Jian Ghomeshi Fired from Q

[On Guard for Thee]

I would assume he has counsel and so I find it surprising he would publish this letter. Of course it's only a civil case, but trying to cast aspersions on his previous partner in a public forum seems a tad opportunistic to me. But after last weeks events in Ottawa and Seattle, this seems like a bunch of clap trap to me.

[On Guard for Thee]

I would assume he has counsel and so I find it surprising he would publish this letter. Of course it's only a civil case, but trying to cast aspersions on his previous partner in a public forum seems a tad opportunistic to me. But after last weeks events in Ottawa and Marysville, this seems like a bunch of clap trap to me.

[Michael Hardner]

The definition you provided is the intent matters.

Yes.

Was the CEO charged for kicking the dog? If not his actions were not illegal or at least not that serious.

Perhaps not, but you can still condemn him for kicking the dog as a cruel act, as animal cruelty is generally illegal and looked down upon.

I don't see the distinction.

It's the difference between personal ethics and public morality. They don't align, but one has to appreciate that others have values that don't agree with yours.

[jacee]

Obviously not all S&M acts are violent but enough are that it is reasonable to characterize it as violance (inflicting pain) for pleasure.

For the dominant partner. For the submissive partner, it would be having pain inflicted on you, for your pleasure.

I believe role reversal may also occur, consensually of course.

Was the CEO charged for kicking the dog? If not his actions were not illegal or at least not that serious.

More serious than private consensual behaviour between adults, imo.

.

Edited October 27, 2014 by jacee

[Moonlight Graham]

I always found Jian annoying, but since we don't know the whole story nor who is right or wrong in all this until it rears it's ugly head in court (Jian may be telling the truth but I'm not just going to take his word for it) I guess I'll pass judgement then.

Edited October 28, 2014 by Moonlight Graham

[poochies]

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/10/26/cbc_fires_jian_ghomeshi_over_sex_allegations.html

The details there cast doubt on the completely consensual nature of his actions, otherwise i would agree it's nobodies business.

[jacee]

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/10/26/cbc_fires_jian_ghomeshi_over_sex_allegations.html

The details there cast doubt on the completely consensual nature of his actions, otherwise i would agree it's nobodies business.

Yes I agree.

He seemed to pick on younger adoring fans, not choose equal consenting partners.

Too bad, so sad. Goodbye Jian.

.

[Derek 2.0]

This...."optics" matter..in Canada and elsewhere. This guy had his fun and now it's over. Move on....

Fifty shades of Ghomeshi? I wonder what the reception would be (by those defending and condemning him) if he was Hockey or Football player? What about a politician or TV preacher??? Of course he has a presumption of innocence, but hiring a PR/damage control firm doesn't hurt.....I wonder if his accusers have the same resources to obtain their own media spin doctors.........

None the less, this appears to be getting more coverage then any recent CBC produced Drama..........

[bush_cheney2004]

...None the less, this appears to be getting more coverage then any recent CBC produced Drama..........

Does employment by the CBC give him some presumed labour law protection not enjoyed by the rest of the bums with just boring, mainstream, makes-him-yawn sex lives ? Doesn't he realize that today's employers actually search social media for red flags in the hiring process ?

Edited October 27, 2014 by bush_cheney2004

[Derek 2.0]

Does employment by the CBC give him some presumed labour law protection not enjoyed by the rest of the bums with just boring, mainstream, makes-him-yawn sex lives ? Doesn't he realize that today's employers actually search social media for red flags in the hiring process ?

I don't know........but if someone like Don Cherry was accused of slapping around four different, much younger women, I'm certain the narrative would be quite different.....

[bush_cheney2004]

I don't know........but if someone like Don Cherry was accused of slapping around four different, much younger women, I'm certain the narrative would be quite different.....

Interesting scenario...who wouldn't want Don Cherry to tie them up and spank them ?

[jacee]

I don't know........but if someone like Don Cherry was accused of slapping around four different, much younger women, I'm certain the narrative would be quite different.....

Though distasteful to me, I would and did defend someone's right to privacy about consensual acts between adults.

However, the Star's investigation reveals more sinister acts, preying on much younger women fans and acting without consent.

Whole different kettle of stinking rotten fish.

.

[jacee]

Interesting scenario...who wouldn't want Don Cherry to tie them up and spank them ?

eewwww!

.

[cybercoma]

Yes I agree.

He seemed to pick on younger adoring fans, not choose equal consenting partners.

Too bad, so sad. Goodbye Jian.

.

That's just silly. These are women in their late 20s, not 14 year old girls. They were all old enough to freely consent. The question is whether they did or not. It's not whether they were capable of consent.

[cybercoma]

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/10/26/cbc_fires_jian_ghomeshi_over_sex_allegations.html

The details there cast doubt on the completely consensual nature of his actions, otherwise i would agree it's nobodies business.

That article sums up nicely why it's not clear on either side. It's possible it wasn't consensual and that they were just all afraid to come forward. But then, there have been no formal charges filed against him, no formal complaints to HR at CBC about him, nothing.

The XO Jane article they mention, which I posted in another thread, was a silly and ridiculous smear campaign. She went on a date with him to a concert and was utterly shocked when he was trying to put his arms around her and grab her ass because, as she says repeatedly in the article, she thought he was gay. It was a pretty crappy article.

But it's certainly possible he did rape them and they didn't consent to the activities. If that's true, I hope he's formally charged with sexual assault and it bears out in court. He's in full damage control right now, but that means nothing. Someone who is guilty would do that, but someone who isn't would as well. IMO, without a formal trial and investigation or more details from both sides, it's impossible to make a decision about this yet.

[TimG]

Perhaps not, but you can still condemn him for kicking the dog as a cruel act, as animal cruelty is generally illegal and looked down upon.

So is S&M as far as a large segment of the population is concerned. I realize that some people would like to see "consensual" S&M be accepted as normal but desires do not make it true. In fact, this case shows why "normalizing" S&M behaviors is probably bad for society because now we have allegations which would be clear evidence of rape if Jian was not making the "its was consensual S&M" excuse.

They don't align, but one has to appreciate that others have values that don't agree with yours.

There is no universal "public morality" anymore. There are only private values shared by a large enough segment of the population to matter. Edited October 27, 2014 by TimG

[Michael Hardner]

So is S&M as far as a large segment of the population is concerned. I realize that some people would like to see "consensual" S&M be accepted as normal but desires do not make it true. In fact, this case shows why "normalizing" S&M behaviors is probably bad for society because now we have allegations which would be clear evidence of rape if Jian was not making the "its was consensual S&M" excuse.

A large number may indeed find it abhorrent, but like homosexuality it seems to fall more easily into the realm of "personal choice/personal life" ... however you see it.

I can't think of anybody being publicly condemned for odd sex practices, homosexuality, in recent memory.

There is no universal "public morality" anymore. There are only private values shared by a large enough segment of the population to matter.

That's a good way to put it. As such, I don't see anybody condemning him unless it is revealed that there wasn't consent.

[cybercoma]

I don't see anybody condemning him unless it is revealed that there wasn't consent.

And that's just it. I think the vast majority of people accept that there is a BDSM lifestyle. Fifty Shades of Grey, as piss poor as the writing was, brought it into the mainstream in recent years. Nobody is arguing against it because people understand it can be consensual. The key in all of this is consent.

[TimG]

A large number may indeed find it abhorrent, but like homosexuality it seems to fall more easily into the realm of "personal choice/personal life" ... however you see it.

I am not arguing that everyone sees it the same way. I am saying there are different, valid opinions. If someone thinks S&M is abhorrent then they are entitled to their opinion. All the difference of social opinion means is it should not be illegal otherwise restricted. However, if a public personality participates in S&M he will find that a large number of people will find that revolting much like a large number of people felt that kicking a dog was revolting. This, in turn, will affect the ability of his employer to keep him in a public position.

That's a good way to put it. As such, I don't see anybody condemning him unless it is revealed that there wasn't consent.

There is a difference between condemnation and disgust. Public personalities sell an image and disgust can destroy that image even if a subset of the population has no issue with the activity in question. Edited October 27, 2014 by TimG

[Michael Hardner]

I am not arguing that everyone sees it the same way. I am saying there are different, valid opinions. If someone thinks S&M is abhorrent then they are entitled to their opinion.

There is a difference between condemnation and disgust.

Yes, agree that thinking the practice is abhorrent isn't "condemning" someone for engaging in it. Again, I'd be surprised if somebody tried to condemn someone in that way today.

[Hal 9000]

Gian did not mistreat an animal or human being.

...after the safe word was used.

[Black Dog]

It was quite simply a vengeful ex-gf. Bedroom activities should be private. She was a vengeful ex, plain and simple.

And you know this because?

Jian did not kick a helpless puppy in an elevator. He engaged in consensual S&M sex with a partner. His parter got pissed because he broke off the relationship. End of story. No more to tell here folks. She knew of his high standing at the CBC and played on it.

The allegations are he sexually and physically was abusive towards multiple partners.

Well, I didn't say, that 'I know, based on a hunch', however, for Jian to publicly come out as he did, would lend credence to his admissions. However, you are right, we need to wait to hear the evidence.

It's called "getting in front of the story" and it's what people pay big PR firms like Navigator to do.

[Boges]

Who wants to be his safe words were Moxy Fruvous?

Edited October 27, 2014 by Boges

[jacee]

That article sums up nicely why it's not clear on either side. It's possible it wasn't consensual and that they were just all afraid to come forward. But then, there have been no formal charges filed against him, no formal complaints to HR at CBC about him, nothing.

The XO Jane article they mention, which I posted in another thread, was a silly and ridiculous smear campaign. She went on a date with him to a concert and was utterly shocked when he was trying to put his arms around her and grab her ass because, as she says repeatedly in the article, she thought he was gay. It was a pretty crappy article.

But it's certainly possible he did rape them and they didn't consent to the activities. If that's true, I hope he's formally charged with sexual assault and it bears out in court. He's in full damage control right now, but that means nothing. Someone who is guilty would do that, but someone who isn't would as well. IMO, without a formal trial and investigation or more details from both sides, it's impossible to make a decision about this yet.

His claim of always using safe words, etc stands in opposition to their claims that he hit them repeatedly in the head (where hair hides bruises) without warning or consent.

The three women interviewed by the Star allege that Ghomeshi physically attacked them on dates without consent. They allege he struck them with a closed fist or open hand; bit them; choked them until they almost passed out; covered their nose and mouth so that they had difficulty breathing; and that they were verbally abused during and after sex.

Whether rape or physical assault ... remains to be determined.

No they weren't 14, but they were much younger, and adoring fans.

Seems to me that one who wants to engage in consensual S&M would carefully choose experienced consenting partners.

This seems more like preying on young women not experienced in such practices to me.

I think formal charges may be the only way to sort it out for sure.

After this media exposure, he should have plenty of willing partners coming forward.

But perhaps they won't appeal to him if creating fear is his thing.

.

Edited October 27, 2014 by jacee

[GostHacked]

Why should a CEO's treatment of animals or political donations tarnish anything? If you want to argue that legal private activities never have any bearing on a public facing job then make that argument for all cases. Don't try to pick and choose which "private activities" are acceptable and which are not based on your personal prejudices.

Did you not just do exactly that on page 1?

CBC made the right move by offering him a 'leave of absence' to allow him to address the allegations. It appears that Jian turned it into a public firing (a detail mentioned in other reports but omitted from his FB post).

We live in a world where a CEO gets fired for kicking a dog or donating to a anti-gay marriage campaign and Jian knows it. He was stupid to engage in private activities which would make a large segment of the public recoil in revulsion if they became public.