The Court of Public Opinion

[sabotabby]

I'm not going to write a lengthy post about Jian Ghomeshi because a) other people have said it better, b) I'm about to head out and won't be around much this weekend, and c) I actually find it really difficult to read any details about this case and I'm finding it hits too close to home.

I am appalled that less than 100% of the people I know are supportive of the brave women who have come forward. I am appalled that I'm still seeing arguments suggesting that he was fired because he was kinky, or that he is innocent until proven guilty, or  that he should not be tried "in the court of public opinion," when the court of public opinion, i.e., social media, is the only justice any of these women, or any survivor of rape or domestic abuse, will ever know.

But the worst, the worst of all, is the people who are asking why the women didn't go to the police. I can't really deal, not at all, so I'm just going to leave this article, by a former Crown prosecutor, about why women don't go to the police.

Trigger warnings, obviously.

Comments

[ironed_orchid]

I saw his pre-emptive consensual kink statement, without knowing who he was or what was going on, and the details coming forward from different women make it completely clear that this is not about consensual kinky sex, although in some of their statements it seems pretty clear that he seems to think it was nothing out of the ordinary, which makes it even more horrific.

[sabotabby]

Yeah, more details are out and there is no way it's consensual kink. Even Navigator dropped him; that's how toxic he is. I'm hoping the people who made supportive statements have now reconsidered and are examining their life choices.

[ironed_orchid]

I keep hoping that the people who signed that petition supporting Roman Polanski (which said he was being charged on moral grounds or something equally vague) have taken the time to think long and hard about their choices.

[sabotabby]

...probably not.

[misslynx.livejournal.com]

One of the most frustrating things is that in some discussions I've seen, people who initially were all righteous outrage along the lines of "ZOMG BIG GOVERNMENT IS COMING TO TAKE AWAY OUR FLOGGERS!!1!", even after other people had pointed out all the reasons this did not sound like it was about consensual kink at all, just kept right on with the same line as if no one had said anything. Didn't respond whatsoever to the people pointing out reasons it didn't sound consensual, didn't offer any argument as to why they thought it was... They just kept on as if no one had said anything. Usually about how "THIS COULD HAPPEN TO ANY OF US SO WE MUST ALL WATCH OUR BACKS NOW" and what not.

Almost without exception, the people who have done this have been straight male doms, which makes me worry a bit that they either find the evidence that is was probably not consensual irrelevant and not even worth addressingand/or believe that even if it was definitely not consensual, it still "could happen to any of [them]", making me wonder just how careful they are or aren't at ensuring their partners have given informed consent. :(

(Though to be fair, I've also heard some male doms strongly condemning Ghomeshi, and emphasizing the importance of negotiation and affirmative consent, so the above attitude is by no means universal among them...)

[sabotabby]

I've, fortunately, mostly seen kinksters condemning Ghomeshi and not wanting to be associated with that shit, which is good. But >0 people seemed to think that the gub'mint was taking away the floggers, including a not-insignificant number of people who aren't kinky but took his statement at face value. But we all knew about the workplace harassment too, which cannot be explained away as consensual kink.

At any rate, now the police are investigating, but it took the media to force them into it, so I still think going to the media/SMS is more effective than going to the police. Preaching to the converted, I know.