Sunday, 26 October 2014

Dear Jian Ghomeshi: an open letter

I have never liked your show. The primary reason I have always found you insufferable is because you have consistently pandered to feminism. You softball any feminist guest--hell, you tend to not just softball, but softball slow and wide and soggy enough to give them a walk every damn time, instead of ever asking them any difficult questions, or demanding they provide empirical evidence for their assertions.

And while I know that asking the really hard questions isn't what The Q is about, I have no doubt that had you ever interviewed me, you'd have been asking those hard questions. You'd have been demanding I prove every single claim I made. You'd do it the way every mainstream interviewer, whether on the political left or the political right, who has dared to talk to me has.

You have been told all your life that the rape of women is not taken seriously enough, even in Western cultures. That women who claim they've been sexually violated are not believed, and even when they are believed, they're blamed or dismissed. You've been told that we live in a rape culture where the sexual terrorizing of women is normalized, and men are absolved through the toxically masculine "boys will be boys".

You have implicitly agreed with that, every time you've swallowed any given feminist assertion at face value, instead of telling that person to prove it to you, and to everyone. You are now reaping what a feminist culture sows. What it sows is an assumption of sexual malice and malfeasance on the part of all men, and the attitude, to paraphrase Alan Dershowitz, that rape is so heinous a crime, even innocence is not a defence. You said yourself, the CBC doesn't give two shits about whether what you did with your partner was consensual--it's only concerned with the fact that some women have impugned your sexuality and your integrity. Some woman somewhere says Jian Ghomeshi is a creep? Here comes your pink slip.

I've been surfing on mainstream websites, and the "goss" is that you're a scumbag and a predator, all based on a single blog post about an alleged ass-grab, written by a female "writer" that "Literotica" wouldn't lower themselves to publishing, a story so cloying and saturated with rape-fantasy narrative that I'd be surprised the author doesn't masturbate to it every night before bed.

I have to say, Jian, I'm not happy with you. I'm really not. You've contributed to a culture where a woman's pointed finger is equivalent to a conviction. A culture Theodore Roosevelt predicted would eventually emerge all the way back in 1904--a future dystopia where any man so much as accused of rape would be as subject to public lynching as the black man was in his own day.

You have consistently and repeatedly enabled the architects of your own undoing, almost certainly thinking they would never, ever turn on you, and almost certainly thinking no man was ever accused of sexual misconduct who didn't deserve it. You were willing to believe the worst of every man who was not you--an entire society of them!--while simultaneously believing that playing by the feminist rulebook would somehow inoculate you against persecution.

I am a public figure who has spoken at political conventions and gender issues conferences, an advocate for men and boys, and a philosophical opponent of ideological feminism. I'm a high school graduate whose writings are currently included in the curricula of more than one university sociology or psychology class. I'm a waitress who is a friend of Warren Farrell (best-selling author of several books on the male experience), and Anne Cools, the first black female to become a senator in North America, and a leading opponent of ideological feminism. I am unusual in background. Atypical in my opinions and my associates. Not your average Jane. People like me have been out here all this time, for the 8 years you have hosted your show, and yet not once have you found any of us interesting enough to interview. Not when there's another Rape Culture hysteric to pander to, for lulz and listens, anyway.

I find you smarmy, self-satisfied, repugnant and unctuous in your 8 years of asking easy questions and avoiding controversy. I detest your smug interview style, your moralizing, prerecorded intros to the show, and your lack of journalistic integrity when presenting the status quo as truth by journalistic fiat.

But as much as I detest the way you've enabled and abetted what I have come to believe are the most insidious organized fraudsters in living memory, I detest even more the way you have been treated by them, by your employer, and by the general public.

Again, I don't like you, and I don't like what you have stood for over my years of listening to your program. But that does not mean I will automatically believe what is being said about you, and given the propensity for feminists to lie about men and about sex, I want to offer you my support, such as it is. I wish you well in your lawsuit.

If it turns out you are a scumbag (as many prominent male feminists somehow magically turn out to be, almost as if they view feminism as a means to groom their victims), I will condemn you as wholeheartedly as anyone else. But until the evidence surfaces to convince me of that, I will be in your corner.

Good luck to you, and here's hoping the all the evidence is heard.

-Karen

22 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. Bravo. Excellent little video. Short and to the point.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
  2. I can quote Frederick von Spee, a Jesuit preist in 16th century Germany who was critical of the witch trials and wrote a book Cautio Criminalis stating his case. Near the end of his booj he says -

    "Thus eventually those who at first clamored most loudly to feed the
    flames are themselves involved, for they rashly failed to see that their
    turn too would come. Thus Heaven justly punishes those who with their
    pestilent tongues created so many witches and sent so many to the stake "

    ReplyDelete
  3. I got the impression that this was about way more than a single case of grab-ass?

    At least if this source is credible:

    Over the past few months the Star has approached Ghomeshi with allegations from three young women, [...]who say he was physically violent to them without their consent during sexual encounters or in the lead-up to sexual encounters. Ghomeshi, through his lawyer, has said he “does not engage in non-consensual role play or sex and any suggestion of the contrary is defamatory.”

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

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There could very well be multiple cases, and wrongdoing on Ghomeshi's part. Are there police reports? If Ghomeshi has committed a crime (multiple times, no less) you'd think at least one of his alleged victims would have thought to report it to police.

      Allegations that exist only in the media, particularly sexual allegations levied against a public figure by unnamed individuals, are inherently unreliable, IMO. The accusation itself is often the point, and it does all the work without anyone having to prove anything.

      From that article, these are not allegations of your typical date rape scenario, but brutal and violent assaults. Now, because of how these women have chosen to handle things (through anonymous allegations in the media, rather than through proper channels), what evidence there might be that could prove these allegations is either stale or non-existent. No police reports, no rape kits, no fingernail scrapings, no police photos of bruises.

      They were worried that they'd be attacked online if they reported to the police? Because why? Because another woman who wrote a syruppy, melodramatic Harlequinesque blog post about an ass-grab got lambasted by readers for indulging in a PTSD fetish? Someone called her a "scumbag of the internet" and this justifies allowing an alleged violent sexual predator to remain free to keep victimizing other women?

      This entire thing stinks. (And no, I don't trust the Star to be credible or unbiased, any more than I would trust Fox News to be credible or unbiased regarding the "war against Christmas".)

      Delete
    2. There were 4 women, none of whom would be identified, none of whom went to the police. The xojane piece is so clearly a hit piece as well... it's basically a guy asks out a girl, she thinks he's gay, he interacts with her like a guy on a date, she is put off by that and then once she clears it up he texts her a few more times and then drops it. Clearly a huge monster right?

      Delete
  4. Magnus,
    "Over the past few months the Star has approached Ghomeshi with allegations from three young women, [...]who say he was physically violent to them without their consent during sexual encounters or in the lead-up to sexual encounters."

    Did the Star also due the minimum due diligence to determine what if any other connection - social personal, professional - these women may have had?

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Will not be drawn into a discussion regarding the trustworthiness of either the publication or Jian. I'm not terribly invested in this issue, and this is the first time I've heard of either.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I wrote out a long comment that I quite like, but hit a wrong button. Argh!

    I'm glad you have discussed this, and I'm proud to call you a fellow Canadian. My mom was actually the one to tell me about this - and she LOVES ghomeshi. She has listened to him for 5+ years. She is also by no stretch of imagination a feminist. I haven't listened enough to know how I feel about him, but, like you, I do not believe that the presumption of innocence should be thrown out.

    My mother in laws elegant response? "This guys obviously a rapist!!!!!" emphasis hers, and one of the rare times I'm dying to say 'because you're obviously a racist". I find it funny how everyone is putting this guy under the bus, from feminists to my 'brown people are all terrorists, probably' inlaws....

    I'd love to see your thoughts on this article as well. I think it sets a very dangerous precedent... http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/the-ghomeshi-question-the-law-and-consent/article21315629/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I actually read the (2010?) SCC decision in the R. v J.A. sexual assault case referenced in that GaM article. Probably the most disturbing thing about that case is that it arose from a false allegation.

      The complainant and defendant were in an LTR and were BDSM practitioners. They agreed in advance to erotic asphyxiation, and to certain acts happening while the complainant was unconscious.

      A few months later, after an argument in which the defendant threatened to leave the relationship and seek custody of their young child, the complainant went to police and reported that she had consented to the asphyxiation, and consented in advance to certain acts during unconsciousness, but that the defendant had gone outside the scope of what she had consented to.

      That is, "I said he could choke me out and he could do A, B and C to me, but he did X to me instead."

      He was convicted. In the appeal, it became a finding of fact before the court that the complainant had lied about what she had and had not consented to, that the defendant had not breached the scope of what they had agreed to, and that she'd made the allegation in order to hurt any application for custody the defendant might make.

      In the appellate court's decision to acquit, one of the three judges asked the question, "is it a legally valid concept to consent in advance to sexual activities that will occur while you're unconscious?"

      Of course, that question necessitated the SCC to look into it and render a judgment. The acquittal was overturned, and the guy went back to prison.

      The decision itself, and its justifications, have ramifications beyond the BDSM community. Ever have a boyfriend ask you to wake him up with morning head? Yeah, that's against the law now--if you comply with his request, you're sexually assaulting him. Caressing or kissing your partner in their sleep? Technically illegal, even if they asked you to.

      It's quite disturbing.

      As far as the bodily harm aspect in the law, this is also quite disturbing. Who determines what is bodily harm? If I get my ears pierced, I'm technically harming my body, resulting in an injury and scar. Should I not be allowed to do that? Why should it be different just because someone gets off to being stuck with a needle, rather than using it for body "modification"?

      If he smacks my bottom and it leaves a welt, it's illegal, but if it doesn't it's not?

      Such laws and precedents lay exquisitely open to potential abuses by unscrupulous people, and given the political climate where any mention of that potential is labelled rape apology, I can only think the system will grow ever more interested in micromanaging the sex lives of Canadians.

      Delete
  8. I cant express how happy I am to read your blog. I dont really care much about Jian but the points you make are exactly what has been on my mind. Thank you for your courage to speak the truth. I know you will be demonized for sharing this for this but just know that there are people like me out there that agree with you 100% and we will stand strong in the face of hypocrisy.

    Thank You!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Excellent article - and I couldn't agree more - especially follow-up comment regarding disturbing SCC decision R. vs J.A. - even it will not be used in this case. And yes - the mangina Gomeshi looks great wearing it - reminds me a bit of preening narcissist Julian Assange.

    ReplyDelete
  10. It would not surprise me in the least if a male feminist turns out to be a sexual predator.
    As Karen has so adeptly pointed out the projection of women, I would add that the eager willingness of male feminists to embrace the vilification of male sexuality as........suspicious.

    ReplyDelete
  11. The famous Boycott American Women blog has returned! We're accepting submissions so if you have any bad experiences with American women and want to share them, just go to the Submit Your Story tab on our site, tell us your story, and we'll publish it, anonymously of course.

    www.boycottamericanwomen.com

    ReplyDelete
  12. Where can one find Theodore Roosevelt's prediction about feminist culture? Anybody?
    Juuust curious. A quick Google search pulled up nothin' but stuff saying he's pro-feminist, yadda yadda. A real mixed-bag, that crazy warmonger. But hey, nobody is perfect. lol.
    Interesting topic, why some men support feminism. Also interesting is how men, these bad man of The Patriarchy's heyday, responded to early feminists, Suffragettes.
    Sidenote: The speculation and analysis I've glanced at online about what's really behind feminism, the real reasons it exists and how it is expressed... I mean from the politics and opportunism to the psychology and the unconscious motivation of individuals, of different groups within both sexes is interesting/disturbing. Pua sh*t =fascinating on this. You know. Talk about sexual strategy... "alphas" or rich, powerful men happy to sh*t on their lessors for the women, thus increasing their power and status (resulting in more opportunity to reproduce, obviously subconscious or just men being socially dominate men since not much of an actual option in their society) and so on. Obama shames men, "Man Up". Conservative fill-n-blank sez "Man Up". And so-called betas getting on board w/ how women been kept down so they can act out a kind of revenge against the bigger boys that pushed 'em around and maybe get some action with the feminist activist chick... Etc. Just thinking off the top of my head and putting off doing work. Confusing, different intriguing speculations. Different people doing things for different reasons.
    Anyway, who reads this? GWW sorry I rambled and took a few seconds from your life you'll never get back. Bless you.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I didn't know anything about Ghomeshi before this happened, and even afterwards, nothing has ever indicated that part of the scandal is in how uncharacteristic his alleged actions are for a "feminist." That part seems to have been left out entirely, and I thank you for speaking directly to it. Your letter, as a consequence, is about so much more than him and his situation. To support him even though you despise him just as much as the feminists do says everything. My only question: Who else do you have in mind when you say "as many prominent male feminists turn out to be." Who were you thinking about when you wrote that?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hugo Schwyzer I bet. An evil Jew, how surprising. :/ Betty Friedan, Gloria Steinem, Andrew Dworkin, are we sensing a pattern here. Feminism is and always has been a Jewish subversive political movement, just like communism.

      Delete
  14. Oh, look ....http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/jian-ghomeshi-charged-with-sexual-assault-choking-1.2850661

    ReplyDelete
  15. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  16. As I think you're aware of now, having actually read the complaints via the verdict, Jian Ghomeshi wasn't even accused of rape in the first place. In other words, he wasn't even accused of any sort of non-consensual touching or penetration of a mouth, an anus, a vagina, or even a clitoris.

    This should make for an object lesson for us all in that we need to know what the accusations actually say, and additionally that we would do much better to not conflate claims of what accurately or inaccurately gets called 'sexual assault' with rape.

    ReplyDelete

Commenting policy:

All comments are welcome here. I refuse to censor points of view that differ from my own.

I recognize that I may be challenging the deep-seated beliefs of some people, and perhaps stirring up emotions in others. However, I would ask:

- if you care to respond to anything that I have said, please do not simply link to or quote some statistic. Do not simply regurgitate things you have been told are true. Think about what I am saying. Respond with an argument. Offer something from your personal observations, and explain to me how you feel your statistic is connected to your experience.

- If you wish to be part of a discussion, try not to dismiss what I or a another commenter says out of hand. Yes, that means that some lines of thought or ideologies may not stand up to scrutiny (perhaps even my own).

- Remember, ad hominem attacks diminish everyone involved. If you want to criticize anything, do so passionately and directly - but debate is about attacking ideas, not people.

Have at you!