Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

I think it's fairly horrible to suggest "well women should have known and stayed away from him" - if that is what is being suggested in some posts here.

Sounds a bit along the lines of "she asked for it". :mad:
 
I'm sure I've recounted the horrible tale of when I was 16 years old and recruited to an all female rock band (who had been quite well known, but split up and this was their new iteration) - and I went along to the first rehearsal which turned out to be just me and the 40+ years old manager of the band in his front room with a sofa bed and a blanket - I refused and left (was a long way from home too) - but just because I did that and because this sort of thing is considered "normal" in the entertainment and music industry does not mean it is OK or that the women (sometimes girls) involved should be more vocal, or that they have somehow consented.

There is a lot of pressure on girls (and I use the term purely in the sense of referring to underage women) and women to comply with sexual demands to get somewhere in the entertainment or music industry. It is not fucking OK, even if some young woman does not physically struggle under a celebrity or person who holds power over her in some way does not make it consensual.
 
Not about Brand but I just noticed a reference to "Hari" in this thread and on Googling I was very surprised to learn that Johann Hari is still able to publish stuff that people will read with a straight face.

I thought he'd just died of being shit a decade or so ago.

I had heard of Hari years ago, but could not remember anything about him. This Wikipedia article is very enlightening. Apparently Brand helped him out a lot.
 
You’re not being castigated for saying Brand may not be guilty of rape.

Everyone here knows Brand may not be guilty of rape and sexual assault (although it looks likely that he could be).


Rape is rape.
It’s not a scale from 1 to rape with “yeah well, she didn’t say no/she was drunk/... etc” somewhere between 1 and rape.

Yes I am.

No they don't. Many are acting like it's banged to rights.

I've already said Rape is rape.

Don't go putting words in my mouth.
Rape is rape regardless of the type of rape and I have no sympathy with proven rapists.

Sad to see you too putting words into my mouth when in fact I'm saying the same as you.
 
By Christ, this is a fucking stupid thing to say. Rapists can often appear to be 'nice' people to others.
To rephrase I said I think he less likely to be a Valery Makarenkov and more likely a Harvey Weinstein type.

Where the fuck do you extract "I think he's nice" from that? Seriously where?
 
Why can my #metoo female friend not see he's an obvious cunt?
People who like him and can't conceive that he could be guilty.
Urbanites who despise him and can't conceive that he could be innocent.

Both sides of the same coin of ignorance in my opinion.
 
I think you should leave this thread.
I'm not leaving because you think I should.

I'm leaving because I'm disgusted by Urbanites on this thread happy to immediately assume guilt.
Based on what?
A Tory news outlet going fishing for dirt, looking to create a story where previously none existing and digging up some accusations.

I've been vilified for daring to suggest that Innocent until proven guilty is a valid stance.

By this post above you are supporting those who disagree with innocent until proven guilty.

North Korea, China, Saudi Arabia and Iran do things the way you lot want. Guilty first.
And someone had the cheek to accuse me of being right wing because I support innocent first. Jokes!
 
Once last point before I go.

BP and Bernard Looney must currently be thanking the Tory Times with all their heart.

Celeb trash runs and runs as celebs polarize opinion. Looney's sleaze will now fade into the background.
 
I'm not leaving because you think I should.

I'm leaving because I'm disgusted by Urbanites on this thread happy to immediately assume guilt.
Based on what?
A Tory news outlet going fishing for dirt, looking to create a story where previously none existing and digging up some accusations.

I've been vilified for daring to suggest that Innocent until proven guilty is a valid stance.

By this post above you are supporting those who disagree with innocent until proven guilty.

North Korea, China, Saudi Arabia and Iran do things the way you lot want. Guilty first.
And someone had the cheek to accuse me of being right wing because I support innocent first. Jokes!

No previous accusations? Look at the Jonathan Ross thing (as I've said previously) or consider the Times interview or woman in a wheelchair clip posted in this thread. Just that sort of stuff sets off alarm bells, more so when the new accusations are added. It's like Saville, a range of incidents & behaviours that add up.
 
No previous accusations? Look at the Jonathan Ross thing (as I've said previously) or consider the Times interview or woman in a wheelchair clip posted in this thread. Just that sort of stuff sets off alarm bells, more so when the new accusations are added. It's like Saville, a range of incidents & behaviours that add up.
Story. Not accusations.

There wasn't a current Russell Brand story. Now there is.

TBH though I haven't had time to watch the TV programme or read the Article yet. So I don't really know if someone went to the Times or if the Times went to all of them and every woman they could find who'd ever worked with him. Or followed rumours or whatever journalistic methods are used.
 
Story. Not accusations.

There wasn't a current Russell Brand story. Now there is.

TBH though I haven't had time to watch the TV programme or read the Article yet. So I don't really know if someone went to the Times or if the Times went to all of them and every woman they could find who'd ever worked with him. Or followed rumours or whatever journalistic methods are used.
So you've formed a rock solid opinion on something you know nothing about. Christ wept. The story / allegations / whatever you want to call it have been brewing for years, covered for by legal threats. Fern Brady, Sarah Pascoe, Jimmy Carr, especially Katherine Ryan have all very clearly alluded to it over the years, but stopped short of actual accusations for two reasons - One, it's not their SA to report and doxxing victims of a prominent predator doesn't end well. And two, the guy had his lawyers over everything.
 
Story. Not accusations.

There wasn't a current Russell Brand story. Now there is.

TBH though I haven't had time to watch the TV programme or read the Article yet. So I don't really know if someone went to the Times or if the Times went to all of them and every woman they could find who'd ever worked with him. Or followed rumours or whatever journalistic methods are used.
When you're halfway to China quit digging
 
Antonio Negri ashtray angle??
The Antonio Negri connection is that the Hari plagiarism was first exposed by fans of Negri who objected to a hit job interview Hari claimed to have done with him, where they realised that he either hadn't done the interview at all or else had spiced it up with questions he'd not actually asked, cos he'd just copy-pasted things Negri had said in a different interview and pretended they were answers to his questions. And the ashtray angle is that one of the things that first tipped them off that the interview might be a bit dodgy is Hari included a bit describing how Negri lit up a fag but was then told by a waiter that you couldn't smoke inside and so put it in the ashtray, ashtrays not traditionally being provided in places where you can't smoke. If it wasn't for his habit of making up lies about Italian autonomists and their smoking habits, Hari's plagiarism might never have come to light. (There's also another side aspect about Hari's fondness for writing some rather troubling erotica that has also been largely lost to the mists of time - content warnings apply to that link.)

I have heard from someone I generally respect that Hari's recent books are actually really good, but given everything about his career up to that point I can't say I have a huge amount of desire to read them.
 
Last edited:
The thing that is most interesting/disturbing for me, is that the very thing that made Russel Brand so in demand back then i.e. his promiscuity & extremely/outrageously flirtatious behaviour and wild antics and his "popularity" with women, as well as the fact that he bragged about it CONSTANTLY are the things bringing him down now. Everything that he did which was seen through rose & booze tinted spectacles is now being seen from a very different perspective.

What once was seen as hilarious/edgy/modern is now, thanks to our new collective awareness, seen through a very different lens. He had a way of making you feel like you're in on the joke. I thought he was very entertaining and anarchic back in the day and it's always sad when people who once entertained you turn out to have been corrupted by power and fame, but it's never surprising, because it's depressingly common. He won't be the first and he won't be the last.

At least he tried to become a better person as he aged, unlike Saville & others.
 
Back
Top Bottom