• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Russell Brand accused of rape and sexual assault

Puppycow said:
There's a reason why normal men (non-lotharios) will ask a woman's father for permission to wed his daughter. And it's not because she is his property. Rather, it is a token of respect and a hope to be on good terms with your future father-in-law. We know that women are not property to be bought and sold, but it's also important for in-laws to get along with each other if you want to have a happy marriage and family life.
Click to expand...

If that was the reason then men would also be asking a woman's mother for permission, and women would be asking both their prospective in laws for permission to wed their son. The old tradition of a man asking a woman's father for permission to marry her was very definitely indicative of a transfer of property.

Fortunately normal men no longer do that.
 
Pixel42 said:
If that was the reason then men would also be asking a woman's mother for permission, and women would be asking both their prospective in laws for permission to wed their son. The old tradition of a man asking a woman's father for permission to marry her was very definitely indicative of a transfer of property.

Fortunately normal men no longer do that.
Click to expand...

OK, fine. But would you at least agree with the other half of what I wrote? The part you didn't quote? If your daughter is done dirty by a lothario who sees her as nothing more than a sexual conquest, you're not going to like him.

From my link above:
The incident left Sachs heartbroken, and his wife Melody revealed this week that she never forgave Brand and Ross.
Click to expand...

So it was not just the male parents who were upset by this.
 
I'm not sure what wedding customs have to do with this considering Brand was never attempting to marry any of these people.

It's a bit tedious trying to sort out what complaints about Brand are disapproval of a hedonistic, yet totally legal (and arguably ethical) lifestyle and the actions he took that were outright predatory. I don't really see any point in hand wringing about a celebrity who shamelessly enjoys a celebrity lifestyle with willing and adoring fans, the accusations that are really damaging Brand's reputation right now are far more sinister.
 
Last edited:
varwoche said:
Such foretelling? This particular allegation can't be waved off so easily:
Click to expand...

I'm certainly not, "waving off", any of the allegations and I haven't read anybody in this thread stating that they are.

(Apart from one recently banned member who can be discounted)
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
I was part of a small circle of friends who used to go to various Mark Thomas gigs. I thought it would be nice to check out Russell Brand as he seemed to be equally 'edgy' and socially perspicacious. This was some eleven years ago. So I bought a couple of tickets. So I made my way to Fairfields Hall Croydon after work via a cattle truck from London Bridge to East Croydon and then a connecting link.
Click to expand...


Can you give some details of this "connecting link", please?

It's just that Fairfield Halls is less than five minutes walk from East Croydon station, and I'm concerned that you might have been taken for a ride.
 
When I noticed this thread started gaining traction on the subforum I made it a point to look up Russell Brand to find out who he was, but even after reading his Wikipedia entry I still feel like I have no idea.

Evidently some police complaints have been filed against him. I suppose the truth will out eventually, whatever it is. Meanwhile I'm being assured that YouTube has been ruined forever because his channel was demonetized or something.
 
Checkmite said:
When I noticed this thread started gaining traction on the subforum I made it a point to look up Russell Brand to find out who he was, but even after reading his Wikipedia entry I still feel like I have no idea.

Evidently some police complaints have been filed against him. I suppose the truth will out eventually, whatever it is. Meanwhile I'm being assured that YouTube has been ruined forever because his channel was demonetized or something.
Click to expand...

Ok, you don't know him. That's ok.

I'm not sure quite what point you're making?
 
Mojo said:
Can you give some details of this "connecting link", please?

It's just that Fairfield Halls is less than five minutes walk from East Croydon station, and I'm concerned that you might have been taken for a ride.
Click to expand...

It's Cockney rhyming slang -

drink ... link ... connecting link

Vixen is saying she stopped off in a pub along the way :)
 
bluesjnr said:
Ok, you don't know him. That's ok.

I'm not sure quite what point you're making?
Click to expand...

That I suppose the truth will come out eventually, whatever it is. I'm not sure how I could have stated that more plainly.

Admittedly slightly more obscured but not, in my (perhaps mistaken?) estimation, totally beyond comprehension was that I don't really think YouTube has been ruined forever because his channel was demonetized.
 
Checkmite said:
That I suppose the truth will come out eventually, whatever it is. I'm not sure how I could have stated that more plainly.

Admittedly slightly more obscured but not, in my (perhaps mistaken?) estimation, totally beyond comprehension was that I don't really think YouTube has been ruined forever because his channel was demonetized.
Click to expand...

i mean, pretty obvious what the truth is already

i could talk for a long time about youtube, it's monetization model, advertising, etc. but i'll save you a lot of trouble by saying what it always comes down to with these guys: russell brand is a mutli-millionaire. he could host his own videos on his own site at any time. but, it's incredibly expensive to buy the bandwidth for the amount of viewers he gets, so he wants the free bandwidth and built in network to an audience without having to do the work and spend the cash himself, but doesn't want to comply with the terms of getting the access. so they frame it as a free speech/they're out to get me as a ploy to get their fanbase to harass youtube into capitulating. but, they won't, bigger and better people have tried that.
 
Well, if he can use a wifi microphone with no problems it shows the amulet is working.
 
RolandRat said:
It's a two edged sword. What's more problematic, publications making accusations with no evidence or individuals bringing frivolous lawsuits designed to intimidate? I don't have an answer for that. The best defence here is legislation against both.
Click to expand...

Problem is, of course, how do you decide what are accusation with no evidence or what is a frivilous lawsuit? You are giving the government too much power iMHO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom