Russell Brand: rape and sexual abuse allegations, grifting and general dodginess - discussion

[BigMoaner]

I mean it’s simple isn’t it, outside of all this gruesome culture war shit. The bloke and the reports need to be investigated by the feds.

Jesus what’s so difficult to understand?

 

[BigMoaner]

You avoiding the circumstantial evidence here that the masseur is being paid a good 3x normal rates, but coincidentally the going rate for outcall sex, matters a whole deal here

Because if this person was indeed a sex worker, then touching them isn't inappropriate, it's basically the only appropriate thing to do!!


You'd have a to draw your own conclusions why she'd make the police complaint - it could be for gain or it could be for serious assault. But the article says "inappropriate touching"

So sex workers can be touched however the punter wants? No boundaries at all? Gosh your brain is sounding broken right now.

 

[eatmorecheese]

You avoiding the circumstantial evidence here that the masseur is being paid a good 3x normal rates, but coincidentally the going rate for outcall sex, matters a whole deal here

Because if this person was indeed a sex worker, then touching them isn't inappropriate, it's basically the only appropriate thing to do!!


You'd have a to draw your own conclusions why she'd make the police complaint - it could be for gain or it could be for serious assault. But the article says "inappropriate touching"

Even if they are a sex worker, consent is stiill consent, you utter prick.

 

[Mumbles274]

From another thread, Pearl Davis (1.8 million subscribers on youtube) and Anna "lol lmao I stand with Brand obviously" Khachiyan (£48,660 per month on Patreon).

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]

You avoiding the circumstantial evidence here that the masseur is being paid a good 3x normal rates, but coincidentally the going rate for outcall sex, matters a whole deal here

Because if this person was indeed a sex worker, then touching them isn't inappropriate, it's basically the only appropriate thing to do!!


You'd have a to draw your own conclusions why she'd make the police complaint - it could be for gain or it could be for serious assault. But the article says "inappropriate touching"

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]

I once got paid £300 to talk for an hour, so i don't think £500 is that much to pay for a travelling, trained masseuse at all.

If i'm the logic lord, then you are my jester

 

[kabbes]

Of course paul knows the going rate for “outcall sex” (whatever the fuck that is). Of course he does.

 

[story]

The world's best sports masseur in the world wouldn't charge £500 per hour. Clearly a call girl

Is touching a call girl now becoming a police matter ?!

Holy fuck this is ridiculous

---

What's obviously going on is that everyone goes full confirmation bias and posts anything with the words sex + Brand. Can't people apply some critical thought per accusation?

Because sex workers can't be sexually assaulted, right?

 

[8ball]

I mean it’s simple isn’t it, outside of all this gruesome culture war shit. The bloke and the reports need to be investigated by the Feds.

I agree, though I think the gruesome culture war shit is the main attraction for most.

 

[paul mckenna]

Because sex workers can't be sexually assaulted, right?

Of course. But it makes a big difference when the accusation is "inappropriate touching". Wouldn't you agree?

 

[story]

Do you believe that a standard masseur was hired for £500?

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]

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

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]

Of course. But it makes a big difference when the accusation is "inappropriate touching". Wouldn't you agree?

No. Er no.

 

[story]

Of course. But it makes a big difference when the accusation is "inappropriate touching". Wouldn't you agree?

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]

No. Er no.

Context makes no difference to appropriateness?

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

Being a rape justifier isn't really 'logic' is it, however you dress it up.

 

[danny la rouge]

No.

What a weird perspective.

You're in "but she was drunk/wearing a mini skirt" territory here mate.

Have a word FFS.

The fact this has to be explained in 2023 is fucking appalling.

 

[story]

Of course. But it makes a big difference when the accusation is "inappropriate touching". Wouldn't you agree?

Start with what is appropriate touching for such a situation. And work back from there.

It really is pretty simple.

 

[BigMoaner]

Context makes no difference to appropriateness?

No. If someone reports abuse, no matter their job title, then it needs to be investigated.

 

[8ball]

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.

 

[paul mckenna]

Start with what is appropriate touching for such a situation. And work back from there.

It really is pretty simple.

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]

Context makes no difference to appropriateness?

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?

 

[story]

I can't quite grasp this level of foolish ignorance. I'm quite taken back tbh.

 

[JimW]

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?

I'd say fuck me but apparently you'd take that as permission.

 

[story]

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?

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.

 

[edcraw]

Do you believe that a standard masseur was hired for £500?

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]

The world's best sports masseur in the world wouldn't charge £500 per hour. Clearly a call girl

Is touching a call girl now becoming a police matter ?!

Holy fuck this is ridiculous

---

What's obviously going on is that everyone goes full confirmation bias and posts anything with the words sex + Brand. Can't people apply some critical thought per accusation?

Can someone please check this cunts hard drive?

 

[Rob Ray]

Of course. But it makes a big difference when the accusation is "inappropriate touching". Wouldn't you agree?

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?

 

[LDC]

Jesus fucking christ, I'm stepping away from this thread. Good luck to those of you trying to talk to this person reasonably.

 

[BigMoaner]

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)