Russell Brand

[Wassapp]

AIBU to think... 'here we go again?'

Anyone watching? I've always said 'innocent until proven guilty' but also 'there is no smoke without fire'.

Having been sexually assaulted myself, one of the stories seem so similar to mine.

What's your thoughts?

This is the most confusing post, I know. I just don't know how I feel.

Yes, he's turned very right wing (he's on rumble isn't he?). He just knows hate sells. He sucks people in with the whole wellness guru stuff, and then channels people down his YouTube and rumble stuff. Mouthpiece for a lot of what's wrong. And people go along with it.

It doesn't seem to allow for people turning their lives around after appalling behaviours. Is there no hope for any sinners? No redemption?

Surely turning your life around (if that's what you believe he has done) doesn't involve absolving oneself of any responsibility for bad behaviour? Wouldn't true redemption involve the opposite?

And the culture of sexism and abuse on the comedy circuit will be completely unchanged

I get the impression that this is big issue. Shappi Korsandi said recently that a male comedian locked her in his flat, saying he was going to come back later on and rape her.

Wow.

Just wow.

re Bob Geldof - I read Brand was dating Peaches when she was 16, no idea if this is true, can’t find anything online.

bet you any money DW is next (at least hope
so).

He really does know that hate sells doesn't he and his followers seem to lap it up.

It doesn't seem to allow for people turning their lives around after appalling behaviours. Is there no hope for any sinners? No redemption?

How long do we give for people to turn their lives around and become civilised members of society?

He got clean and sober at the end of 2002 and went to rehab again a couple of years later for sex addiction. The SA and exploitation of the 16 happened in 2006. Some of the other allegations were about events which occured in 2013.

His interview with Emily Maitlis happened in 2017 and he did not seem that remorseful then. He seemed annoyed that his previous behaviour was described as disgusting.

I don't think he's the least bit remorseful, I think he thinks "shit happens" and I try to do better now.

Of course there is redemption but if you claim to be redeemed and then continue to exhibit the same appalling behaviour then it's no surprise if people don't believe you and feel you can't be trusted.

I doubt this documentary would have been made if he'd been a complete arsehole during active addiction and had cleaned up his act since.

I'm not comfortable about trial by media either but I don't think the women involved have much chance of justice through the legal system and we need to be able to show other young women exactly how men like Brand operate so that they can protect themselves.

Sorry, forgot to quote the above pp in my post above. But he's a vile human being.

bet you any money DW is next

Agreed.

But the text is not in isolation.

The text would be looked at in the light of the fact that the woman went to the rape centre and gave her underpants as evidence and what she told them.

The text would be looked at in the light of the fact that the police contacted the woman around the time of the rape and therefore there is a record of what she told them.

Agreed. I was in 6th form in the mid 90’s. I had friends who slept with much older men, and it was viewed as “you’re 16 so it’s your choice”. If anyone had suggested a power imbalance, no one else would have know what they were talking about. The notion hadn't yet been created.

I do feel uncomfortable that the media are holding Brand and other to account for their actions in the 90’s, based on todays standards and principles.

It says a lot that you seem more concerned about damage to the reputation of abusive men, than you are about the damage done to their victims.

I'm not particularly interested in the 'redemption' of yet another wealthy, white, male celebrity.

Mark Wahlberg's career has gone from strength to strength despite him having done time for racially aggravated assault. Roman Polanski has never been served justice for his rape of a child and Hollywood celebs write letters in support of him. Plenty of A list actors are still happy to work with Woody Allen. Sean Penn, Christian Slater, Mel Gibson, Nicolas Cage, Alec Baldwin and many others have all continued to work in TV and Film after being arrested and in some cases convicted for Domestic Abuse. Violently assaulting his pregnant wife didn't do any damage to Ozzy Osbornes career, and even when she wrote about it in her book he continued to tour, appear on TV and sell records. Louis CK is back on the comedy circuit after his pathetic non-apology for indecently exposing himself to multiple women backstage at gigs. Any of that make you feel "uneasy"?

But yeah, let's all spare a thought for the poor male celebrities whose "appalling behaviours" have come to light and are now facing the consequences.

I do feel uncomfortable that the media are holding Brand and other to account for their actions in the 90’s, based on todays standards and principles.

So, we should just have left Savile alone? Jesus wept.

In an interview with Louis Theroux, British-Canadian comedian Katherine Ryan says that there is an "open secret" in British comedy that a famous comedian is a sex offender. She has not named the man and says that he has not assaulted her personally.
“It’s very dangerous for us to have this conversation,” she told Theroux. “I’m happy to have it, but it’s a litigious minefield because lots of people have tried to nail this person down for their alleged crimes and this person has very good lawyers, so am I going to put my mortgage on the line by saying who this person is or entering into any conversations like that?”
Ryan previously revealed her confrontation with the man in question, which took place during her show “Backstage With Katherine Ryan” earlier this year.
“I called him a predator to his face and in front of everyone that day,” Ryan said.

@Lemons1571

But that doesn’t make it ok? Something that was harmful to women now was still harmful in the 90’s. That’s how we progress as a society. By saying - hang on, why was this acceptable, we need to address this, we need to call it out.

Jimmy Savile was not honest and upfront. He wasn’t who he purported to be. To compare RB to Savile is disgusting

Pretty sure rape and sexual assault were illegal in the 90's

A powerful post but these people won’t respond to you.

They plop their misogynistic bile here and run.

I suspect there are RB’s followers on here too, as well as women with internalised misogyny.

Wow? A well thought out constructive comment or a knee jerk rather pathetic predictable reaction?

A student acquaintance had a night with a 70s rock star. She was disappointed that he didn't ask for her number but knew the score.

If he raped, of course that's awful and I hope the women go to the police.

But mostly he was promiscuous and didn't hide it. And the women he was with would have known that.

And why now?

As far as redemption goes I was widening the debate. It's allowed.

yes, girls went out with older boys or men and there’s nothing their parents or police could do as it’s not illegal.

But men who raped those 16yo girls were doing so illegally.

Do you think rape was illegal then?

Do you actually think the government is threatened by his grifing youtube or rumble ramblings? Most of his followers probably don't even live in the UK.

I think it’s time institutions stopped putting these arseholes in positions of power and authority. RB was a drug addict mess. Why was he being pandered to and being elevated? He didn’t even try to mask his true nature. Creeps will always exist. It’s totally naive to think we can wipe out perversions and corruption in men, any way that we can wipe out any other personality trait. They are wired for it. However safeguarding should always take precedence. They should never be in a position where they are able to take advantage in the fist place and that is up to the authorities. Shame on channel 4 and the bbc. He should never have been allowed past the threshold.

It doesn’t matter if it was 1,000 consensual and the one time was rape.

The one time that was rape needs to be answered for.

Why do you keep trying to equate promiscuity with rape?

In this day and age why didn’t the women go to the police? Russell Brand is hardly a very powerful figure.

It does feel a bit discombobulating for me and I’m trying to work out why

First the build up, granted I did see it on here with the biggest news thread. If I hadn’t seen that I wouldn’t have seen anything on it beforehand

Next the way the show ran. I believe their stories, it was so tightly focussed with editing and lines of corroboration it was a bit like being hit over the head. Mind you I never watch programmes like this so maybe I’d forgotten

Lastly, the outcome. There won’t be an arrest I assume, he’s been dropped from talent agency but shows are sold out and going ahead. Platform viewing will likely continue and possibly go up.

With the care home programme that led to court but with this what comes next?