Kasabian//Tom Meighan

[lighthouse]

Well, Kasabian was already on the way down before this even happened.

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, Quark said:

I'd disagree Neil.  It's important, I think, to make sure there's a line between forgiveness/redemption and facing consequences of your actions.

There's nothing preventing him from going away, paying his dues, getting himself sorted out, and making a comeback under his own name or as part of another project.  One of the big arguing points yesterday was that the whole point of the justice system should be a mixture of punishment and rehabilitation.

But equally, he has to face consequences.  His actions have resulted in him losing that job and, from the look of it, his friends. From the wording of their statement he had an opportunity to approach the release of information differently.  If he'd done what was apparently agreed/expected, their follow up and attitude might have been different. That's the consequences.

None of this stops him from seeking and finding redemption. But it's entirely the group's call to look at his actions and say "nope, we're not sticking with this". Given that his behaviour over the last few years sounds to have been challenging, it's entirely possible (conjecture I admit) that they've already stood by him and supported him in sorting himself out, and this was the final straw.

I think you must have misunderstood what I was getting at.

I've no problem with them saying "we cannot accept what he's done so we no longer want to work with him".

It's the bit where they say they had "no choice" and then imply that to make a different choice would be condoning his actions.

I did also say that perhaps it's just poor wording.

The consequences he has to face and should face are the legal ones. There's nothing tacked onto that about how if someone does something wrong they must also lose their job.

Kasabian had a choice. They made their choice. I'm happy for them to make whatever choice they feel is appropriate.

It's the nu-puritanical bit i object to, of claiming they didn't have a choice.

Because if that 'no choice' idea is used consistently there can be no redemption for anyone about anything.

 

 

[gigpusher]

1 minute ago, Quark said:

Agreed to a point, but again (and I know you were writing this while I was posting so we're a bit out of sync) it's possible to face consequences without being cancelled (I had to look that term up btw!).

With the more vocal arsehole fans contingent, it's like Hopkins getting binned off Twitter.  No-one's saying she can't use the internet as a platform, but Twitter don't want her on their platform.  But the fan reaction (again very similar) is this massive overreaction like she's been gagged by the thought police.

When behaviour gets challenged, fandom like that has a massive overreaction, like a toddler being told they can't have their toy for a bit. And like toddlers, you can't give into it, or it becomes acceptable.  There *have* to be consequences, and it's important for that concept to become normalised as much as it's important for the actions that led there to stop being normalised, surely?

Yes absolutely consequences but I suppose what I am saying is the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. 

It feels to me like people now only think in PR terms as opposed to what will actually benefit society terms. There seems to be this very binary bad/good, yes/no dynamic that I find incredibly unhealthy in actually moving anything forward. Any celebrity who commits these crimes is basically shunned usually for an undefined period based on how worthy we found them in the first place. If we think they are incredibly talented they seem to be able to wheedle their way back without necessarily taking too many steps to change their behaviour. I personally feel like in this case Kasabian would have happily put up with his behaviour if he hadn't been so obviously caught. Everything they have done is for PR to protect them and not really in any way thinking of the only real victim of this crime which is Vikki Ager. 

I just would like justice to focus more on prevention, actual rehabilitation and better conversations about male behaviour which doesn't make men defensive but makes every man more reflective of what they can do to be better allies to women who have to suffer as a result of these crimes.  

[gooner1990]

8 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I think you must have misunderstood what I was getting at.

I've no problem with them saying "we cannot accept what he's done so we no longer want to work with him".

It's the bit where they say they had "no choice" and then imply that to make a different choice would be condoning his actions.

I did also say that perhaps it's just poor wording.

The consequences he has to face and should face are the legal ones. There's nothing tacked onto that about how if someone does something wrong they must also lose their job.

Kasabian had a choice. They made their choice. I'm happy for them to make whatever choice they feel is appropriate.

It's the nu-puritanical bit i object to, of claiming they didn't have a choice.

Because if that 'no choice' idea is used consistently there can be no redemption for anyone about anything.

 

 

I would have thought some sort of PR manager at their label would have written it for them?

[Quark]

9 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I think you must have misunderstood what I was getting at.

I've no problem with them saying "we cannot accept what he's done so we no longer want to work with him".

It's the bit where they say they had "no choice" and then imply that to make a different choice would be condoning his actions.

I did also say that perhaps it's just poor wording.

The consequences he has to face and should face are the legal ones. There's nothing tacked onto that about how if someone does something wrong they must also lose their job.

Kasabian had a choice. They made their choice. I'm happy for them to make whatever choice they feel is appropriate.

It's the nu-puritanical bit i object to, of claiming they didn't have a choice.

Because if that 'no choice' idea is used consistently there can be no redemption for anyone about anything.

Interesting point, and yeah I prob did misunderstand your point a bit - my bad. Language is an important thing, so see where you're going.

2 minutes ago, gigpusher said:

Yes absolutely consequences but I suppose what I am saying is the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. 

It feels to me like people now only think in PR terms as opposed to what will actually benefit society terms. There seems to be this very binary bad/good, yes/no dynamic that I find incredibly unhealthy in actually moving anything forward. Any celebrity who commits these crimes is basically shunned usually for an undefined period based on how worthy we found them in the first place. If we think they are incredibly talented they seem to be able to wheedle their way back without necessarily taking too many steps to change their behaviour. I personally feel like in this case Kasabian would have happily put up with his behaviour if he hadn't been so obviously caught. Everything they have done is for PR to protect them and not really in any way thinking of the only real victim of this crime which is Vikki Ager. 

I just would like justice to focus more on prevention, actual rehabilitation and better conversations about male behaviour which doesn't make men defensive but makes every man more reflective of what they can do to be better allies to women who have to suffer as a result of these crimes.  

Absolutely there is a desire to be on the right side of history, and we've seen that in the BLM movement with firms falling over themselves to "do the right thing". I think there's an element of "if the results are correct, how important is it that the motivation was spot on?" but that's a loooong topic of conversation!

[zahidf]

15 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I think you must have misunderstood what I was getting at.

I've no problem with them saying "we cannot accept what he's done so we no longer want to work with him".

It's the bit where they say they had "no choice" and then imply that to make a different choice would be condoning his actions.

I did also say that perhaps it's just poor wording.

The consequences he has to face and should face are the legal ones. There's nothing tacked onto that about how if someone does something wrong they must also lose their job.

Kasabian had a choice. They made their choice. I'm happy for them to make whatever choice they feel is appropriate.

It's the nu-puritanical bit i object to, of claiming they didn't have a choice.

Because if that 'no choice' idea is used consistently there can be no redemption for anyone about anything.

 

 

TBH even if they did want to keep working with him, Tom getting a ridiculously lenient sentence means the music fanbase as a whole would reject any attempts by the band to keep him on 

 

I agree generally with someone being given a chance at redemption, but his statement before the court hearing coming out, his attempts at denial before the CCTV came out and the lenient sentence makes me think its not the situation in this case

[eFestivals]

4 minutes ago, gooner1990 said:

I would have thought some sort of PR manager at their label would have written it for them?

Doesn't really matter how the wording ended up as it did, the point is the wording is nu-puritanical bollocks.

And I'll just quote myself below, so that the line above is in full context and can't be deliberately misunderstood by a troll.  

16 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Kasabian had a choice. They made their choice. I'm happy for them to make whatever choice they feel is appropriate.

It's the nu-puritanical bit i object to, of claiming they didn't have a choice.

 

[mattiloy]

42 minutes ago, Padgey said:

 

New Band Name

My thoughts are that they will form under a new name, although they have distanced themselves from TM's actions the band's name will be linked with his actions. 

How about ’Kasabagain’

[Gilgamesh69]

I was wondering... is it possible to recover from something like this career-wise? How?

 

I mean, these days you can get cancelled for offensive social media media posts, so something like this is much worse. Plus at least with that you might get people defending you, whereas with this it's going to be difficult to get any support from others. Nobody is going be saying "ohdon't be so hard on him, it was only a bit of domestic abuse. None of us are perfect!"

[CaledonianGonzo]

4 minutes ago, Gilgamesh69 said:

I was wondering... is it possible to recover from something like this career-wise? How?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Brown_discography

[Quark]

7 minutes ago, Gilgamesh69 said:

I was wondering... is it possible to recover from something like this career-wise? How?

 

I mean, these days you can get cancelled for offensive social media media posts, so something like this is much worse. Plus at least with that you might get people defending you, whereas with this it's going to be difficult to get any support from others. Nobody is going be saying "ohdon't be so hard on him, it was only a bit of domestic abuse. None of us are perfect!"

Chris Brown is the obvious one.  Rihanna case was 2009, got his first US no 1 album 2 years later

EDIT - Calgon was quicker on the draw...

Edited July 8, 2020 by Quark

[eFestivals]

 

Just now, zahidf said:

but his statement before the court hearing coming out, his attempts at denial before the CCTV came out and the lenient sentence makes me think its not the situation in this case

You can't blame him for the 'lenient' sentence.  

Me, I've put his "statement before the court hearing coming out" alongside the report of the court hearing I read, and it doesn't sound particularly unreasonable even tho it's 'me' focused, as I'd rather he was a reformed-abuser-arsehole than still-an-abuser-with-some-nice-virtue-signalling.

From that court report it sounded like he's recognised just how much he stepped over the line, and from his statement that he's dealing with it. That's the best outcome to be had, so I hope it's how it is.

[gooner1990]

1 minute ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Brown_discography

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozzy_Osbourne_discography

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

Stan Collymore didn’t struggle for employment despite beating Ulrika up.

[mcshed]

15 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

The consequences he has to face and should face are the legal ones. There's nothing tacked onto that about how if someone does something wrong they must also lose their job.

Except that his lawyer pointed to the loss of his position in the band as a mark of the effect this was having on him and the sentencing will have taken this into account.

[Quark]

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

From that court report it sounded like he's recognised just how much he stepped over the line, and from his statement that he's dealing with it. That's the best outcome to be had, so I hope it's how it is.

This is absolutely the key bit we agree on.  If you don't want people who do wrong to recognise, correct and move forward you might as well introduce capital punishment for every offence.

[zahidf]

4 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

 

You can't blame him for the 'lenient' sentence.  

Me, I've put his "statement before the court hearing coming out" alongside the report of the court hearing I read, and it doesn't sound particularly unreasonable even tho it's 'me' focused, as I'd rather he was a reformed-abuser-arsehole than still-an-abuser-with-some-nice-virtue-signalling.

From that court report it sounded like he's recognised just how much he stepped over the line, and from his statement that he's dealing with it. That's the best outcome to be had, so I hope it's how it is.

Fair point, i blame the judge for such a lenient sentence. 

Lets see, but there was evdience of previous physical abuse, so im not massively willing to give him any benefit of doubt

[CaledonianGonzo]

Fairly sure the Godfather of Soul had a few skeletons in his closet when he graced the Pyramid Stage.

[zahidf]

15 minutes ago, Gilgamesh69 said:

I was wondering... is it possible to recover from something like this career-wise? How?

 

I mean, these days you can get cancelled for offensive social media media posts, so something like this is much worse. Plus at least with that you might get people defending you, whereas with this it's going to be difficult to get any support from others. Nobody is going be saying "ohdon't be so hard on him, it was only a bit of domestic abuse. None of us are perfect!"

I dont see any come back really for him for it, especially as most people are disgusted by the lenient sentence he got

[Quark]

17 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

How about ’Kasabagain’

Underrated response

[eFestivals]

2 minutes ago, mcshed said:

Except that his lawyer pointed to the loss of his position in the band as a mark of the effect this was having on him and the sentencing will have taken this into account.

that's not of any relevance towards Kasabian's choice to virtue-signal their nu-puritanical-ism.

I've no problem with someone losing their job because of what they've done. I've no problem with an employer deciding to sack someone because of what they've done as long as there's a thought process to it.

I *do* have a problem with any employer claiming they had no choice over the decision: they have a choice.

Thankfully, there's some employers who go out of their way to employ ex-offenders. Unfortunately, lots of those companies feel unable to tell the public they do that because the public are morons.

And because the public are morons, those like Kasabian virtue-signal their nu-puritanical-ism. 

[Hugh Jass]

2 minutes ago, zahidf said:

I dont see any come back really for him for it, especially as most people are disgusted by the lenient sentence he got

People have very short memories. A couple of years out of the spotlight and as long as he doesn’t misbehave again he’ll be back.

[eFestivals]

4 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Fair point, i blame the judge for such a lenient sentence. 

Lets see, but there was evdience of previous physical abuse, so im not massively willing to give him any benefit of doubt

No one has asked you to give him the benefit of the doubt.

What's important from where things are now is that he recognises he's done wrong and does what's necessary for no repeat.

Everything else is bollocks really.

[Hugh Jass]

They should probably drop “You’re in Love With A Psycho” from the setlist though.

[zahidf]

2 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

People have very short memories. A couple of years out of the spotlight and as long as he doesn’t misbehave again he’ll be back.

Nah, he will always be the man who beat his fiance and got away with community service. He may try to make a comeback but i doubt many people will give him the time of day