help grow.
All this has now changed.
Today I was fired from the company where I've been working for almost 14 years – stripped from my show, barred 
from the building and separated from my colleagues. I was given the choice to walk away quietly and to publicly 
suggest that this was my decision. But I am not going to do that. Because that would be untrue. Because I’ve 
been fired. And because I've done nothing wrong. 
I’ve been fired from the CBC because of the risk of my private sex life being made public as a result of a campaign 
of false allegations pursued by a jilted ex girlfriend and a freelance writer.
As friends and family of mine, you are owed the truth.
I have commenced legal proceedings against the CBC, what’s important to me is that you know what happened and why.
Forgive me if what follows may be shocking to some. 
I have always been interested in a variety of activities in the bedroom but I only participate in sexual practices that 
are mutually agreed upon, consensual, and exciting for both partners.
About two years ago I started seeing a woman in her late 20s. Our relationship was affectionate, casual and passionate. 
We saw each other on and off over the period of a year and began engaging in adventurous forms of sex that included 
role-play, dominance and submission. We discussed our interests at length before engaging in rough sex (forms of BDSM). 
We talked about using safe words and regularly checked in with each other about our comfort levels. She encouraged 
our role-play and often was the initiator. We joked about our relations being like a mild form of Fifty Shades of Grey or 
a story from Lynn Coady's Giller-Prize winning book last year. I don’t wish to get into any more detail because it is truly 
not anyone's business what two consenting adults do. I have never discussed my private life before. Sexual preferences 
are a human right.
Despite a strong connection between us it became clear to me that our on-and-off dating was unlikely to grow into a 
larger relationship and I ended things in the beginning of this year. She was upset by this and sent me messages indicating 
her disappointment that I would not commit to more, and her anger that I was seeing others. 
After this, in the early spring there began a campaign of harassment, vengeance and demonization against me that would 
lead to months of anxiety.
It came to light that a woman had begun anonymously reaching out to people that I had dated (via Facebook) to tell them 
she had been a victim of abusive relations with me. In other words, someone was reframing what had been an ongoing 
consensual relationship as something nefarious. I learned – through one of my friends who got in contact with this person – 
that someone had rifled through my phone on one occasion and taken down the names of any woman I had seemed to have 
been dating in recent years. This person had begun methodically contacting them to try to build a story against me. Increasingly, 
female friends and ex-girlfriends of mine told me about these attempts to smear me. 
Someone also began colluding with a freelance writer who was known not to be a fan of mine and, together, they set out to 
try to find corroborators to build a case to defame me. She found some sympathetic ears by painting herself as a victim and 
turned this into a campaign. The writer boldly started contacting my friends, acquaintances and even work colleagues – all 
of whom came to me to tell me this was happening and all of whom recognized it as a trumped up way to attack me and 
undermine my reputation. Everyone contacted would ask the same question, if I had engaged in non-consensual behavior 
why was the place to address this the media?
The writer tried to peddle the story and, at one point, a major Canadian media publication did due diligence but never printed 
a story. One assumes they recognized these attempts to recast my sexual behaviour were fabrications. Still, the spectre of 
mud being flung onto the Internet where online outrage can demonize someone before facts can refute false allegations has 
been what I've had to live with. 
And this leads us to today and this moment. I’ve lived with the threat that this stuff would be thrown out there to defame me. 
And I would sue. But it would do the reputational damage to me it was intended to do (the ex has even tried to contact me to 
say that she now wishes to refute any of these categorically untrue allegations). But with me bringing it to light, in the coming 
days you will prospectively hear about how I engage in all kinds of unsavoury aggressive acts in the bedroom. And the implication 
may be made that this happens non-consensually. And that will be a lie. But it will be salacious gossip in a world driven by a 
hunger for "scandal". And there will be those who choose to believe it and to hate me or to laugh at me. And there will be an 
attempt to pile on. And there will be the claim that there are a few women involved (those who colluded with my ex) in an 
attempt to show a "pattern of behaviour". And it will be based in lies but damage will be done. But I am telling you this story in 
the hopes that the truth will, finally, conquer all. 
I have been open with the CBC about this since these categorically untrue allegations ramped up. I have never believed it was 
anyone's business what I do in my private affairs but I wanted my bosses to be aware that this attempt to smear me was out 
there. CBC has been part of the team of friends and lawyers assembled to deal with this for months. On Thursday I voluntarily 
showed evidence that everything I have done has been consensual. I did this in good faith and because I know, as I have always 
known, that I have nothing to hide. This when the CBC decided to fire me. 
CBC execs confirmed that the information provided showed that there was consent. In fact, they later said to me and my team 
that there is no question in their minds that there has always been consent. They said they’re not concerned about the legal side. 
But then they said that this type of sexual behavior was unbecoming of a prominent host on the CBC. They said that I was being 
dismissed for "the risk of the perception that may come from a story that could come out." To recap, I am being fired in my prime 
from the show I love and built and threw myself into for years because of what I do in my private life.
Let me be the first to say that my tastes in the bedroom may not be palatable to some folks. They may be strange, enticing, weird, 
normal, or outright offensive to others. We all have our secret life. But that is my private life. That is my personal life. And no one, 
and certainly no employer, should have dominion over what people do consensually in their private life. 
And so, with no formal allegations, no formal complaints, no complaints, not one, to the HR department at the CBC (they told us 
they’d done a thorough check and were satisfied), and no charges, I have lost my job based on a campaign of vengeance. Two 
weeks after the death of my beautiful father I have been fired from the CBC because of what I do in my private life.
I have loved the CBC. The Q team are the best group of people in the land. My colleagues and producers and on-air talent at the 
CBC are unparalleled in being some of the best in the business. I have always tried to be a good soldier and do a good job for my 
country. I am still in shock. But I am telling this story to you so the truth is heard. And to bring an end to the nightmare.


----------



## Guest

Finally a CBC-produced drama I'm interested in!


----------



## Krelf

Try this link.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/


----------



## mhammer

Can you say "Helena Guergis"? Oh this is going to get unpleasant. And it is highly unlikely that anyone is going to say "Ooops, my bad. Sorry about, Chief."

His post is a perfect example of why I elect not to be on Facebook. A big gigantic EEEWWWWWW, there. I really don't want to know these things about people.

As for the BDSM part of his private life: _Get a shave, buddy! _ I don't know that there could be anything more savage that one person could do to another in the context of physical intimacy than rub that face against delicate skin.


----------



## R.S.Fraser Sr.

mhammer said:


> Oh this is going to get unpleasant.


It will get as unpleasant as Mr Ghomeshi wishes it to get,
though I'm sure he has a safe word.


----------



## Accept2

I dont care for the cbc, and I dont know who this jian dude is, but I would say maybe its all irrelevant to his job. If they care what he does in his bedroom, should they also be firing anyone else who doesnt subscibe to what they deem normal? If its the same standards for everyone, will they also fire homosexuals as well? Maybe they should just concern themselves about the dudes show and not what he does with his pee pee gun. Just a thought.........


----------



## Steadfastly

Who is Jian Ghomeshi? Not that I really care.


----------



## GuitarsCanada

Its an unfortunate side effect of being a public figure now a days. If it were one of us nobody would care. Having said that, when you choose to enter the public eye I think you really need to think hard about every person you get close to and anything that you may do that could come back and haunt you. Sad, but true.


----------



## Guest

Steadfastly said:


> Who is Jian Ghomeshi? Not that I really care.


Curly, long, dark haired gentleman in this video:

[video=youtube;ylaLG-DdT7E]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylaLG-DdT7E[/video]

I still dig the Früvous. Great band.

More recently:

[video=youtube;pXbdUYShXWs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXbdUYShXWs[/video]

Interviewing the amazingly talented Annie Clark. Seriously, if you can get out to see a St Vincent show it's rather awesome.


----------



## Diablo

Aww c'mon....other than for being a generally dull, smug, windbag, this is what he's best known for: [video]http://blip.tv/q-tv/billy-bob-thornton-blow-up-on-q-tv-1985296[/video]


----------



## Diablo

Accept2 said:


> I dont care for the cbc, and I dont know who this jian dude is, but I would say maybe its all irrelevant to his job. If they care what he does in his bedroom, should they also be firing anyone else who doesnt subscibe to what they deem normal? If its the same standards for everyone, will they also fire homosexuals as well? Maybe they should just concern themselves about the dudes show and not what he does with his pee pee gun. Just a thought.........


Nah, you're worrying about nothing, liberals love homosexuality. Although CBC caters to a wide demographic, his show most likely was never watched by the Don Cherry crowd. If this was a legitimate concern, Steven and Chris show wouldn't be on CBC. This must be much worse.


I'm torn. On one hand I think ppl have a right to sexual privacy. OTOH, I understand how a media outlet would want a certain type of person as a representative.
its like the Paul Reuben's thing. All the guy did was jerk off in a porno theatre, and his career was destroyed. Was his behaviour inappropriate? Sure, but pretty much harmless. At the same time, Magic Johnson received praise for publicly coming out with HIV most likely acquired through promiscuous behaviour during his marriage. Role model hypocrisy? I think so. But thems the breaks. Pay attention, kids: reckless casual sex spreading disease is more respectable than masturbation.

pretty crappy of an ex to screw him over this way though. It's almost like blackmail. "Never break up with me, or I'll publicly humiliate you and ruin your career".


----------



## Cartcanuck

Personally, I very much enjoyed listening to Q. Jian was a very good interviewer showing a level of knowledge about his guests and the reason they are on his show that is sadly missing in most interviewers. He actually sounded intelligent. You don't get that from radio or TV interviewers anymore. I will miss him on CBC and will likely tune out at that time of day from now on. Piya Chattopadhyay or whoever replaces him really won't convey the same level of interest in the guest that he was able to show. 

On his personal life? Well.......whatever. I guess we'll see how it plays out. I like that he is taking an aggressive, up front role in this instead of trying to hide it all. Sadly, whether his odd activities in the bedroom were consensual or not may not matter because if he is accused then many people will crucify him as guilty regardless of what he says. 

He had to know that his position of "celebrity" put him at risk of something like this being exposed. This can't be a big surprise to him. It's they way things go for "celebrities". You don't get a private life. Nothing is beyond scrutiny. 

Geez, hold the whip the wrong way, forget to zipper up the gimp mask, and drop the butt plug once, and look what happens. All heck breaks loose.


----------



## Guest

Jesse Brown's investigation is up on The Star now: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/10/26/cbc_fires_jian_ghomeshi_over_sex_allegations.html

Not good. Not good at all. Very bad behaviour on his part. That's too many similar stories for it to be a smear IMO. Sucks. I liked him.


----------



## Electraglide

Like others have said, Jian who? So the guy played a little whips and chains with his girlfriend/boyfriend, who ever. No biggy, unless the "On Air" light was on and perhaps the cameras were running. Paul Rubens? Oh the peewee herman guy.....he had a career? Ummm, Diablo, as far as I know, "Reckless casual sex" never got you committed as masturbation in it's various forms did. Good reason to lock peewee up. And as far as ex's screwing you over.....that's what they usually do and it is blackmail. 
"As for the BDSM part of his private life: Get a shave, buddy! I don't know that there could be anything more savage that one person could do to another in the context of physical intimacy than rub that face against delicate skin." Oh there's lots of things more savage than a three day growth of beard on a guy.


----------



## nonreverb

I just read an interesting piece on the Huffington Post which kinda sums it up for me.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/justin-beach/jian-ghomeshi-fired-cbc_b_6051938.html

I liked Q and it was an obvious hit across the country. Having said that, if there's even a scintilla of evidence that there was any non consensual sex happening, that changes the game entirely. Remember, Jian has got the spin doctors in full swing right now to try and manage the message. Personally, I think he's probably telling the truth but one cannot leave a stone unturned for the sake of justice. This mess is just getting started and it'll be some time before it gets resolved IMO.


----------



## mhammer

The Star article goes beyond "bedroom stuff" and implies sexual harassment at work, which IS grounds for dismissal. I do hope this doesn't turn into another Jimmy Saville incident, where we find that a well-liked public figure had a very ugly side to them.

The quandary for CBC is that they have a rather large library of excellent interviews with interesting people (and for those unfamiliar with him, he IS an excellent listener and interviewer; right up there with some of the best). I don't know that they can use those, now, whether in audio or video form, because they are "tainted" by the host's presence. The producers of the show could always turn to a "best of Q" library of past interviews to put together a show during the summer months or fill in on a civic holiday. What do they do now? Tremonti already has a 90-minute slot, and Enright is gradually moving towards retirement. Who else is there on staff that interviews quite as well, and is able to draw in the younger demographic that CBC hopes to turn into lifelong patrons?


----------



## TubeStack

I just downloaded the CBC radio app on my phone, and the first thing you see is a video clip with Jian saying hello and welcoming you to the new app.


----------



## Milkman

I've watched and enjoyed a few interviews conducted by Ghomeshi.

I'll let the courts decide who's right and wrong in this one.


----------



## Jimmy_D

laristotle said:


> Ghomeshi Facebook page Sunday.
> 
> 
> Dear everyone,
> I am writing today because I want you to be the first to know some news.
> This has been the hardest time of my life. I am reeling from the loss of my father. I am in deep personal pain
> and worried about my mom. And now my world has been rocked by so much more.
> Today, I was fired from the CBC.
> For almost 8 years I have been the host of a show I co-created on CBC called Q. It has been my pride and joy.
> My fantastic team on Q are super-talented and have helped build something beautiful.
> I have always operated on the principle of doing my best to maintain a dignity and a commitment to openness
> and truth, both on and off the air. I have conducted major interviews, supported Canadian talent, and spoken
> out loudly in my audio essays about ideas, issues, and my love for this country. All of that is available for anyone
> to hear or watch. I have known, of course, that not everyone always agrees with my opinions or my style, but
> I've never been anything but honest. I have doggedly defended the CBC and embraced public broadcasting.
> This is a brand I’ve been honoured to help grow.
> All this has now changed.
> Today I was fired from the company where I've been working for almost 14 years – stripped from my show, barred
> from the building and separated from my colleagues. I was given the choice to walk away quietly and to publicly
> suggest that this was my decision. But I am not going to do that. Because that would be untrue. Because I’ve
> been fired. And because I've done nothing wrong.
> I’ve been fired from the CBC because of the risk of my private sex life being made public as a result of a campaign
> of false allegations pursued by a jilted ex girlfriend and a freelance writer.
> As friends and family of mine, you are owed the truth.
> I have commenced legal proceedings against the CBC, what’s important to me is that you know what happened and why.
> Forgive me if what follows may be shocking to some.
> I have always been interested in a variety of activities in the bedroom but I only participate in sexual practices that
> are mutually agreed upon, consensual, and exciting for both partners.
> About two years ago I started seeing a woman in her late 20s. Our relationship was affectionate, casual and passionate.
> We saw each other on and off over the period of a year and began engaging in adventurous forms of sex that included
> role-play, dominance and submission. We discussed our interests at length before engaging in rough sex (forms of BDSM).
> We talked about using safe words and regularly checked in with each other about our comfort levels. She encouraged
> our role-play and often was the initiator. We joked about our relations being like a mild form of Fifty Shades of Grey or
> a story from Lynn Coady's Giller-Prize winning book last year. I don’t wish to get into any more detail because it is truly
> not anyone's business what two consenting adults do. I have never discussed my private life before. Sexual preferences
> are a human right.
> Despite a strong connection between us it became clear to me that our on-and-off dating was unlikely to grow into a
> larger relationship and I ended things in the beginning of this year. She was upset by this and sent me messages indicating
> her disappointment that I would not commit to more, and her anger that I was seeing others.
> After this, in the early spring there began a campaign of harassment, vengeance and demonization against me that would
> lead to months of anxiety.
> It came to light that a woman had begun anonymously reaching out to people that I had dated (via Facebook) to tell them
> she had been a victim of abusive relations with me. In other words, someone was reframing what had been an ongoing
> consensual relationship as something nefarious. I learned – through one of my friends who got in contact with this person –
> that someone had rifled through my phone on one occasion and taken down the names of any woman I had seemed to have
> been dating in recent years. This person had begun methodically contacting them to try to build a story against me. Increasingly,
> female friends and ex-girlfriends of mine told me about these attempts to smear me.
> Someone also began colluding with a freelance writer who was known not to be a fan of mine and, together, they set out to
> try to find corroborators to build a case to defame me. She found some sympathetic ears by painting herself as a victim and
> turned this into a campaign. The writer boldly started contacting my friends, acquaintances and even work colleagues – all
> of whom came to me to tell me this was happening and all of whom recognized it as a trumped up way to attack me and
> undermine my reputation. Everyone contacted would ask the same question, if I had engaged in non-consensual behavior
> why was the place to address this the media?
> The writer tried to peddle the story and, at one point, a major Canadian media publication did due diligence but never printed
> a story. One assumes they recognized these attempts to recast my sexual behaviour were fabrications. Still, the spectre of
> mud being flung onto the Internet where online outrage can demonize someone before facts can refute false allegations has
> been what I've had to live with.
> And this leads us to today and this moment. I’ve lived with the threat that this stuff would be thrown out there to defame me.
> And I would sue. But it would do the reputational damage to me it was intended to do (the ex has even tried to contact me to
> say that she now wishes to refute any of these categorically untrue allegations). But with me bringing it to light, in the coming
> days you will prospectively hear about how I engage in all kinds of unsavoury aggressive acts in the bedroom. And the implication
> may be made that this happens non-consensually. And that will be a lie. But it will be salacious gossip in a world driven by a
> hunger for "scandal". And there will be those who choose to believe it and to hate me or to laugh at me. And there will be an
> attempt to pile on. And there will be the claim that there are a few women involved (those who colluded with my ex) in an
> attempt to show a "pattern of behaviour". And it will be based in lies but damage will be done. But I am telling you this story in
> the hopes that the truth will, finally, conquer all.
> I have been open with the CBC about this since these categorically untrue allegations ramped up. I have never believed it was
> anyone's business what I do in my private affairs but I wanted my bosses to be aware that this attempt to smear me was out
> there. CBC has been part of the team of friends and lawyers assembled to deal with this for months. On Thursday I voluntarily
> showed evidence that everything I have done has been consensual. I did this in good faith and because I know, as I have always
> known, that I have nothing to hide. This when the CBC decided to fire me.
> CBC execs confirmed that the information provided showed that there was consent. In fact, they later said to me and my team
> that there is no question in their minds that there has always been consent. They said they’re not concerned about the legal side.
> But then they said that this type of sexual behavior was unbecoming of a prominent host on the CBC. They said that I was being
> dismissed for "the risk of the perception that may come from a story that could come out." To recap, I am being fired in my prime
> from the show I love and built and threw myself into for years because of what I do in my private life.
> Let me be the first to say that my tastes in the bedroom may not be palatable to some folks. They may be strange, enticing, weird,
> normal, or outright offensive to others. We all have our secret life. But that is my private life. That is my personal life. And no one,
> and certainly no employer, should have dominion over what people do consensually in their private life.
> And so, with no formal allegations, no formal complaints, no complaints, not one, to the HR department at the CBC (they told us
> they’d done a thorough check and were satisfied), and no charges, I have lost my job based on a campaign of vengeance. Two
> weeks after the death of my beautiful father I have been fired from the CBC because of what I do in my private life.
> I have loved the CBC. The Q team are the best group of people in the land. My colleagues and producers and on-air talent at the
> CBC are unparalleled in being some of the best in the business. I have always tried to be a good soldier and do a good job for my
> country. I am still in shock. But I am telling this story to you so the truth is heard. And to bring an end to the nightmare.


Wall O text?


----------



## bw66

mhammer said:


> The Star article goes beyond "bedroom stuff" and implies sexual harassment at work, which IS grounds for dismissal.


That's what I was thinking too. However, these are not the grounds upon which he was dismissed, so he may very well have a case. In fact it sounds like the CBC may have swept the alleged harassment under the carpet.



mhammer said:


> A big gigantic EEEWWWWWW, there. I really don't want to know these things about people.


Yup.


----------



## bagpipe

Cartcanuck said:


> I like that he is taking an aggressive, up front role in this


Sounds like he doesn't have a problem with being aggressive!

(Whoops. Forgot to add "allegedly"!).


----------



## boyscout

iaresee said:


> Jesse Brown's investigation is up on The Star now: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/10/26/cbc_fires_jian_ghomeshi_over_sex_allegations.html
> 
> Not good. Not good at all. Very bad behaviour on his part. That's too many similar stories for it to be a smear IMO. Sucks. I liked him.


Suggesting that the Toronto Star can be trusted to be the last word on this (or anything!) is like suggesting that Bernie Madoff can be trusted to return to the chairmanship of NASDAQ.

As far as we know, the women in the story didn't complain until an author showed up to shape this story into a sensational bombshell that would damage a widely-liked and possibly-desirable guy who may have dumped them. Not exactly granite foundation yet.

I'm among those who barely know who Ghomeshi is, but it's probably best to hold off the hatchets for now.


----------



## noman

Diablo said:


> Nah, you're worrying about nothing, liberals love homosexuality.


Even for you, this has to be the most moronic, idiotic thing you have written on this site. Keep blathering on so we can keep enjoying your neanderthal-like musings..........


----------



## mhammer

I was curious as to how the show would begin today. Substitute host Brent Bambury began with a very big sigh.


----------



## Voxguy76

Totally forgot about this band (thankfully) Didn't know he was a part of it. 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5MeQK7JtLpU


----------



## Diablo

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*



Cartcanuck said:


> On his personal life? Well.......whatever. I guess we'll see how it plays out. I like that he is taking an aggressive, up front role in this instead of trying to hide it all. Sadly, whether his odd activities in the bedroom were consensual or not may not matter because if he is accused then many people will crucify him as guilty regardless of what he says.


Absolutely true. unfortunately merely being accused of something can haunt someone their entire life. regardless of validity.


Cartcanuck said:


> He had to know that his position of "celebrity" put him at risk of something like this being exposed. This can't be a big surprise to him. It's they way things go for "celebrities". You don't get a private life. Nothing is beyond scrutiny.


Im sure he did...and yet there is still often a phenomena of celebrities that think they can get away with a lot of stuff that the average person couldn't.

- - - Updated - - -



noman said:


> Even for you, this has to be the most moronic, idiotic thing you have written on this site. Keep blathering on so we can keep enjoying your neanderthal-like musings..........


Yawn...and as usual for you, you bring nothing to the table but knee jerk simple minded hostilities. Such a fool doesn't even understand 3 words put together.
if liberals haven't been the stalwart defender/champion of homosexuals, who has, the far right? idiot.


----------



## gtrguy

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*

It amazes me how quickly threads on this board descend into name calling and nitpicking... it's 4ucking embarrassing but maybe I shouldn't be surprised by anything on the internet.


----------



## Diablo

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*



gtrguy said:


> It amazes me how quickly threads on this board descend into name calling and nitpicking... it's 4ucking embarrassing but maybe I shouldn't be surprised by anything on the internet.


I apologize for my part, but I do feel I was unnecessarily provoked.
In the future I will try to take a few deep breaths before responding to flamebait posts.


----------



## traynor_garnet

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*

It's time for this thread to halt. At this point we know the point of contention. Nobody here knows, or could know, anything more. If he is guilty of something let him be convicted, if he is innocent and being smeared, let him clear his name.

As for his sexual acts, other than the issue of consent, it doesn't matter what what type of stuff he/they were doing.


----------



## GuitarsCanada

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*



traynor_garnet said:


> It's time for this thread to halt. At this point we know the point of contention. Nobody here knows, or could know, anything more. If he is guilty of something let him be convicted, if he is innocent and being smeared, let him clear his name.
> 
> As for his sexual acts, other than the issue of consent, it doesn't matter what what type of stuff he/they were doing.


words of wisdom


----------



## mrmatt1972

iaresee said:


> Finally a CBC-produced drama I'm interested in!


It better be good, the production costs are going to be huge.


----------



## smorgdonkey

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*



traynor_garnet said:


> It's time for this thread to halt. At this point we know the point of contention. Nobody here knows, or could know, anything more. If he is guilty of something let him be convicted, if he is innocent and being smeared, let him clear his name.
> 
> As for his sexual acts, other than the issue of consent, it doesn't matter what what type of stuff he/they were doing.





GuitarsCanada said:


> words of wisdom


+1

...and after having Steve in charge for as long as he has been, *I will say that I am a Liberal*.


----------



## Guest

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*



smorgdonkey said:


> .. *I will say that I am a Liberal*.


You have my sympathies. lol.


----------



## Robboman

I'd never heard of this guy til this morning. Now I just know he's some perv who used to work for CBC, from reading his own words. 

This.. for sure:


> A big gigantic EEEWWWWWW, there. I really don't want to know these things about people.


----------



## smorgdonkey

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*



laristotle said:


> You have my sympathies. lol.


Thanks!! I need it as I am sending my sympathies to every Canadian since 2006!


----------



## Jim DaddyO

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*

Slightly familiar with Jian. As far as I know he did his job well, end of story as far as his employer goes (CBC), other than reporting a human interest story. I have not heard of any charges or convictions against him, his bedroom is none of my business, and I am not interested in it. I don't need to see all the copies of his "confession" all over the web, I didn't get through it the first time. There are other public figures who's personal lives are a horror story, yet retain their position, (coughfordcough) why is this any different?


----------



## smorgdonkey

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*

For the record, I think Jian is an excellent interviewer who learns/researches his subject(s) and consistently comes up with unique questions that often surprise, and almost always stimulate great discussion between the guest(s) and himself.

As for the admission/confession, he must have been quite certain that it would be used against him to bring it all out like he did.


----------



## mhammer

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*

I suspect he's a little messed up from his father's passing. And to hear him talk about his dad in past, "family honour" is a bit of a deal. That is not to say that his post necessarily _restored_ "family honour". But I can see why the notion of his name (and by extension, his late father's) being besmirched irked particularly at this time. I don't know that there is any "good" time to bring up such matters, but this was certainly not the best time.


----------



## keto

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*

I think he's naive and wasting his money to think he can win the lawsuit.

I love his interview style, he obviously cares, does deep research, and brings out the best in many of the interviewees. That said, I've pretty much lost interest in anything he has to say or do going forward.


----------



## smorgdonkey

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*

I also have read this which was published June 10, 2013:
http://www.xojane.com/it-happened-to-me/non-date

It seems very realistic and leads me to believe that there is definitely more to the story. I have never had a woman tell a story like that about me because I have never treated a woman like that. 

Anyway, no judge or jury here but just because I think he's a talented interviewer (his band SUCKED) certainly doesn't get him a free pass from me particularly when a major newspaper can say this: 
"* The three women interviewed by the Star allege that Ghomeshi physically attacked them on dates without consent. They allege he struck them with a closed fist or open hand; bit them; choked them until they almost passed out; covered their nose and mouth so that they had difficulty breathing; and that they were verbally abused during and after sex. 
**A fourth woman, who worked at CBC, said Ghomeshi told her at work: “I want to hate f--- you.”* ".


----------



## Krelf

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*

*If* what they say is true, he _could_ be one step away from being a rapist and that is what is likely scaring the CBC. Being aware that the BBC has gone through all kinds of shit with Jimmy Savile and others, I believe the CBC is opting to take it on the chin now, and not roll the dice regarding his future conduct. There is also the possibility of more stuff coming to the surface and the CBC probably wants him out in case it does.


----------



## Diablo

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*



Krelf said:


> *If* what they say is true, he _could_ be one step away from being a rapist and that is what is likely scaring the CBC. Being aware that the BBC has gone through all kinds of shit with Jimmy Savile and others, I believe the CBC is opting to take it on the chin now, and not roll the dice regarding his future conduct. There is also the possibility of more stuff coming to the surface and the CBC probably wants him out in case it does.


Ya, especially if as Smorg says, hes doing it at work. In addition to being an HR nightmare at the CBC, it lends support to the other allegations. And that may have been the final straw.
I don't think someone should be punished at work for what they do in their private lives, but if theyre bringing that sort of behavior and inappropriate conduct into the office with them, it does make it the employers problem to deal with.


----------



## davetcan

this is the bit I wonder about. If he figures this warning means consent he's got a problem.

Another woman, who described a similar alleged attack, said that in the lead-up to their date Ghomeshi “warned me he would be aggressive.”

“I thought this meant he would want to pull my hair and have rough sex. He reassured me that I wouldn’t be forced. (Later) he attacked me. Choked me. Hit me like I didn’t know men hit women. I submitted.”


----------



## boyscout

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*



keto said:


> <snip> I love his interview style, he obviously cares, does deep research, and *brings out the best in many of the interviewees*. That said, I've pretty much lost interest in anything he has to say or do going forward.


... and the worst in at least one of them:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJWS6qyy7bw

That said, I've pretty much lost interest in anything Billy Bob Thornton does going forward. A little kink in the bedroom - IF that's all it was, we don't know - is easier to accept than Thornton's monumental rudeness during the interview. Ghomeshi's unusual skill in handling it is a reason not to throw him out of the boat before the facts are established.


----------



## Diablo

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*



boyscout said:


> ... and the worst in at least one of them:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJWS6qyy7bw
> 
> That said, I've pretty much lost interest in anything Billy Bob Thornton does going forward. A little kink in the bedroom - IF that's all it was, we don't know - is easier to accept than Thornton's monumental rudeness during the interview. Ghomeshi's unusual skill in handling it is a reason not to throw him out of the boat before the facts are established.


I don't think he showed much skill in that one. 
BBT was pompous and difficult, no doubt.
JG did in a manner of speaking, ambush him, even if the material (acting) seems hardly worth getting upset about- although I can see why BBT would have set those terms, out of respect for his band mates, so that his celeb status doesn't steal the show and have them sitting around quietly like fools while he answers questions about his movies and Angelina Jolie.
nonethless, JG never turned the interview around, it remained uncomfortable till the end. He stepped on one landmine after another. Nor did he get any useful info out of it.
it all came across as kind of "college radio", which IMO is where JG belongs.
but I know we all get gravitate to different radio personalities. I personally like Bill Watters and Bob Mccown, who I know a lot of ppl strongly dislike as well.


----------



## Milkman

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*



boyscout said:


> ... and the worst in at least one of them:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJWS6qyy7bw
> 
> That said, I've pretty much lost interest in anything Billy Bob Thornton does going forward. A little kink in the bedroom - IF that's all it was, we don't know - is easier to accept than Thornton's monumental rudeness during the interview. Ghomeshi's unusual skill in handling it is a reason not to throw him out of the boat before the facts are established.


I've seen Thornton act equally rude and pissy in other interviews. It's not Ghomeshi in this case. Thornton is an ass. He may be talented, but....


----------



## boyscout

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*



smorgdonkey said:


> I also have read this which was published June 10, 2013:
> http://www.xojane.com/it-happened-to-me/non-date <snip>


I just read it. Pretty disturbing, and *apparently* published long before any of the more-recent and possibly-engineered story broke.

<sigh> Looking more like ANOTHER case of a big-headed star letting his little head do the thinking for him. But we don't know yet.


----------



## mhammer

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*

Comedic legend Lenny Bruce used to cite a Yiddish proverb (or at least say he was doing so) that went something like this: When the penis stands up, the head goes in the ground. I.E., sexual arousal tends to push aside good reasoning.


----------



## JHarasym

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*

Here's an interesting take on why this story is disturbing to many Canadians: http://www.vulture.com/2014/10/why-...r-the-cbc-sex-scandal.html?mid=facebook_nymag


----------



## Diablo

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*



boyscout said:


> I just read it. Pretty disturbing, and *apparently* published long before any of the more-recent and possibly-engineered story broke.
> 
> <sigh> Looking more like ANOTHER case of a big-headed star letting his little head do the thinking for him. But we don't know yet.


In fairness, I don't believe the blogger ever said the guy in the story was JG. It was speculated by the commenters.

"Keith" certainly sounds like an ego maniac though.
This blog alone (ie not the punching/choking stuff) doesn't really surprise me. Just about every girl I dated told me about encounters with guys like that, that couldn't take no for an answer and thought the whole chase/rebuff thing was part of "the game"...and I went out with a group of co-workers once and one of the guys acted that way as well.


----------



## butterknucket

A friend of mine read his Facebook statement and commented, "That's just a hot mess!"


----------



## JHarasym

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*



Milkman said:


> I've seen Thornton act equally rude and pissy in other interviews. It's not Ghomeshi in this case. Thornton is an ass. He may be talented, but....


I saw an interview Billy Bob did on late night TV shortly after the CBC interview. 
He stated he regularly acted like that, so what's the big deal? 
In other words, "I know I'm an asshole, so sue me."


----------



## TubeStack

JHarasym said:


> Here's an interesting take on why this story is disturbing to many Canadians: http://www.vulture.com/2014/10/why-...r-the-cbc-sex-scandal.html?mid=facebook_nymag


Seems like the writer is generalizing quite a bit and placing an over-importance on the value of media/CBC to all Canadians. I know plenty of people who don't care about the CBC and don't know who Ghomeshi is (though I listen to CBC and Gomeshi a lot, myself). 

It sounds like he thinks his experience is everyone's experience.


----------



## smorgdonkey

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*



Diablo said:


> This blog alone (ie not the punching/choking stuff) doesn't really surprise me. Just about every girl I dated told me about encounters with guys like that, that couldn't take no for an answer and thought the whole chase/rebuff thing was part of "the game"...and I went out with a group of co-workers once and one of the guys acted that way as well.


Indeed, and many people don't like the confrontation of telling someone to F-off or that they are an a-hole and avoid it at all costs. So, I look at the way that she described how she (seemingly) didn't want to offend and how his persistence (also seemingly) allowed him to get her into his car. Even though it wasn't horrible after that point (the horrible stuff from my perspective happened earlier), it made me think about the girls who are even a little more meek and how much worse it is for them in situations like that.

Now, I am attracted to women in their 20s too (ok...after they speak, I am only attracted to a few of the ones that I initially have attraction for) but I never come on to them - they have to show me that they have attraction for me prior to any sort of reciprocation.* I guess that is because I have respect for people. Many people think that respect has to be earned but I believe that respect should be given as a default and that a person can lose it or gain a higher level via their actions.*

Default respect people. I know, it sounds like 'common sense' doesn't it? We know how the world seems to lack that too right? Wouldn't it be much better if we all had both?


----------



## smorgdonkey

TubeStack said:


> Seems like the writer is generalizing quite a bit and placing an over-importance on the value of media/CBC to all Canadians. I know plenty of people who don't care about the CBC and don't know who Ghomeshi is (though I listen to CBC and Gomeshi a lot, myself).
> 
> It sounds like he thinks his experience is everyone's experience.


I agree Tube...I enjoy the CBC a lot and I think that if it were to be shut down or stripped-away that it would be a great loss. I even think that people who don't listen to CBC are missing out on a lot but that doesn't change the fact that many people don't listen nor care about it.


----------



## Guest

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*



smorgdonkey said:


> *I guess that is because I have respect for people. Many people think that respect has to be earned but I believe that respect should be given as a default and that a person can lose it or gain a higher level via their actions.*


I'm the same. Everyone get's my respect. 100%. 
It's up to them to keep it there.


----------



## smorgdonkey

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*



laristotle said:


> I'm the same. Everyone get's my respect. 100%.
> It's up to them to keep it there.


Yes. Trust is earned, respect should already be there.






Except the damn Liberals.


----------



## Jimmy_D

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*

You guys sound like... most of my teachers, my cub and scout leaders, our minister, my parents, my friends parents... wait... they're all dead, hmmm


----------



## mhammer

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*



JHarasym said:


> Here's an interesting take on why this story is disturbing to many Canadians: http://www.vulture.com/2014/10/why-...r-the-cbc-sex-scandal.html?mid=facebook_nymag


I think the writer astutely captured a) the importance of CBC radio to Canadians, and b) why the Ghomeshi thing will only seem important to a small segment of Canadians, and perhaps only for a short while. Now, if Stuart MacLean were to turn out to be a pedophile, or Peter Mansbridge had all his money in a Cayman Islands account, or Sheilagh Rogers turned tricks in Vancouver alleyways for crack-money, or Rex Murphy was spotted stealing tips that others had left on tables, THAT would be something.


----------



## smorgdonkey

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*



Jimmy_D said:


> You guys sound like... most of my teachers, my cub and scout leaders, our minister, my parents, my friends parents... wait... they're all dead, hmmm


That means...


*YOU'RE OLD!!!*


----------



## shoretyus

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*

Interesting take on the whole situation

http://freethepresscanada.org/2014/10/28/toronto-star-loses-its-religion-for-jian-ghomeshi/


----------



## Adcandour

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*

For the love of Gob

I read this whole fvcking thread and have ZERO to contribute. I'm so upset with myself right now.


----------



## jayoldschool

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*

Here's my 2c:

This is the biggest example of someone desperately trying to get out ahead of a story that I have ever seen. The open letter is what a lawyer told him to say. That means the real details will be significantly more "interesting".


----------



## smorgdonkey

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*



shoretyus said:


> Interesting take on the whole situation
> 
> http://freethepresscanada.org/2014/10/28/toronto-star-loses-its-religion-for-jian-ghomeshi/



and yes, story aside, Jesse Brown is a scuz.



jayoldschool said:


> This is the biggest example of someone desperately trying to get out ahead of a story that I have ever seen. The open letter is what a lawyer told him to say. That means the real details will be significantly more "interesting".


Agree 100%.


----------



## GuitarsCanada

Dude was the guest speaker at my sons graduation a few years back out of Humber. Frankly I had never heard of him before that. He gave a great motivational speech that day and I really enjoyed it. We will see where he ends up


----------



## shoretyus

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*

Here's the legal argument
http://business.financialpost.com/2014/10/28/jian-ghomseshi-lawsuit-cbc/



jayoldschool said:


> Here's my 2c:
> 
> This is the biggest example of someone desperately trying to get out ahead of a story that I have ever seen. The open letter is what a lawyer told him to say. That means the real details will be significantly more "interesting".


----------



## cheezyridr

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*

i can only use previous experience as a yardstick to measure what i might think of the case.

i've dated my share of women, i was a bachelor a long time between wives. there were a couple who asked for that sort of thing. i made it clear that there would never be anything remotely like that going on in my house. ever. i've one plenty of dumb stuff, but anyone who can't smell the trap has issues of one kind or another. 


there are some people i've known very well who were into that sorta thing. all of them were predators. one of them was a woman. some i met in juvenile hall. i know what i know because i've seen it in life. every one of the guys had forced someone. if the guy is telling you he's into that stuff, punching a woman, spitting on her, choking her, he's got issues. those issues will absolutely 100% of the time always spill into other parts of their lives. if i had a company, and found out i had an employee like that he would be gone as fast as i could possibly make it happen, and the end would justify the means afaic. if i had to make up a weird other reason, so be it. no way would i tolerate a fox in the henhouse


----------



## TubeStack

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/201...t_of_violence_sexual_abuse_or_harassment.html One woman, actor Lucy DeCoutere, alleges she was slapped and choked without her consent


----------



## GuitarsCanada

TubeStack said:


> http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/201...t_of_violence_sexual_abuse_or_harassment.html One woman, actor Lucy DeCoutere, alleges she was slapped and choked without her consent


wow, the stories are almost identical. This guy is a super freak and this behavior borderlines on criminal. At the very least he needs to be beaten to a pulp


----------



## TubeStack

GuitarsCanada said:


> wow, the stories are almost identical...


Yes, at one point I thought was rereading the same section by accident, but it was the identical story from a different woman.


----------



## shoretyus

It seems to be getting ugly quickly


----------



## Milkman

As others have observed, it seems like he's trying to get ahead of the story but I think he's going to lose big.

Anyone who takes pleasure in causing pain or humiliation to others needs a dose of his own medicine (unless he also enjoys that).

Prison is a good place to get such "love".

Too bad really. I enjoyed his interviews.


----------



## starjag

Milkman said:


> Too bad really. I enjoyed his interviews.


I'm more concerned about the victims. Prison is where this guy needs to be.


----------



## mhammer

"Ow!" means "no".


----------



## surlybastard

This is pretty hysterical in retrospect : https://twitter.com/jianghomeshi/status/146313744778137600?s=07


----------



## Jimmy_D

1. where are the cops on this one, he should be busted by now.
2. this guy is one sick puppy and it figures he worked for the cbc.
3. ricky's gonna be pissed.


----------



## mhammer

1) People have to press charges for the cops to be involved, and I don't believe anyone has done so yet.

2) Why the assumption that the CBC and unsavoury characters are somehow a "natural fit"?

3) Took me a minute but I finally figured out who the "Ricky" was.


----------



## rollingdam

I guess Ghomeshi is going to have a tough time getting a date these days.


----------



## Guest

GuitarsCanada said:


> At the very least he needs to be beaten to a pulp





Milkman said:


> Anyone who takes pleasure in causing pain or humiliation to others needs a dose of his own medicine (unless he also enjoys that).










Ooooh .. hurt me, hurt me.


----------



## Diablo

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*



mhammer said:


> 1)* People have to press charges for the cops to be involved, and I don't believe anyone has done so yet.
> *
> 2) Why the assumption that the CBC and unsavoury characters are somehow a "natural fit"?
> 
> 3) Took me a minute but I finally figured out who the "Ricky" was.


Re: 1) Are you sure about that? Its different here than in the states. Here, I don't think it matters if you press charges, but likely a report needs to be filed. The police can press charges themselves.
I know that in a domestic dispute situation in the US if the cops show up, and the wife says "ya he hit me, but I don't want to press charges" the cops will roll their eyes and leave. But here, if the woman says the same thing, the cops will say "sorry, im charging him with x". Happened to an ex girlfriends parents a long time ago.

I still have no idea who Ricky is? Trailer park boys reference?

- - - Updated - - -



rollingdam said:


> I guess Ghomeshi is going to have a tough time getting a date these days.


hahaha....people are funny. Both Homolka and Bernardo have gotten re-married, and I believe OJ had lots of dates as well so JGs chances of finding another freak with a bdsm/celebrity fetish are pretty good.


----------



## Jimmy_D

mhammer said:


> 1) People have to press charges for the cops to be involved, and I don't believe anyone has done so yet.
> 
> 2) Why the assumption that the CBC and unsavoury characters are somehow a "natural fit"?
> 
> 3) Took me a minute but I finally figured out who the "Ricky" was.


1. better check again, the cops charge people based on evidence.

2. just seems right to me.

3. ricky... you know, lucy's boyfriend... lucy the one gomeshi slapped around, (today's news).


----------



## nonreverb

The mere fact that you generally associate the CBC with deviant characters just blew any credibility you may have had right out the window....just sayin'



Jimmy_D said:


> 1. better check again, the cops charge people based on evidence.
> 
> 2. just seems right to me.
> 
> 3. ricky... you know, lucy's boyfriend... lucy the one gomeshi slapped around, (today's news).


----------



## mhammer

Yeah, that Mr. Dressup, and Earl Cameron, and Don Messer, and the Friendly Giant. Man, what a buncha lowlifes!


----------



## Jimmy_D

Why do you guys have to be so sensitive, I don’t need any credibility to have an opinion on what at least half of the country refers to as “the corpse”... no point in trying to derail this one simply because a single person has stated and opinion which is reflected by many Canadians.

The cbc bigwigs knew about this guy and the issues raised by the star reporter for months and did nothing until it became public, that’s not too cool and it’s typical of a king sized government corp, like it or not that’s reality to most people who prior to the news becoming public, hadn’t tune in cbc radio since the ‘70s thought that jian gomeshi was some genetic disorder or a pasta dish.

And Hammer, I hate to break it to you but the '60s are over and have been for some time.


----------



## Milkman

mhammer said:


> Yeah, that Mr. Dressup, and Earl Cameron, and Don Messer, and the Friendly Giant. Man, what a buncha lowlifes!



Mr. Dressup and the Friendly Giant were favourites in my home. We also watched Don Messer's Jubilee often.

I was always a big fan of Rusty the Rooster. He played a mean accordian as I recall.


----------



## smorgdonkey

Jimmy_D said:


> an opinion on what at least half of the country refers to as “the corpse”...


That's Canada P ost as far as I know. The employees have been calling it that for years.



Diablo said:


> hahaha....people are funny. Both Homolka and Bernardo have gotten re-married, and I believe OJ had lots of dates as well so JGs chances of finding another freak with a bdsm/celebrity fetish are pretty good.


I bet his personal life heats up. All of the freaks who want that will know exactly where to get it - not to mention, many of the people who are damaged from previous trauma end up gravitating toward people like that too so even some who don't want it will be there.


I bet Elvira Kurt is extra happy that she's gay now and I bet many of his female guests who he's gushed over during interviews are extra creeped-the-F-out now too.


----------



## mhammer

Milkman said:


> I was always a big fan of Rusty the Rooster. He played a mean accordian as I recall.


Yeah, but those two kittens who he used to play with? Drug addicts. And those little furry bastards got Suzy from Chez Hélene hooked. "Wanna come over to our place and hear some Bach?" they asked her. Yeah sure, more like the "Brandenburg nose concertos".


----------



## bluzfish

Oh, don't get me started with Chez Helene... I was just a kid but that sexy French voice... ooh, la la!!! I've had a thing for French girls ever since.


----------



## smorgdonkey

By Owen Pallet:

I was challenged by a friend to say something about the recent allegations against Jian Ghomeshi.
Jian is my friend. I have appeared twice on Q. But there is no grey area here. Three women have been beaten by Jian Ghomeshi.

I have sat with Jian over drinks and discussed our respective anxiety disorders. We have been photographed hugging on camera.

Just ten days ago, I helped him find musicians for his father’s funeral. Three women have said that Jian beat them without their consent. “We will never really know what happened.” Yes we do. Jian beat, at the very least, three women. Three women said so. “They were jilted exes.” Maybe so. They were beaten by Jian.
“They were freelance writers looking to get ahead.” Three women were beaten by Jian Ghomeshi.
At no point here will I ever give my friend Jian’s version of the truth more creedence than the version of the truth offered up by three women. Anonymity does not mean these women do not exist.

“They were engaged in BDSM role-play.” This: this is something I need to talk about.
The beauty of BDSM relationships is that the power is always in the hands of the sub. BDSM and choke play is a subversion of male violence. To hear that anybody has been abusing the BDSM power relationship for the purpose of engaging in non-consensual violence-against-women is horrifying. That is not the point of BDSM. BDSM is in fact about the exact opposite thing. It is about repurposing acts of violence into creating a power dynamic of fucking EQUALITY.

As for the rest. I have seen my Facebook feed littered with comments about how “for years we’ve known Jian to be a shady character.” I too have heard endless rumours that he’s been a bad date, and have heard stories of shadiness and strange behaviour. I have heard about his ridiculous pick-up lines and have (to my shame) tittered about them with my friends. But I have never heard, until today, that Jian Ghomeshi beats women.
I am skeptical of arts reporting. I am skeptical of Canadian journalism. I am sensitive toward shaming of people who are so-called sexual deviants.

But let’s be clear. Whether the court decides that predatory men are punished or exonerated does not silence the voices of the victims. It does not make victims liars.
Whether our culture continues to celebrate the works of predatory men is another issue. It does not silence the voices of the victims.

Jian Ghomeshi is my friend, and Jian Ghomeshi beats women. How our friendship will continue remains to be seen.


----------



## nonreverb

Understood....but what does that have to do with the thread? and how many other corps/ businesses have been in the same situation and done exactly the same thing....definitely not unique to CBC. Sounds like it's personal...




Jimmy_D said:


> Why do you guys have to be so sensitive, I don’t need any credibility to have an opinion on what at least half of the country refers to as “the corpse”... no point in trying to derail this one simply because a single person has stated and opinion which is reflected by many Canadians.
> 
> The cbc bigwigs knew about this guy and the issues raised by the star reporter for months and did nothing until it became public, that’s not too cool and it’s typical of a king sized government corp, like it or not that’s reality to most people who prior to the news becoming public, hadn’t tune in cbc radio since the ‘70s thought that jian gomeshi was some genetic disorder or a pasta dish.
> 
> And Hammer, I hate to break it to you but the '60s are over and have been for some time.


----------



## smorgdonkey

He really is an egomaniac and those sort of people always feel like they are untouchable.

"I am really famous"
"I have a book"
"extra staff have been brought on because I am here"
"you are lucky to be with me"

What a whack job.

I used to discuss with a friend of mine how he'd always say one of the following, in his interviews/on his show:

#1 The Beatles
#2 The Stones (but mostly The Beatles)
#3 his experiences in a band
#4 his experiences touring

It was like "ok, which will it be tonight?" and sometimes "whoah!! BOTH!" or something like that...

and we'd just joke a bit about how he was a little self-absorbed. Obviously, I had never expected him to be a real sicko like these claims...and there is no way that all of these unassociated people 'get together to create a smear campaign'.


----------



## cheezyridr

smorgdonkey said:


> By Owen Pallet:
> 
> The beauty of BDSM relationships is that the power is always in the hands of the sub. BDSM and choke play is a subversion of male violence. To hear that anybody has been abusing the BDSM power relationship for the purpose of engaging in non-consensual violence-against-women is horrifying. That is not the point of BDSM. BDSM is in fact about the exact opposite thing. It is about repurposing acts of violence into creating a power dynamic of fucking EQUALITY.



one of the biggest bullshit lies you'll ever see.


----------



## Diablo

cheezyridr said:


> one of the biggest bullshit lies you'll ever see.


Im with you on that one.

besides, its not the bdsm play that is at issue.
its the consent/lack of it, in this particular story.
This pretentious, self-absorbed unaware scumbag is simply trying to soften the story by confusing consensual bdsm play with what is more similar to date-rape.


----------



## nonreverb

Based on what is being said now, I tend to agree....It makes sense now why he disseminated that FB post so quick to try and frame the issue to his advantage.....totally miscalculated his odds and didn't see the blowback coming. Smacks of a wee bit of self righteous arrogance to the average Canadian.IMO 



Diablo said:


> Im with you on that one.
> 
> besides, its not the bdsm play that is at issue.
> its the consent/lack of it, in this particular story.
> This pretentious, self-absorbed unaware scumbag is simply trying to soften the story by confusing consensual bdsm play with what is more similar to date-rape.


----------



## Cartcanuck

Yep. It seems that the more that is reported, the more the BDSM "explanation" is just a smoke screen for "I like to smack women around". If what is being said about him is true, hopefully he has his day in court........and a longer time in jail.


----------



## mrmatt1972

My thoughts about this thing have done a complete 180. At first I was thinking CBC was guilty of wrongful dismissal, but the more accounts I've read, the more I see he's an abusive, misoginistic prick. I don't know the law, I know he hasn't been formally charged, but CBC seems to be in the right at this point.


----------



## Guest

Navigator, crisis communication PR specialists, have just dropped him: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/10/30/jian_ghomeshi_issues_statement_on_allegations.html


----------



## nonreverb

Sh*t's gonna hit the no-longer occluded fan now...



iaresee said:


> Navigator, crisis communication PR specialists, have just dropped him: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/10/30/jian_ghomeshi_issues_statement_on_allegations.html


----------



## deadear

Nothing like the scorn of a jilted ex. He has never been charged with any crime. All these women comming out of the wood work should have pressed charges after the incidents. Not get together for a hen party and compare notes to trump something up.


----------



## Jimmy_D

Toronto 5 pm news; chief Blair said they need either proof (which without a complaint would be photo or video evidence) or an actual complaint to investigate, but they won't "force" anyone to come forward. My guess he's busted within a week at the most.

Deadear... tell me you're trolling with that post.


----------



## bagpipe

iaresee said:


> Navigator, *crisis communication PR specialists*, have just dropped him: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/10/30/jian_ghomeshi_issues_statement_on_allegations.html


Exactly. You know when a company like this drops you, and tries to distance itself from you, that you're in some serious shit.


----------



## GuitarsCanada

Lets put it this way. He is finished. He will drift off into total obscurity and never be heard from again. WFUK in Istanbul would not pick him up to do the Sunday farm report. He had his 15 minutes and clearly abused it to satisfy his "desires". Slapping a woman in the face or punching her in any way that produces a hard on is deranged in my opinion. It's not a game and its not role playing. It's sick and I urge anyone out there that sees themselves in the mirror with these same feelings to seek help immediately. It is not healthy. You can have fun without violence. If for some bizarre circumstance you actually find a partner that likes to be slapped and punched during sex then bring them along to the psychiatrist when you go to visit because they have issues too.


----------



## jayoldschool

If you can't PAY a PR firm to take you as a client... you might have a problem.


----------



## Adcandour

jayoldschool said:


> If you can't PAY a PR firm to take you as a client... you might have a problem.


Reminds me of Nathan. He couldn't get a PR guy (4:25).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NO8V72pDw1o&feature=youtu.be


----------



## smorgdonkey

The stats on how many sexual assaults which are reported which end up getting a conviction is ridiculous. ..something like 3 in 1000...so THAT'S why they didn't report it at the time-a big part of it anyway. 

I hope they have public book burnings of his memoir.


----------



## bluzfish

It makes me wonder how many more we'll never hear about because the victims may be thinking that 10 accusations should get the bastard what he deserves and just not want to get into the whole trial ordeal or can't take the time off work to travel or any number of other reasons. I salute the courage of the women who have come forward but I would understand why many other victims won't or can't.


----------



## cheezyridr

deadear said:


> Nothing like the scorn of a jilted ex. He has never been charged with any crime. All these women comming out of the wood work should have pressed charges after the incidents. Not get together for a hen party and compare notes to trump something up.




wow - i mean, i'll admit i can be pretty insensitive at times. but holy shit, did you even think before you typed that? can you not think of half a dozen reasons why women might not come forward in such a case? i suppose it's possible that you really could be that clueless, but honestly it's hard to imagine for me. i won't bother to list any for you. if you want to, you'll figure it out on your own. unless maybe you feel for him because of some more fraternal reason


----------



## Diablo

deadear said:


> Nothing like the scorn of a jilted ex. He has never been charged with any crime. All these women comming out of the wood work should have pressed charges after the incidents. Not get together for a hen party and compare notes to trump something up.


Its a conspiracy!!!
"all these women" got together and said "which douchey soothing-voiced c-list celeb can we destroy?".
<eye roll>
I bet if we were talking about a black NFL player, youd be less likely to think something was trumped up.


----------



## bagpipe

deadear said:


> He has never been charged with any crime. All these women comming out of the wood work should have pressed charges after the incidents. Not get together for a hen party and compare notes to trump something up.












11111111111


----------



## Guest

deadear said:


> Nothing like the scorn of a jilted ex. He has never been charged with any crime. All these women comming out of the wood work should have pressed charges after the incidents. Not get together for a hen party and compare notes to trump something up.


Nice to see others calling you out for what is a deplorable attitude here. Allowing nonsense like this to fester without comment only further destroys assault victim's ability to speak up when it happens. You're part of the problem.


----------



## Guest

Also worth noting: the complete lack of _consensual_ partners coming to his defense. I find that telling.


----------



## mhammer

Personally, I'd like the story to go away quietly, and wish that the CBC would stop leading with it. I no more want to hear about the sexual proclivities of radio personalities than I would want to see nude sunbathing pics of the Queen, or listen to the story of the terrible hemorrhoid problems of the person waiting for the bus beside me.

The guy was seemingly good at his job, but bad at life. How bad is not for me to judge. Our niece works in the same Front St. building, for the Corporation, on websites, and commented on her facebook page (or at least so my wife told me) that JG had a penchant for hitting on women around the office much younger than himself. That, in itself, is not immoral, but neither is it anything to be proud of, or a sign of maturity.

As for the lack of consensual partners coming forward, I doubt that any would, since being pushed around, beaten, or humiliated, and enjoying or overlooking it, is not the sort of thing anyone would likely want to admit to. Moreover, Ghomeshi has been so vilified in the press over this past week, that no one wants the taint accompanying a public association with him, even IF they are on his side, and see no sound reason to eschew their affiliation. Hell, I bet the band would get a different drummer if they ever got back together.

What I find more interesting is that the corporation probably had to think about it for awhile before deciding to burn the bridge. As I may have noted earlier, they have a fairly large archive of audio and video recordings of excellent interviews with fascinating people that he did, and they can't just declare him persona non grata and still use that material...and that's an awful lot of really good material. Cripes, imagine if Rick Mercer was found in Thailand, in the "company" of a 12 year-old boy (and I don't wish to impute anything about him, I only select that because he is a very likeable CBC personality, affiliated with them for a long time). What the hell would they do? So they had to ponder whether it was more awkward to retain him_ in spite of _allegations coming out, or completely sever any and all ties_ because _of them, and forfeit their investment. I suspect it took a while to come to a decision.


----------



## Diablo

mhammer said:


> Personally, I'd like the story to go away quietly, and wish that the CBC would stop leading with it. I no more want to hear about the sexual proclivities of radio personalities than I would want to see nude sunbathing pics of the Queen, or listen to the story of the terrible hemorrhoid problems of the person waiting for the bus beside me.
> 
> The guy was seemingly good at his job, but bad at life. How bad is not for me to judge. Our niece works in the same Front St. building, for the Corporation, on websites, and commented on her facebook page (or at least so my wife told me) that JG had a penchant for hitting on women around the office much younger than himself.


In cases like this, it is kind of ignorant to want to brush it under the carpet. TBH, im a little surprised by your comments.
If you found out it was your niece or daughter who was on one of these "dates" would you want it all to go away quietly? I'll tell you, if it were my daughter, the lead story would be "JG found stumbling around in a ditch missing all his teeth".

Dismissing it all as "bad at life" is kind of trivializing it. Who cares if he was good at his job? Phil Spector was GREAT at his job. And a scumbag. 
To me, its a bit of a 1950's sensibility. "I sure wish that martin luther king guy would just go away quietly and stop creating all this unrest". It easy to say, Mark, when you likely have nor ever been in a situation as the one these uppity girls are casting light upon. In spite of JG's spin, this isn't 50 Shades of Grey Canada. Noones forcing you to read anything with the name Jian Gomeshi in it. Shouldn't be hard to filter stories out from stories about all the other Jian Gomeshi's out there.

Also, lets not forget the optics if the CBC stopped reporting on the story. In many eyes it would appear as though theyre integrity had been compromised.

Bottomline: JG threw away any chance of the story going away quietly with his stupid, self-righteous lawsuit.


----------



## deadear

Sorry folks I will give the man his day in court. I will not contribute to his demise by reading and believing media reports. I was not there were You ?


----------



## mhammer

Diablo said:


> In cases like this, it is kind of ignorant to want to brush it under the carpet. TBH, im a little surprised by your comments.
> If you found out it was your niece or daughter who was on one of these "dates" would you want it all to go away quietly? I'll tell you, if it were my daughter, the lead story would be "JG found stumbling around in a ditch missing all his teeth".
> 
> Dismissing it all as "bad at life" is kind of trivializing it. Who cares if he was good at his job? Phil Spector was GREAT at his job. And a scumbag.
> To me, its a bit of a 1950's sensibility. "I sure wish that martin luther king guy would just go away quietly and stop creating all this unrest". It easy to say, Mark, when you likely have nor ever been in a situation as the one these uppity girls are casting light upon. In spite of JG's spin, this isn't 50 Shades of Grey Canada. Noones forcing you to read anything with the name Jian Gomeshi in it. Shouldn't be hard to filter stories out from stories about all the other Jian Gomeshi's out there.
> 
> Also, lets not forget the optics if the CBC stopped reporting on the story. In many eyes it would appear as though theyre integrity had been compromised.
> 
> Bottomline: JG threw away any chance of the story going away quietly with his stupid, self-righteous lawsuit.


But there's ways of doing it, and ways of doing it. There's a whole frigging world out there, chock full of international crises, remarkable discoveries, and all manner of things far more important than this. Certainly don't cover it up or ignore it on the news, and all plaintiffs should do what needs to be done, but it is NOT "the lead story" on The World at Six. If anything, I'm more offended that it is deemed as more newsworthy than all of that other stuff. Although, being about_ Toronto,_ I suppose that makes it just the most important thing in the world to folks at the Globe and Mail, Star, Sun, and CBC, now, doesn't it?


----------



## Diablo

mhammer said:


> But there's ways of doing it, and ways of doing it. There's a whole frigging world out there, chock full of international crises, remarkable discoveries, and all manner of things far more important than this. Certainly don't cover it up or ignore it on the news, and all plaintiffs should do what needs to be done, but it is NOT "the lead story" on The World at Six. If anything, I'm more offended that it is deemed as more newsworthy than all of that other stuff. Although, being about_ Toronto,_ I suppose that makes it just the most important thing in the world to folks at the Globe and Mail, Star, Sun, and CBC, now, doesn't it?


Fair enough.
im not sure how the media prioritizes stories ie local vs global. theres some magic factor they must use. And of course, sex/sleaze sells.
I personally don't watch local news for that reason. housefires, car accidents and the occasional minor political scandal seem to dominate. But that's what theyre there for.
For more important stuff, theres always CNN (if you can get past the American centrism), BBC, etc.
TBH, for me, the JG story was welcomed. I got really tired of the unfortunate Ottawa shooting story, which started to focus more on the mans dog than on his family, as I guess ppl are more sympathetic to animals? 

And I think in the JG story, the CBC is being somewhat opportunistic in being able to paint the picture in what way serves them best, as there are outstanding legal proceedings they are involved in. There is a certain conflict of interest here, lets not forget. But life isn't fair.


----------



## Jimmy_D

deadear said:


> Sorry folks I will give the man his day in court. I will not contribute to his demise by reading and believing media reports. I was not there were You ?


I guess you haven't been reading about this one so I'll fill you in. Giving a guy his day in court is what you do when there's zero to go on, not when the similar-fact evidence has already drowned him.

There will be no day in civil court as he'll withdraw it before a judge throws it out and awards costs to the cbc, there will probably be a day in criminal court shortly and at some point he's gonna be sitting on ice, that's my prediction.


----------



## mhammer

Diablo said:


> For more important stuff, theres always CNN (if you can get past the American centrism), BBC, etc.


BBC, yeah. CNN, nah.

Jeez, I miss being able to get BBC World on cable TV. But they bumped it and inserted OLN in that slot here. I used to enjoy the Doha Debates. Now its just another channel to flip through, like Home Shopping, A&E, TLN, ABCSpark, and Canadian MTV. I was pleased when our local cable pulled HNN and replaced it with BBC World, so I didn't have to look at Nancy Grace's sneering mug any more.


----------



## Duffman

I read his piece........well, if nothing else....he has Moxey.

Whatever the outcome I think his career in mainstream media is done.
Maybe satellite radio or fading away in the blogosphere.


----------



## smorgdonkey

deadear said:


> Sorry folks I will give the man his day in court. I will not contribute to his demise by reading and believing media reports. I was not there were You ?


I won't give him his day in court since he attacked people who were less powerful than he is and that they were in situations which he knew damn well would end up only in 'he said, she said' scenarios and that they would come out of those situations humiliated and/or broken by them.

For him to publicly release that statement, whether or not fabricated by the media 'reputation management specialist' company (which has already cut ties with him) was arrogant and defiant. Being arrogant and defiant after doing what he has done and in direct correlation to what he has done is extremely low.

I do hope that someone out there has some evidence and will press charges so that the others can all be witnesses at the trial to corroborate his behavior. The penalty would be too small in my opinion but I'd like to see the guy officially labelled.


----------



## smorgdonkey

I just have to add this for the people who say "why didn't the women call the police and report it?". The article in the link is written by a woman who was assaulted and reported it (there are many much worse stories):

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/jill-amery/post_8544_b_6063898.html

Also...look at this graphic and ponder the statistics...keep in mind that 'false claims' are believed to be between 2% and 8%. I also consider that women who I have known well enough for them to divulge that sort of intimate information to me, have had experiences that were clearly sexual assaults and none of them were reported. Of the ones who I have known well enough to discuss such topics, the number who had been assaulted far outnumbered the ones who said that they had not been assaulted.


----------



## Diablo

mhammer said:


> BBC, yeah. CNN, nah.
> 
> Jeez, I miss being able to get BBC World on cable TV. But they bumped it and inserted OLN in that slot here. I used to enjoy the Doha Debates. Now its just another channel to flip through, like Home Shopping, A&E, TLN, ABCSpark, and Canadian MTV. I was pleased when our local cable pulled HNN and replaced it with BBC World, so I didn't have to look at Nancy Grace's sneering mug any more.


BBC is overall good but has too much British stuff that's even more out of my wheelhouse than CNN American stuff 
I don't care about "footballers WAGs" and any news about the monarchy is as stomach turning to me as apparently Nancy Grace is to you. But ya, you get the idea. Theres a lot more to news than just whats on CTV, City, etc.

Nancy Grace is terrible, but I don't know if I would watch news nearly as much without HLN's Robin Meade during the week or Lynn Berry on weekends. They make me happy.


----------



## Guest

The police have apparently started a criminal investigation: http://www.theglobeandmail.com//new...ward-to-police-about-ghomeshi/article21416903 and http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/...f_bondage_beating_sources.html?app=noRedirect

And Lights has dropped him as her manager: https://twitter.com/KikkiPlanet/status/528313318638096384


----------



## smorgdonkey

iaresee said:


> The police have apparently started a criminal investigation: http://www.theglobeandmail.com//new...ward-to-police-about-ghomeshi/article21416903 and http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/...f_bondage_beating_sources.html?app=noRedirect
> 
> And Lights has dropped him as her manager: https://twitter.com/KikkiPlanet/status/528313318638096384


I am not surprised about the charges...relieved, happy, etc., yes. Not surprised.

I wonder how many creepy moments Lights had with Jian GoSMASHi.


----------



## deadear

smorgdonkey said:


> I am not surprised about the charges...relieved, happy, etc., yes. Not surprised.
> 
> I wonder how many creepy moments Lights had with Jian GoSMASHi.


Charges ? I read a investigation has started. Don't twist things. No charges at this point.


----------



## deadear

On a side note a nice little story about a member of the media and her antics. Read her track record of slander over the years. Scroll down to (Escalation of defamation action against Laura Robinson) http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...h-john-furlong-says-of-abuse-claims-1.2287112


----------



## smorgdonkey

deadear said:


> Charges ? I read a investigation has started. Don't twist things. No charges at this point.


Well, Mr. 'Nothing happened until it is proven in court'...I admit that I used the wrong term. My mistake.* I am happy about the investigation and that there have been official complaints.* However, I didn't 'twist' anything...your views on this story are twisted enough for me. Oh, sorry, on second thought, *THE NINE DIFFERENT PEOPLE ARE ALL MAKING IT UP. *



deadear said:


> On a side note a nice little story about a member of the media and her antics. Read her track record of slander over the years. Scroll down to (Escalation of defamation action against Laura Robinson) http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...h-john-furlong-says-of-abuse-claims-1.2287112


That's another story altogether. I know nothing about it. I will say this though: how could they possibly prove it if it were true? If it happened, it happened. If it happened and there is no proof, does that mean that it didn't happen?


----------



## nonreverb

Patience....they'll be brought soon enough. 



deadear said:


> Charges ? I read a investigation has started. Don't twist things. No charges at this point.


----------



## deadear

smorgdonkey said:


> Well, Mr. 'Nothing happened until it is proven in court'...I admit that I used the wrong term. My mistake.* I am happy about the investigation and that there have been official complaints.* However, I didn't 'twist' anything...your views on this story are twisted enough for me. Oh, sorry, on second thought, *THE NINE DIFFERENT PEOPLE ARE ALL MAKING IT UP. */QUOTE]
> 
> Wrong again Smorg.
> 
> Two people have come forward. A lawyer and a east coast actress. The rest will not go on the record. I am done with it so go ahead have your last word and continue with your Kangaroo court. Possibly turn on Jerry Springer for a little extra jolt.


----------



## Electraglide

deadear said:


> smorgdonkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, Mr. 'Nothing happened until it is proven in court'...I admit that I used the wrong term. My mistake.* I am happy about the investigation and that there have been official complaints.* However, I didn't 'twist' anything...your views on this story are twisted enough for me. Oh, sorry, on second thought, *THE NINE DIFFERENT PEOPLE ARE ALL MAKING IT UP. */QUOTE]
> 
> Wrong again Smorg.
> 
> Two people have come forward. A lawyer and a east coast actress. The rest will not go on the record. I am done with it so go ahead have your last word and continue with your Kangaroo court. Possibly turn on Jerry Springer for a little extra jolt.
> 
> 
> 
> Jerry who? Oh yeah, the guy who bounced the checks. As far as how many have come forward, I couldn't tell you 'cause about the only time I hear much about this is what's on the site here. As far as I know tho, he has admitted to playing a little slap and tickle at times and has this thing for a big eared teddy bear....or is that bare.
> And now smorgy will probably shout at me.
Click to expand...


----------



## Guest

Electraglide said:


> Jerry who?


----------



## smorgdonkey

Oh...I guess it is ok if it is only two then.

Why would I yell at anyone?

if you guys want to ignore the statistics, that's your choice.

May you never have a female family member or close friend experience an assault by a guy and feel so victimized and then helpless...and then victimized again by the court/law enforcement.


----------



## starjag

smorgdonkey said:


> May you never have a female family member or close friend experience an assault by a guy and feel so victimized and then helpless...and then victimized again by the court/law enforcement.


Indeed! One victim is one too many!


----------



## smorgdonkey

It just seems archaic in today's world that people are still of the opinion that one must be convicted to be guilty. Other actions might not have as much impact and can be dealt with over time but when dealing with sexual assaults, and the complexity surrounding them, there need not be an execution but there can't be a free pass either. If it were 'a jilted ex who was attempting revenge' then so be it...but for 9 people to have come forward with their stories (and 3 as of about noon today to have spoken to police) this is not a case of "let's see what the court decides".

In post #130 the graphic which I posted shows that of 1000 sexual assults:
-33 are reported to police
-29 are recorded as a crime
-12 have charges laid
-6 are prosecuted
-3 lead to conviction


So...if EVERY case was reported, of the 460 000 sexual assaults per year, less than 10% would result in conviction. If you have ever read a woman's story about what they went through during a trial, then you might understand why they don't get reported...often the system seems to put the woman on trial.


----------



## butterknucket

I just saw this and thought I'd share it. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSkjqK4SdP8#t=46


----------



## cheezyridr

you know, that's one of my personal peeves. it's the one of the reasons i don't like cobain. when you have contempt for your fans, you have committed a cardinal sin, imo.


----------



## Diablo

cheezyridr said:


> you know, that's one of my personal peeves. it's the one of the reasons i don't like cobain. when you have contempt for your fans, you have committed a cardinal sin, imo.


In his case, he's right though.
his band was so shitty, it's hard to have any respect for anyone that would be their " fans". It's like being a fan of Paris Hilton.
his own words, "losers" is correct.
although since they did help him make a living, they deserve a little more respect than that. At least from him.

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/dai...deo---all-my-fans-make-me-sick-200938199.html


----------



## Guest

Shut your pie holes, Früvous was _awesome_.


----------



## bagpipe

iaresee said:


> Shut your pie holes, Früvous was _awesome_.


Ditto. Most Fruvous un-love comes from people who've only ever heard King of Spain. Dont be dissin' the band just because Ghomeshi is a dirt bag!


----------



## mhammer

1) I am trying my damndest to have as little of the coverage be a part of my life as possible, BUT...as far as I know there have been no claims brought forward of _sexual _assault. _Physical assault_, in the context of "romantic overtures", yes, but not _sexual_ assault, despite 9 claimants coming forward. We are still dealing with reprehensible behaviour here, but let's keep boundaries clear. And since I am trying to make this a very tiny part of my life and reading, if my disinterest in the story has led me to overlook any actual claims of sexual assault (which IS still different from unwanted attention and harassment in the workplace), please correct me.

2) I'm curious as to what folks are finding so distasteful, and anger-provoking. Is it the hitting per se, or the nonconsensual part? In other words, if by some strange twist of fate, it were determined tomorrow that _every_ single instance of whatever hitting and hair pulling occurred was, as Ghomeshi has contended, "a consensual act between adults", would you still take the same stance you do in this thread, or is it primarily the presumed nonconsensual aspect that raises your hackles? In other words, if everything was exactly as he depicts it, would your attitude be "Hell, I don't get it, and I'll never understand why that gets some people off, but if they're fine with it, I guess whatever floats your boat...", or would it be "What kind of sick perverted...how can they let someone like that in broadcasting". Do Polaris prizewinners now have to sterilize their awards?


----------



## TubeStack

mhammer said:


> 1) I am trying my damndest to have as little of the coverage be a part of my life as possible, BUT...as far as I know there have been no claims brought forward of _sexual _assault. _Physical assault_, in the context of "romantic overtures", yes, but not _sexual_ assault, despite 9 claimants coming forward. We are still dealing with reprehensible behaviour here, but let's keep boundaries clear. And since I am trying to make this a very tiny part of my life and reading, if my disinterest in the story has led me to overlook any actual claims of sexual assault (which IS still different from unwanted attention and harassment in the workplace), please correct me.



“Jian had his hands around my throat, had pulled down my pants and was aggressively and violently digitally penetrating me with his fingers,” Seth recounts. “When it was over, I got up and it was clear I was really angry. My sexual interactions until then had always been consensual, enjoyable and fun."

http://m.thestar.com/#/article/news...va_seth_accuses_jian_ghomeshi_of_assault.html


----------



## smorgdonkey

mhammer said:


> if my disinterest in the story has led me to overlook any actual claims of sexual assault (which IS still different from unwanted attention and harassment in the workplace), please correct me.


TubeStack handled that with one example and there are more.



mhammer said:


> Is it the hitting per se, or the nonconsensual part? ... or is it primarily the presumed nonconsensual aspect that raises your hackles?


It's the action(s) without consent. 

There are people out there who get off on all manner of things and if they do what they do with partner(s) and with consent, pretty much anything goes (but I am sure that anyone can imagine something that isn't right). I know that there are people who do like some pain/physical 'abuse' in their sex lives...if all involved are ok with it then so be it. 

When someone abuses someone physically without consent it is wrong. When they do it from a position of power and they do it out of the blue like a sucker punch it is flat-out disgusting. 

I suspect that he was hoping that he'd find someone who was into it by randomly testing the waters or that he'd find someone who was too submissive to say anything. Perhaps he lost it in those situations and can't actually stop himself. He could be a couple of steps away from being something much more sinister.


----------



## Diablo

bagpipe said:


> Ditto. Most Fruvous un-love comes from people who've only ever heard King of Spain. Dont be dissin' the band just because Ghomeshi is a dirt bag!


In fairness, if a bands biggest hit is that lame as King of Spain, why would anyone bother to seek anything more? Did you all buy Psy's cd when you heard Gangnam Style, in case there may have been something good on it?
No need to be embarrassed, everyone has some lame cd's/guilty pleasures in their closet.


----------



## Diablo

smorgdonkey said:


> TubeStack handled that with one example and there are more.
> 
> 
> It's the action(s) without consent.
> 
> There are people out there who get off on all manner of things and if they do what they do with partner(s) and with consent, pretty much anything goes (but I am sure that anyone can imagine something that isn't right). I know that there are people who do like some pain/physical 'abuse' in their sex lives...if all involved are ok with it then so be it.
> 
> When someone abuses someone physically without consent it is wrong. When they do it from a position of power and they do it out of the blue like a sucker punch it is flat-out disgusting.
> 
> I suspect that he was hoping that he'd find someone who was into it by randomly testing the waters or that he'd find someone who was too submissive to say anything. Perhaps he lost it in those situations and can't actually stop himself. He could be a couple of steps away from being something much more sinister.


+1.
Its mostly the non consent issue...theres a big difference between what this guy was doing, and a freaky consensual relationship with a chick that was into the same stuff "..ooh baby, harder, choke me, ..." etc. Theres no way that's the case here.

The lecherous behavior, while inappropriate and unbecoming, isn't really the issue here EXCEPT, he seems to do it in abuse of authority situation. Its one thing if he were doing it entirely outside of work, with people of similar stature. But he seemed to prey on young intern types aspiring to careers in media, where its not hard to establish a power disparity. That's a big HR and workplace ethics problem. Not to mention (we should all know this), illegal. http://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/hs/pubs/wvps_guide/guide_7.php

And as Smorg suggests, although we don't convict on "pre-crime", this violent aspect along with the lack of understanding boundaries, just feels like in a perfect storm of emotions, he could become the next Russell Williams.

Finally, what I think evokes such a strong reaction, is people feel deceived. Overall, he seemed like a mellow, easy going, effete, intellectual type gentleman, that you wouldn't have a problem with if he took your sister out for coffee. but then you find out the other side of what he was up to...
Its a wolf in sheeps clothing thing.


----------



## cheezyridr

well not for me. i dont care if they begged him for it. anyone who enjoys hitting people and spitting on them has something fucking wrong with them. unless you are defending yourself or someone else, there is NEVER a reason to put your hands on someone in a violent fashion. that's not sex, and anyone who thinks that's what sex is, needs to be locked up. those people are predators. *wether it was consensual or not, it's someone who gets off abusing others*. 
people in general need to grow enough balls to stand up and point out what's wrong, instead of being such a bunch of ******* they spend their lives trying to pick up a turd from the clean end.


----------



## davetcan

I'm of the opinion that if the only way you can get off with a woman, or any sexual partner I guess, is by "pretending" to be violent then you've got a screw loose. It would also be a slippery slope to acting out the real thing if willing partners weren't readily available. Just my opinion of course.

edit: I see Cheezy beat me to it, completely agree.


----------



## hardasmum

cheezyridr said:


> well not for me. i dont care if they begged him for it. anyone who enjoys hitting people and spitting on them has something fucking wrong with them. unless you are defending yourself or someone else, there is NEVER a reason to put your hands on someone in a violent fashion. that's not sex, and anyone who thinks that's what sex is, needs to be locked up. those people are predators. wether it was consensual or not, it's someone who gets off abusing others.
> people in general need to grow enough balls to stand up and point out what's wrong, instead of being such a bunch of ******* they spend their lives trying to pick up a turd from the clean end.


I know a Dominatrix, it's her full time gig. She has some high profile clients; sports stars, politicians, Doctors and Lawyers. They get up to all sorts of crazy stuff. All of it is consensual and none of it involves any actual penetration. It's all whips, chains and bondage gear.

It's not my cup of tea but I sure as hell am in no position to judge her or her clientele. Who am I? Seriously it's none of my f#cking business. 


(I am not defending Jian Ghomeshi in any way. I think he's using BDSM as an excuse)


----------



## Adcandour

I'm from the camp that certainly thinks if you're into that shit, you're messed in the head.

But, you need to realize that I think we are ALL messed in the head.


----------



## mhammer

This is pretty much why I asked the question I did a post or two back. I'm one of those "squares" who assumes that sex is about pleasure, but fundamentally about emotional closeness within the context of pleasure. So, even if two or more people get a contract notarized that A wants B and C to do X to them, I just don't get it, and my "ewwww" reflex kicks in. "Emotional closeness within the context of pleasure" still leaves a very big canvas to work with, but I find that aggression, as a principal component of pleasure, is more about distance than closeness, so for me it's not part of that canvas.

As such, even were Ghomeshi's depiction of his private life, and interactions with women, accurate and honest, my reaction is still that the guy somehow spoiled it for me; "it" being the sense that I was in the company of a pleasant, socially attractive and engaging person, when I listened to the show. Again, it would be the same thing for me, listening to Cross Country Checkup, if I learned Rex Murphy liked to steal tips left on other customers' tables, or watching Sandy Rinaldo, if I learned she had been withholding a Filipino nanny's passport. Yes, I know that they are not my friend, and that what I hear, or see on TV, is not reality. But the pleasure of many shows is the illusion that one is in the company of pleasant people, and when that illusion is ruined, well, there goes the pleasure of being a viewer/listener.


----------



## Diablo

davetcan said:


> I'm of the opinion that if the only way you can get off with a woman, or any sexual partner I guess, is by "pretending" to be violent then you've got a screw loose. It would also be a slippery slope to acting out the real thing if willing partners weren't readily available. Just my opinion of course.
> 
> edit: I see Cheezy beat me to it, completely agree.


This part may fall under the category of TMI.
Im only saying it, because I had a girlfriend once who was into that scene. it was a pretty wild ride...liked to be spanked, slapped, choked, tied up, etc. All her fantasies involved being taken advantage of, overpowered etc. She thought I was too vanilla. Not my scene. What made it extra creepy is she told me she had been date raped in high school. Fuck, I'll never understand how someone who went though that would willfully bring that kind of stuff into a relationship years later.
Theyre out there though...its not just guys.

but hardasmum is right. JG is using BDSM as an excuse.


----------



## Guest

Meh. I have no qualms with what ever consenting adults want to do to each other in the privacy of their homes.

Non-consenting humans? That's the deplorable part for me.


----------



## davetcan

Yep, I still believe that, despite my personal opinions on the subject.



iaresee said:


> Meh. I have no qualms with what ever* consenting *adults want to do to each other in the privacy of their homes.


----------



## mhammer

In our home, the radio dial rarely changes from CBC, and the radio is on many hours a day. So, for the people I don't know, what goes on between them with their consent does not involve, interest, or even perturb me. It's a big ol' world out there, and I understand that. But when it's someone who essentially enters my home with my permission, even if by the airwaves, I tend to be more selective.


----------



## Guest

I should clarify that, while I am a-okay with consenting adults doing what they like, like Mark: I don't want to hear about it. Consent doesn't not equate to interest on my part.


----------



## smorgdonkey

cheezyridr said:


> well not for me. i dont care if they begged him for it. anyone who enjoys hitting people and spitting on them has something fucking wrong with them. unless you are defending yourself or someone else, there is NEVER a reason to put your hands on someone in a violent fashion. that's not sex, and anyone who thinks that's what sex is, needs to be locked up. those people are predators. *wether it was consensual or not, it's someone who gets off abusing others*.
> people in general need to grow enough balls to stand up and point out what's wrong, instead of being such a bunch of ******* they spend their lives trying to pick up a turd from the clean end.


I think that you are missing something here. Some people get more pleasure if there is some pain involved. Most of the people who are into that sort of thing don't give consent as a 'gift' to their partner, they consent because they like the pain. If one likes the control aspect and being dominant and the other likes the pain and the submissive end, then they are a match. I am sure that many like both and take turns or whatever.

Fact is, many people do get off on different things and consent is critical. Without consent, it is assault. Even 'Mr. Super Straight only do it on Tuesday evening at 10 pm in missionary position with a Kenny G cd on' needs consent. I had one partner who really got bored quickly and things had to escalate. She was super shy when we first got together and before we split, things had reached the point of her being blindfolded and tied up - she loved it. However, I am simply not into anything more than that so who knows what her limits are...perhaps she got slapped around by her next guy? I don't know because I am sure that I couldn't have done it for her if she wanted. 

Anyway, bottom line is that all kinds of people like all kinds of things - that's where they get that saying "different strokes for different folks".


----------



## cheezyridr

no i think you're the one who doesn't get it. if someone gets off on pain, that's sick. that's not sex. if someone gets off on hurting others, that's sick. just because it's consensual doesn't make it not be abuse. do you know why the body feels pain? it's a warning to let you know you're being damaged. we're talking about someone who gets off damaging another person. it's wrong and no one has the right to be violent on someone of it's not in defense. also, it's a tell. an identifier. those people are fucked up power trippin bullies even this time. it's undeniable and right out there for all to see. if these people didnt have these tendencies 100% of the time you would almost be able to play that privacy of one's bedroom nonsense. then there's just the flat out reality. whether she asked for it or not, if i found out someone ever did those things to my stepdaughter? i would teach that guy things about pain that would make memories he'd carry with him forever.


----------



## Guest

cheezyridr said:


> if i found out someone ever did those things to my stepdaughter? i would teach that guy things about pain that would make memories he'd carry with him forever.


This exactly why it's none of our business what other, consenting, adults do in the privacy of their own bedrooms.


----------



## smorgdonkey

cheezyridr said:


> no i think you're the one who doesn't get it. if someone gets off on pain, that's sick. that's not sex. if someone gets off on hurting others, that's sick. just because it's consensual doesn't make it not be abuse. do you know why the body feels pain? it's a warning to let you know you're being damaged. we're talking about someone who gets off damaging another person. it's wrong and no one has the right to be violent on someone of it's not in defense. also, it's a tell. an identifier. those people are fucked up power trippin bullies even this time. it's undeniable and right out there for all to see. if these people didnt have these tendencies 100% of the time you would almost be able to play that privacy of one's bedroom nonsense. then there's just the flat out reality. whether she asked for it or not, if i found out someone ever did those things to my stepdaughter? i would teach that guy things about pain that would make memories he'd carry with him forever.


Well, I disagree.


----------



## hardasmum

cheezyridr said:


> no i think you're the one who doesn't get it. if someone gets off on pain, that's sick. that's not sex. if someone gets off on hurting others, that's sick. just because it's consensual doesn't make it not be abuse. do you know why the body feels pain? it's a warning to let you know you're being damaged. we're talking about someone who gets off damaging another person. it's wrong and no one has the right to be violent on someone of it's not in defense. also, it's a tell. an identifier. those people are fucked up power trippin bullies even this time. it's undeniable and right out there for all to see. if these people didnt have these tendencies 100% of the time you would almost be able to play that privacy of one's bedroom nonsense. then there's just the flat out reality. whether she asked for it or not, if i found out someone ever did those things to my stepdaughter? i would teach that guy things about pain that would make memories he'd carry with him forever.


How do boxers, hockey players and MMA fighters etc. fit into your theory?

I guess they're also sick because they enjoy inflicting pain on other people?


----------



## Krelf

hardasmum said:


> How do boxers, hockey players and MMA fighters etc. fit into your theory?
> 
> I guess they're also sick because they enjoy inflicting pain on other people?



I dunno. I never noticed any evidence of sexual arousal protruding from their boxing trunks.


----------



## bolero

sounds like Ghomeshi needs a little Gimp action

[video=youtube;S8kPqAV_74M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8kPqAV_74M[/video]


----------



## cheezyridr

hardasmum said:


> How do boxers, hockey players and MMA fighters etc. fit into your theory?
> 
> I guess they're also sick because they enjoy inflicting pain on other people?



rather specious attempt.


----------



## hardasmum

cheezyridr said:


> hardasmum said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do boxers, hockey players and MMA fighters etc. fit into your theory?
> 
> I guess they're also sick because they enjoy inflicting pain on other people?
> 
> 
> 
> rather specious attempt.
Click to expand...

Your argument is ethnocentric.


----------



## cheezyridr

soooo... your saying it's a cultural norm for iranian people? intersting. i work with a few iranian guys, and they've never even hinted at things like that when we talk of women and sex. i'll have to ask about that on monday


----------



## Krelf

Hey guys, put your differences aside and buy a Jiam Ghomeshi tee shirt.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/printmaker-makes-point-with-jian-ghomeshi-shirt-1.2826989


----------



## mhammer

I still think we need a T-shirt that says "Ow means no".


----------



## hardasmum

cheezyridr said:


> soooo... your saying it's a cultural norm for iranian people? intersting. i work with a few iranian guys, and they've never even hinted at things like that when we talk of women and sex. i'll have to ask about that on monday


I made it pretty clear I wasn't defending Ghomeshi. 

BDSM has existed as a subculture for hundreds of years.


----------



## bagpipe

Krelf said:


> Hey guys, put your differences aside and buy a Jiam Ghomeshi tee shirt.
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/printmaker-makes-point-with-jian-ghomeshi-shirt-1.2826989


I think Buddy is lookin' to make a couple of bucks, whether Ghomeshi is guilty or not:

"Although he doesn't know whether Ghomeshi has actually done anything wrong, he hopes to make a wider point about the role of violence against women, and the fact that women are often hesitant to come forward with allegations of abuse."


----------



## Krelf

Although it's not a direct quote by the seller, but an opinion of his sentiments by the article writer, it would be reckless to portray a person as an asshole if you honestly believed he could be innocent. And I agree, profit is the likely motive for producing these shirts!


----------



## smorgdonkey

hardasmum said:


> BDSM has existed as a subculture for hundreds of years.


Yes. It isn't abuse if you like it.


----------



## cheezyridr

bullshit 3456789


----------



## davetcan

and what about the guy who gets off on dishing out that abuse? Sick fucks!



smorgdonkey said:


> Yes. It isn't abuse if you like it.


----------



## smorgdonkey

cheezyridr said:


> bullshit 3456789


Abuse is the systematic pattern of behaviors in a relationship that are used to gain and/or maintain power and control over another. If one person in a relationship gets off on being dominated and they have a mutual agreement, then they are not being abused.



davetcan said:


> and what about the guy who gets off on dishing out that abuse? Sick fucks!


As long as the guy (OR GIRL) is in a consensual situation it is none of my, your or anyone else's biz.

The fact that one cannot accept something does not make it wrong.


----------



## Option1

To me, the intriguing thing about discussions like this are the number of people who believe everyone must think and assess things the same as they do. There is little to no room for different views or thoughts.

But on a lighter note, I'm reminded of this:

The masochist: "Beat me! Beat me!"

The sadist: "No..."

Neil


----------



## hardasmum

cheezyridr said:


> bullshit 3456789


This is just your own personal opinion right? It's not actually based on any studies or research on BDSM culture.


----------



## rollingdam

It is time for the moderator to shut this thread down.


----------



## smorgdonkey

rollingdam said:


> It is time for the moderator to shut this thread down.


...but I was just getting excited...

Seriously though, if some people had their way, anything other than missionary for 5 minutes (and only once per week) would be outlawed.


----------



## davetcan

It's not the sex I have a problem with, it's the violence. Define "consensual". How many women stay with men who abuse them? Far too many. Really hard to separate the consensual from the scared. I'll say it one more time and then bow out of this. If you're a man who gets of on abusing women, consensual or not, you've got a problem. Just my opinion but perhaps someone could explain to me how it would not be considered a problem?



smorgdonkey said:


> As long as the guy (OR GIRL) is in a consensual situation it is none of my, your or anyone else's biz.
> 
> The fact that one cannot accept something does not make it wrong.


----------



## smorgdonkey

davetcan said:


> How many women stay with men who abuse them? Far too many.


No person should stay with someone who abuses them.



davetcan said:


> Really hard to separate the consensual from the scared.


It's not hard to separate. Consent and fear are completely different. If someone is staying out of fear, that is abuse. If someone gets off on being dominated, that is consensual.


Is it difficult to tell who is an abuser? Perhaps so, but that is society's problem. If someone is 'helping a senior citizen' in their day to day life and has them in fear to the point that they give them all of their money, that shouldn't stop everyone from helping senior citizens. It just puts the onus on society to get, charge and prosecute the thieving bullies when they can be caught. 

Same situation. It is society's burden to weed out the abusers and get them when they can. At this point, most get nothing and the system can set someone up with a restraining order...they make them out of paper which resists knifes and bullets I hear.


----------



## davetcan

You conveniently failed to comment on those who get off on dishing out the abuse.



smorgdonkey said:


> No person should stay with someone who abuses them.
> 
> 
> It's not hard to separate. Consent and fear are completely different. If someone is staying out of fear, that is abuse. If someone gets off on being dominated, that is consensual.
> 
> 
> Is it difficult to tell who is an abuser? Perhaps so, but that is society's problem. If someone is 'helping a senior citizen' in their day to day life and has them in fear to the point that they give them all of their money, that shouldn't stop everyone from helping senior citizens. It just puts the onus on society to get, charge and prosecute the thieving bullies when they can be caught.
> 
> Same situation. It is society's burden to weed out the abusers and get them when they can. At this point, most get nothing and the system can set someone up with a restraining order...they make them out of paper which resists knifes and bullets I hear.


----------



## Electraglide

smorgdonkey said:


> ...but I was just getting excited...
> 
> Seriously though, if some people had their way, anything other than missionary for 5 minutes (and only once per week) would be outlawed.


The old wham, bam, thank you mam; man on top get it over with quick. Sounds like my second wife but 5 min was pushing it. I guess we're both sick puppies smorg.


----------



## Electraglide

Option1 said:


> To me, the intriguing thing about discussions like this are the number of people who believe everyone must think and assess things the same as they do. There is little to no room for different views or thoughts.
> 
> But on a lighter note, I'm reminded of this:
> 
> The masochist: "Beat me! Beat me!"
> 
> The sadist: "No..."
> 
> Neil


Why did "Freakers Ball" start running thru my head.


----------



## smorgdonkey

davetcan said:


> You conveniently failed to comment on those who get off on dishing out the abuse.


I didn't "conveniently fail" at anything...if the person gets off on being the dominant one and there is pain involved, it is NOT abuse if it is consensual. 

Some people want to eat whipped cream off of each other - do they need the Canadian Food Inspection Agency to approve it?

If both parties are into it and there are no animals or minors involved, then swing from the chandeliers.


----------



## Electraglide

davetcan said:


> You conveniently failed to comment on those who get off on dishing out the abuse.


Depends what you classify as abuse I guess. The guy who likes to slap people around, anytime he wants to even tho they object, is an abuser. This includes but is not limited to his partner, his kids and his dog. The 'slapping' can take many forms.
http://www.edmontonpolice.ca/VictimSupport/WhatIsAbuse.aspx
If it's with a partner, it's something that you both agree upon and have set limits to and in certain instances is legal, then to me it's not abuse. And....the big 'and'....you have to know when to do it and when to stop and that each time is different.
Is this abuse? Your partner gets out of the shower and walks past you on the way to the bedroom. You slap them on the ass. They turn, smack your hand away and ask you what you meant by that which in turn leads to more smacking, tickling, pinching and biting and ends up with the both of you sweating heavily on the floor.
As afar as Ghomeshi goes, from what I've heard, his slap and tickle with some partners was consensual on both sides. To me not abuse. At other times his partners didn't consent but he kept on going. Abuse. I heard on some news thing that years ago he fondled his college roommate. The roommate said no, supposedly Ghomeshi stopped. Not abuse but I suppose he should have asked first. Not too sure if they were both sober at the time or what was going on before he grabbed a handful.


----------



## Electraglide

smorgdonkey said:


> I didn't "conveniently fail" at anything...if the person gets off on being the dominant one and there is pain involved, it is NOT abuse if it is consensual.
> 
> Some people want to eat whipped cream off of each other - do they need the Canadian Food Inspection Agency to approve it?
> 
> If both parties are into it and there are no animals or minors involved, then swing from the chandeliers.


No animals? How about we go by age of consent as to where you live. Tried the chandelier thing, once. It broke, two people got hurt, there was hell to pay from the guy who owned the place. And do you whip the cream before hand or just use the stuff in cans? I prefer it with chocolate sauce, strawberries and Caramilk bars. A 4 poster bed with some silk scarves. Ummmm, excuse me while I go add a few things to the grocery list.


----------



## bluzfish

...huh... and all in the sleepy little hamlet of Red Deer... whodathunkit...

:smile-new: BTW, any parties coming up down there (hint, hint).


----------



## Electraglide

bluzfish said:


> ...huh... and all in the sleepy little hamlet of Red Deer... whodathunkit...
> 
> :smile-new: BTW, any parties coming up down there (hint, hint).


This was more in the Okanagan. Here, the cats come and go where and when they please.


----------



## TubeStack

iaresee said:


> Shut your pie holes, Früvous was _awesome_.


Are you being serious? Fruvous always made me nauseous.

This sums it up perfectly:




> Dr. Seuss, Fruvous, the CBC and you
> The Varsity confronts Moxy's sober and sobering acappella satire
> Published, Oct. 5, 1992 in The Varsity newspaper (University of Toronto)
> 
> By Naomi Klein
> Varsity Staff
> 
> For ethical reasons, I will begin by admitting that my motives for interviewing Moxy Fruvous were less than pure. Truth be told, it was more of a vendetta than an interview. I think my feelings are best explained in verse — Fruvous-style.
> 
> I don't like them that's the key, I do not like them on the CBC.
> 
> I do not like them on a stage, I do not like them on a newspaper page.
> 
> I would not listen to them on the air, I would not marvel at their flowing hair.
> 
> I would not, could not, don't you see? I do not like them, so just let me be.
> 
> I do not like their faux-politics. I've had enough of that Moxy-schtick.
> 
> I do not like them at a pro-choice rally, I do not want to meet them in an alley.
> 
> I do not like their P.C. ham, I hate them hate them, Sam I am.
> 
> Moxy Fruvous, in case you have been frozen in time, is the latest brand of nursery school all-Canadian rock. Healthy, squeaky clean and painfully well groomed, this semi-acappella band's cartoonish quality recalls an all-male Josie and the Pussycats.
> 
> Why this level of hostility? For starters, there was a period this summer when I seemed unable to turn on the radio, see a band that I do like, or even walk down the street without being assaulted by the friendly sounds of Fruvous. The most disturbing occasions were: a benefit for the Ontario Coalition for Abortion Clinics where Moxy Fruvous upstaged Morgentaler, the opening of Molson Place which was billed only as Holly Cole but featured a surprise cameo by, you guessed it, Moxy Fruvous, and the Toronto Star picket line where the boys entertained the workers with lyrics even cheesier than the paper's Life section. They were tailing me. I swear it.
> 
> Although I had already heard Moxy Fruvous' headline-rhymes several times on CBC radio, I was still taken aback when, on one somber morning following the Toronto riot, I turned on CBC's Sunday Morning only to hear the boys cooing a Dr. Seuss condemnation of police brutality. Where were you when...
> 
> Predisposition aside, I still believe that I went into the interview with an open heart and an objective mind. I even started with a joke to put the band at ease. The pre-interview press material included a Toronto Star article which opened with the warning that if there is one thing the Fruvous boys hate, it is the description that they are the "Nylons-meet-Barenaked ladies."
> 
> "So, you guys are like the Nylons-meet-the Barenaked Ladies, right?" I said as I sat down with the four band members last July. My remark was met with stony stares and sulky glances. I then spent the next 10 minutes backpedaling, trying to explain irony to a group which bills itself as political satirists. Yikes, this was not going well.
> 
> In the words of band member Mike Ford, Moxy takes satire mighty seriously. "Our job as satirists is to discover the irony inherent in the issue or with a public perception that is off." Well then, as the self -proclaimed satirist of these satirists, the irony in these political humorists is that they are neither effectively political not particularly humorous.
> 
> Their lyrics, which tackle issues ranging from cross border shopping to Harbourfront development to the Gulf War, are hit-you-over-the-head-we're-so-sensitive political, while their presentation, which includes stupid hats, improv troop antics and mime, is goofy slapstick. They coat their pill with jam and thus make themselves easy for the likes of Peter Gzowski to swallow. Fruvous—which writes to order for the CBC—is pure Morningside.
> 
> Moxy member and former president of the York Federation of Students Jean Ghomeshi disagrees: "I think there are some really great messages in these lyrics that I'm very proud of. It's a pop medium but it has its message. As long as we can play the kind of things we want, we are using Moxy Fruvous to help the causes."
> 
> A pet cause is the pro-choice movement. Ghomeshi sports an OCAC t-shirt and boasts that they played a rally and a benefit. I know, I was there. At the benefit in question, the crowd separated into two factions: those who thought these cheesy white boys should get the hell off stage and those who thought these sensitive young men should be commended for bringing the cause to the mainstream — and for having great hair. There's the Toronto left for you.
> 
> David Matheson, who plays Sam in "Green Eggs and Ham", is less convincing. Asked if they cater their politics to their medium, Matheson admits "We're not going to write something they are going to freak out over."
> 
> Levelheadedness, is perhaps not the most sought-after quality one looks for in a rock band. But then they're not really a rock band, are they? The Fruvous-phenomenon, however, is not something you can just chalk-up to Paul Mitchell. Their fans span a hugely wide age-range from swooning underaged drinkers to crotchety CBC fans with opera glasses. It cannot be denied that Moxy Fruvous is appealing to something. But what? Ghomeshi puts forward one theory:
> 
> "The reason people like what we do is that there are so few young people doing political satire. When we played Voice of Women we were symbols of young progressive males. That gives them hope for the future."
> 
> So why do I feel this sense of impending doom? Slick and sanitized, Moxy Fruvous is not the only Canadian pop band to emerge that clearly goes to bed before 9:00 and won' t make the decent gesture of returning hero-worship with self abuse. Not only don't these guys drink alcohol, you'd be hard pressed to catch them drinking tap water.
> 
> On a hot night last summer, band member Murray Foster bounced into a bar where he was playing later that evening munching a green pepper.
> 
> They will eat green peppers in a bar, they will eat green peppers in a car, eat them eat them, you may go far....


----------



## Guest

TubeStack said:


> Are you being serious? Fruvous always made me nauseous.


That's nice. I like them.


----------



## davetcan

This would be my definition.




Electraglide said:


> Depends what you classify as abuse I guess. The guy who likes to slap people around, anytime he wants to even tho they object, is an abuser. This includes but is not limited to his partner, his kids and his dog. The 'slapping' can take many forms.


----------



## cheezyridr

you people who like to play the role of "not my business if it's consensual" might feel different if you were subjected to alot of beatings yourself. maybe you were lucky enough to not be the smallest kid in a bad neighborhood, or not born to parents who answered every question with a snide comment and a back hand to the mouth. maybe you didn't spend your grade school _years_ going home a different way, every day, so you could avoid the school bullies. or maybe you _were_ the bully/shitty parent/abuser of some other sort? maybe you have no concept of what it is like to have someone put their hands on you, and you can do nothing about it. good for you i suppose, that you don't have that baggage to carry around. if you did, i can garantee your attitude towards abuse would be 180º from the one you currently hold. perspective is everything.


----------



## Guest

cheezyridr said:


> you people who like to play the role of "not my business if it's consensual" might feel different if you were subjected to alot of beatings yourself.


Nope. You seem exceptionally bothered that we don't agree with you here.


----------



## smorgdonkey

cheezyridr said:


> you people who like to play the role of "not my business if it's consensual" might feel different if you were subjected to alot of beatings yourself. maybe you were lucky enough to not be the smallest kid in a bad neighborhood, or not born to parents who answered every question with a snide comment and a back hand to the mouth. maybe you didn't spend your grade school _years_ going home a different way, every day, so you could avoid the school bullies. or maybe you _were_ the bully/shitty parent/abuser of some other sort? maybe you have no concept of what it is like to have someone put their hands on you, and you can do nothing about it. good for you i suppose, that you don't have that baggage to carry around. if you did, i can garantee your attitude towards abuse would be 180º from the one you currently hold. perspective is everything.


Wrong. I had that stuff happen to me. Guess what? None of that was consensual. You 'garanteed' it...now what do I get?


----------



## cheezyridr

smorgdonkey said:


> Wrong. I had that stuff happen to me. Guess what? None of that was consensual. You 'garanteed' it...now what do I get?


you get a prize, of course!


----------



## Diablo

cheezyridr said:


> you people who like to play the role of "not my business if it's consensual" might feel different if you were subjected to alot of beatings yourself. maybe you were lucky enough to not be the smallest kid in a bad neighborhood, or not *born to parents who answered every question with a snide comment and a back hand to the mouth. * maybe you didn't spend your grade school _years_ going home a different way, every day, *so you could avoid the school bullies*. or maybe you _were_ the bully/shitty parent/abuser of some other sort? *maybe you have no concept of what it is like to have someone put their hands on you, and you can do nothing about it.* good for you i suppose, that you don't have that baggage to carry around. if you did, i can garantee your attitude towards abuse would be 180º from the one you currently hold. perspective is everything.


This post confuses me, because the examples you use ie bullies are clearly NOT consensual. Although one might say they have a passive/tolerant way of living with abuse, its not to be confused with true consent.

Those guys in the Jackass movies do some pretty bizarre/ painful stuff to each other (but its generally consensual) should we be outraged? Should law enforcement be involved? I think that would be pretty absurd.

So its hard not to think of consent as being the heart of the matter. 
If it goes beyond that, we run the risk of going back to the old days of the government/law/morality going into the bedrooms of our homes. And that has some pretty big implications.


----------



## mhammer

Cheezy has revealed, in bits and pieces over the years, his justifiably bitter relationship with physical cruelty. And on that basis, I will cut him lots of slack. I have yet to meet a single person who has been through personal trauma involving physical cruelty - from those who were in the concentration cfamps, to victims of childhood sexual or physical abuse, to ex-military - that are NOT prone to accelerating from cool-as-a-cucumber to full-on red-faced anger in an eyeblink. It's just one of those lasting things that comes with the territory. Most of us would find a car that accelerated that quickly immensely appealing. Within a person's own life, though, it's a whole other matter.

So, I don't always agree with Mr. Ridr, but I get where he's coming from, and I make cordial space for it. Nuff said.


----------



## mhammer

So here is another question-borne-of-curiosity. What would it take, either for you personally, or for Canadian society, or "the industry" to find Ghomeshi rehabilitated.

As reprehensible as the available testimony suggests his actions were, there is no court case, and police are only considering pressing charges, and no charges have been yet laid. Even if/when any charges are laid, AND the fellow is convicted of something, he's no Justin Bourque, so any hypothetical sentence would be modest. The guy has serious broadcast skills, and I doubt, even if he sequed from being King of Spain to working at Pizza Pizza, whether Pizza Pizza would want him at any of their outlets. Indeed, I'd imagne that few employers would feel comfortable with him being in any sort of role where he mingles with the public. Still, the guy is going to have to earn a living at some point down the road (I have serious doubts as to whether he'd be living off $55M from the CBC). So, in such a case, what do you see as a sufficient penance?

Would you see him as EVER being eligible to working in broadcast media in any way ever again? Would he be acceptable to return in, say, 6 years after having gone through some demonstrable "treatment"? Are folks with the reputation he has so quickly acquired EVER redeemable?

The brother of a friend of ours was a physician of some sort, possibly a psychiatrist, who was found guilty of sexual indiscretions with adult female patients. To the best of my recollection, there was no physical intimidation involved, merely taking advantage of patients who were psychologically vulnerable and possibly sedated (that's not a justification; I'm just trying to convey what he did and didn't do). The guy ends up losing his license, and is running a small dollar store, the last I heard. The friend asked me to look in on him at one point about a dozen years ago, and when I came to his row house to knock on the door, the place, as viewed through the front window, was an absolute s**thole. It seemed like the abode of someone who was sitting in darkness in front of the TV, day-in/day-out, eating ramen and wondering what the point is in living any longer.

How do we bring such folks back into society? I'm not saying we have to have pity or sympathy for them. But if you're not going to hand them over to ISIL for beheading, and you don't feel like keeping them in jail on the public nickel forever, eventually they're gonna have to earn a living and have a place to live. So what does it take to regain your membership in the human race?


----------



## Diablo

that's a good question.
I don't personally think the usual RX of a couple sensitivity/respect courses and some community service work is going to change something as primal as sexual preferences and impulse/urge control. This is much deeper than "ohhh...I had no idea what I was doing was inappropriate. It was a simple misunderstanding. I'll be sure and conduct myself accordingly going forward".

that said, I don't think its necessarily required. Now that the public is aware of what kind of person he may be, its up to women to decide if they want to get involved with someone like that. I don't recall OJ Simpson ever getting rehabilitated after the murder case. But even though he was found not guilty, most ppl would think someone would be insane to date him.

Who knows, maybe he can re-invent himself after a certain amount of time has passed.As you say, he didn't kill anyone. Charlie Sheen, Robert Downey Jr and others have had some pretty amazing careers in spite of some tarnished personal reputations. OTOH....theres Mel Gibson.
but I think in spite of rehab, therapy or whatever else, I would get a bitter taste every time id see/hear his name, for him to have much of a public career.
Maybe his next career is off camera/radio...behind the scenes...producing, directing or something.

OTOH, I don't really give a damn what happens to him. He can work at McDonalds for all I care. It an honest living that noone should feel above.
And maybe some humility might give him some respect for others around him, not think of them as objects for his fantasies.


----------



## mhammer

Diablo said:


> He can work at McDonalds for all I care. It an honest living that noone should feel above.


Apologies in advance for the levity, but my first thought, upon reading this, was the sound of Ghomeshi saying "On your burger today...", or "There's that familiar ring, and that can only mean one thing...it's Friday, and the fries are ready.".:sSig_Idontgetit:


----------



## cheezyridr

Diablo said:


> This post confuses me, because the examples you use ie bullies are clearly NOT consensual. Although one might say they have a passive/tolerant way of living with abuse, its not to be confused with true consent.
> 
> Those guys in the Jackass movies do some pretty bizarre/ painful stuff to each other (but its generally consensual) should we be outraged? Should law enforcement be involved? I think that would be pretty absurd.
> 
> So its hard not to think of consent as being the heart of the matter.
> If it goes beyond that, we run the risk of going back to the old days of the government/law/morality going into the bedrooms of our homes. And that has some pretty big implications.



the difference there is, the jack ass thing is devoid of violence and megalomania that comes with bullying and intimidation. the reason i keep bringing that up is because  in my experience, without fail, those people who get off on sexual violence have personal attributes that bring out the sort of behavior that i keep mentioning. these are the same people who pick one or two people at work, and give them all the shitty stuff because it's fun to watch them be frustrated and hate their job. it's never confined to just the bedroom because those desires come from a core part of who they really are. remember the story of the lady and the snake? 


you cant rehabilitate those people. they are aberrant, whether anyone likes it or not. remember the guy who cut the other guys head off on the bus? he's supposedly safe now too. you guys care if he moves next door? how about back in the 50's and early 60's when people thought you could be cured of being gay? i'm totally flummoxed that you guys understand that straight away, yet wonder if one can be cured of something like this. i say if someone like ghomeshi loses their livelyhood for what they've done, and they feel alone, and isolated, and they wonder what the point of continuing is, that's justice. he's reaping exactly what he's sown.


----------



## Diablo

cheezyridr said:


> the difference there is, the jack ass thing is devoid of violence and megalomania that comes with bullying and intimidation. the reason i keep bringing that up is because  in my experience, without fail, those people who get off on sexual violence have personal attributes that bring out the sort of behavior that i keep mentioning. these are the same people who pick one or two people at work, and give them all the shitty stuff because it's fun to watch them be frustrated and hate their job. it's never confined to just the bedroom because those desires come from a core part of who they really are. remember the story of the lady and the snake?


I think you might be over generalizing.
if it were that easy to judge a book by its cover, and see the freaks coming from a mile away, ppl wouldn't be taken in by the Ghomeshis, bernardos, ted bundys of the world.


----------



## Duster

Had to get this off my chest:

I find the current news coverage on the Jian Ghomeshi scandal to be distasteful and off-key.

I don't defend the man or his actions. Enough accusers have come forward to make it evident that at the very least, he has mistreated women, and at worst, he has committed criminal acts of abuse or assault against several women. 


But there is a cynical part of me that looks at the news coverage of the event and sees something else. Surely, there have been other men who have assaulted and abused women. There are many who have murdered women. Some have been people in the public eye. The coverage of this event contains something else, however.


Two weeks ago, Jian was a respected cultural figure in Canada, at least to those who only knew him from a distance. Those who knew him well, who worked with him, who worked in the media, certainly didn't claim otherwise. And now, two weeks later, he's suddenly something completely different.


In today's world of social media, citizen-journalism, and everyone-knowing-everything-all-the-time, how is it possible that all of these people who knew him, who worked with him, didn't say anything? Aside from some mysterious tweets from what appeared to be a Carleton student, nothing else appeared to the general public.


Now, two weeks later, everyone who's ever known him is coming forward saying "he's a bad guy". Well, where were all of you folks two weeks ago? Keeping silent? Working with the man? Having him host your galas?


If he was such a bad guy, and all of you worked with him, partied with him, socialized with him, why did you decide to keep it to yourselves? I can understand some of the victims being afraid, but what about all the people who heard the victims' stories? Were they afraid too? And now that there's a giant pile-on, no one's afraid any more? That's what they call a mob mentality. You all ought to be ashamed of yourselves, and you should consider yourself complicit in what's gone on. You all profited and benefited from the guy's image, whatever sheen he may have given to your events, but now you're all so much better than him, and you knew all along that something was wrong with the guy. Well, you're a day late and a dollar short.


And my cynicism is reserved most of all for the CBC. Their coverage has been offensive on several levels. One week they've got a 20-foot high photo of the man in their lobby, the next week they're gleefully reporting on a story where a graphic artist has decided to print t-shirts featuring Ghomeshi's face above the word "asshole". They wouldn't let a reader write that word in the comments section to one of their stories, yet they feel comfortable printing it and showing photos of the t-shirt on their website, because it's about Ghomeshi. They ought to be ashamed of themselves too.


Ever since the story broke, it has appeared that the CBC has been pursuing a cynical and self-serving approach to the scandal. It's as if they've got their own PR-crisis-management firm advising them, and the advice has been: Get ahead of the story. Report like crazy on the story. Make sure you're the ones telling the story, and no one else. Make sure you drive the narrative. And make sure that narrative is not about employers enabling employees' bad behaviour because they profit from it. Make sure the story is about society-wide attitudes towards violence against women. Distance yourself from Ghomeshi, and from the idea that you had any role in his behaviour or in that violence. Communicate often and repetitively, that this story is about violence against women in society, and it's about men everywhere. Pick up any story you can, from any other company or industry, where this might be going on, to show that this isn't a problem at the CBC, but in Canada generally. And make sure that it is CBC who has the leading story on this issue, not the Globe and Mail or the Toronto Star. Control the message, guide the story's development.


And above all, destroy Jian Ghomeshi. Dig into the dirt of his past. Find out what he did in University. Did he grope anyone or act inappropriately when he was in his 20s? If some of that behaviour has the tinge of homosexuality or at least a confused sense of sexuality, so much the better. Find out what he said when he was drunk backstage with his musician friends. If you can show that he was rude to his fans, that would be great. Any time he's ever mentioned being violent in any way, tell the story, even if he was joking about it. Especially if he was joking about it. We need to make him as unlikeable and reprehensible as possible. We need to make him a narcissistic, homosexual, homophobic, misogynisitc, elitist, insecure, outsider. Despite what we always say about removing the stigma of mental illness, let's discuss his anxiety disorder, and talk about the teddy bear he used in therapy. We need to make him so much of an outsider, an anomaly, that no one will identify with him, no one will sympathize with him, and no one will take his side or defend him.



We need to make it so that even defense lawyers will question whether or not representing him is ethical. If we an manage that, then he certainly won't bring legal action against us. No one will. Because it will be his fault, and his fault alone.



And let's just hope that no one asks us, if he was all these things, such a monster, such an outsider, such a person unworthy of anything, why we had a 20-foot tall picture of him in our lobby. Why hundreds of people who worked with him and knew him personally, said nothing, tweeted nothing, blogged nothing, printed nothing, about how awful he is. And let's hope they don't ask us specifically, as this nation's news outlet of record, why we ourselves said nothing. Because the only answer we're going to have is: He was making money for us.


----------



## mhammer

I hear ya.

The piling on over the last few weeks has been, to use Chief Bill Blair's response to Rob Ford's public admission several months back, "disappointing". There is an element of Maoist China to it, with Ghomeshi now declared "an enemy of the state". You'd think he was worse than whoever sexually assaulted that poor 16 year-old girl in Winnipeg the other day and then threw her into the Assiniboine River (What? You didn't hear about that? My point, exactly.).

And many would also argue that the explosion of tawdry sensationalistic details about Ghomeshi's private life (some of them foolishly contributed and made public by the guy himself) is largely what prompted Justin Trudeau's suspension of the two Liberal MPs. And THAT clumsy revelation prompted many other folks to come forward with tales of sexual harassment within the halls of Parliament. Yesterday Sheila Copps revealed that she had been sexually assaulted as a young MPP. And THOSE revelations resulted in me spending 45 minutes on the phone yesterday with a Postmedia reporter who wanted to know more about harassment within the federal public service and how it is monitored. 

Sexual aggression and harassment is certainly the _saveur-du-jour_. Not that it is unimportant, or undeserving of attention and public censure, and not that Mr. Ghomeshi HASN'T been a _very_ big "disappointment" (and besmirched his late father's name), but it has turned into the Justin Bieber/Beyoncé/Brangelina of tawdry news stories PDQ. Was the CBC envious of the BBC and their Jimmy Saville scandal?

But before the very CBC itself turns into the next tawdry news item, I'll nip it in the bud, and just say that _many_ parties to this have been "a disappointment", albeit some more aggregious than others. I thought Brent Bambury's huge sigh, as guest host, at the start of the Monday episode of Q, immediately after the news about Ghomeshi went public, said pretty much everything that needed to be said.

EVERY employer runs the risk of employing a-holes who "seemed nice at the time". Grievances get raised, people get fired, and we never hear about it unless we actually work there, or unless criminal charges get filed and it ends up in the local papers. But they don't use the media to whip up a frenzy.


----------



## Diablo

There is a media piling on effect, but that's what happens when youre a public figure. Doesn't matter if youre JG, Charlie Sheen, Amanda Bynes, Lindsay Lohan or Rob Ford. especially if its a slow news week (local).
So I cant say it bothers me that much. Its par for the course. Its pretty easy to avoid, all you have to do is go to news sources that are more globally focused.
And to be frank, as "distasteful" as it is, its somewhat less grim than most of the other news we get inundated with about shootings outside nightclubs, housefires, car accidents and missing teens bodies found in ditches.
If youre looking for "feel good" news stories, youre usually going to come up empty handed.


----------



## mhammer

True dat, mi amigo, true dat.


----------



## Duster

Diablo said:


> There is a media piling on effect, but that's what happens when youre a public figure. Doesn't matter if youre JG, Charlie Sheen, Amanda Bynes, Lindsay Lohan or Rob Ford. especially if its a slow news week (local).
> So I cant say it bothers me that much. Its par for the course. Its pretty easy to avoid, all you have to do is go to news sources that are more globally focused.
> And to be frank, as "distasteful" as it is, its somewhat less grim than most of the other news we get inundated with about shootings outside nightclubs, housefires, car accidents and missing teens bodies found in ditches.
> If youre looking for "feel good" news stories, youre usually going to come up empty handed.


My issue is not with the media pile on, my issue is with who is doing the media pile on.

The very employer that covered up reports of his bad behaviour and helped him strategize to avoid the story coming out is the one that's leading the pile on.

This morning they did a radio piece on the anniversary of the Montreal Massacre and how relevant it is given that violence against women is so much in the news these days. So not only did they manage to link Jian Ghomeshi to a gruesome mass murder, but they are the ones that have put violence against women in the news, by facilitating his behaviour, and then making it a national issue to distance themselves from it.

It's a brilliant strategy, it has worked very well, and it is very disappointing. I was expecting more of a backlash against CBC's coverage, but it looks like everyone's buying it hook line and sinker. They are doing a great job.


----------



## Diablo

Duster said:


> My issue is not with the media pile on, my issue is with who is doing the media pile on.
> 
> *The very employer that covered up reports of his bad behaviour and helped him strategize to avoid the story coming out is the one that's leading the pile on.*
> 
> This morning they did a radio piece on the anniversary of the Montreal Massacre and how relevant it is given that violence against women is so much in the news these days. So not only did they manage to link Jian Ghomeshi to a gruesome mass murder, but they are the ones that have put violence against women in the news, by facilitating his behaviour, and then making it a national issue to distance themselves from it.
> 
> It's a brilliant strategy, it has worked very well, and it is very disappointing. I was expecting more of a backlash against CBC's coverage, but it looks like everyone's buying it hook line and sinker. They are doing a great job.


There is definitely a conflict of interest in the position of the CBC. I suppose there is an option for them to not cover the story at all....but I don't know if that's right either.


----------



## cheezyridr

that would be be truer if many of the people who dealt with gomeshi weren't forced to because of their jobs. and lets not forget, like any other predator, stealth, disguise, and manipulation are learned survival skills. ted bundy was a master of deception and manipulation. it's well documented. and if you can't see how bernardo and homolka used deception to lure their victims, maybe you need to start questioning why you're so obtuse. one CAN spot them a mile off, i do it with consistent regularity. just because others can't or won't, doesn't mean it can't be done. but first you have to be willing to face an ugly truth: evil is a real thing. bear in mind i use it in this case as it is firstly defined, devoid of any religious connotation.


----------



## Duster

And there you go. Now we think it's normal to talk about Jian Ghomeshi in the context of Ted Bundy, Paul Bernardo, and Karla Homolka. CBC mission accomplished.


----------



## mhammer

What, no lumping in with Jeffrey Dahmer? And they call themselves _journalists_. Bah!


----------



## Diablo

The one positive to all this, could be what my local newspaper referred to as the "ghomeshi effect"...basically an increase in reporting of sexual harassment incidences. NB an increase in reporting, not in incidences.


----------



## Duster

And now Linden MacIntyre is barred by the CBC for suggesting that the corporation itself needs to do a better job protecting its employees. A credible journalistic voice pointing a finger at the CBC cannot be tolerated. He too must be silenced. I guess he's not towing the line that Ghomeshi is a monster and the CBC was as surprised as anyone about it... 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...mpid=rss1&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=gplus

They`re barring MacIntyre and hiding behind the idea that they`re protecting Peter Mansbridge`s behaviour. After some fantastic crisis management manoevring, the mis-steps begin. They always do.


----------



## cheezyridr

what really happened, i suspect goes a little more like this:
people knew, but were afraid of how it might affect their job/career. i see it all the time, even down on the jobsites. a guy is workin steady a while, and he aquires things. before you know it he has a kid or 2, a house, a cottage up north, a snowmobile, 2 cars, and a credit card or 2 or 3. work slows down, and you can see the look on his face change. he'd push his grandma down the stairs to keep his job, because the things he owns, are owning him. same thing at the cbc, it's no different anywhere you go, because people are people.


----------



## smorgdonkey

I was wondering if Jian ever interviewed Bill Cosby...


----------



## Steadfastly

I can't believe this thread has gone to the 8th page!


----------



## vadsy

Steadfastly said:


> I can't believe this thread has gone to the 8th page!


Why can't you believe it?


----------



## smorgdonkey

vadsy said:


> Why can't you believe it?


He's a non-believer.


----------



## Sneaky

Gohmeshi has dropped his lawsuit against CBC. (uhh, no kidding)


----------



## davetcan

While thanking his lucky stars for Bill Cosby.



Sneaky said:


> Gohmeshi has dropped his lawsuit against CBC. (uhh, no kidding)


----------



## smorgdonkey

Sneaky said:


> Gohmeshi has dropped his lawsuit against CBC. (uhh, no kidding)


I had not heard this...great reporting Sneaky.


----------



## butterknucket

I'm not saying this will happen, but it wouldn't surprise me if a year from now, he's back on the CBC with a new show.


----------



## Bubb

Sneaky said:


> Gohmeshi has dropped his lawsuit against CBC. (uhh, no kidding)


well,they settled... quote...“The parties have reached a settlement; the lawsuit has been withdrawn but it still needs to be formalized through a court order,” 
he's still grieving his termination through his union .


----------



## ronmac

He is also paying CBC $18k in legal costs as part of the retraction agreement. That is not something someone in the driver's seat ever does. He is toast. Likely to be working on a cable show in Milwaukee, if he is lucky.


----------



## Steadfastly

vadsy said:


> Why can't you believe it?


I can't see what the big interest in it is. There are much bigger and more important things happening in the world than this.


----------



## vadsy

If you don't like it move along, you don't have to read it or post. As for how important something is, to each his own, you of all people should know and respect that given some of the threads you've started here. 
Just because you're bored you don't have wander around the forum posting just to get your numbers up attempting to start another argument and derail a thread you don't agree with. 
Idle hands are the devils playthings.


----------



## 4345567

Steadfastly said:


> I can't see what the big interest in it is. There are much bigger and more important things happening in the world than this.


Like Dominic Hasek, laptop mouse pads and best amps for home use?


----------



## Guest

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*

Gomeshi was charged this morning by police. Snippet from the brief article:



> *Jian Ghomeshi charged with sexual assault*
> 
> Former CBC radio host Jian Ghomeshi has surrendered to police and has been charged with sexual assault, police confirmed Wednesday.
> 
> Toronto police said in a statement that Ghomeshi has been charged with four counts of sexual assault and one count of overcome resistance - choking.
> 
> The 47-year-old is set to appear in court Wednesday afternoon.


----------



## Milkman

*Re: Jian Ghomeshi &amp; CBC split*

Down boys.

Yes, he has now been charged.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2014/11/26/22096636.html


----------



## Guitar101

They should get Judge Judy to judge these women. When the accusers are standing in front of her in the courtroom, she would ask "Did you seek medical assistance?" to which the answer is "no". Then she would ask "Did you report this to the police?" to which the answer is "no". Next out of her mouth would be "Get out of my courtroom" .


----------



## Guest

Guitar101 said:


> They should get Judge Judy to judge these women. When the accusers are standing in front of her in the courtroom, she would ask "Did you seek medical assistance?" to which the answer is "no". Then she would ask "Did you report this to the police?" to which the answer is "no". Next out of her mouth would be "Get out of my courtroom" .


Thank fuck that isn't how our justice system works. Or that you're a judge.


----------



## Milkman

Guitar101 said:


> They should get Judge Judy to judge these women. When the accusers are standing in front of her in the courtroom, she would ask "Did you seek medical assistance?" to which the answer is "no". Then she would ask "Did you report this to the police?" to which the answer is "no". Next out of her mouth would be "Get out of my courtroom" .


That's why she's a TV judge. TV is pretend. She's a nasty old .....

She'd be equally harsh in judging Gomeshi.


----------



## Steadfastly

vadsy said:


> If you don't like it move along, you don't have to read it or post. As for how important something is, to each his own, you of all people should know and respect that given some of the threads you've started here.
> Just because you're bored you don't have wander around the forum posting just to get your numbers up attempting to start another argument and derail a thread you don't agree with.
> Idle hands are the devils playthings.


I started to read it the first time it was posted. Then I just seen the number of pages grow. I don't waste my time on stuff like this. I probably shouldn't even respond to your assumption but here you go. BTW, please send us some of your snow and a couple of those big mountains you got out there. We are a little short on that here in Ontario and it would sure be a boost to my ski season. Best regards, Steadfastly


----------



## cheezyridr

Guitar101 said:


> They should get Judge Judy to judge these women. When the accusers are standing in front of her in the courtroom, she would ask "Did you seek medical assistance?" to which the answer is "no". Then she would ask "Did you report this to the police?" to which the answer is "no". Next out of her mouth would be "Get out of my courtroom" .


i won't thumb you down, but i sure disagree with you


----------



## Jimmy_D

Oh look, yesterday he dropped the suit and agreed to pay the cbc their legal costs and today he's busted for 4 counts of assault... never saw that coming.

edit; yes I'm joking.


----------



## starjag

Guitar101 said:


> They should get Judge Judy to judge these women. When the accusers are standing in front of her in the courtroom, she would ask "Did you seek medical assistance?" to which the answer is "no". Then she would ask "Did you report this to the police?" to which the answer is "no". Next out of her mouth would be "Get out of my courtroom" .


Ignorant and rather stupid!


----------



## Guitar101

cheezyridr said:


> i won't thumb you down, but i sure disagree with you


I hope you don't think that by my post, I think it's Ok to hit and objectify women. If you do, that was not my intention. However, I do not think it's ok to wait years to report something that you disagree with and only do so after someone else comes forward in the media. That is also a form of abuse. If you think you've been abused for any reason, report it to the police, seek medical attention and let the courts handle it.


----------



## Jimmy_D

holy 7uck, two interesting points;

1. this guy found two women to defend him, what people will do for a buck.
2. if you search far enough you can find the perp walk they took him for through college park with audio, what a circus.


----------



## keto

Jimmy_D said:


> 2. if you search far enough you can find the perp walk they took him for through college park with audio, what a circus.


I don't understand what it is you found, the words don't make sense to me strung in that order.


----------



## Jimmy_D

keto said:


> I don't understand what it is you found, the words don't make sense to me strung in that order.


Sorry (roaches doobie) if you check out the video on the news stations you'll see the cops did a perp walk, from the courthouse to his van, when he was released on bail.

There are reporters and people in the crowd screaming shit at him.

I was surprised that the cops dragged him through what was bound to be a circus and slightly surprised at the mood of the crowd.


----------



## Krelf

I suppose the next move is to arrest Big Ears Teddy as an accessory. He knew what was going on and didn't come forward. At least get him for aiding and abetting!

https://theunpluggeddiaries.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/jg_featurephoto.jpg?w=500


----------



## Sneaky

He was an accessory alright.


----------



## keto

Jimmy_D said:


> Sorry (roaches doobie) if you check out the video on the news stations you'll see the cops did a perp walk, from the courthouse to his van, when he was released on bail.
> 
> There are reporters and people in the crowd screaming shit at him.
> 
> I was surprised that the cops dragged him through what was bound to be a circus and slightly surprised at the mood of the crowd.


Got it, thanks for understanding my thickheadedness. I'm a little surprised too, that they didn't take him out the back door in a dark windows van or whatever.


----------



## Krelf

Jimmy_D said:


> holy 7uck, two interesting points;
> 
> 1. this guy found two women to defend him, what people will do for a buck.
> 2. if you search far enough you can find the perp walk they took him for through college park with audio, what a circus.


I brought a similar matter up before a prosecutor years ago when I was doing enforcement work. The answer I got was that every accused has a right to be defended, and a defence lawyer must do his/her best to ensure the client receives a fair trial and that his side of the story is heard in court. Whether or not they find the crime repugnant shouldn't enter into the equation. If they really feel the matter is so distasteful, they can refuse the case, but the challenge of presenting the case generally wins out.

What kind of a system would we have if an accused is unable to get a defence? We'd be living in a fascist dictatorship.


----------



## Jimmy_D

Krelf said:


> I brought a similar matter up before a prosecutor years ago when I was doing enforcement work. The answer I got was that every accused has a right to be defended, and a defence lawyer must do his/her best to ensure the client receives a fair trial and that his side of the story is heard in court. Whether or not they find the crime repugnant shouldn't enter into the equation. If they really feel the matter is so distasteful, they can refuse the case, but the challenge of presenting the case generally wins out.
> 
> What kind of a system would we have if an accused is unable to get a defence? We'd be living in a fascist dictatorship.


Ya I get that he has a right to a proper defense and no I wasn't suggesting anything else.

My point is that any lawyer in a situation like this one can decide not to take a case, there's plenty of choice here and she's chosen to represent him. 

I don't think she's doing it for free because she thinks he's wrongly accused.


----------



## Krelf

Lawyers will take high profile cases because it raises their profile and can help them attract higher level clients and charge higher fees. Whether the lawyer is male or female is irrelevant. The lawyer in question is Marie Henein who comes with excellent credentials.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/11/26/jian-ghomeshi-lawyer-marie-henein_n_6227920.html


----------



## Diablo

Buncha idiots.
the guy has dropped a $55m lawsuit, is VOLUNTARILY writing a check for $18k instead, not to mention writing off his own expenses, has been charged by police, and you're still calling him a victim in this?

you may not like where this story came from and is heading, but burying your head in the sand, is just embarrassing yourself.


----------



## Diablo

Guitar101 said:


> I hope you don't think that by my post, I think it's Ok to hit and objectify women. If you do, that was not my intention. However, I do not think it's ok to wait years to report something that you disagree with and only do so after someone else comes forward in the media. *That is also a form of abuse.* If you think you've been abused for any reason, report it to the police, seek medical attention and let the courts handle it.


re: bolded, I'm not familiar with that definition of abuse. 

Re: rest of your post, are you saying that some burden of evidence hasn't been satisfied in this case to justify charges, or some statute of limitations has expired?


----------



## Jimmy_D

Diablo said:


> Buncha idiots.
> the guy has dropped a $55m lawsuit, is VOLUNTARILY writing a check for $18k instead, not to mention writing off his own expenses, has been charged by police, and you're still calling him a victim in this?
> 
> you may not like where this story came from and is heading, but burying your head in the sand, is just embarrassing yourself.


Wait... what... who's an idiot, who's calling him a victim?


----------



## rollingdam

I guess living with his mother is going to put a real damper on his sex life.


----------



## Diablo

rollingdam said:


> I guess living with his mother is going to put a real damper on his sex life.


I wouldn't put anything past him, lol.


----------



## deadear

Krelf said:


> Lawyers will take high profile cases because it raises their profile and can help them attract higher level clients and charge higher fees. Whether the lawyer is male or female is irrelevant. The lawyer in question is Marie Henein who comes with excellent credentials.
> 
> http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/11/26/jian-ghomeshi-lawyer-marie-henein_n_6227920.html


 Yes and this case will be dropped before court by the crown due to no chance of a conviction. If Micheal Bryant can have his charges dropped for running a bike couriers head into a mail box with his vehicle on the wrong side of the road traveling in the wrong direction of traffic I would say this lawyer can have the Ghomeshi charges dropped. 
Everyone goes home and the GC bottom feeders find another story to harp about. Surprised they are not down in Ferguson burning down buildings.


----------



## smorgdonkey

Guitar101 said:


> However, I do not think it's ok to wait years to report something that you disagree with and only do so after someone else comes forward in the media. If you think you've been abused for any reason, report it to the police, seek medical attention and let the courts handle it.


That's not how victims tend to act. After trauma and stress there are many things that won't seem normal to other people that haven't undergone the trauma or stress. The system victimizes the victims and tends to let the abusers off easy.


----------



## Jimmy_D

deadear said:


> Yes and this case will be dropped before court by the crown due to no chance of a conviction. If Micheal Bryant can have his charges dropped for running a bike couriers head into a mail box with his vehicle on the wrong side of the road traveling in the wrong direction of traffic I would say this lawyer can have the Ghomeshi charges dropped.
> Everyone goes home and the GC bottom feeders find another story to harp about. Surprised they are not down in Ferguson burning down buildings.


"gc bottom feeders" and excellent reference to those here who have no clue, yourself included... I'll be back here to drag up your post when gomesh goes to jail.


----------



## deadear

Jimmy_D said:


> "gc bottom feeders" and excellent reference to those here who have no clue, yourself included... I'll be back here to drag up your post when gomesh goes to jail.


Winner Winner Chicken Dinner. Like catching fish in a barrel.


----------



## Jimmy_D

deadear said:


> Winner Winner Chicken Dinner. Like catching fish in a barrel.


Ah shucks thank you, it isn't really anything you'd expect to "win" something for, but in this case I'll gladly accept the retard identification award.


----------



## Scotty

Diablo said:


> I wouldn't put anything past him, lol.


Gack....I ALMOST visualized that...gross


----------



## smorgdonkey

deadear said:


> and the GC bottom feeders


I was wondering what a GC bottom feeder was...either people on GC talking about the lowlife who smacks women around without their consent or the people on GC who don't seem to have a problem with people smacking women around without their consent.


----------



## deadear

smorgdonkey said:


> I was wondering what a GC bottom feeder was...either people on GC talking about the lowlife who smacks women around without their consent or the people on GC who don't seem to have a problem with people smacking women around without their consent.


 Ding Ding Ding another chicken dinner . Just look in the mirror. ZING


----------



## bluzfish

deadear said:


> Ding Ding Ding another chicken dinner . Just look in the mirror. ZING


What the hell...???


----------



## Jimmy_D

As I have no time to write long and involved responses to garbage, I'm in the habit of just calling people like deadear something other than their proper name, or even easier and more in line with the effort they put forth, simply telling them to 7uck off.

So, sticking to that - if any of you guys (deadear) think slapping women around is cool, I'm here telling you to 7uck off.


----------



## smorgdonkey

deadear said:


> Ding Ding Ding another chicken dinner .


So, I gave 2 answers and they are both correct? Interesting.



deadear said:


> Just look in the mirror. ZING


I will look in the mirror...you look for a therapist.


----------



## deadear

smorgdonkey said:


> I will look in the mirror...you look for a therapist.


 What is yours name so no one uses him or her because it ain't working for you.


----------



## deadear

Jimmy_D said:


> As I have no time to write long and involved responses to garbage, I'm in the habit of just calling people like deadear something other than their proper name, or even easier and more in line with the effort they put forth, simply telling them to 7uck off.
> 
> So, sticking to that - if any of you guys (deadear) think slapping women around is cool, I'm here telling you to 7uck off.


Show the post where he said it was cool. Another guy twisting statements


----------



## smorgdonkey

deadear said:


> What is yours name so no one uses him or her because it ain't working for you.


You aren't even a little funny...you could have been more direct with "I know you are but what am I?"


----------



## deadear

smorgdonkey said:


> You aren't even a little funny...you could have been more direct with "I know you are but what am I?"


Your slipping I expect something better than that. Have a good weekend Smorg.


----------



## Accept2

This thread is done like dinner..............


----------

