Kasabian hot on the heels of Richard Madeley

[Jeanhatchet]

Kasabian issued a woeful tweet statement before Tom Meighan, their singer, was convicted of domestic abuse and (insultingly to his victim) given 200 hours of community service.

Apparently she refused to support a prosecution and so the sentence was lighter. The judge said he "could" have given a jail sentence and of course he SHOULD have.

It takes abused women a long time to look back and dismantle what was happening to them. Whilst they do that they should still receive justice appropriate to the crime against them.

But ... point here is that between men who should know better ... Madeley ... and men who just want to make money and not bother themselves with women's "problems" ...Kasabian .. it's clear that there is still an awful lot of awareness raising to do.

Kasabian initially issued a statement talking about "Personal issues ..affecting his behaviour" without condemning that behaviour or mentioning support for the woman affected by it. They have been slammed extensively and have tried to amend with something even worse. It ignores the victim ... mentions domestic abuse without any level of understanding beyond the words themselves and offers zero apology for the damage they have done to victims with their previously flippant post and without any message of support to Meighan's victim Vicky Agar.

There is still much work to be done.

As someone who doesn't usually dip into the feminist board, I found reading this jarring...and alarming. If someone has experienced abuse they can develop hypervigilance and see 'danger' /attack where there is none. I have every sympathy with victims/survivors of abuse but blaming a band for a statement that would have been written and released by a legal team, pre-trial then attacking them when they have done all they could and jeopardised their own futures financially to do so... That way madness lies.

The opinion supporting that narrative is what leads to extremists. No open dialogue, no open mind... 'I'm not bothered 99% of people disagree with me'... Detrimental.

I do think it's wrong to criticise the victim but that's not at all what the bad have done.

It is very sad for the child. Would it be usual for the child to stay with the mother if she is staying with the man?

I would be pretty pissed off if my name was splashed around the press by my husband's employers after HE had committed a crime.

I've been the victim of a crime. I've been identified in the press as part of reporting of that crime. It makes you feel more vulnerable and exposed.

I think condemning the act and the perpetrator is exactly the right tone to hit.

They could have continued with him in the band to preserve their own careers. It seems to be what the misguided fans are calling for. They didn't. They made clear they aren't happy to work with him. I think that sends a strong message.

Jean, I couldn't give a shit.

We need a range of views, including some more extreme to push things along and move the Overton window, but if that happens too quickly or too forcability, it also poses a risk of an extreme backlash the other way because it doesnt have a broad enough base of support of the core idea. That's why broad consensus is just so important. Without it we don't get meaningful change and long lasting change, we like it or not, 'cos reality'.

This is unavoidable in society with a range of different people, interests and priorities.

This does not mean I support DV nor do I minimise it. It means I view the way to end it differently and it means I think it's a much more complex route to the same eventual outcome.

You interpret this as a 'red flag'.

shrug

Well said @RedToothBrush. I agree with everything you've said.

You know she didn't support the prosecution and is standing by him and wants to resume the relationship right ?

I think the response from the rest of the band was great - they explained why they had to say "personal issues" until the legal action was concluded and they have very strongly condemned it as soon as they could and don't seem to be entertaining any "trying again once he's been to rehab" like the victim.

Feminists wonder why they are seen as man- haters- there's posts on here which justify that

?! Why is women being critical about responses to domestic violence perpetrated by men on women, ‘Man-hating’ in your book?

Because it isn't being critical- it's pulling apart and looking for ridiculous, god only knows what the band should do for no reason other than to attack them.

The band's actions were correct at each stage. They sacked him and when it was legally appropriate to do so made a statement condemning him.

Kasabian probably had to issue a neutral statement initially, as they did not want to in any way interfere with the legal process.

Dido no. it’s not absolutely not ‘man-hating’ or ‘attack’ to say someone could have written more in a public statement or could have written it differently. This is a site for opinions. It’s a public statement. Nobody has to agree with those. But we don’t need tired sexist put-downs either.

The public includes people affected by DV at some point in their lives including right now. DV is a particularly common problem including right now, as even the government acknowledges.

I read it earlier. It’s not what he’s ‘becoming’ - it’s what he has already become.

I do take issue with his statement. It’s a brief intro, apology, short admission of culpability then a few paragraphs of me me me and some excuses.

He would have done far better to go with brief intro, admission of personal problems, apology then a bit more on his culpability.
But hey...

Still think the band did fine.

Sorry I read Tom Meighan’s statement.

I read that and saw...

ADHD
Alcoholism
Personal Issues
Struggling
Mental Health

Almost a full house of excuses in with him recognising what he was becoming and needing family and friends to support him get through it all

As Debbie Huighes said "Often an abuser picks on the people around them that are vulnerable so alcohol or mental health cannot be blamed for their actions. There is still that level of conscience to decide who they are going to be abusive towards.

And then... another sentence

Kasabian said they had not been able to give details before the proceedings, but women's groups claimed their statement had "minimised" the seriousness of the crime and the band should have waited to comment. THAT! 100%. Much as Jean said in her OP.

On balance, I get that Jean has a hard stance and that she may have overstated this, but, in essence, I agree with that last statement. Had the band waited and not rushed to distance themselves (save their careers etc etc etc), they may have made a single, more meaningful statement!

I've found the band questionable after discovering the meaning of their name. I find it unsavoury that they glamorise someone implicit in murder.

Never google Joy Division then.

Kasabian said they had not been able to give details before the proceedings, but women's groups claimed their statement had "minimised" the seriousness of the crime and the band should have waited to comment.THAT! 100%. Much as Jean said in her OP

Well as opinions are apparently welcome I disagree with that statement. Kasabian did not have to say anything at all. It appears to escaped several people's notice that the trial was ongoing when the first statement was issued. Saying anything stronger or sacking him at that point could have prejudiced the result. Would that have made Jean and Chatty Lion happy?

Didono. it’s not absolutely not ‘man-hating’ or ‘attack’

Looks very much like it to me. Opinion and all that. I sincerely hope the band don't see this thread.

You , general you , go on about men needing to be "feminist allies" yet when they do it gets analysed to this level of pulling apart / reinventing what they said/ going to extraordinary lengths to find fault.

Jean's "editing " of their statement is every bit as spiteful and vindictive as the TRA "editing" of The Harper's Bizarre letter.

It appears to escaped several people's notice that the trial was ongoing when the first statement was issued. Saying anything stronger or sacking him at that point could have prejudiced the result. Would that have made Jean and Chatty Lion happy?

Quite.

This hadn't escaped my thoughts.

I didn't miss that fact, stated it quite clearly in my first response.

My point is that the first statement was not needed. Waiting might have given them a better shot at one clear statements.

Then again, if he had lied to them....but they know him, I don't and maybe, just maybe, there is a case for them not to have said anything at all!!

The continuing disagreement shows it's a tricky situation for friends and family to navigate!

Absolutely what redtoothbrush said. I'm so sick of having to perform my values to an unimpeachably high standard on social media. I'm a dick sometimes, most of us are. Sometimes I use terms or a tone that doesn't quite hit the spot or that could be interpreted hurtfully.

What the takeaway message is from Jeans op is 'you won't get it right, you can't get it right, so best just zip it'.

If I ever find myself the victim of any crime, please don't keep silent for fear of not saying the right things. Say what you think. Open the conversation. Be wrong even, but don't sit on your hands because everything is now cancel-able and you don't want to risk it. This is entirely the wrong direction we're heading in.

Ps same goes for if I'm bereaved. Don't cross the road to avoid speaking to me because of 'ten things not to say to a bereaved person'. Just talk to me, say weird shit, put your foot in it, be a dick. God knows I am.

And Dido I didn’t even mention the first statement. I said their second statement had some good bits and that it also could have gone further.

I think it’s better if you can stick to what people have actually posted, otherwise it looks a bit like creating straw men to argue against.

Do we know the age of the child? That could be a small but nevertheless important consideration.

Sorry if this has already been discussed - it's a long thread!

@TheProdigalKittensReturn

Not a fan. But I guess they could well carry on without him in this instance as the guitarist can sing and writes most of the tunes. In most bands, trying to carry on without your front man would be difficult.

Not advocating or condoning domestic abuse in any way... but yes bands don't tend to kick out members for this sort of thing.