ilovefuzz.com

What does a conviction have to do with anything? Do you believe that incidents don't occur until there's an official record of them? Are you intentionally implying that there's no chance this guy's guilty of any wrong-doing? Are you being willfully ignorant of the fact that this is an Icelandic band and an American accuser, meaning a conviction is even more wildly unlikely than usual, regardless of the authenticity of her claim? You are doubling down on serious ignorance.

You're jumping through some serious hoops now. All I said was: nobody's been convicted yet. So in other words, might wanna hold off on acting like the dude's a rapist until he's been proven to be.

I'd like to see if you act the same way if somebody is being accused of pedophilia, or if this massive need to play the devil's advocate only surfaces on issues like this.

Like, I get your point, he's not convicted yet. Yet you implicitly open the possibility of the girl in this case being a liar, which is what half this thread has been about.

Edit: So, we don't know yet. People were saying that this sucks and that nobody is pure. Then you enter with the «We don't know, she might lie»-thing. What exactly prompted you to do that?

PuddysJacket wrote:You're jumping through some serious hoops now. All I said was: nobody's been convicted yet. So in other words, might wanna hold off on acting like the dude's a rapist until he's been proven to be.

Jesus christ, you knuckle dragger - Convictions don't usually happen in sexual assault cases and you fucking know that. Stats show that men rarely believe women, even when there is proof, so how would we go about getting these convictions? How do we convince you that rape and violence happened, if you were on the jury, since you start with the assumption that the woman is lying and trying to ruin the lives of men around her? When the cops assume you are lying? When the fucking president assumes you are lying?

Tell me, oh impartial judge of all things, how are women suppose to get any justice AT ALL when the majority of men in power do not want to end sexual violence. If a majority of powerful men wanted to end it, we would see changes. We would see rape kits get tested. We would see abuser cops thrown off the force. We would see military personnel dishonorably discharged when they were caught abusing or harassing their fellow officers. We would see jailers fired when they abuse inmates (who are mostly male and do not report either).

But we don't see those things, do we? We see powerful men defending the right to rape and harass women and you, sir, are part of that problem.

Go find a fucking therapist and dig deal into your issues regarding women with them. Don't do it in public and especially don't do it here.

Eivind August wrote: Edit: So, we don't know yet. People were saying that this sucks and that nobody is pure. Then you enter with the «We don't know, she might lie»-thing. What exactly prompted you to do that?

Probably the fact that the general sentiment on the first couple pages was "wow, nobody saw this coming....really sucks. Why are men like this?".....as if this was something definite, set in concrete. People lie all the time, that's why we have due process. If you're asking me to be open to the idea that the dude raped her while she was unconscious - of course. But taking one side of a story as fact is retarded, and is what almost everyone on this thread is doing.

Hate to point to the Gira thing again...but I had the same stance in that case and guess what? The chick was full of shit and just angry he didn't return her feelings.

aens_wife wrote:

PuddysJacket wrote:You're jumping through some serious hoops now. All I said was: nobody's been convicted yet. So in other words, might wanna hold off on acting like the dude's a rapist until he's been proven to be.

Jesus christ, you knuckle dragger - Convictions don't usually happen in sexual assault cases and you fucking know that. Stats show that men rarely believe women, even when there is proof, so how would we go about getting these convictions? How do we convince you that rape and violence happened, if you were on the jury, since you start with the assumption that the woman is lying and trying to ruin the lives of men around her? When the cops assume you are lying? When the fucking president assumes you are lying?

Tell me, oh impartial judge of all things, how are women suppose to get any justice AT ALL when the majority of men in power do not want to end sexual violence. If a majority of powerful men wanted to end it, we would see changes. We would see rape kits get tested. We would see abuser cops thrown off the force. We would see military personnel dishonorably discharged when they were caught abusing or harassing their fellow officers. We would see jailers fired when they abuse inmates (who are mostly male and do not report either).

But we don't see those things, do we? We see powerful men defending the right to rape and harass women and you, sir, are part of that problem.

Go find a fucking therapist and dig deal into your issues regarding women with them. Don't do it in public and especially don't do it here.

Didn't mean to reply via PM. But, once you learn some reading comprehension, and can articulate a response without name calling, typing in capitals, and cursing, I'll respond to you.

PuddysJacket wrote:

Eivind August wrote: Edit: So, we don't know yet. People were saying that this sucks and that nobody is pure. Then you enter with the «We don't know, she might lie»-thing. What exactly prompted you to do that?

Probably the fact that the general sentiment on the first couple pages was "wow, nobody saw this coming....really sucks. Why are men like this?".....as if this was something definite, set in concrete. People lie all the time, that's why we have due process. If you're asking me to be open to the idea that the dude raped her while she was unconscious - of course. But taking one side of a story as fact is retarded, and is what almost everyone on this thread is doing.

Hate to point to the Gira thing again...but I had the same stance in that case and guess what? The chick was full of shit and just angry he didn't return her feelings.

Ok, good luck being right in a few percent of these cases. Hope that feeling of accomplishment is worth it.

In all seriousness, I see your general point (I think everyone here does), but I do not see the point of arguing so vehemently about it. Nobody in this thread had called Orri a rapist as far as I can tell. Most of us, however, seem to feel for the accuser in cases such as this, or at least to be empathetic to their struggle. I'm having a hard time seeing why anybody would think otherwise, which is why I called you out.

Nobody read my response. That’s cool! Tldr amirite?

Can we just like stop fighting here? I mean, it’s the internet and it’s going to go nowhere no matter what, sooooo what’s the point?

PuddysJacket wrote:

aens_wife wrote:

PuddysJacket wrote:You're jumping through some serious hoops now. All I said was: nobody's been convicted yet. So in other words, might wanna hold off on acting like the dude's a rapist until he's been proven to be.

Jesus christ, you knuckle dragger - Convictions don't usually happen in sexual assault cases and you fucking know that. Stats show that men rarely believe women, even when there is proof, so how would we go about getting these convictions? How do we convince you that rape and violence happened, if you were on the jury, since you start with the assumption that the woman is lying and trying to ruin the lives of men around her? When the cops assume you are lying? When the fucking president assumes you are lying?

Tell me, oh impartial judge of all things, how are women suppose to get any justice AT ALL when the majority of men in power do not want to end sexual violence. If a majority of powerful men wanted to end it, we would see changes. We would see rape kits get tested. We would see abuser cops thrown off the force. We would see military personnel dishonorably discharged when they were caught abusing or harassing their fellow officers. We would see jailers fired when they abuse inmates (who are mostly male and do not report either).

But we don't see those things, do we? We see powerful men defending the right to rape and harass women and you, sir, are part of that problem.

Go find a fucking therapist and dig deal into your issues regarding women with them. Don't do it in public and especially don't do it here.

Didn't mean to reply via PM. But, once you learn some reading comprehension, and can articulate a response without name calling, typing in capitals, and cursing, I'll respond to you.

So your reply to my angry, but salient questions is to tell me to calm down and not be so angry and then you'll talk to me?

Nah. I am good over here, angry as fuck about sexual violence and other such bullshit.

Eivind August wrote:

PuddysJacket wrote:

Eivind August wrote: Edit: So, we don't know yet. People were saying that this sucks and that nobody is pure. Then you enter with the «We don't know, she might lie»-thing. What exactly prompted you to do that?

Probably the fact that the general sentiment on the first couple pages was "wow, nobody saw this coming....really sucks. Why are men like this?".....as if this was something definite, set in concrete. People lie all the time, that's why we have due process. If you're asking me to be open to the idea that the dude raped her while she was unconscious - of course. But taking one side of a story as fact is retarded, and is what almost everyone on this thread is doing.

Hate to point to the Gira thing again...but I had the same stance in that case and guess what? The chick was full of shit and just angry he didn't return her feelings.

Ok, good luck being right in a few percent of these cases. Hope that feeling of accomplishment is worth it.

In all seriousness, I see your general point (I think everyone here does), but I do not see the point of arguing so vehemently about it. Nobody in this thread had called Orri a rapist as far as I can tell. Most of us, however, seem to feel for the accuser in cases such as this, or at least to be empathetic to their struggle. I'm having a hard time seeing why anybody would think otherwise, which is why I called you out.

The precedent being set by incidents like these is what's unsettling. By simply accusing him, the dude's time in a band touring the world is over. For the rest of his life he'll be known as a rapist by anyone who googles him.

It would've been the same for Gira as well, and 3/4 of the self-policing indie community had already convicted him - look at his lyrics, his music, his stories. He was not a hard sell as someone who'd do something terrible if you know his work.

Except...he didn't do it. He 'victim' had sent him dozens of emails both before and after the incident - she was quite literally obsessed with him.

Again, nobody has to label someone outright for one to gauge what the general sentiment is. All I'm doing is remaining objective, that's it. If that leads you to assuming I'm defending one of the most heinous crimes on the planet...there has been a critical misstep in your logic somewhere along the line.

Jwar wrote:Nobody read my response. That’s cool! Tldr amirite?

Can we just like stop fighting here? I mean, it’s the internet and it’s going to go nowhere no matter what, sooooo what’s the point?

I read your post, but I am/was too angry at the knuckle draggers to see straight at the moment. I'd love to be able to discuss the nuances that are so critical to each person's experience, but I can't when we still have dudes whining about "notallmen" and "well, actually" and "calm down and then we can discuss it"

Also, nothing has happened to most dudes who are accused. Gira still has a band and a rabid following. Cosby was only brought down when 50+ women accused him. Bill Clinton went on to be president. Trump is current president. Kavanaugh is going to be confirmed to SCOTUS. Louis CK is back on stage. Charlie Rose is planning a come back. Mario Batali still has a cooking empire.

Where exactly is the awful consequences you are yelling about?

PuddysJacket wrote:
All I'm doing is remaining objective, that's it.

LOL

PuddysJacket wrote: But, once you learn some reading comprehension, and can articulate a response without name calling, typing in capitals, and cursing, I'll respond to you.

Read and comprehend this:
DIE IN A FIERY FUCKING CAR ACCIDENT YOU ENTITLED SHIT BAG. How fucking dare you? Do you know who the fuck you're talking to, you slimy weasel anus? Is this articulate enough of a response to be granted the privelage of conversation with thyself, Sir Lord Fuck Nugget?

please write your response on a 3x5 index card and shove it up your fucking ass.

PuddysJacket wrote: But taking one side of a story as fact is retarded

PuddysJacket wrote: Didn't mean to reply via PM. But, once you learn some reading comprehension, and can articulate a response without name calling, typing in capitals, and cursing, I'll respond to you.

You're out of here, bud.

If anyone else wants to be a sexist and ignorant piece of shit, PM me first and we can make this process a whole lot quicker. And if you disagree with this act of banning, you can get the fuck off my forum.

Ghost Hip wrote:

PuddysJacket wrote: But taking one side of a story as fact is retarded

PuddysJacket wrote: Didn't mean to reply via PM. But, once you learn some reading comprehension, and can articulate a response without name calling, typing in capitals, and cursing, I'll respond to you.

You're out of here, bud.

If anyone else wants to be a sexist and ignorant piece of shit, PM me first and we can make this process a whole lot quicker. And if you disagree with this act of banning, you can get the fuck off my forum.