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.

I wonder if his wife will leave him. She can’t have known all of this previously.

I can't seem to watch the documentary on catch up, I think it has been pulled?

Generally speaking though, if someone says they have been sexually assaulted, we should believe them. As already covered extensively, conviction rates are horrifyingly low. The number of false allegations are tiny in comparison to the number of actual assaults that go unpunished.

I agree that 90s/00s "Lad" personas and general attitude to women in the media have effectively enabled this and given some men a green light to behave appallingly towards women and girls under the guise of "a bit of banter".

I lost count of the number of times I was groped by a stranger, wolf whistled at, had comments made about my body, exposed to, all before I hit 20 and sometimes in school uniform. You were conditioned to expect it and welcome that sort of attention-even by men 3 or 4 times older than you.

Re speaking up. Don't minimise the impact of control an abuser can have over you. It happened to me and I could be silenced by a look. Never mind words.
In fact, 5 years after it happened I was dating someone who unbeknown to me, was friends with him. He literally said the words "I hope what happened with me and you won't affect you seeing X, he is a lovely guy". How I regret not punching him in the face. But instead, my stomach twisted, the air seemed to go from my lungs and I silently nodded and said nothing. That is the power these men can wield.

He's creepy and weird. I never liked him.
Plus, he reminds me of Rasputin.

He’s selling to the alt-right anti-vax QANON, MAGA crowd. These people:
https://www.newstatesman.com/spotlight/tech-regulation/cybersecurity/2022/03/conspiracy-theories-online-psychology

Exactly. We have progressed and our understanding has evolved.

We don’t hold people to account for actions that were deemed acceptable in their day. Headmasters are not being convicted because they hit school children in the 70’s. We don’t charge people in 2023 because they said a (now unacceptable) racist word in 1952. So we can’t start vilifying anyone in 2023 for actions that were both legal and deemed as acceptable of their time.

The accusation of Rape had many more grey areas in the 90’s. At school in the 80’s I remember the girls almost being discouraged from reporting anything, as it was “impossible to prove” and “only a handful of rapes had ever led to a successful conviction”. The thinking was wrong, and we as a society have evolved and grown from that thinking. But it was certainly the belief back then (rural mid England).

Why did nobody do anything about Brand? Why did nobody do anything about Saville? Same old story. The 90's weren't much better than the 80's in terms of reporting abuse. Police were generally disinterested and asking why you were out alone in a short skirt or "domestic abuse" was a private affair.
They only came out if you were disturbing the peace.
Nobody wanted to get involved. I was in my late 30's and early 40's during that time.
Russell Brand was always a filthy creep, he looks disgusting, he sounds disgusting, I lost count of the times I saw his penis on tv or heard him talking about rough, nasty sex.
Like Saville it was all out there right in front of us. He thinks it was ok because he admitted his drug, drink, sex addiction despite harming countless women during this time.

@Nevermind202020 I agree he’s following a protocol that’s been used many times before but I do think he’s also playing that role in a way few people have recently : his broadcaster background combined with his self promotion skills and ability to sound intelligent whilst saying absolutely nothing of depth puts him way ahead of the rest.

Oh yes and shitty behaviour is still being covered up - look at Huw Edwards, why did nobody do anything about him?

Banter and boys being boys is explicity mentioned in school safe guarding training.

Do not excuse it under boys being boys. From primary school keep girl's safe.

I reported some very unpleasant comments to dd primary school and didn't hear back.

I've also seen tutors ignoring it.

His defence is that this is a MSM conspiracy because he’s upsetting people with his “truths”.

But, to my mind, the fundamental flaw with that argument is that this investigation shines an equally powerful spotlight on MSM and their culpability in this.

C4, BBC, agents, producers etc could have stopped him in his tracks but chose to turn a blind eye and are basically admitting it.

if I wanted to ‘take someone down’ I wouldn’t knowingly choose a method that took me down with them. I’d find another way.

And that’s why I’m of the opinion that this is proper investigative journalism and not a hit piece. I only hope that from this we finally introduce strong safeguarding in the media and that he faces appropriate consequences.

So we can’t start vilifying anyone in 2023 for actions that were both legal and deemed as acceptable of their time.

Rape was not acceptable in the 2000s.

If in 2012 your daughter was groomed at 16, or pinned down as she screamed, or raped against a wall, would you say these were acceptable?

In order to believe the first girl is lying, you would have to believe she...

1. Went to a rape crisis center after they had sex and pretended she was raped
2. Allowed evidence to be taken and frozen by experts
3. Manipulated Russell somehow into apologising for something he didn't do via text
4. Spend five months in therapy and speaking to the rape crisis team pretending to have been raped, and pretending to be wrestling with whether to tell the police
5. Waited many years for the perfect time to come out so they could enable a conspiracy unwittingly or not

I mean... come on

I can definitely think of other people who have done exactly as he's doing.

I can't seem to watch the documentary on catch up, I think it has been pulled?

still there for me

Think its back up on 4 now-was unavailable earlier-thank you!

I haven't read this entire thread so sorry if I'm repeating something but to the people that have said women had a choice not to go backstage and did they think it was for tea and biscuits- were you never young?

Do you honestly think a young girl or woman would not be excited to be selected to meet someone famous? And does that make them fair game?

When I think back to my teenage years I can think of at least ten incidents involving myself or my peers that now with the wisdom and experience of age I see as abusive, predatory and exploitative.

And that's the bloody point, someone older abusing their position of power and privilege on someone less worldly and in their thrall that's what is abhorrent and cunning and no doubt part of the thrill, I am amazed this isn't apparent.

An 18 year old 'woman' for example still at sixth form is not wise or cynical to the nasty shit of men , if you have an girls in your family are you honestly saying you'd expect them to be.

@OhhhhhhhhBiscuits
Well said. The question shouldn't be: 'why did the victim do / not do X'? it should be: 'how do we stop the rapist'? Answer: by convicting him. Every time.

Exactly....but I'm not sure critical thinking is some of these poster's strong point.

When I first saw his video my mind did go to this but having watched the programme and read the articles I'm not convinced this is the case. He comes across as a narcissist and has carefully curated the 'the government and media are trying to silence me' for this very purpose.

I have seen RB live and he's very funny and intelligent but I felt sick watching the programme last night and I believe the women.

@CherryMaDeara

i have never personally found these actions to be acceptable.

But it’s as a previous poster said, the times were different. Police would’ve asked why you were out alone in a short skirt, for example. Standards were different. “Acceptable” was different. Lower boundaries. Generally, women and victims were questioned as to how much blame they should take, ie if you wear that dress what can you expect?

But what is your actual point? Because when you say ‘So we can’t start vilifying anyone in 2023 for actions that were both legal and deemed as acceptable of their time’ you’re saying he needs to be allowed to get away with it. Do you realise that?

C4 hasn’t learned a thing from this. It was only relatively recently that ‘comedian’ Jordan Gray appeared on. Friday Night Live singing a vile misogynistic song and playing the piano with his surprise penis - to an audience who weren’t aware of what was going to happen.
He reminded me a lot of RB at the time. Same puerile behaviour, not to mention the voice.

Oh and I saw him live a few years ago - I never found his overtly sexualised comedy funny but he seemed to change his ways. What an utter disgrace.

I agree that in the early 2000s people were a bit more tolerant of an older man having a relationship with a 16 year old, provided it was consensual and the girl was well treated, but even then sexual assault and abuse in the relationship was seen as very wrong and illegal. Its only 20 years ago but attitudes have changed a lot with regard to the age difference, but as I say the abuse would have been seen as wrong at the time.

First off, I'd 100% believe he's likely to be guilty. I also suspect that there are many people within the mainstream media world who would have had a decent idea about it. I think he was protected by being a reasonably powerful part of the club. I do think there is quite likely to be some truth in the idea that as he is now a relatively influential anti-mainstream media persona that he not only lost the protection he had but became someone who it would be in their interests to take down.

And yes, to everyone sneering at the idea that he's influential rather than a youtube grifter. Two things can be true at once. I just checked and he has 6.6million followers. That does actually mean he has a pretty huge following. Especially when there would be plenty of people who follow his channel but don't want to be seen as a subscriber. Compared to Joe Rogan, who is undeniably very influential as an anti-msm voice, who has 15 million youtube subscribers. Rogan is American with a much bigger market than Brand. So Brand's 6.6million suggests far more influence than people give him credit for. (Just to be clear, I'm only comparing Brand and Rogan as they speak to a lot of the same types of people, I'm not questioning Rogan as any sort of sexual predator.)

It also makes me wonder if the reason for Brand's current media persona is at least partially to have it as a defence for when these accusations became public. There are so many comments that he's innocent and this is all a set up, that it's very convenient for him. Either way he'd always have defenders, but this way, he's a political martyr. He's fairly unlikely to do jail time for this but may actually end up making more money now if he's perceived to be being persecuted for his 'truth telling.'