CBC cuts Jian Ghomeshi loose

423 posts / 0 new

Fri, 2014-10-31 20:06

Pondering

http://www.macleans.ca/education/unirankings/why-dont-canadian-universit...

Very few Canadian universities have policies or university-funded services that deal specifically with sexual assault, even though the prevalence is the same: nearly one in five women will be sexually assaulted as students, according to Charlene Senn, a women’s studies professor at the University of Windsor who is an expert on rape prevention....

There is a patchwork of policies on Canadian campuses, according to Jessica McCormick, national chairperson for the Canadian Federation of Students, but the facts are clear: Women aged 15 to 24 experience the highest rates of sexual violence in the country, according to a 2013 Statistics Canada report that relied on police-reported data. It also found that women reported 460,000 incidents of sexual assault to social-service providers in 2009, but less than 10 per cent were reported to the police....

Since McGill doesn’t have a sexual-assault policy, that will be Tétrault’s first priority. Any comprehensive university policy needs to have a clear definition of what sexual assault is and a “pro-survivor approach,” she says, meaning that academic accommodations, counselling and other support systems are available for victims from the minute they come forward.

While the University of Windsor also has no sexual-assault policy, its Bystander Initiative, led by Senn, is one of the most respected examples of rape prevention on campuses in Canada. Through workshops, students learn how to recognize sexual assaults, intervene appropriately and support survivors. The university funded the project in 2010, shortly after a bunch of male students were caught, more than once, peering into residence bathrooms as female students showered. But Senn says the university still has a lot of work to do. “I was horrified when I recently typed in ‘sexual assault’ and ‘rape’ into our website and found you don’t get any information telling you what to do or where to go if you’ve been assaulted,” she says. “It’s a very confusing process to find resources.”.......

Liz Quinlan, a sociology professor at the University of Saskatchewan, is leading a study on sexual-assault policies at Canadian universities, but she is hesitant to talk about her work because it’s “impossible to anticipate what the consequences might be.” Her daughter, Lakehead University sociologist Andrea Quinlan, another researcher in the group, says, “We’re working in a climate where some of us are having to reapply to the very universities we’re now speaking about in our research; it carries some risks for us in terms of the stability of our employment.”....

Women feel actively discouraged not only from coming forward about personal attacks but even from speaking up about the lack of sexual-assault policies for fear it will harm them professionally.

Fri, 2014-10-31 21:22

#353

bekayne

Pondering wrote:

The show’s executive producer also did not respond to questions about his meeting with her.....

I wonder if we will ever find out those men's names.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/10/31/jian-ghomeshis-journey-from-immi...

Arif Noorani, executive producer of Q, flatly denied the claim, reported Friday in the National Post, that he was aware of a workplace sexual harassment claim and told the victim, a former producer, that Mr. Ghomeshi is “never going to change,” so the solution was to work around it.

Fri, 2014-10-31 21:42

#354

Debater

Toronto police launch investigation into Jian Ghomeshi allegations

Fri Oct 31 2014

Toronto police have confirmed that two women have come forward with allegations against Jian Ghomeshi and are investigating.

The Star has learned that one of the women is Trailer Park Boys actress Lucy DeCoutere, who alleged in an interview with the Star that in 2003, Ghomeshi choked her to the point she could not breathe and then slapped her hard three times on the side of her head.

The other woman, who wishes to remain anonymous, first talked to a Star reporter on Monday, and alleged that without consent, Ghomeshi grabbed her hair and pulled her down to the floor. Then, she alleges, he delivered three sharp punches to the side of her head while she lay on the floor.

The woman had been invited to a taping of >play in 2002. Ghomeshi was the host of the CBC Newsworld TV show.

Det. Lisa Ferris of Toronto police’s Sex Crimes Unit will be conducting an interview Saturday, said the woman, who has been assured by the police that her identity will be protected.

---

More here:

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/10/31/jian_ghomeshi_showed_cbc_v...

Fri, 2014-10-31 22:13

#355

Debater

Toronto Police now investigating Jian Ghomeshi allegations

Friday, October 31, 2014

Two women have come forward to Toronto Police with allegations against Jian Ghomeshi, a police spokesperson said Friday night.

The women contacted police on Friday and the allegations are being investigated.

Actress Lucy DeCoutere is one of the two women who went to police. In interviews with CTV News and other media outlets this week, she alleged that Ghomeshi grabbed her by the throat and slapped her after they went out to dinner in 2003.

Earlier Friday, the CBC said it fired Ghomeshi after seeing “graphic evidence” that the radio host had allegedly harmed a woman.
Chuck Thompson, head of public affairs for the CBC, outlined the series of events that led to Ghomeshi’s termination on Sunday in a statement emailed to CTV News.

The CBC would not say if the graphic evidence was a video or videos of bondage or beatings during sexual activity, citing the ongoing investigation being conducted by an outside agency.

However, sources close to the investigation told CTV News that Ghomeshi himself showed such videos to CBC management. Ghomeshi was trying to show “how bruising could happen and it could still be consensual,” sources said.

----

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/toronto-police-now-investigating-jian-ghome...

Sat, 2014-11-01 00:12

#356

6079_Smith_W wrote:

Does he think those videos are in any way relevant, or is he just a showoff looking for an opportunity for some exhibitionism?

Is a video of me walking my dog proof that I don't rob banks?

right on point! he was probably like c'mon you guys , we've all been there wink wink nudge nudge so sickening!

What i dont get is how he thought he could just use the cover of BDSM and people would just be so afraid to talk about it any further, like it would distract them somehow. It could've worked too.

Sat, 2014-11-01 00:20

#357

Pondering

It's interesting that he shot himself in the foot twice. First, when he assumed the article coming out was about him, and showed videos to CBC. (I wonder if the videos were consentual?)

Second, when he refused to walk away quietly and posted his defence.

Light has now ditched him too as well as two speaker's agencies.

Sat, 2014-11-01 00:32

#358

6079_Smith_W

Pondering wrote:

(I wonder if the videos were consentual?)

There's consent, and then there's consent to show them to perfect strangers.

I'd be really surprised .

Sat, 2014-11-01 00:58

#359

I suspect the women didnt even know they were being filmed or I doubt the vids are consentual but we'll see. I dont wanna even try to get into his mindset, he's a sicko probably a criminal.He's the third media figure to be suspected of sexual crimes recently. There is also Bill Cosby who's had a four-decade old sex crimes allegations - just heinous.Mr Cosby paid some of the women. Then there is the dad from Seventh Heaven show suspected of child sex crimes. That guy will likely go to prison.

Sat, 2014-11-01 01:16

#360

wage zombie

Thanks for sharing the bad news about Bill Cosby. I hadn't heard about any of that.

Hopefully all of this acts as a big wakeup call. A lot of people jumped fervently to Ghomeshi's defence on Sunday, and now they're having to examine why they would have done that.

Sat, 2014-11-01 01:38

#361

Bacchus

Actually NS, the 7th heaven guy will not be charged at all.

Sat, 2014-11-01 01:50

#362

Bacchus what? you're kidding? its so terrible

I can never watch reruns of that show or the Cosby's.Ever. Or eat Jello. Ever.

Its odd, an outsider like Jesse helped bring him down and a Comedian in his stand up routine called out Cosby. Goes to show you the state of institutions and culture.

Sat, 2014-11-01 02:21

#363

Pondering

6079_Smith_W wrote:

Pondering wrote:

(I wonder if the videos were consentual?)

There's consent, and then there's consent to show them to perfect strangers.

I'd be really surprised .

I wonder if the execs who saw them considered that if a criminal case ensues they could be called as witnesses. That must have been the most bizarre meeting any of them have ever or will ever attend. I would love to hear the conversations that occured after Jian left.

Sat, 2014-11-01 03:51

#364

Sean in Ottawa

MegB wrote:

With notable exceptions Sean, it's been made light of.

Historically, for women, rape and other forms of sexual abuse were seen as crimes of property. In light of that any attempt to make light of sexual abuse carries with it a lack of understanding of the issues, as well as an extraordinary lack of empathy. It needs to be called out.

While I don't disagree with the comment, I am finding it diffiuclt to understand how this post relates to what I said.

This is what Pondering said:

"I don't trust that people even here, are really all that outraged. I think they are secretly thinking it's no big deal. It just wouldn't be politically correct to say it."

-- This is what I said:

"I will have to disagree with the idea that people here think this was not a big deal though."

I am not speaking in general terms and Pondering was not either.

Both comments directly referenced the people here -- ie the people reading and writing in this forum.

Who participating in this forum secretly thinks this is no big deal?

I did not mean to pick a fight in saying that either-- actually I was trying to say there is more support than that for women's experience in this particular place -- this forum of this site.

Are you saying it is being made light of HERE?

I have to say I don't think so and that does not contradict any statement that it is more generally being made light of in wider society outside of here. But specifically the people in this thread in the feminist forum of babble on rabble -- are we really saying that people here secretly hold this opinion? That would require an astonishing level of hypocrisy here in general terms among a majority of the people here. I think in this case this is a place where people are sincere about their feelings about this.

This is important as I do agree that outside of this place it is being made light of. I also think we need to hear some explanations from the CBC about why it seems that they must have known about this for a long time and ignored it. In fact I suspect the CBC likely should be sued but not by Gomeshi -- by his victims.

But I thought the point I made was that the majority HERE -- those participating in this thread of this site did not make light of this. I am perhaps a little more optimistic of the community that is right here -- reading and writing here.

Sat, 2014-11-01 08:56

#365

Maysie

Catchfire wrote:
I find these ground-level protections against sexual predators to be quite powerful, actually -- because the institutions that are supposed to protect vunerable people -- the courts, the police, the media -- have abjectly failed.

Catchfire, my point was that there is no possible way that all potential 20-something women/CBC interns who (now that I have more info about how JG trolled for dates) who tweeted they liked him, made comments on social media about him, etc could have been notified about him. Yes there are unofficial networks about "bad dates" (there's a euphemism) and yes they are unacknowledged by who decides what a legitimate network is. But using the fact of this unofficial network to imply that they should have known better is ridiculous and despicable.

As for my outrage, it is real. I've worked in the VAW field, directly and indirectly for over 20 years. I'm also a woman. Just because sexual assault happens to 1 in 2 or 1 in 3 women doesn't mean I'm not outraged everytime. I am.

As for being surprised and stunned, I'm completely not surprised and stunned at the violence JG committed, was allowed to continue to do, the "insider secret", the CBC's spinelessness in doing nothing until it would make them look bad. VAW, rpe culture and defenders of male supremacy don't surprise me. What I'm surprised about is the pitiful level of discourse this discussion has taken here, on rabble.ca's discussion board.

Sat, 2014-11-01 10:04

#366

6079_Smith_W

Bacchus wrote:

Actually NS, the 7th heaven guy will not be charged at all.

Look at Terry Richardson. There have been all sorts of accounts of him assaulting women and nothing has come of any of them because he is a powerful, creepy photographer and music producer with lots of defenders. He even manages keep his facebook page squeaky clean. The assaults are mentioned under the benign title "Personal Life".

Outrageous, yes. Surprising? Sadly, no.

http://www.theguardian.com/fashion/2013/nov/18/terry-richardson-fashion-...

There enough examples of cases like this where it is not even an open secret, so it is hardly surprising that abusers like Ghomeshi are left unchallenged for so long.

Sat, 2014-11-01 10:20

#367

Debater

Bacchus wrote:

Actually NS, the 7th heaven guy will not be charged at all.

That's probably correct, unless other women who were abused more recently come forward.

The problem the police in LA & NYC are having with charging Stephen Collins (who was in the first Star Trek movie in 1979, btw) is that he sexually assaulted these women when they were 10 or 11-year old girls about 30 or so years ago. Unfortunately, the Statute of Limitations seems to have expired for all of them, even though there is an AUDIO TAPE posted on the TMZ website of Collins admitting sexual contact with an 11-year old girl.

The Collins case is an illustration of why countries (especially the USA) need to reform their laws to make it easier to make exceptions to the Statute of Limitations when it involves sexual abuse that survivors may not be ready to reveal until many years later. Otherwise it is giving people the license to abuse children and get away with it unless they are reported within a certain number of years.

Sat, 2014-11-01 12:04

#368

Sean in Ottawa

Maysie, What you say rings loudly.

I am finding after the initial information to be more and more shocked at the question of how the CBC could have let this go on so long only to react when it was clear their brand would be harmed having done nothing to protect the people their organization brought in contact with Gomeshi.

I cannot believe the account coming from the CBC that they were caught unaware.

Jian Gomeshi's story is very clearly whatever words he can come up with to try to protect himself. While horrible it is not difficult to understand that he is saying whatever he thinks would help himself. I think we can understand that mechanism without accepting or believing what he has to say.

That predators exist is not news, unfortunately. While we are hearing of an informal network that may well have protected a few women we are also aware of the formal structure of the CBC, that must have known there was a problem doing nothing to stop Gomeshi and everything to enable him. There are people who knew within the CBC responsibly for failing to be responsible to those who were hurt so badly. There are others who have a responsibility to investigate and find out who those people were.

The outstanding essential question, really is the CBC now. It is impossible for me to believe having heard some of the accounts that are out there now, that what was unknown to many of us, was unknown to the people in CBC who could have stopped this. It may be hard to know exactly who knew and when the CBC was aware but it is not credible that the CBC had no idea this was happening.

Predators are dangerous but what gives them the greatest power are the denials and enablers. When we hear of people who are serial predators, we can usually look back over the events aware that if people had believed the women and if others who knew, had acted many would have been protected. We cannot stop predators from existing but we ought to be looking to dismantle the support systems that allow them to continue for years after others knew and could have stopped them. Instead we have a fucked up argument where people who knew and could have done something did nothing while some even blame the victims themselves who did not report these crimes in the context of understanding that other people must have known this was happening and were doing nothing.

Sat, 2014-11-01 12:10

#369

howeird beale

It sure would be nice if someone could apply Jian's standards of consent and respect back on Jian, all of a sudden, say, as he passes by on the street.

Oh, gee, sorry, Jian, I just got this vibe from you that you'd be into it.

Sat, 2014-11-01 12:13

#370

Sean in Ottawa

howeird beale wrote:

It sure would be nice if someone could apply Jian's standards of consent and respect back on Jian, say, by suckering him on the street.

Oh, gee, sorry, Jian, I just got this vibe from you that you'd be into it.

I understand the feeling-- but this is revenge and vigilante thinking and calling for harm to other people, no matter how dispicable they are, is not what we do here. At least I hope not.

I am more inclined to be intereseted in a full examination of who the enablers were in the CBC who knew something terrible was going on and did nothing. Those people need to be re-assigned from any positions of authority and their careers questionned. The CBC needs to collectively take responsibility and change the culture there that has failed so badly.

Jian should be removed from contact with people and perhaps receive some mental health attention. He is a monster. I don't believe anyone grows up wanting to be a monster so something has gone seriously wrong. The people who did nothing enabling a monster need a second look.

Sat, 2014-11-01 12:22

#371

Pondering

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

This is what Pondering said:

"I don't trust that people even here, are really all that outraged. I think they are secretly thinking it's no big deal. It just wouldn't be politically correct to say it."

-- This is what I said:

"I will have to disagree with the idea that people here think this was not a big deal though."

I am not speaking in general terms and Pondering was not either.

Both comments directly referenced the people here -- ie the people reading and writing in this forum.

Who participating in this forum secretly thinks this is no big deal?

I did not mean to pick a fight in saying that either-- actually I was trying to say there is more support than that for women's experience in this particular place -- this forum of this site.

I appreciate the motivation in saying so and I did interpret the point you were making correctly. I wish I could believe you. From threads in the feminist forum I don't think attitudes here towards women are all that different than they are in the general population.

I'm beginning to think there is more shock about this because for most it seems he didn't actually rape them which is why he thinks what he did isn't that big a deal and why others are so shocked. If it were just normal rape people would be secretly, and not so secretly thinking that the women were sleeping their way up the ladder. Even now, for everyone thinking he took advantage of his stature to prey on women, there are some thinking the women just got more than they were bargaining for. If he was only raping them we wouldn't be hearing about any of this. It would still be back-channel info.

I know some think it's a coping mechanism to speak of regular or normal rape but I see as not sugar coating reality. This was posted earlier in the thread.

onlinediscountanvils wrote:

Neville Park: [url=http://nevillepark.ca/2014/10/20/womens-measures/]Women’s Measures[/url]

What defines the norm in a society? Is it not the usual way that people behave? The natural default? From that article:

Quote:
In her recent Globe and Mail piece, fellow writer Stacey May Fowles explains,

These conversations are not new. It’s just that we’re finally having them out in the open. While some of these predators have been operating for years without public acknowledgment or punishment, there has long been a shared back channel amongst women in Canadian literature – coded warnings relayed privately, chatter about who can be trusted and who is safe to be around.

Predators plural. It is part of normal female culture to deal with abuse privately or to share with other women in self-defense. Men are not part of this backchannel of mutual defense against them.

Quote:
Every community, every industry, every scene has its own version of the secret backchannel that operates behind popular, successful, respectable predators. It’s only very recently that anyone even acknowledged its existence, and the cost of doing so is almost too high to be worth it.

Quote:
When I posted about a rapist in a community I belonged to, although I gave almost no details about the guy except “he’s a rapist,” I immediately got several emails from other members of that community saying “oh, you must mean X.” Everyone knew who he was! Tons of people, including several in the leadership, instantly knew who I meant. The reaction wasn’t “there’s a rapist among us!?!” but “oh hey, I bet you’re talking about our local rapist.” Several of them expressed regret that I hadn’t been warned about him beforehand, because they tried to discreetly tell new people about this guy. Others talked about how they tried to make sure there was someone keeping an eye on him at parties, because he was fine so long as someone remembered to assign him a Rape Babysitter.

At what point do people admit this is western culture?

Quote:
Cliff Pervocracy, who is referring to his local BDSM/polyamory scene:

When I posted about a rapist in a community I belonged to, although I gave almost no details about the guy except “he’s a rapist,” I immediately got several emails from other members of that community saying “oh, you must mean X.” Everyone knew who he was! Tons of people, including several in the leadership, instantly knew who I meant. The reaction wasn’t “there’s a rapist among us!?!” but “oh hey, I bet you’re talking about our local rapist.” Several of them expressed regret that I hadn’t been warned about him beforehand, because they tried to discreetly tell new people about this guy. Others talked about how they tried to make sure there was someone keeping an eye on him at parties, because he was fine so long as someone remembered to assign him a Rape Babysitter.

I understand no one going to police without proof but the men are not even socially shunned. It's just accepted that he has to be watched out for. The onus is on women to avoid him and if they can't stand seeing him it is they who have to leave the group (or the school, or the military, or anywhere else women are abused).

I believe some people are genuinely sickened but there is a disconnect between the prevalence of back-channels in social and professional groups and the outrage when one of these men is finally publically acknowledged as a serial abuser. Then it's reach for the smelling salts.

This would all still be an open secret if Jian had not thought the twitter announcement of the big story was about him. Because of that he showed his video clips to the CBC which forced their hand. The story would still have remained rumour if he had not written his facebook post. The CBC was going to let him walk away quietly and the Star wasn't going to print their story. This would have remained a back-channel warning system.

Everyone is not part of back-channels (previously known as grapevines) but they are not uncommon. They are a normal mechanism our society uses to deal with low-level (not hospitalized) sexual abuse of women.

Sat, 2014-11-01 12:41

#372

NDPP

Pondering wrote:

At what point do people admit this is western culture?

bingo!

Sat, 2014-11-01 12:45

#373

Pondering

Maysie wrote:
But using the fact of this unofficial network to imply that they should have known better is ridiculous and despicable

I never said or implied that women should have known better. You chose to misinterpret it that way in order to attack me. That is despicable and repulsive.

Sat, 2014-11-01 12:58

#374

MegB

Pondering wrote:
Everyone is not part of back-channels (previously known as grapevines) but they are not uncommon. They are a normal mechanism our society uses to deal with low-level (not hospitalized) sexual abuse of women.

Sadly, these back-channeled open secrets are not in any way confined to mainstream media and institutions. The same thing goes on in progressive circles. Women warn each other that "so and so is a date rapist" or "so and so likes them really young". That's how pervasive our rape culture is. Those of us who understand rape culture, experience it, critique, analyse and write about it are at a loss as to how to change our culture. Survivors are often too traumatized or ashamed to come forward or discuss their experiences openly because of the shaming and blaming. I think that's the thing that's got to change first. Make it easier and safer for women to come forward and acknowledge their experience and "out" the perpetrator.

ETA: Sorry if this post is redundant - I wish I had the time to read all five pages of this thread.

Sat, 2014-11-01 13:12

#375

6079_Smith_W

NDPP wrote:

Pondering wrote:

At what point do people admit this is western culture?

bingo!

Um... how about ALL culture, to some degree or another. I know you aren't saying it explicitly, but the notion that it is distinct to one ideology, and all will be better after the revolution is false. As was also just said, it is alive and well even in progressive circles.

Sat, 2014-11-01 13:22

#376

NDPP

then perhaps they're not really 'progressive' at all...

Sat, 2014-11-01 13:28

#377

pookie

Pondering wrote:

Maysie wrote:
But using the fact of this unofficial network to imply that they should have known better is ridiculous and despicable

I never said or implied that women should have known better. You chose to misinterpret it that way in order to attack me. That is despicable and repulsive.

I agree - that was a gross misinterpretation.

Are Pondering's experiences as a sexual assault survivor skimmed over in order to attack her because her political views are so despised here?

I'm actually a bit shocked, TTYT.

Sat, 2014-11-01 14:57

#378

Sean in Ottawa

pookie wrote:

Pondering wrote:

Maysie wrote:
But using the fact of this unofficial network to imply that they should have known better is ridiculous and despicable

I never said or implied that women should have known better. You chose to misinterpret it that way in order to attack me. That is despicable and repulsive.

I agree - that was a gross misinterpretation.

Are Pondering's experiences as a sexual assault survivor skimmed over in order to attack her because her political views are so despised here?

I'm actually a bit shocked, TTYT.

I hope that is not the case. I did not see much of a reaction to her recent posts in this thread in spite of the magnitude of content of them.

I think it is well known that becuase of previous difficulty, I am trying to avoid a conflict and not responding to her very much on this site but I felt compelled to this time in part becuase I would not want someone to say the things she said and not get a response -- not have them acknowledged as heard. As human beings we cannot lose our reactions to this no matter how many times we hear it or how we come to understand that it is a common experience.

I can't explain why people react the way they do -- or why they sometimes don't. I would hope this would not be looked at in political partisan ways becuase the partisan parts of our lives are so much smaller than what Pondering is speaking of here.

In part I write this becuase the difference I have had with her must be seen as insigificant in the light of violence to women and in particular violence to her.

Attacking her on any of these points would be tragic. I hoped to reassure her that people here did not dismiss her experience as insignificant. I was very moved by the horror that someone could experience what she did and report it here and then say that she felt others -- even here, which is a progressive place -- would think her experience no big deal. To me it is heartbreaking to see that feeling laid out like that. I hoped to help ease that -- at least for my part as one who is writing and reading here.

I don't think that violations such as what we are seeing are so much a matter of degrees or steps or defined actions. These violations are about power and hate directed at women as women. There can never be "no big deal" about this. No woman should feel that she has to accept this or bear it as if it had not happened.

As a man, I have never experienced anything like this but to my imagination, which is the only reference I have, this is the worst kind of experience I can possibly imagine. The fact that it is normalized, minimized and presumed to be a given from men is horrific. I cannot claim an understanding beyond what little my imagination can afford but it pains me to even contemplate that Ponderings words here would be coloured by anything other than humanity. In the context of her expereince there is nothing else relevant.

That her experience is so common to so many women that it is practically standard does not make it in any way more acceptable or possible to ignore or to feel nothing about.

I am not arguing. I am hoping for all of us that others feel the way I do.

Sat, 2014-11-01 15:13

#379

MegB

NDPP wrote:

then perhaps they're not really 'progressive' at all...

Really? That's all you got out of that post? Nothing about the fact that hypocrisy isn't limited to one sector, that the shaming of women survivors keeps the silence, the culture of open secrets, silenced victims? Geeze.

Sat, 2014-11-01 15:16

#380

onlinediscountanvils

Elisabeth Faure:

“So, did Jian Ghomeshi try to sleep with you?”

This was the first question the then-Director of Current Affairs for CBC Radio in my hometown asked me the first day I got back from a 6-week unpaid internship at Q in Toronto. Her question, asked in front of a small group of co-workers in an open newsroom, elicited gales of laughter from all assembled. Because, you know, back then, it was funny what a reputation Jian (or JG, as he was known in Q circles) had for being a total sleazebag.

[...]

Now, Ghomeshi’s reputation lies in tatters, likely beyond repair, no matter how much he pays a PR firm and legal team. His posters have been ripped from the walls of the CBC, his image scrubbed clean from the CBC’s website. His high-powered PR reps have dropped him. The one-time Canadian Prince of Pop Culture is now possibly the most unpopular figure in the country. And I am pissed off.

Pissed off because I realize just how much the CBC did nothing – nothing – to rein in their star host. Pissed because so many women had to become his victims before his crimes were revealed. Pissed because at first his victims were not believed. Pissed because you know what? It’s not funny to ask a junior employee if a host tried to sleep with her, because the internship the network set me up with happened to be with a notorious womanizer and predator.

Knowing his reputation, the network should never have put me, or any other female employee, in that position.

http://headspacepress.com/former-q-intern-questions-cbcs-lack-action/

Sat, 2014-11-01 15:39

#381

NDPP

MegB wrote:

NDPP wrote:

then perhaps they're not really 'progressive' at all...

Really? That's all you got out of that post? Nothing about the fact that hypocrisy isn't limited to one sector, that the shaming of women survivors keeps the silence, the culture of open secrets, silenced victims? Geeze.

When you assume you make an ass of u not me...

Sat, 2014-11-01 15:46

#382

Debater

Police probing three complaints in Ghomeshi investigation

Saturday, Nov. 01 2014

Three women have now filed abuse complaints against fired CBC star Jian Ghomeshi and investigators are looking into reports of a “graphic” video in the network’s possession, police said Saturday.

“These people have come forward. They’ve seen that other people are talking about it and it’s brought it back up in their lives,” Insp. Joanna Beaven-Desjardins told reporters after confirming a third person has come forward with allegations.

“At this point, these are allegations. He has not been convicted of anything, these are allegations. We are trying to get all the information from our reportees — our victims — first, so that we have the best evidence to move forward,” with the assault and sexual assault investigation, Insp.Beaven-Desjardins added.

Police have not sought an interview with Mr. Ghomeshi, she said, but investigators will approach him “when the evidence leads us to that point.”

----

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/police-now-probing-three-co...

Sat, 2014-11-01 16:48

#383

Unionist

Ruth Spencer is Managing Editor of The Guardian U.S. She dated Jian Ghomeshi for five months in 2010.

[url=http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/01/jian-ghomeshi-i-dat... dated Jian Ghomeshi, Canada's fallen radio star[/url]

Quote:

As for me, I now believe that Jian was grooming me for the same violence he inflicted on other women. I think he was pursuing and encouraging me because of the existing power imbalance, creating a level of emotional intensity as a preface to his “big reveal” so that I would either acquiesce or never tell. He trained me to feel sorry for him, to feel guilty about not giving enough of myself to him, to believe I was special to him. And for what? So that one day, when he thought the time was right for us to be more physically intimate, he could hit me? Smash my head against a concrete wall, like he allegedly did to one woman? Choke me with a leather belt, like he allegedly did to another?

Even today, as I’m writing this, I find I’m thinking about him, worrying: will he be disappointed in me for writing this? Should I hold back? Will he text me to tell me he wouldn’t have done this to me? But that is how his kind of manipulation works, and I refuse to protect him.

I now believe that I only escaped him subjecting me to sexual violence because of the circumstances, because of the timing, because I moved away from Toronto. Those terrible stories we’ve been reading could have been about me. They almost were about me.

I am no different from any of the young women Jian is alleged to have abused – I’m just lucky that he never got around to doing it. I’m no longer confused by what happened between us: it makes a sick sort of sense, but I’m too sickened by what he is said to have done to so many other women to care about him anymore. I’m severing myself from him, once and for all.

Sat, 2014-11-01 17:20

#384

eastnoireast

yesterday evening i stopped by to see my neighbours (retired, good people, good neighbours).

the subject of the gomeshi situation came up.

"who?" says the husband, coming in from the (unsuccessful) start of deer season. jian flashes on the news from the diarrhoea-ing tv in the corner of the room. we point. "oh, him", he says disinterestedly.

"you know what i think? i think he read that fifty shades of grey", says the wife.

this whole thread passes thru my mind. i clumsily say what i can, and we move on to discuss pasture fleas, ruffed grouse and the lovely letter from that european couple with the flat tire they rescued one night last year.

my point? not sure i have one, but i value perspective beyond my babble bubble, and i value my neighbours.

and good lord, shifting the level of understanding in the cosy houses of good people across canada is ridiculously difficult.

this case is an opportunity like no other for that, and, way more importantly, cuts open the bullshit within the canadian "progressive" and creative communities.

we have to deal with and heal ourselves first.

i'm not talking 20 yo interns keeping quiet, their heads down and their shoulders tense - i'm interested in those more senior in cbc who covered it up or did nothing when they could have, i'm especially interested in the established artists and musicians who went on the show anyway, i'm interested in the people who kept tuning in anyway.

not to single her out, or any woman - but as i went out of my way to not ever hear his voice, she's the name that jumps into my head because i did tune into part of that show, as i love her work and have a lot of respect for her - but as an example out of hundreds, did joni mitchel know about his reputation before going on the show?

i liked pia chatapati guest hosting q the other day - "i am happy to be here" - as in, because it means he isn't.

Sat, 2014-11-01 17:47

#385

6079_Smith_W

eastnoireast wrote:

my point? not sure i have one, but i value perspective beyond my babble bubble, and i value my neighbours.

I hear you, and I concur. Although this one has a lot of people I know rattled, and with good reason.

It may be different circles, but the shock is not something that is just limited to this one, for me at least.

It is extremely upsetting on a lot of fronts. Funny thing is that the fact it involves the CBC, and its implication there has taken far more of a backseat issue than I would have expected with some other issue; though it underscores the gravity of the issues of trust, betrayal, disbelieving of victims, and entltiement of abusers this has brought to the fore. This is much bigger than the CBC.

That goes double for those who may have initially believed him or given him the benefit of the doubt, and have had their eyes opened.

Sat, 2014-11-01 20:51

#386

Maysie

Fyi that quoted piece of text of mine was in a paragraph addressed to Catchfire, who was the first to address my point about the informal network's lack of magical powers. I was a bit too overstated in my use of the word "despicable" since I know Catchfire isn't that guy. But just as a reminder, I have been a woman for over 4 decades and know very well the existence and the ongoing use of this network women use in community.

The comment was not aimed at anything Pondering said because now I try to avoid directly addressing her for obvious reasons.

Sat, 2014-11-01 23:42

#387

Pondering

Maysie wrote:
The comment was not aimed at anything Pondering said because now I try to avoid directly addressing her for obvious reasons.

Well that seems to be a recent decision as you did address me directly in post 286 and your latest comment seemed to be referring to the same topic.

We have barely ever interacted. We are on opposite sides of the prostitution issue but I don't think that is a good enough reason for you to treat me the way you do in the handful of posts you have directed at me.

Having said that, I assumed your second comment was directed at me but I was wrong so I apologize for addressing you disrespectfully.

Sun, 2014-11-02 06:20

#388

pookie

Maysie wrote:

Pondering wrote:
Interesting. My reaction was more surprise that anyone considered it a big enough deal to come forward at all. It seems none of them were raped.

Pondering, What The Fuck?!?! It's called assault!!!!!

The reasons why many of the women didn't come forward (at the time or right now) have been explained quite a few times already. If you choose not to get it, then you need to at least understand how vilely offensive this is.

"Politically correct"?!?!? Jebus H. Cripes.

Pondering wrote:
The word was out. Women warned each other. No one, men included, seemed to think it was something that should be reported.

I'm a bit stunned that this was a "known secret", and that some folks, rather proudly(??) have been saying "Oh yeah I knew this about him 10 years ago" in a rather proud manner it seems to me. Having no connections to him or his entourage, I cannot imagine knowing such information, doing NOTHING, and then quasi-bragging about it now. If I had known this, and had done nothing, I would be deeply ashamed of myself and wouldn't be bragging about how much idiot "insider" info I had all these years. For Fucks Sake.

Women warned each other? So, any woman who dated him was asking for it?Knew what he did and therefore was into it? Are You Fucking Kidding Me? Like everyone this happened to already was able to warn and defer all 20 something interns at the CBC, or wherever else he looked for dates/victims?

And what men think should be reported is completely useless. And that includes women who agree with such men.

P.S. Pondering if you're in the PR business I think you can pick him up as a client since Navigator has dropped him.

The last quote, addressed to a self-identified sex assault survivor saying that she should represent an accused sexual predator, is especially "despicable".

So, can we please cut the bullshit Maysie? It's insulting.

Sun, 2014-11-02 10:10

#389

MegB

I'm declaring this a safe space for survivors of sexual assault (I shouldn't have to, but apparently I do). Survivors, also recognize that this is Trigger Central and a level of self-care is prudent, if not necessary.

For survivors who are distressed by what they read in this thread, you can call the Assaulted Women's Helpline. You may also message me. I'm not a professional counsellor but I am a fellow survivor and have particular experiences and insights you may find helpful.

Sun, 2014-11-02 11:24

#390

NorthReport

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

Sun, 2014-11-02 11:26

#391

NorthReport

''''''''''''''''''''''''

Sun, 2014-11-02 11:28

#392

NorthReport

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

Sun, 2014-11-02 11:57

#393

Tehanu

Well, Meg, I have to say that I found this:

Quote:
Interesting. My reaction was more surprise that anyone considered it a big enough deal to come forward at all. It seems none of them were raped.

... triggering as hell. It may not have been Pondering's intention to minimize the assault those women experienced but it sure came across that way.

I have not been raped, in that I have not been forced to have unwanted penis-in-vagina sexual intercourse, but I have been sexually assaulted more than once. And that post made me feel as though at least one person doesn't consider it a big enough deal.

Pondering clarified later in the thread, but when I first read that I wanted to throw my laptop across the room.

I am deeply sympathetic to Pondering's experiences. As with any woman who has been sexually assaulted. And I would hope that I would never, ever, write or say anything that implied that one person's experience was worse than someone else's, or that not being raped doesn't count as much. Again, it may not have been Pondering's intention to imply this, but that post sure did. And it was deeply upsetting.

Edited to add: When I hit submit on this post on the side of the screen I saw a rabble article title: [url=http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/christophermajka/2014/10/rape-mother-ear..."The rape of Mother Earth: Reverberations of violence."[/url] (written by a man). Now, I've long been frustrated by the application of the word "rape" to situations othat than actual sexual assault. I said to myself, okay, benefit of the doubt, it's rabble so let's read the article. It makes an explicit parallel between environmental destruction and sexual assault in the context of the Ghomeshi case. Sure, capitalism, partriarchy and greed have common roots. But using the word "rape" and using these women's experiences to illustrate a point about the environment? Not okay. I'm both an environmentalist and a feminist. This kind of appropriation is wrong and offensive. Let's haul out the thesaurus and use a different word than "rape." Please.

Sun, 2014-11-02 12:02

#394

Pondering

Sean in Ottawa wrote:
I hoped to reassure her that people here did not dismiss her experience as insignificant. I was very moved by the horror that someone could experience what she did and report it here and then say that she felt others -- even here, which is a progressive place -- would think her experience no big deal. To me it is heartbreaking to see that feeling laid out like that. I hoped to help ease that -- at least for my part as one who is writing and reading here.

It does ease my heart to know there are men like you and Owen Pallett and others here. But the moment I start to believe in you, a little voice says "but how do you know? How can you tell? They could just be saying those things, paying lip service." To those not in the know Jian Ghomeshi was considered progressive and feminist in his views. That was his public persona. "But he was so nice, so charming, so good looking" is a frequent refrain when abusers are exposed.

Quote:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2014/05/01/campus_sexual_assault_st...'s be clear: No one is saying that the high rates of victimization among college women mean that all men are rapists. That 1 in 5 college women have been assaulted doesn't mean that 1 in 5 men are assailants. Far from it. A study published in 2002 by David Lisak and Paul Miller, for which they interviewed college men about their sexual histories, found that only about 6 percent of the men surveyed had attempted or successfully raped someone.

A minimum of 6% of university men are rapists. Other studies say 14%. I read one survey with much higher numbers of men who would be willing to rape a woman if they thought they could get away with it.

So if I walk by 100 men on a university campus, 6 of them are rapists and even more would if they could. That isn't counting those who have a narrow definition of rape and don't count coercion or intimidation, only pure force. How many men post here? Which ones are the rapists?

20% of women in university are sexually assaulted, but most colleges and universities in Canada don't have any outreach or set protocols or training for staff to follow if a student confides in them, no official support centre. Female researchers on sex assault fear reporting their results will negatively impact their careers.

If I go to a party with 20 men, at least one is likely a rapist, if I go on a protest march or grocery store or movie theatre rapists are there too. That isn't paranoia, that's statistical reality.

6 in a hundred university men are rapists, but many more are willing to protect him. Jian is far from the only abuser working at the CBC, or any bank, or any large company, or posting on this message board.

I do believe that most men aren't personally abusive, but there is no way to tell which is which.

Sun, 2014-11-02 12:36

#395

Pondering

Tehanu wrote:

Well, Meg, I have to say that I found this:

Quote:
Interesting. My reaction was more surprise that anyone considered it a big enough deal to come forward at all. It seems none of them were raped.

... triggering as hell. It may not have been Pondering's intention to minimize the assault those women experienced but it sure came across that way.

I have not been raped, in that I have not been forced to have unwanted penis-in-vagina sexual intercourse, but I have been sexually assaulted more than once. And that post made me feel as though at least one person doesn't consider it a big enough deal.

Pondering clarified later in the thread, but when I first read that I wanted to throw my laptop across the room.

I'm sorry I made you feel that way Tehanu but relieved that you understood what I meant later. I recently read that the anesthesiologist that sexually assaulted women was only investigated after 5 women accused him. I guess two wasn't enough to get police suspicious.

There is a massive disconnect between the shock and horror people express whenever a fresh case pops up and the business as usual follow through.

People are piling on the CBC because of Jian but every big organization or group of any kind shelters these men.

eastnoireast wrote:

however, it seems to me there is also a lot of good people on this thread bringing what they can to a community discussion of what is a watershed moment in canadian society.

the whole institutionalized and internalized cone of silence on this is being ripped away, and it's just starting. i fuckin' love it. how can we support this? what is our role in all of this? and i mean all of us, and all our shit, all our 'isms.

This is a scandal for the CBC not a watershed moment for Canada. I hope that longterm, over decades, it will contribute to societal change but next week or next year will be no different than this week and this year.

There is still huge emphasis, and acceptance, that it is because a successful actress and a lawyer came forward, that the women are being believed. The others are still too fearful to come forward. I suppose in that sense it is a watershed moment. Two public women had the courage to step forward.

I would be delighted to read that the back-channels are leading to shunnings now instead of tolerance. I don't think it's going to happen.

Sun, 2014-11-02 12:39

#396

jas

In praise of the court of public opinion

No. This is an dangerous and anti-democratic precedent. Please let's not start endorsing mob rule because this one time it caught a bad man. What about all the other bad men we've called out?

Sun, 2014-11-02 12:49

#397

voice of the damned

Tehanu wrote:

Edited to add: When I hit submit on this post on the side of the screen I saw a rabble article title: "The rape of Mother Earth: Reverberations of violence." (written by a man). Now, I've long been frustrated by the application of the word "rape" to situations othat than actual sexual assault. I said to myself, okay, benefit of the doubt, it's rabble so let's read the article. It makes an explicit parallel between environmental destruction and sexual assault in the context of the Ghomeshi case. Sure, capitalism, partriarchy and greed have common roots. But using the word "rape" and using these women's experiences to illustrate a point about the environment? Not okay. I'm both an environmentalist and a feminist. This kind of appropriation is wrong and offensive. Let's haul out the thesaurus and use a different word than "rape." Please.

The Beat poet Gary Snyder used that same imagery to describe environmental exploitation in his poem Front Lines.

http://tinyurl.com/qebushs

(Possibly triggering)

I believe that's from 1974. We studied that poem in a modern poerty class I took at univeristy, taught more or less from a feminist perspective, and the women in the class(or at least the ones I remember as expressing an opinion) all shared the professor's dislike for it. I pretty muich concured with them, finding the philo-gynist symbolism politically problematic and aestheticallly tacky. As the prof later remarked(probably referencing Snyder in general), it's not too far a leap from portraying the land as virginal, to portraying cities, disparagingly, as whores.

Snyder was pretty much my least favorite of the Beat writers I studied. I guess I can see why some environmentalists would get inspirarion from his work, but it's a little too much of the macho wild-man trip for me.

Sun, 2014-11-02 13:48

#398

Pondering

MegB wrote:

Pondering wrote:
Everyone is not part of back-channels (previously known as grapevines) but they are not uncommon. They are a normal mechanism our society uses to deal with low-level (not hospitalized) sexual abuse of women.

Sadly, these back-channeled open secrets are not in any way confined to mainstream media and institutions. The same thing goes on in progressive circles. Women warn each other that "so and so is a date rapist" or "so and so likes them really young". That's how pervasive our rape culture is. Those of us who understand rape culture, experience it, critique, analyse and write about it are at a loss as to how to change our culture. Survivors are often too traumatized or ashamed to come forward or discuss their experiences openly because of the shaming and blaming. I think that's the thing that's got to change first. Make it easier and safer for women to come forward and acknowledge their experience and "out" the perpetrator.

ETA: Sorry if this post is redundant - I wish I had the time to read all five pages of this thread.

It's not redundant. I would never have shared the information I have here if anyone knew my real name. I don't much care if that means people don't believe me because we can't all be disbelieved.

Social media is helping. Yesallwomen shocked a lot of men. Even anonymously when women speak in large numbers they cannot be ignored, and victims do exist in large numbers.

This incident will blow over too but it is another straw on the camel's back.

Sun, 2014-11-02 13:49

#399

Pondering

6079_Smith_W wrote:

NDPP wrote:

Pondering wrote:

At what point do people admit this is western culture?

bingo!

Um... how about ALL culture, to some degree or another. I know you aren't saying it explicitly, but the notion that it is distinct to one ideology, and all will be better after the revolution is false. As was also just said, it is alive and well even in progressive circles.

I don't exclude progressives from western culture even if they/we imagine ourselves to be outside of it. I'm not sure if progressives can even be said to exist as a noun. Maybe western society would have been a better descriptor, I don't know. Do progressives play video games that objectify women? Consume porn that degrades women?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/teen-pimp-ringleader-hearing-detail...

How is it a 15 year old girl can find enough johns to have sex with girls as young as 13?

Sun, 2014-11-02 14:21

#400

jas wrote:

In praise of the court of public opinion

No. This is an dangerous and anti-democratic precedent. Please let's not start endorsing mob rule because this one time it caught a bad man. What about all the other bad men we've called out?

True. The pendulum goes from one extreme to the other. Media and media consumers shouldnt be so quick to congratulate ourselves. Jesse Brown said it in his Toronto Life piece, that he doesnt relish in this story at all and neither should we.

Sun, 2014-11-02 15:56

#401

6079_Smith_W

Pondering wrote:

Maybe western society would have been a better descriptor.

Absolutely it includes progressives, and I'm not defending western society. My only concern is seeing exploitation of women used as a foil for something else. It is good to make those links, but there are enough so-called revolutionaries who say exploitation of women is just a symptom of capitalism or imperialism, then shove it under the rug.

And I am not saying you are doing this; I don't think you are. My point was that sexism is everywhere; we don't need to qualify it as "western".

Western society didn't invent rape, and it certainly did not invent the exploitation of women. Sadly, they have always been with us, and are everywhere.

(edit)

And there is a big difference between mob rule and establishing a case built on legitimate media sources. Absolutely there is a lot about this that is shocking, and a lot of people aren't seeing things entirely clearly. But even without a charge, there is a pretty solid body of evidence that seriously challenges that benefit of the doubt.

I don't think it is an either/or, or a case of "mob rule" working here. That isn't what this is built on.

CBC cuts Jian Ghomeshi loose

Pages