Jian Ghomeshi scandal

[flipstah]

Originally posted by D'z Nutz


Hahahaha why do I have a funny image of a bunch of local tv personalities at a bar trying to score? Darr Maqbool, Darrel Janz, Tony Tighe, and Larry Day hanging out together at Cowboys

Tara McCool would be a hit in my eyes.

[flipstah]

Double post.

[lil*tymer]

CBC Jian, or Gimp suit Jian.

[eiysa101]

I don't think a lotta people would get the reference. I don't even know what the guy looks like and I actually know of him and heard his show. Don't think CBC radio is doing well anyways with viewership and ratings so other people will just think you as the brown guy who forgot a costume...assuming most of you guys are brown

[rage2]

Originally posted by R154
I do not believe it. Darr Maqbool is a weather guru. That is all.

Meh, I've heard way more stories about the other guys in that crew. They still have careers today so no point in stirring shit up unless it's called for. My ex and her friends used to hang around with them quite often so I know more than I want to about them.

Originally posted by eiysa101
I don't even know what the guy looks like

I had no idea until yesterday. I thought it was a news story on ZorroAMG.

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by JRSC00LUDE
A. You can lose user points outside the marketplace Tik-Tok.

Haven't heard of it since they changed the marketplace rules to use userpoints

[R154]

Originally posted by rage2

I had no idea until yesterday. I thought it was a news story on ZorroAMG.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA.


/Thread.

Since the Keiths commercial what is he doing?

[rage2]

Zorro has a regular role on Helix, and a few movies coming up.

[JRSC00LUDE]

Originally posted by R154



BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA.


/Thread.

Since the Keiths commercial what is he doing?

Helix for one:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2758950/...f_=tt_ov_st_sm

[suntan]

Originally posted by R154
Suntan, youre so full of shit. I scoured the internet. The only legal hot water Darr Maqbool is in, is over his "illegal" basement kitchen that he installed before the laws changed, and now refuses to remove the kitchen.

I couldnt find anything, not even hearsay about anything of sexual nature involving him.

Yup, the interweb has everything.

Next up: Nenshi.

[rage2]

http://business.financialpost.com/20...ing-the-truth/

Coles Notes:

It is interesting that Ghomeshi is issuing a $50-million claim against CBC, while simultaneously declaring his historic loyalty to and love for it. The reality is, as he must also know, that suit will go nowhere. As a unionized employee, he cannot sue the CBC in court but is stuck with having to grieve through the arbitration process.

It is a common misapprehension that many unionized employees have (although it’s hard to believe of Ghomeshi). They mistakenly believe that being part of a union provides them protection. In fact, it is the reverse: Unionized employees cannot sue their employer for anything flowing from the employment relationship, whether it’s wrongful dismissal, constructive dismissal or anything else. Ghomeshi surely wishes he was not part of a union.

[msommers]

Interesting perspective from a law professor at UofT.

The Ghomeshi question: The law and consent

A Canadian celebrity, an iconic Canadian institution and four anonymous women have produced a Canadian sex scandal the likes of which we haven’t seen in decades. Jian Ghomeshi, host of Q, has been fired by the CBC, because of something to do with sex. The million dollar question – or in this case – the $50-million question – is what. Mr. Ghomeshi says he was fired because of his private sexual proclivities. More specifically, he says, because he engages in BDSM – bondage, dominance, sadism and masochism for the uninitiated. Mr. Ghomeshi claims that he had rough but entirely consensual sex, and it shouldn’t be the business of the public broadcaster.

The CBC has not commented. But in an article published Monday, the allegations of the four anonymous women have been set out. Acccording to the article three of the women allege that he physically assaulted them – that he “struck them with a closed fist or open hand; bit them; choked them until they almost passed out; covered their nose and mouth so that they had difficulty breathing; and that they were verbally abused during and after sex.” And that all of this was allegedly without their consent.

On the one hand, this is the classic he said/she said of sexual assault. Consent is the dividing line between sex and sexual assault, and its presence or absence is often the linchpin of sexual assault prosecutions.

But Ghomeshi-gate puts a twist on this plot, because BDSM has a more complicated relationship with the law. BDSM practices span a broad spectrum, from fantasy play, light bondage to the infliction of increasing severe physical pain. The one thing that all of the practices have in common amongst its practitioners is that it is heavily negotiated. Consent, limits and safe words are all carefully worked out in advance.

But, when it comes to BDSM – or at least its more intense versions – the law doesn’t actually care about consent. The Supreme Court has said that a person cannot consent to assault. While the cases have typically arisen in the context of bar room brawls or hockey violence, other courts have applied the same reasoning to the sexual context. So, if a sexual activity causes bodily harm, a person cannot consent to it.

This is pretty problematic from the perspective of the BDSM community. Carefully negotiated consent is rendered irrelevant, and effectively criminalizes all those who derive sexual pleasure from activities that involve physical pain, if it leaves a mark. But, it’s the law.

The Supreme Court has said that consent that is given only in advance isn’t determinative – consent is an ongoing process and a person must be in a state of consciousness to be able to withdraw that consent at any time. The case involved what’s known as erotic asphyxiation – basically, where a person is choked to the point that they lose consciousness. It’s a controversial practice within the BDSM community. But, those who practice it do so with carefully negotiated consent in advance.

So, lets assume for a moment that Mr. Ghomeshi’s side of the story is true (no, I am not saying that the women are lying – this is just a thought experiment). Let’s say he engaged in rough sex, very rough sex with consenting partners. According to the law, if it was rough enough to cause bodily harm, then he has still committed assault, regardless of consent. If he did hit, punch, bite or choke them – even if it was consensual – the law would very likely say that he committed assault.

Let’s assume a modified version of the contested facts. Let’s say that the women consented in advance to the sexual activity. According to the published article, this appears to be one of the reasons that they have not come forward. Say that in e-mails or texts or phone calls, they agreed to engage in some kind of BDSM. Then they showed up, and the sex was rougher than they had anticipated. The consent in advance doesn’t matter – at all. There has to be ongoing consent. The law might well declare that Mr. Ghomeshi has committed assault.

BDSM sexuality still lives on the margins of legality in Canada. Fifty shades of grey is actually a pretty good description of its legal status. This isn’t to say that the CBC should or shouldn’t have fired Mr. Ghomeshi for it. Simply that Mr. Ghomeshi’s defense that the sex was consensual – even if it is true – is not the end of the story.

Since the news broke, sides have been drawn, nasty name-calling has begun – everything from the CBC is sex phobic to Ghomeshi fans are slut-shaming his accusers. But, none of us know the facts. We barely know the allegations. We could take a step back, let the contested facts come to air and reflect on the state of the law of consensual and non-consensual sex, including its traditional mistrust of sexual assault complainants. But, alas, such is not the way of sex scandals.

Source: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe...board/follows/

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by msommers


the fact of the matter is that whatever this guy is into in his personal time is none of your fucking business until those personal decisions start affecting your job (ie: Rob Ford).

Thanks for proving my point, ie, those personal decisions have affected his job

In an age of social media — tools that Ghomeshi uses skillfully — there is no such thing as private time versus work time. He had to know that

[msommers]

If he's bragging on social media about banging these chicks and choking them on air, public venues, social media etc, then yes that would help prove your point because his reputation projected out on such mediums directly affect CBC. But the situations described were completely private and are only public because of rape allegations. I don't personally know all the facts so I can't say I side completely with him but at the same time it's not completely unbelievable that there are crazy ex's out there just looking to take you down by any means necessary because you dumped them.

But that's not initially what happened at all. Rob Ford's substance abuse problems directly affected his decision-making abilities and therefore directly his job as Mayor.

They're not the same and does not help prove your point.

Where is that quote from by the way?

I face a similar yet not quite as extreme dilemma with work. One of the realities of my job is that at any time during a contract, I can be asked to submit for a drug test and outright refusal leads to the end of the contract. The problem is that I don't see a problem smoking a joint while out camping in August. But that decision could completely fuck me if I get tested in September or October even depending on how in-depth it is. How a casual thing such as that I described can affect a job I have no idea, it's retarded. But I don't do it because the risk is there. The reality is no one is forcing Ghomeshi to answer questions about his love-life because no one should give a shit unless a law is broken, in this case it appears to be despite consent anyways - kind of a gray but not area it seems for him.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[FraserB]

Originally posted by Sugarphreak


Pretty interesting, thanks for posting that!

Basically the way the law is worded he is going to get charged with multiple accounts of sexual assault and be a convicted criminal no matter what his defense is... which is probably good enough for CBC to justify firing him given the type of position he holds.

IF the anonymous women come forward, which might be unlikely since they never filed complaints with the police when the supposed incidents occurred. Certainly raises the possibility that some of it might be a case of realizing they might get named as having been involved, but the optics being better if it is claimed as non-consensual.

And going by the letter of the law, pretty much anyone who's left a handprint on their partner's ass while in bed is guilty of assault causing bodily harm/sexual assault.

[ExtraSlow]

Originally posted by FraserB
And going by the letter of the law, pretty much anyone who's left a handprint on their partner's ass while in bed is guilty of assault causing bodily harm/sexual assault.

Wow, so being kinky pretty much is a crime. That is awful.

[Redlyne_mr2]

I always enjoyed his show, he interview celebrities much differently than most entertainment shows. Hopefully a network in the US picks him up.

Better yet, with his new rep, he could be Canadas "howard stern".

[Robin Goodfellow]

Originally posted by ExtraSlow

Wow, so being kinky pretty much is a crime. That is awful.

"Just being kinky" is the spin that Gomeshi is trying to put on the matter.

Increasingly it appears that he's an asshole that has a thing for hitting women, with or without their consent.

"Once he was the king of spain...."

[ExtraSlow]

Fuck, now I hate everything. It is possible that he's using that defense and he's a real abusive asshole. I want to believe that's not true, but really, wishing and hoping isn't going to change anything one way or the other.
Some more well-reasoned thought on this topic:
http://sexgeek.wordpress.com/2014/10...cuted-pervert/