I'm already trying to self-justify listening to Swans, my favourite "band", whilst knowing that Gira is an asshole. This pains me.

Lennon was an asshole a whole lot of times wasn't he? Did some of our favourite authors drown puppies in their spare time?

In spite of Gira's wife's assurances, the lawyer-assisted statement really did not deviate much from Grimm's story. Worrying indeed.

See that is exactly what i noticed too

larkin the liar grimms fb friend count is above 2k whereas it was lower than 200 originally. she timed the accusation well coinciding with a tour and a new song and is using it to beg for attention and hugs.

her career will ultimately fail anyway since her terrible music does not appeal to anyone. the question is what will she do next to keep the media attention?

and all you dipshits on here believe a trial is gonna happen.

no.

she never wanted or intended for a trial to happen. thats not how the law works. gira would have to take HER to court for slander and would prob bankrupt himself in a futile attempt to disprove it since there is no evidence and its he said she said.

congrats to all of you for deciding a rape victim is a rapist because a lying rich girl sociopath told you so.

So your shit smelling foot has come out of your ass and is now circling back to put said shit back into your mouth?

You're nihilistic whit is usually funny but in this instance its just pathetic.

Again NO ONE IS SAYING GIRA IS GUILTY BUT FRANKLY YOU'RE BEING AN ASSHOLE FOR ENTIRELY DISMISSING HER ACCUSATION. Indeed you're gonna feel like Hitler if Gira comes out and some time and confess (not saying he will but if he does?)

even you are backtracking now

her accusations are fucking lies and she knows it and probably thinks its hilarious

Backtracking how? I have said the same thing consistently on this entire thread better go back and reread my posts if you think otherwise

You must spread some (positive) Reputation around before giving it to SuchFriendsAreDangerous again.

more bs from you

i entirely dismissed the allegation - as if i didnt consider it and look at all available evidence.

you idiots assumed there would be a trail, now that i pointed out there isnt im being accused of what, not considering her side of the story fairly or something?

i did and thats what leads me to believe shes a lair.

i refuse to accept her false allegation designed to smear and get revenge on a real artist, actual rape victim and innocent man.

sorry, deciding that "it could be true" is what leads to an innocent persons career and life being ruined. which some of you are happy to see happen for the cheap emotional thrill and sense of self righteous anger you have.

idiots.

INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY

and dont pretend the legal system is what it used to be before the 1950s because it just isnt.

woah, I've never heard this about him, and it doesn't seem to be a secret
http://highline.huffingtonpost.com/a...he-lost-girls/

He doesn't seem too far from Jimmy Saville. Fuck.

Just curious but what makes you so sure?

What evidence exactly? We haven't been provided ANY evidence at all. We're not on a jury, this isn't a trial, and no one here has said, "oh Gira did it for sure."

HOWEVER you have insensitively condemned the accuser equally without any kind of evidence and then flippantly dismissed the entire thing as a publicity stunt.

Innocent until proven guilt DOESN'T MEAN suspicion of guilt isn't sometimes warranted by the very nature of being accused

I don't see this note from Jennifer Gira mentioned

https://www.facebook.com/coveredwith...06691239732330

bipolarism is very severe condition.

it sounds like this culminates a long simmerng situation at least since 2008. "Michael dropped Larkin, and she has been jilted about it ever since. Larkin may know in the past, Michael has shuddered and simply deleted her harassing emails/texts, rambling obsessive tomes, declarations of unrequited love, hate speech, and threats to him."

"starfucker"

You guys probably weren't even born for Tawana Brawley = the case that made Al Sharpton, one of the most hated men in NY. We all felt like fucking idiots because sadly it seemed believable.

You didn't say believing the accusations are ambiguous you said rape itself. Think before you speak next time.

I HAVEN'T TAKEN ANYONE'S SIDE BUT TO AUTOMATICALLY DISMISS THE ACCUSATIONS IS TO SIDE WITH THE ACCUSED.

Who has what guilty conscience here? Just because i think the accusations are fair doesn't necessarily mean i think they are true. Again, you're not thinking before you speak.

Well, by the logic no one who ever accused anyone of a crime could possibly have actually been a victim.

Think before you speak. I'm not sure that either (a) your saying exactly what you mean or intend to say or (b) have any idea at all wtf you're talking about

That is true but what warrants casting that suspicion on the accuser right off the bat? How about we wait and see before we start making accusations at the accuser. Indeed THAT is why so many victims of sexual abuse or assault don't come forward and don't go to court.

Sure is a lotta BS in this thread.

Facts:

-Gira's wife was absolutely resolute that she had proof this didn't happen.
-soon after, a lawyer assisted statement from Gira practically mirrors Grimm's account.
-today Gira asks us not to post hateful, sexist or harrassing comments. I guess he forgot about his wife's long post.

I fucking adore Swans. I am in the process of mentally separating Art from the Artist.

Yeah, Gira has written some extra creepy shit, I know it's just writing, but fuck, wear a coating of penciclovir if you ever gotta get close

I'm glad you noticed how Gira changed his original statement and how some of his wife's comments were frankly unnecessary

His wife was absolutely classless in her response, in my opinion. She was dehumanizing and condescending, saying things like "Sorry honey, but.." and the like. Also that line where she refers to herself in the third person ad talks about how analytical she is? It doesn't have much to do with the issue or the situation or the debate, but I'm just saying... I feel deep embarrassment for people who talk that way.

I really didn't mean to cause a shit-show here (talking to you, pepper_green), but the fact that some folks have responded with knee-jerk allegiances that they seem willing to defend despite having almost nothing to back them up, makes me think this kind of discussion needs to happen. I don't understand how or why anyone would automatically side with the accused in a situation like this. Unless some of you folks know Ms. Larkin personally, and can attest to some lengthy history of dishonesty, why would you assume she's being dishonest?

I think males have a lot of pent up feelings of frustration regarding these situations because, frankly, the thought that someone could successfully accuse innocent people of rape is utterly terrifying. While I understand that fear, and the contempt that it breeds, I also understand that he cases in which a male has been falsely accused of rape to the detriment of his life or career are negligible compared to the number of cases where the accusation was true, not to mention the unknown millions upon millions of unreported tapes and sexual harassments that women (and men!) fail to report because they don't want to be seen as a conniving, attention-seeking liar (which is unfortunate how a fair number of men are going to view any woman who speaks up about a rape, no matter what the facts suggest.)

I'm not hating on Gira. I don't particularly like this Larkin woman from what I know, and I definitely feel that there are some major "wait, huh?" moments in her story, but if I automatically sided with Gira, which I initially did, that would be an indication to me that I have some serious biases that I need to work on. Obviously I do have those biases, and that's why I wanted to talk this out. I don't think this has been a "bullshite" thread. An unpleasant one? Yeah, definitely. But just because something is controversial or unpleasant doesn't mean it shouldn't be discussed. Indeed, if anything, those are indications that it should be.

the fact that everyone believes they have to automatically side with anyone at all is the problem.

you dont. you shouldn't take sides.

it is up to the victim to go to the law asap and start the procedure of locking up the rapist. this is the only way it can be done. not trail by social media or the court of public opinion. this stops future rapes from happening. but this can only be done with proof because thank god despite the best efforts of the moronic millions among us we still live in a system of mostly rational legal conduct.

larkin grimm didnt do that, she never had any interest in doing that. all she wants to do is get the revenge she swore on gira by publically humiliating/shaming/destroying his career. she knows its long past the time where any proof could be found so its her word against his. she knows she will be automatically believed by enough people.. she is getting revenge like she vowed to do on gira because she feels entitled to a career even though noone cares about her terrible music. she's deleted all the original posts and the earlier accusations against other musicians but is still referring to the gira story begging for attention and hugz because it got media traction.

i dont have proof either except all the many pieces of evidence that point towards her story being bs. i do not for one second believe her and i believe 100% that gira is innocent. it is absurd that anyone could think otherwise after actually looking at all the things she's said online and knowing anything about gira's character.

we don't live in the patriarchal pre 1960s anymore. laws were changed. the law sides with the victim first. older feminists actually accomplished this. some of the new breed of rich lib fems are the most despicable people out there and they are power hungry, conservative and live off the suffering and exploitation of poorer women.

lib fem bs is telling you we still live decades and decades ago. you must believe and have a "dialogue" about their mission to redefine consent into whatever a woman decides any time after the fact whatsoever. i'll admit they aren't ALL evil, many are just stupid or so blinded by misandry they don't think.

the cases were false accusations are made are not neglible, they are very common. but of course you can find stats proving anything you want so people dont believe until they see it. plenty of high profile celeb cases happening all the time. you hear about those because those people have to spend thousands proving the accusations are lies or their career is over.

poor men? they're fucked.

you all disengage your rational minds and jump into the scapegoat/shaming/life destroying. it makes you feel good or makes you look good maybe? you think you're helping victims? no, you're allowing more criminals to get away with it!

you all assume we're still living in a time long past and the way to find justice is just to automatically side with those perceived weaker. this is not a testament to your moral superiority like you think, but is in fact a testament to your ignorance and laziness. you are all the mirror image of the stereotype of an evil patriarch who refuses to accept anything a woman says and refuses to allow her to legally remedy it.

Dead_battery you assume we have automatically taken sides when in all reality only one who took a definitive "side" is you and frankly you're wrong.

...

you must spread some reputation around before giving it to Severian again.

I'm not taking sides with anyone. As far as I can see though you are. You don't know what happened as much as I don't know either so stop talking shit, ok?

i'll say what i want and if you think its shit then either dont read it or go fuck yourself

It goes both ways. Your thoughts are your own but when you choose to share and express them we all have fair right to criticize them. If you don't like being criticized then don't share your ideas.

In Rastafari there is an expression, "if a fish woulda keep him big yap shut him never woulda got caught in the first place!"

I'll do neither of those ;)

Yeah, I admit I initially sides with Gira, sort of instinctively, as I said in my last post, but it didn't take long for me to realize it was an extremely loaded issue that I was unfairly making a decision about before I even finished reading the account.

That didn't make me "side" with Larkin. I think a lot of what she's saying sounds funny to say the least, and the way she's saying it is not respectable at all. (If it really was ONLY about business, she would have done this through a lawyer, she did the opposite - made a public accusation without pressing charges... makes it seem a little like she did want to smear his image, despite her comments to the contrary). But it does mean that I'm checking myself and stopping myself from BELIEVING WHAT I WANT TO BELIEVE.

Nobody has enough information to really take sides, and I think those of us who are taking the non-DB stance are simply saying that the accusations should not be brushed off, taken lightly or ignored. That should never be the case, no matter how many times the law is abused by false testimonies. If we stopped caring about "boys crying wolf" just because sometimes they're lying/seeing things/having a nightmare, then we'd be going down a path to lawlessness. It doesn't matter how many boys "cry wolf," good parents still pay attention when they're kid is screaming.

The alternative is to let everyone take care of themselves, fully and completely.

Face it, as a society we have to either take rape allegations seriously all the time, or legalize rape and forget about it. There's no middle ground. I'm not saying we should believe them all, but they should be taken seriously. HAVE TO be taken seriously.

WE dont need to do shit.

the victim needs to report it to the police to stop it from happening again.

thats it.

when the victim doeesnt do that for no good reason they are at fault too.

the law DOES take accusers/victims very, very seriously and sides with them by default.

but of course the lib fems dont talk about this because they dont care. what they are interested in is the power of public shaming and rape accusations in public discourse for their own individual gains and redefining consent.

also larkin publically stated she would destroy giras career and that is what she is trying to do while promoting her own with well timed song releases and a tour.

i'll continue to call her out for the liar she is and she'll probably continue to smirk and sneer and laugh. but people as crazy as her don't tend to stop and when her career fails again she'll have to come up with some other pr stunt.

and i'll continue to defend gira who is innocent. that should be enough but since it isn't for some of you, he's also a rape victim himself so congrats on who you're tying to shame

i can understand severian and a few others reactions in this thread because they are rational but the rest of you are fuckin pathetic

You don't know he's innocent, dead_battery. Say whatever you want, however you want, and that will still be a fact. You don't know. You believe. Restructure your statements around the "I believe X because y" model instead of this "I know X, because duh it's X" thing you're going for, and nobody can really fault you. But the way you're coming at this is logically flawed on several levels.

And you're right, you don't HAVE to do anything. Nobody does. But in MY opinion, in order to engage in ethical civil discourse, one simply needs to be willing to evaluate one's own biases and pre-existing beliefs, and consider why they feel the way they do.

There's an old I-don't-know-what-culture-but-probably-not-Rastafarian-since-it-was-quoted-by-some-Aryan-chick-on-Dexter, saying, "trust those who seek the truth, question anyone who claims to have found it."

;)

Fuck off Stuart.

I hope the whole thing resolves itself with a winner deserving of 100% victory. I can't help thinking that the woman accusing Michael Gira of rape mayhave found herself in a situation where she sensed something was going wrong and decided to stay. There is definitely an element of ruthless cynicism in her posts, which makes it more difficult to be compassionate towards her. In that scenario Michael Gira would still be a rapist of sort. If that's not the case, it's anyone's guess? Michael Gira may be the victim of womb gentrification and we are all internet spectators with our hands tied. More horrific than any punishing Swans song.

#FeelTheBern

she's jostling to be the voice of the 'survivors movement'. she's a freelancer and needs the gig.

Hah.

Not sure what to make of this. I'm not bored of myself. My mind is a veritable waterfall of entertainment, from sex scenarios to ideas for really dark movies about superheroes that don't even exist, to simple musings about what I might be when I grow up (right now I'm leaning toward being a professional floater of professions, after an illadvised departure from a graduate program that was just way too serious to not drop out of) ...

And I'm not bored with anyone else. Tell ya what though, I tend to like it when people read my posts and respond to them instead of telling me I'm bored with myself, and suggesting not that I dig a hole without finding anything.

That's trickier than it sounds man. I tried and I found both dirt and a cat skull after like three minutes!

So, this was posted on Facebook today -



I haven't been following this thread, so it's probably already been mentioned, but Gira (with the assistance of Norm) is allegedly collating the various threats she sent him (emails, texts etc) over the past year threatening to 'ruin him.'

All that could be true and he stilll could have raped her