Joint investigation by C4 Dispatches and The Times about allegations made by women who have worked with Russell Brand

[IwantToRetire]

NB - I know trigger warnings have a bad name, but in this instance should add that some may find descriptions in the report of sexual violence personnally disturbing.

Alice has decided to speak out because she now believes that she was too young to be able to consent to a relationship with an adult man, and that the law should be changed to protect those under 18. “My mum still feels like she failed me in some way in allowing this to happen, but she had no recourse at all,” she says. “It shouldn’t be legal for a 16-year-old to have a relationship with a man in their thirties. There should be something in place to protect children.”

She also wants the entertainment industry to change. For many years, Brand has been applauded for his jokes describing how he has manipulated women for sex.

“I think he was very skilful in the start of making his identity be, ‘I’m the womaniser. I’m a sex addict. I’m inappropriate but it’s all just a joke, it’s funny’,” Alice claims, “It’s a smokescreen for a lot more of his dark behaviour.”

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/russell-brand-rape-sexual-assault-abuse-allegations-investigation-v5hxdlmb6 (*)

https://www.channel4.com/programmes/russell-brand-in-plain-sight-dispatches

The tv channels and theatres still behave as those male entertainers are entitled to have every one of their whims catered to, including expecting womrn to be sexually available. For them, Me Too and all the other exposes have not stopped them acting like pimps.

(*) The Times article has been archived at https://archive.ph - just paste the Times web link into the box provided.

Can't say I am surprised. I've always found him a repulsive creep.

This is shocking though - how did this not come out when Savile was being investigated??

"In May 2007, Brand called Jimmy Savile, who suggested the pair could meet if Brand brought along a sister. Brand doesn’t have a sister, so instead offered to bring a female employee — agreeing, on Savile’s request, that she should be naked.

“I’ve got a personal assistant,” he said. “And part of her job description is that anyone I demand she greet, meet, massages, she has to do it. She’s very attractive, Jimmy.” This was four years before Savile’s death and five years before details of the Jim’ll Fix It presenter’s crimes were exposed."

Is it in today's (Sunday) Times? I might buy a copy. My heart goes out to all the women but especially Alice. She was so young 💔

The allegations are so disturbing and distressing, those poor women. This morning I’m mad as hell, what can be done to stop this behaviour, people knew and did fuck all. We’ve had enough!!

Here's the earlier thread in Feminism Chat www.mumsnet.com/talk/feminism/4897546-russell-brand-accused-of-rape-sexual-assaults-and-abuse-the-timessunday-times-story

Didn't think anyone bothered with "chat" as it is the non feminist feminist thread.

And something as fundamental as sexual abuse should be discussed within the context of the basic understanding that women's dicrimination is based on her sex.

So surprised discussion has happened there but not here.

But of course in doing that justifies MNHQ's false analysis that sex and gender are a minority interest for feminists who really just want to chat.

:(

Disturbing that he has daughters.

The allegations are so disturbing and distressing, those poor women. This morning I’m mad as hell, what can be done to stop this behaviour, people knew and did fuck all. We’ve had enough!!

Well I am afraid that as long as men's needs and behaviour are prioritised nothing is going to happen. And more often than not when something like this is made public,all those positions of power express shock and vow it will never happen again. But the reality is they envy men like this and secretly with they could get away with it.

And I am afraid this isn't just about institutions but that fact that the men who grow up to be abusers are the product of families as much as anything else.

We now have a situation of open hypocrasy where society wrings it hands about violence against women, yet at the same time promotes men who are overtly misogynistic and thing being a sexual predatory is what all men want to be. (check out "banter").

Not forgetting that society still makes out that some women who fall for this "bad boy" persona will have their reputations enhanced to be seen with a man like that.

And it also indicates that however much feminists have campaigned on issues about violence against women and exploitation eg prostitution and pornography, for many women this has no traction.

Why would any woman want to have anything to do with man who boasted about being raised on his father's pornography?

This isn't to blame women, as obviously men are the problem.

But just that so much of culture is still about men being allowed to cross the line, and are enabled by other men.

Is anyone surprised?

So surprised discussion has happened there but not here.

It's still FWR, if this thread was busy MN would probably have moved it over. But there was a busy thread already. And this thread isn't busy.

It doesn't need a separate thread here, it isn't a different topic. This is one subject where we can unite with other feminists, unless you feel there is a specific angle that's not being covered.

I am not surprised that a creep is being accused of being a rapist but for major newspapers to be confident enough to say it takes a lot of groundwork for journalists and lawyers and a lot of bravery from the victims. If the Times even made minor mistakes here they could be sued for millions but they have put together an astonishing detailed and convincing report that is very hard to doubt. In contrast Russell Brand has released a silly video claiming it is all a conspiracy against him because he is danger to the establishment.

It's still FWR, if this thread was busy MN would probably have moved it over. But there was a busy thread already. And this thread isn't busy.

What are you talking about? Are you some MNHQ lackey?

Everyone, or at least everyone always used to say they do NOT want MNHQ to move threads that have posted on FWR to chat.

That is because chat is rogue strategy by MNHQ to make out that FWR is a single issue campaing board, which is isn't even though they have tried to label it as such, but it is as the URL still reveals feminism and women's rights.

Chats is for all the "nice girls" who dont want to be contaminated by all the hard line feminists who are so strident and aren't "kind" to TRAs.

So in starting a thread on FWR it is because hopefully the discussion will be influenced by the fact that the board is aimed at women who are aware that their sex is the basis of their oppression.

Your remarks are baffling.

Or possibily an indication that MNHQ and the nice girls have derailed what used to be the committed autonomous thinking of FWR, and new users just subserviently think that they must toe the line of the establishment.

The ultimate aim to syphon of discussion about how trans activism is erasing women's rights as some fringe element to make FWR as single issue board.

Which more and more I am thinking they might have achieved as only a totally other thread when I posted something about certain words and a feminist analysis of those words, the response was about "tone" rather than how historically man have use words about women's body past as being the worst sort of insult anyone can have said about them.

Very impressive reporting from the Sunday Times and Dispatches - the amount of work that has gone into it is staggering. The stories were immensely harrowing.

Shocked to see so many people (including, disappointingly, people who call themselves feminists) saying they don't believe it, and it's a conspiracy by mainstream media against poor little innocent Russell. Even though you only have to listen to his own words to see what a vile predator he is.

Also shocking that a whole stadium of presumably both men and women stood up and applauded him last night.

I can understand that if you were someone who for whatever reason thought Brand was an interesting (???!!!!) person you would be reluctant to have to admit that maybe he is not only a piece of shit, but a sexuallly violent man.

I have a horrid feeling that this might turn out to be how Johnny Depp became even more of a hero to some than he already was. Even when there were recordings of him and some pathetic english actor making grotesquely violent comments about Amber Heard.

God I'm just watching Dispatches now.

I was wondering how a celebrity could possibly get away with this behaviour post Savile but then looked up when Savile died and it was only October 2011 and Brand had gone to America by then.

You'd have hoped that Operation Yewtree or Me Too might have flushed out more of this type of thing.

It's also shocking that The BBC and Chanel 4 are being somewhat cagey about the information that they have. You'd think after Savile they would be more transparent.

What are you talking about? Are you some MNHQ lackey?

If you had already started a thread and someone else dared to post one, you'd have lost your shit over it. Your thread is superfluous, there is already a perfectly reasonable thread, without your grandstanding.

As with Saville there are 2 things for me. Firstly RB being a creepy misogynistic unfunny one trick pony arsehole always seemed obvious to me & I’ve always been baffled at his popularity. I would say his predatory behaviour has been hiding in plain sight but it’s not even been hiding has it?

which is the second thing. He has been enabled by media companies, agents, other tv & rádio people who knew what he was like & knew how he treated women who worked on his shows let alone those who didn’t but they turned a blind eye because he was popular.

Yes they've learned absolutely nothing, have they? Or they don't give a shit.

Yes complete agree!

YES YES YES! THIS^

He's filthy scum but well-supported by conspiracy nuts, which seems to have been his deliberate strategy in recent years - outperform Jimmy Savile by recruiting an army of psychos to help bash the victims.

His latest tactic is to court Putin and hope that glorying in the slaughter of Ukrainian children serves him as well as it does the US far right.

What I don't understand about this is that there must be thousands of wannabe actors/presenters out there. RB is pretty famous, I wouldn't say wildly so or national treasure status. What is it these creeps do or know that means that are tolerated in a work place. We never know because they aren't saying and the TV companies aren't saying, they are happy with the focus being on the individual.

It's all very distasteful. I'm saddened by the # of times I've seen people assign blame to Katie Perry, Katherine Ryan, the girls/women themselves, anyone but RB.

It’s being reported that more women have come forward and the police will investigate. If that’s true presumably they will need place a reporting ban pdq or the media and online interest will be at risk of undermining any criminal case against him.

I actually remember that interview being used to prove how creepy Saville was; no one seemed to think RB was also being creepy then.