Russell Brand: rape and sexual abuse allegations, grifting and general dodginess - discussion
- Thread starter mod
- Start date
BigMoaner
We will all go together
So sex workers can be touched however the punter wants? No boundaries at all? Gosh your brain is sounding broken right now.
eatmorecheese
He's fallen out of the car again
Even if they are a sex worker, consent is stiill consent, you utter prick.
Mumbles274
running from law and the press and the parents
I had to "don't recommend channel again" to a Jim Davidson video on YT with his views so it's safe to assume he can be added to the list
editor
hiraethified
So, despite the fact that you have absolutely zero evidence that she's a sex worker, you're going to continue to defend Brand. But however you spin it, there still is no logical reason for her to go to the police if she was a sex worker. But even if she was and he overstepped the mark, it's still sexual assault. Or don't you think sex workers have a right to be defended from assault?
paul mckenna
Bellend
If i'm the logic lord, then you are my jester
story
Changing the facts
8ball
Maximum Facepalm
I agree, though I think the gruesome culture war shit is the main attraction for most.
paul mckenna
Bellend
Of course. But it makes a big difference when the accusation is "inappropriate touching". Wouldn't you agree?
story
Changing the facts
Let's say she was in actual fact a sex worker.
And let's suppose for a moment that her report is true, even in part.
Are you dismissing her claim? Based on...?
hitmouse
so defeated, thinks it's funny
Yeah, looks like he's been going on GBNews to defend him:
Hopefully this won't lead to a multi-page discussion of how we're unfairly overlooking Jim Davidson's many virtues. Although not sure that would actually be worse than the rest of what's happening on the thread at the moment.
BigMoaner
We will all go together
No. Er no.
story
Changing the facts
No.
What a weird perspective.
You're in "but she was drunk/wearing a mini skirt" territory here mate.
Have a word FFS.
paul mckenna
Bellend
Context makes no difference to appropriateness?
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
Being a rape justifier isn't really 'logic' is it, however you dress it up.
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
The fact this has to be explained in 2023 is fucking appalling.
story
Changing the facts
Start with what is appropriate touching for such a situation. And work back from there.
It really is pretty simple.
BigMoaner
We will all go together
No. If someone reports abuse, no matter their job title, then it needs to be investigated.
8ball
Maximum Facepalm
Big celebrity is hiring a masseuse(sp?) and is planning a little self-entitled hanky panky.
Flashes some cash out of ego, plus a little incentive for hired party to feel she is being treated well in the deal.
It doesn't sound that odd to me. He probably saw it in a gangster movie.
Flashes some cash out of ego, plus a little incentive for hired party to feel she is being treated well in the deal.
It doesn't sound that odd to me. He probably saw it in a gangster movie.
paul mckenna
Bellend
So you agree: given the situation, calibrate your behaviour
I've just hired a prostitute and received a massage. I think i'm ok to touch these
I'm in Starbuck buying a latte. I don't think i'm ok to touch these
Like that?
story
Changing the facts
Are you trolling? Or you really really don't know?
If the person who was touched says it was inappropriate what kind of context, what situation, do you think, would make that person wrong?
Is it the action of touching, the doing, the motivation behind the act that is the deciding factor?
Or is it, maybe, the position thoughts feelings and words of the person who is touched that is the governing factor?
JimW
支那暗杀团
I'd say fuck me but apparently you'd take that as permission.
story
Changing the facts
A prostitue is not chattal FFS.
Not an object.
You don't buy a person when you hire a prostitue. They don't become your property. You are paying for their time and their services.
Last edited:
Which is more believable - a masseur could charge £500 for a private visit or Russel Brand’s then girlfriend would hire a call girl for him?
Russell Brand protected by High Court order after accusations from masseuse in 2014
Russell Brand was protected by a High Court order from a senior judge after he was accused of assaulting a woman hired to give him a birthday massage.
www.standard.co.uk
beesonthewhatnow
going deaf for a living
Can someone please check this cunts hard drive?
Rob Ray
Weight is meaningless
No. A sex worker is paid for a specific job, and inappropriate touching would be touching that has not been agreed within that remit. The same would be true of any job, in any workplace, from offices to care homes. It's really quite simple, I don't quite get why you're struggling with it?
BigMoaner
We will all go together
I’d think the dynamic between punter and sex worker is a very delicate interplay between consent, prior agreement of “services”, sexual energy and chemistry, respect, intuition between the pair etc.
Nowhere does “doing what one likes” to the other
person come into that
(Though Christ knows it’s no doubt one of the roles where abuse is suffered a great deal)
Nowhere does “doing what one likes” to the other
person come into that
(Though Christ knows it’s no doubt one of the roles where abuse is suffered a great deal)
Similar threads
