Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
tevaburger

Ryan Adams

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Shouldn't we have the reckoning before talking about rehabilitation?

isn't it all part of the same thing? It is to me.

The crime disappears into the past. The crim doesn't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FatAmmy said:

But seriously...don't you think it's a bit odd to deploy the "Well, nobody's perfect" style of argument in this situation?

Because, typically, the sort of people who deploy that argument are maybe not entirely comfortable with their own pasts and don't want to see someone face consequences for it, because then they would have to admit to themselves they did something wrong

No, no I don't, and I don't think it's typically any type of person. Of course someone uncomfortable with their past may seek to defend their own actions, but I think to wait and see all the information before you rush to a decision is the correct thing and not the trend for trial by social media, where innocent and guilty get equally fucked before a limited recourse for those who did nothing, but will be forever tainted. I'm all up for whistleblowing, but if the NYT had any scruples, they'd have gone to the FBI with this info before running the story. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, gherkin8r said:

Who'd have thought a man called superscally who looks uncannily like Macho Man Ramdy Savage would be the beacon of rational thinking in all of this?

 

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Superscally said:

I think to wait and see all the information before you rush to a decision is the correct thing and not the trend for trial by social media, where innocent and guilty get equally fucked before a limited recourse for those who did nothing, but will be forever tainted.

The number of women who never get justice because they can’t prove it, or are too scared to come forward because of fear they won’t be believed, far, far, far outweighs the number of powerful men who have their careers ruined by the testimony of several lying women (are there any examples of that at all?), so I’m comfortable with accepting their story with the “evidence” that we have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Bradders said:

We’re not talking about the law though. We’re believing the accounts of several women which corroborate evidence of similar behaviour. He could be found innocent of all crimes but I still believe their account of his behaviour and wouldn’t support him again (not that I ever have tbf).

I'm not disputing that they seem to have seen the darker side of his character. What I'm querying is the amount and the severity of it...which none of us know. I'm similarly not saying he's a lovely faultless fella. Until the nature of this potential underage thing is judged upon however (which of course could change everything), I don't really think the level of flak he's taken is justified and as I've already said, his behaviour has never escalated to a unique peak amongst rockstars, nor to be honest people who you may even know (with different results, most likely) and being a bit of an arse has never stopped an album before. I think until more information became available, however, holding that album and distancing is an appropriate response. I'm cynical enough to know that any corporate dumpings are more likely to be a fear of blowback, rather than a genuine empathy, which is a sad thing. If this turns out to be mostly true and people decide to not like him - that's cool. It's right too. Shit behaviour can't be tolerated, but as Neil has said, find the facts, punish appropriately after a reasoned judgement and then, if appropriate help all parties involved to move on and avoid the same shit happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t really care how bad it is compared to other rock stars, I just think it’s a lot worse than you seem to.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What flak, exactly, has Ryan Adams personally taken from a group of people posting negatively about him on Efestivals, the #1 Glastonbury info forum on the web?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bradders said:

The number of women who never get justice because they can’t prove it, or are too scared to come forward because of fear they won’t be believed, far, far, far outweighs the number of powerful men who have their careers ruined by the testimony of several lying women (are there any examples of that at all?), so I’m comfortable with accepting their story with the “evidence” that we have.

Craig Charles almost had his ruined, Cliff was almost lynched on unfounded allegations. I'm comfortable on accepting their testimonies as evidence and the allegations should be investigated and judged appropriately. I'm not shouting their testimonies down, but what I'm reading from them is not criminal behaviour (Caveat: Pending Ava) it's the action of a very insecure man with a personality defect (he seems mentally ill to me) who alongside his alleged manipulation which seemed more like a bat signal for a psychiatrist, made some promises he didn't keep...

Phoebe Bridgers discussed this behaviour with her manager BEFORE accepting to work and tour with him??? WTF? This means that either the behaviour wasn't that bad or the manager is worse than anyone in this story?

Mandy Moore didn't get to record her songs? What if they were shite and another vocalist would do a better job? Shady, but not abusive behaviour. Adams denies this was ever the case.

Now take the above for what it is - I'm not saying that that was the case, but they alternative viewpoints and until we know the ACTUAL facts, they're as valid as any other. I'm not defending anyone. I'm just glad the allegations are getting investigated and I hope they do...FAIRLY.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, FatAmmy said:

What flak, exactly, has Ryan Adams personally taken from a group of people posting negatively about him on Efestivals, the #1 Glastonbury info forum on the web?

Not been on twitter recently?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bradders said:

I don’t really care how bad it is compared to other rock stars, I just think it’s a lot worse than you seem to.

I don't "seem to" think anything. Ask me again when the results are in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Superscally said:

Now take the above for what it is - I'm not saying that that was the case, but they alternative viewpoints and until we know the ACTUAL facts, they're as valid as any other. I'm not defending anyone.

You may not think so, but you are constantly positing alternative explanations for how this situation has occurred.  If you wish to be impartial then do so. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, clarkete said:

You may not think so, but you are constantly positing alternative explanations for how this situation has occurred.  If you wish to be impartial then do so. 

I thought the definition of impartiality was posting both sides of the argument. The other one has been more than put forward and I've also expressed my empathy with any victims of inappropriate behaviour. Didn't see much point in reposting the allegations. I didn't see anyone else rushing to put the other side forward. Have you ever heard of the phrase "devil's advocate"?

Edited by Superscally

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, jyoung said:

Don't know why it's so hard for some people. Very depressing. Always an if or a but.

 

 

19 hours ago, DR OK said:

That’s a useless tweet, look at the evidence and make a decision for yourself. To believe or not believe someone because they are a woman OR because they claim to be a victim is ridiculous.  

 

19 hours ago, gherkin8r said:

Believe women.... I mean really? Believe someone based on their gender? Isn't that the whole problem here? Survivors of what? Has Ryan Adams killed others?

I'm lost.

you know Natalie Prass is a past girlfriend? hence her tweet 

Edited by tevaburger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Superscally said:

I thought the definition of impartiality was posting both sides of the argument. The other one has been more than put forward and I've also expressed my empathy with any victims of inappropriate behaviour. Didn't see much point in reposting the allegations. I didn't see anyone else rushing to put the other side forward. Have you ever heard of the phrase "devil's advocate"?

Credible accusations of sexual misconduct are not a topic that requires a devil's advocate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, FatAmmy said:

Credible accusations of sexual misconduct are not a topic that requires a devil's advocate

they also don't need a competition in outrage.

 

Edited by eFestivals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

they also don't need a competition in outrage.

 

Is it your position that people are just pretending to be upset? Do you strongly believe in the phrase "Virtue signalling"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, FatAmmy said:

Is it your position that people are just pretending to be upset? Do you strongly believe in the phrase "Virtue signalling"?

I'm not thinking anyone is pretending to be upset.

I meant exactly what I said. It wasn't code for anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, eFestivals said:

I'm not thinking anyone is pretending to be upset.

I meant exactly what I said. It wasn't code for anything.

So, people are posting their sincerely held thoughts, and you feel the need to portray it as an "outrage competition", because...why, exactly?

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, FatAmmy said:

So, people are posting their sincerely held thoughts, and you feel the need to portray it as an "outrage competition", because...why, exactly?

Not for those other people's posts. For your own.

Because you've tried to make it that, with your disapproval (and more) of posts which aren't expressing the level of outrage you think should be said.

Those people are also expressing sincerely held thoughts, as valid as your own.

I take it as a given that anyone posting in this thread does not approve in anyway whatsoever of what Adams has done. 

Edited by eFestivals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, FatAmmy said:

Credible accusations of sexual misconduct are not a topic that requires a devil's advocate

They require due process. That's what I'm calling for. Address the point over Phoebe Bridger's manager deciding that the behaviour was not bad enough to stop an ongoing relationship. You probably can't, because you don't know the facts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Superscally said:

They require due process. That's what I'm calling for. Address the point over Phoebe Bridger's manager deciding that the behaviour was not bad enough to stop an ongoing relationship. You probably can't, because you don't know the facts. 

Ryan Adams will get due process, I assure you. 

There are a myriad of reasons why people will not break off relationships with an abuser. It happens all the time. It's some dark shit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Not for those other people's posts. For your own.

Because you've tried to make it that, with your disapproval (and more) of posts which aren't expressing the level of outrage you think should be said.

Those people are also expressing sincerely held thoughts, as valid as your own.

I take it as a given that anyone posting in this thread does not approve in anyway whatsoever of what Adams has done. 

OMG this is so sad. (insert broken hearted emoji here)

My thoughts and prayers are with the victims. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Not for those other people's posts. For your own.

Because you've tried to make it that, with your disapproval (and more) of posts which aren't expressing the level of outrage you think should be said.

Those people are also expressing sincerely held thoughts, as valid as your own.

I take it as a given that anyone posting in this thread does not approve in anyway whatsoever of what Adams has done. 

Except that the reasons I have disapproved of various posts have had nothing to do with the level of outrage contained within them, but my sincere disagreement with the content of the posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, FatAmmy said:

Except that the reasons I have disapproved of various posts have had nothing to do with the level of outrage contained within them, but my sincere disagreement with the content of the posts.

Really? 

Seemed like you were more interested in slurring those who expressed different views. 

eg:

 

2 hours ago, FatAmmy said:

You are telling on yourself HARD here

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...