Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2018 12:54:13 GMT -5
Here's the power that he had: He was a wrestling Youtuber they liked. A power dynamic doesn't have to be someone who holds your career in their hands. As soon as you're a fan of someone, they have that bit of psychological power over you. Look at any concert with teenagers in the crowd, you'll see thousands of people who the person on stage could get to do pretty much anything they wanted to gain their approval. You can say "oh he was just a youtuber". Doesn't matter, he was, even on a minor level, a celebrity and had fans who would like to please him. If anything Youtube encourages a closer relationship with the person creating content which exacerbates that. Here's the quote from one of the people involved: "Knowing that I was 19, drunk, sexually inexperienced and had moral objections to sending him nudes, he continued to try to persuade me," "In the end, I relented." "He was charming, he was the face of a YouTube channel and I'd been a fan of him for a while." "He made me feel so good about myself for about six hours, then he made me feel like utter shit for months." So, he got a teenage girl who he knew looked up to him to do this while drunk over her objections. And yes, she was an adult, 19, but can anyone here honestly say that drunk 19 year olds are above being manipulated into doing things they don't really want to do? Especially to gain approval from someone, be it a partner, a friend or a celebrity? At least he realised what he was doing and is trying to be a better person. If you think his life was ruined, at least let the guy speak for himself. www.independent.co.uk/voices/sexual-harassment-women-life-career-ruined-deserved-adam-blampied-youtube-a8167751.htmlFair enough. I wasn’t thinking about that aspect of the power quote but it is a valid point. I still think predator is a little much however I can understand why it is used
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2018 13:20:22 GMT -5
Here's the power that he had: He was a wrestling Youtuber they liked. A power dynamic doesn't have to be someone who holds your career in their hands. As soon as you're a fan of someone, they have that bit of psychological power over you. Look at any concert with teenagers in the crowd, you'll see thousands of people who the person on stage could get to do pretty much anything they wanted to gain their approval. You can say "oh he was just a youtuber". Doesn't matter, he was, even on a minor level, a celebrity and had fans who would like to please him. If anything Youtube encourages a closer relationship with the person creating content which exacerbates that. Here's the quote from one of the people involved: "Knowing that I was 19, drunk, sexually inexperienced and had moral objections to sending him nudes, he continued to try to persuade me," "In the end, I relented." "He was charming, he was the face of a YouTube channel and I'd been a fan of him for a while." "He made me feel so good about myself for about six hours, then he made me feel like utter shit for months." So, he got a teenage girl who he knew looked up to him to do this while drunk over her objections. And yes, she was an adult, 19, but can anyone here honestly say that drunk 19 year olds are above being manipulated into doing things they don't really want to do? Especially to gain approval from someone, be it a partner, a friend or a celebrity?
At least he realised what he was doing and is trying to be a better person. If you think his life was ruined, at least let the guy speak for himself. www.independent.co.uk/voices/sexual-harassment-women-life-career-ruined-deserved-adam-blampied-youtube-a8167751.htmlEdit: Take your likes back, I rescind this post. lol
|
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 15,027
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Dec 30, 2018 13:26:39 GMT -5
Here's the power that he had: He was a wrestling Youtuber they liked. A power dynamic doesn't have to be someone who holds your career in their hands. As soon as you're a fan of someone, they have that bit of psychological power over you. Look at any concert with teenagers in the crowd, you'll see thousands of people who the person on stage could get to do pretty much anything they wanted to gain their approval. You can say "oh he was just a youtuber". Doesn't matter, he was, even on a minor level, a celebrity and had fans who would like to please him. If anything Youtube encourages a closer relationship with the person creating content which exacerbates that. Here's the quote from one of the people involved: "Knowing that I was 19, drunk, sexually inexperienced and had moral objections to sending him nudes, he continued to try to persuade me," "In the end, I relented." "He was charming, he was the face of a YouTube channel and I'd been a fan of him for a while." "He made me feel so good about myself for about six hours, then he made me feel like utter shit for months." So, he got a teenage girl who he knew looked up to him to do this while drunk over her objections. And yes, she was an adult, 19, but can anyone here honestly say that drunk 19 year olds are above being manipulated into doing things they don't really want to do? Especially to gain approval from someone, be it a partner, a friend or a celebrity?
At least he realised what he was doing and is trying to be a better person. If you think his life was ruined, at least let the guy speak for himself. www.independent.co.uk/voices/sexual-harassment-women-life-career-ruined-deserved-adam-blampied-youtube-a8167751.htmlI think you've changed my mind on this. I know this is an exhausting thing for women to hear, but I just thought of "If this dude behaved that way to my sister would we be having words?" and yeah, we would be. I found the bolded paragraph particularly well expressed. Holy crap! This must be a first in the history of internet debates!
|
|
|
Post by Hurbster on Dec 30, 2018 14:02:36 GMT -5
It wasn't good that Cultaholic got screwed over by it, just as they were going to launch.
|
|
|
Post by Fade is a CodyCryBaby on Dec 30, 2018 14:24:30 GMT -5
But he was a predator. Obviously he wasn't Weinstein or Spacey, but he abused his power and name to get people to provide him with sexual gratification inappropriately. Generally, when people think of “predators” they think of people like Bill Cosby or Harvey Weinstein. What Adam did was shitty, but it wasn’t anywhere near the level of being a predator. Hell, the Drake and Millie Bobby Brown stuff gives me pause.
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Dec 30, 2018 14:29:06 GMT -5
The fact that Blampied resigned by choice is absolutely relevant to this, and not in a positive way.
People are defending Blampied on the basis of something he does not himself defend.
Blampied used the power that comes with having a fandom to get people to send him naked photographs of themselves. No I am not saying this is my assessment of the situation. It is his. He accepts that this was wrong. He realised this was an issue and departed because of it.
There is absolutely no point in saying someone is innocent of something when they themselves say they are guilty of it, regardless of how you feel about what he did.
For a bit more conjecture and moving away from what Blampied actually said and did, I don't remember whether the reaction on here was hysterical or not but can believe it was. However that hysteria can co-exist alongside what he did being f***ed up too.
Not understanding the way men with any kind of power can override women's consent or will it judgement suggests not listening to what women themselves say about this. I'm male myself so what I think isn't really relevant here. Talk to some women. Or more accurately, listen to some.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Dec 30, 2018 14:46:22 GMT -5
Yeah, what put this story into the creeper territory is that the guy used his celebrity (albeit minor, but how big a celebrity is partly depends on what you're a fan of, I suppose) to prod young women for nudes even after initially being told no. If he was in a relationship with one and they just happened to be sending stuff like that to one another with a mutual understanding of where that fit into their sex life then it's quite a different story...still arguably stupid, but very different, even ignoring him having a girlfriend at the time (their relationship is their business).
This doesn't make him a monster on par with Weinstein, but the mentality behind that type of behavior isn't terribly different: "I'm a man with some level of influence on or cache with these young women, and I intend to leverage that so that they'll provide me sexual satisfaction, even if they tell me outright they'd rather not." The fact that he opened his eyes, realized he was doing something wrong, and sought to act on it is a positive, and I hope he's grown as a person and becomes a positive contributor to the ongoing social dialog on these issues, but yeah, his life certainly was not "destroyed" nor was he chased away by an angry mob.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Dec 30, 2018 15:04:16 GMT -5
I don't think dude himself took it this hard.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2018 15:22:47 GMT -5
So when you become famous are you only allowed to hit on other famous people then or...?
And if it works out, great, it's just a relationship. If it DOESN'T work out...you're being toxic and awful?
|
|
|
Post by romanstylesiii on Dec 30, 2018 15:35:16 GMT -5
He had a girlfriend at the time though right? How is this anyone else's business? In fact, most people have cheated on at least one spouse in their lifetime. Participating in an online lynch mob for a private incident is far worse than what he did.
|
|
|
Post by romanstylesiii on Dec 30, 2018 15:56:35 GMT -5
Here's the power that he had: He was a wrestling Youtuber they liked. A power dynamic doesn't have to be someone who holds your career in their hands. As soon as you're a fan of someone, they have that bit of psychological power over you. Look at any concert with teenagers in the crowd, you'll see thousands of people who the person on stage could get to do pretty much anything they wanted to gain their approval. You can say "oh he was just a youtuber". Doesn't matter, he was, even on a minor level, a celebrity and had fans who would like to please him. If anything Youtube encourages a closer relationship with the person creating content which exacerbates that. Here's the quote from one of the people involved: "Knowing that I was 19, drunk, sexually inexperienced and had moral objections to sending him nudes, he continued to try to persuade me," "In the end, I relented." "He was charming, he was the face of a YouTube channel and I'd been a fan of him for a while." "He made me feel so good about myself for about six hours, then he made me feel like utter shit for months." So, he got a teenage girl who he knew looked up to him to do this while drunk over her objections. And yes, she was an adult, 19, but can anyone here honestly say that drunk 19 year olds are above being manipulated into doing things they don't really want to do? Especially to gain approval from someone, be it a partner, a friend or a celebrity? At least he realised what he was doing and is trying to be a better person. If you think his life was ruined, at least let the guy speak for himself. www.independent.co.uk/voices/sexual-harassment-women-life-career-ruined-deserved-adam-blampied-youtube-a8167751.htmlShe was a consenting adult. She has her own agency. She has the ability to say no. Being a "celebrity" is not a type of power that any court will ever hold-up. With this insane logic, no celebrity could ever have sex with someone who is not famous. Or do they have to do in it a context where YOU get to choose if it is morally acceptable? The precedent you want to set is insane? Should a celebrity have to go to some sort of court to get permission to have a relationship with another consenting adult? I am just confused to how two consenting adults can have a relationship with your logic? When 75 year old Mick Jagger is having sex with people 50 years younger, they are not CHOOSING to be with him because he is incredibly good looking for a senior citizen, they are CHOOSING to be with him because of his celebrity and influence.
|
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 15,027
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Dec 30, 2018 16:17:17 GMT -5
Here's the power that he had: He was a wrestling Youtuber they liked. A power dynamic doesn't have to be someone who holds your career in their hands. As soon as you're a fan of someone, they have that bit of psychological power over you. Look at any concert with teenagers in the crowd, you'll see thousands of people who the person on stage could get to do pretty much anything they wanted to gain their approval. You can say "oh he was just a youtuber". Doesn't matter, he was, even on a minor level, a celebrity and had fans who would like to please him. If anything Youtube encourages a closer relationship with the person creating content which exacerbates that. Here's the quote from one of the people involved: "Knowing that I was 19, drunk, sexually inexperienced and had moral objections to sending him nudes, he continued to try to persuade me," "In the end, I relented." "He was charming, he was the face of a YouTube channel and I'd been a fan of him for a while." "He made me feel so good about myself for about six hours, then he made me feel like utter shit for months." So, he got a teenage girl who he knew looked up to him to do this while drunk over her objections. And yes, she was an adult, 19, but can anyone here honestly say that drunk 19 year olds are above being manipulated into doing things they don't really want to do? Especially to gain approval from someone, be it a partner, a friend or a celebrity? At least he realised what he was doing and is trying to be a better person. If you think his life was ruined, at least let the guy speak for himself. www.independent.co.uk/voices/sexual-harassment-women-life-career-ruined-deserved-adam-blampied-youtube-a8167751.htmlShe was a consenting adult. She has her own agency. She has the ability to say no. Being a "celebrity" is not a type of power that any court will ever hold-up. With this insane logic, no celebrity could ever have sex with someone who is not famous. Or do they have to do in it a context where YOU get to choose if it is morally acceptable? The precedent you want to set is insane? Should a celebrity have to go to some sort of court to get permission to have a relationship with another consenting adult? I am just confused to how two consenting adults can have a relationship with your logic? When 75 year old Mick Jagger is having sex with people 50 years younger, they are not CHOOSING to be with him because he is incredibly good looking for a senior citizen, they are CHOOSING to be with him because of his celebrity and influence. You know that's not what happened right? It's not 75 year old Mick Jagger being chased by girls going after his money. It's a guy going after several girls and when they says no, pressuring and using the influence he has to get them to do it anyway, she's said that's what happened, he's said what's happened that's what happened. That's gross if it's a celebrity doing it, a boyfriend doing it or anyone doing it. Plenty of things can be creepy and skeevy without being illegal. As for "she could say no and walk away" yeah, human psychology doesn't work like that, otherwise most abusive relationships wouldn't happen. I don't see how this is ever her. Someone says no, accept that and go on your way, that happens, none of this ever happens. He got an answer, he's a grown adult with his own agency, he could have walked away, on any of the multiple times he admits to pulling this crap. Anyone can date whoever they like, but no means no, not "I'll use their admiration of me to turn it into a yes".
|
|
TGM
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 6,073
|
Post by TGM on Dec 30, 2018 16:27:39 GMT -5
Of course Adam Blampied considers himself a celebrity.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2018 17:30:47 GMT -5
She was a consenting adult. She has her own agency. She has the ability to say no. Being a "celebrity" is not a type of power that any court will ever hold-up. With this insane logic, no celebrity could ever have sex with someone who is not famous. Or do they have to do in it a context where YOU get to choose if it is morally acceptable? The precedent you want to set is insane? Should a celebrity have to go to some sort of court to get permission to have a relationship with another consenting adult? I am just confused to how two consenting adults can have a relationship with your logic? When 75 year old Mick Jagger is having sex with people 50 years younger, they are not CHOOSING to be with him because he is incredibly good looking for a senior citizen, they are CHOOSING to be with him because of his celebrity and influence. You know that's not what happened right? It's not 75 year old Mick Jagger being chased by girls going after his money. It's a guy going after several girls and when they says no, pressuring and using the influence he has to get them to do it anyway, she's said that's what happened, he's said what's happened that's what happened. That's gross if it's a celebrity doing it, a boyfriend doing it or anyone doing it. Plenty of things can be creepy and skeevy without being illegal. As for "she could say no and walk away" yeah, human psychology doesn't work like that, otherwise most abusive relationships wouldn't happen. I don't see how this is ever her. Someone says no, accept that and go on your way, that happens, none of this ever happens. He got an answer, he's a grown adult with his own agency, he could have walked away, on any of the multiple times he admits to pulling this crap. Anyone can date whoever they like, but no means no, not "I'll use their admiration of me to turn it into a yes". But that's not how life works. I'll bet money on the fact you've had to ask someone twice to go out, or to have sex. We all have. It's a parody of existence to pretend otherwise. A hot girl you like, you've been building up courage to ask her out. You're at a party together, you build up the courage. You ask her, she declines. Do you: A) Lick your wounds, wonder if it was how you come across, ask your friends for advice and pluck up the courage to ask again at another time or B) Say: "Oh okay, goodbye for ever" shake her hand and then go and stand in the corner drinking soda until your parents pick you up. The problem with so much of the debate surrounding this and other issues is that it's dominated by people who really want to pretend life is how it should be rather than how it is. That's how life works. Viewing everything in this spectrum of black and white where the nuances of human interaction are immersed in shades of grey is very, very dangerous. Reducing human interaction down to effectively monosyllabic interactions where we pretend there's no subtext for anything, no signals, no courting, just out and out "We could have sex" Yes, but let's not "Agreed" ..as if life was a Family Guy cutaway. Anyone who has ever had sex knows that isn't how it works. It's very damaging to the psyche of young people that we now live in a world where people pretend it is. That isn't encouraging them to have a healthy relationship with sex at all. There's also more than an undercurrent of paternalism about the idea that if you ask a girl twice for boobs she's helpless to resist. How could she resist the charms of a man who appears on YouTube, she's a girl and was probably baffled by anything that wasn't dollies and cookware. She could have said 'no' and cut off contact, but I imagine she was thinking about knitting a blouse and got confused. Adam, the man, should have used his superior man brain to recognise the situation was problematic. I'm sorry but there's more than a hint of misogyny about the outlook that argues she's somehow rendered a victim because she was asked something twice. In fact the whole thing fits in of a narrative where (mainly) men still view sex and sexual interaction as something done to women. She willingly sent him pictures of herself because she fancied him and thought it'd be a way to get into her pants, he took the pictures, probably masturbated with them and then lost interest in her. She then got upset because he was no longer responding to her advances and she went public and tried to play the victim. It's fairly open/shut. If she had a channel and he sent her picture of his penis after she asked him twice this wouldn't be an issue.
|
|
|
Post by eJm on Dec 30, 2018 17:42:54 GMT -5
I’m not even going to bother replying because people have told you what happened and you keep trying to make up your own narrative but here’s my question;
Why does it matter to you?
Blampied admitted that’s what happened, he decided to leave on his own, he’s only popped up to say what he’s doing to not do it again.
This isn’t like every other one of these cases where said person tries to spin it to make it seem different when it blatantly was the victim’s story. As someone said before, the woman in question said what happened, Adam agreed that’s what happened so guess what? That’s what happened. Anything else is speculation and whatever mixed up logic people have about relationships.
This whole thing is a non factor until Blampied comes back and/or Cultaholic sign him which he said himself that wouldn’t happen so I have no idea what this thread’s for.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Dec 30, 2018 19:08:10 GMT -5
So when you become famous are you only allowed to hit on other famous people then or...? And if it works out, great, it's just a relationship. If it DOESN'T work out...you're being toxic and awful? Depends: did you ask the person out, did you just happen to meet somewhere and hit it off, or did you wait until they were drunk and then keep bugging them until they sent you a picture of their breasts? One of those things is not like the other things, one of those things just doesn't belong.
|
|
The Ichi
Patti Mayonnaise
AGGRESSIVE Executive Janitor of the Third Floor Manager's Bathroom
Posts: 37,281
Member is Online
|
Post by The Ichi on Dec 30, 2018 20:32:14 GMT -5
You know that's not what happened right? It's not 75 year old Mick Jagger being chased by girls going after his money. It's a guy going after several girls and when they says no, pressuring and using the influence he has to get them to do it anyway, she's said that's what happened, he's said what's happened that's what happened. That's gross if it's a celebrity doing it, a boyfriend doing it or anyone doing it. Plenty of things can be creepy and skeevy without being illegal. As for "she could say no and walk away" yeah, human psychology doesn't work like that, otherwise most abusive relationships wouldn't happen. I don't see how this is ever her. Someone says no, accept that and go on your way, that happens, none of this ever happens. He got an answer, he's a grown adult with his own agency, he could have walked away, on any of the multiple times he admits to pulling this crap. Anyone can date whoever they like, but no means no, not "I'll use their admiration of me to turn it into a yes". But that's not how life works. I'll bet money on the fact you've had to ask someone twice to go out, or to have sex. We all have. It's a parody of existence to pretend otherwise. A hot girl you like, you've been building up courage to ask her out. You're at a party together, you build up the courage. You ask her, she declines. Do you: A) Lick your wounds, wonder if it was how you come across, ask your friends for advice and pluck up the courage to ask again at another time or B) Say: "Oh okay, goodbye for ever" shake her hand and then go and stand in the corner drinking soda until your parents pick you up. The problem with so much of the debate surrounding this and other issues is that it's dominated by people who really want to pretend life is how it should be rather than how it is. That's how life works. Viewing everything in this spectrum of black and white where the nuances of human interaction are immersed in shades of grey is very, very dangerous. Reducing human interaction down to effectively monosyllabic interactions where we pretend there's no subtext for anything, no signals, no courting, just out and out "We could have sex" Yes, but let's not "Agreed" ..as if life was a Family Guy cutaway. Anyone who has ever had sex knows that isn't how it works. It's very damaging to the psyche of young people that we now live in a world where people pretend it is. That isn't encouraging them to have a healthy relationship with sex at all. There's also more than an undercurrent of paternalism about the idea that if you ask a girl twice for boobs she's helpless to resist. How could she resist the charms of a man who appears on YouTube, she's a girl and was probably baffled by anything that wasn't dollies and cookware. She could have said 'no' and cut off contact, but I imagine she was thinking about knitting a blouse and got confused. Adam, the man, should have used his superior man brain to recognise the situation was problematic. I'm sorry but there's more than a hint of misogyny about the outlook that argues she's somehow rendered a victim because she was asked something twice. In fact the whole thing fits in of a narrative where (mainly) men still view sex and sexual interaction as something done to women. She willingly sent him pictures of herself because she fancied him and thought it'd be a way to get into her pants, he took the pictures, probably masturbated with them and then lost interest in her. She then got upset because he was no longer responding to her advances and she went public and tried to play the victim. It's fairly open/shut. If she had a channel and he sent her picture of his penis after she asked him twice this wouldn't be an issue. Read. What. Happened. And then read it a few more times. Really try to drill something past this thick layer of narrative you've made up. The guy himself you're defending would tell you to stop.
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,041
Member is Online
|
Post by Mozenrath on Dec 30, 2018 20:34:50 GMT -5
"Why?" *is explained, in detail, why, including both the accuser and the accused agreeing on the course of events* "But why, though?"
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Dec 30, 2018 21:43:51 GMT -5
There aren't a whole lotta women who want to be asked out again if they've already rejected ya. The idea of 'persistence' being any kind of attractive trait is a weird pop culture trope that usually isn't gonna work out favorably. The Urkel approach ain't gonna work with most women.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Dec 30, 2018 21:49:20 GMT -5
Blampied admitted that’s what happened, he decided to leave on his own, he’s only popped up to say what he’s doing to not do it again. This isn’t like every other one of these cases where said person tries to spin it to make it seem different when it blatantly was the victim’s story. As someone said before, the woman in question said what happened, Adam agreed that’s what happened so guess what? That’s what happened. Anything else is speculation and whatever mixed up logic people have about relationships. This needs to be stated again. Blampied admitted what happened, and agreed that it as not acceptable behavior which is why he quit Youtube.
|
|