- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
So given all this was happening he totally knew what was inevitably coming, giving him the time to reinvent himself. Seems he didn't like being publicly called out about it and made alot of lifestyle changes to protect himself. I truly believe he knew this day would come.Here's a better article about it
Revealed: Russell Brand Exited Comedy Central’s ‘Roast Battle’ After Facing Sexual Predator Claims On-Camera
EXCLUSIVE: Russell Brand’s last major television job in the UK ended with him being dropped after he was repeatedly accused of being a “sexual predator” during the recording of th…deadline.com
You and I both know that’s not what I meant and that you are being facetious. I was writing in response to a post that has now been deleted, where someone was using the age old ‘but but but they all consented to sex previously’Let me get this straight, purely for my own peace of mind. If my girlfriend consented for me to have sex with her and we have sex because of that consent, then we break-up and a few years later I get a knock on the door and am told that she is accusing me of raping her because she has now, in hindsight, withdrawn that consent I may face legal consequences and have to prove that I acted in good faith at the time and didn't rape her?
Again, I'm just asking for a friend.Cheers!
But to avoid any doubt, I meant I can agree to sex with someone 1000 times previously, that does not mean that I necessarily consent to future sex. Consent can’t be withdrawn with hindsight. However it must be gained in advance regardless of your sexual history together.
Editing to add: it can also be withdrawn at any time up to or during the act of sex.
Does that clear it up? Will your ‘friend’ understand now?
Last edited:
Brand demonetised
Russell Brand: YouTube suspends monetisation of star's channel
The comedian and actor is accused of historic rape and sexual assaults, which he denies.
www.bbc.co.uk
mumsnet is RIFE with conspiracy theorists, so i’ll post here what i posted there, i’m sure it’s fell on deaf ears over there..
To assume 'they' are trying to distract us you would also have to assume that everyone knows and cares about the actions of Russell Brand . They don't. Yes he's a household name but realistically only people that were invested in that culture and era of the 2000's are going to take an interest in that, leaving a massive number of the population presumably not even following the story.
Sorry but if they needed a distraction i'm sure they could've come up with something bigger than 'Russell Brand abuses women'... it's hardly the most shocking revelation of the decade.
I'm saying this as someone that doesn't trust MSM as a whole and as much as i love a good conspiracy, this situation is so transparent and the people blindly following his new found (conveniently curated) anti establishment persona need to open their eyes and stop believing that every single person who's speaks up against the MSM and establishment does it with good intentions, there's a growing pattern in people excusing their crappy actions by masquarading behind this 'victim of the media for telling the truth' bullshit persona.
YES there are genuine people out there spreading the message of fake news and how the government is so in control, but you all struggle to recognise when you're being played by evil people using this narrative to cover up their wrongdoings . OPEN YOUR EYES!
To assume 'they' are trying to distract us you would also have to assume that everyone knows and cares about the actions of Russell Brand . They don't. Yes he's a household name but realistically only people that were invested in that culture and era of the 2000's are going to take an interest in that, leaving a massive number of the population presumably not even following the story.
Sorry but if they needed a distraction i'm sure they could've come up with something bigger than 'Russell Brand abuses women'... it's hardly the most shocking revelation of the decade.
I'm saying this as someone that doesn't trust MSM as a whole and as much as i love a good conspiracy, this situation is so transparent and the people blindly following his new found (conveniently curated) anti establishment persona need to open their eyes and stop believing that every single person who's speaks up against the MSM and establishment does it with good intentions, there's a growing pattern in people excusing their crappy actions by masquarading behind this 'victim of the media for telling the truth' bullshit persona.
YES there are genuine people out there spreading the message of fake news and how the government is so in control, but you all struggle to recognise when you're being played by evil people using this narrative to cover up their wrongdoings . OPEN YOUR EYES!
Totally agree with this
crazy that you had to explain this tbh.
the longer people keep pretending to misunderstand the most basic theories of consent, the longer men like brand and their supporters will continue to get away with this because oh it’s so confusing isn’t it, consent? makes me
I found this article interesting
archive.ph
The ‘naive cynicism’ of Russell Brand’s hasty defenders | The Specta…
archived 18 Sep 2023 08:01:28 UTC
no. Consent can be withdrawn at any time during the event. You also could realise afterwards you didn’t actually give informed consent. Or you weren’t able to give consent, under the influence, groomed, power imbalance etc. if you’re really worried about if your ex consented…thats a you question to really think aboutLet me get this straight, purely for my own peace of mind. If my girlfriend consented for me to have sex with her and we have sex because of that consent, then we break-up and a few years later I get a knock on the door and am told that she is accusing me of raping her because she has now, in hindsight, withdrawn that consent I may face legal consequences and have to prove that I acted in good faith at the time and didn't rape her?
Again, I'm just asking for a friend.
He's got monetary restrictions on his you tube account now. Wonder how long before patreon do this same if he tries to open an account there.
John Noel will want to protect his son who was very much embroiled in the whole Brand "enterprise".
Considering how Patreon have been regarding grifters like Jack Monroe I don't think they'd give a shiny tit about Brand
Eta they appear to be an awful company unwilling to take any action about creators who use their platform, and certainly don't care about penalising creators who don't fulfil their patreon rewards. They leave it those left out of pocket to sort and its pretty difficult to contact them.
The Evil Media trope. Convenient scapegoat for everyone from the government down to the chip shop owner selling rotten fish.
Isn’t even Prince Harry, a man so privileged that he literally grew up in a palace at tax payers expense, going down the route that he was a victim of them.
What I will say about the MSM is that they ARE subject to editorial controls and the processes for making complaints are in place (no matter how toothless).
The, shall we say, “Independent“ media has no such controls or processes, so in effect Brand and his ilk could say anything he likes without consequence. This is how conspiracy theories such as the fake covid and the microchips in vaccines bullshit takes hold, there is always an obscure tweet from an anonymous source behind them.
And forgive me if I’m wrong, but isn’t that the exact type of misinformation that the Independent Media are railing against?
Another thought, can Youtube, which basically comes preloaded on any device you care to purchase, still be regarded as Independent, giving the advertising and the ability to remove content at whim?
Last edited:
Well, he's not going to be able to access it from prison in any case
Tour pulled, book pulled. YouTube etc ...
Finally!
Finally!
From what I've seen Youtubers say, they are extremely pro Creators and very supportive to ensure there's a wide variety of content that is independently produced.
It's a pretty big deal that they have taken this step, and they have left his content up for the moment. He's just not going to get that dollar dollar if he starts protesting his innocence. Companies like Facebook are a lot hotter on flagging up independent content with fact checkers, particularly the type of info Brand peddles.
Funny you should say that. He is a Fabian & a wolf in sheep's clothing is their symbol.
STAY FREE FOUNDATION - Charity 1199269
Charity details for STAY FREE FOUNDATION - Charity 1199269
List of the trustees...
- Status