Separating art from artist

[Gesu 1537]

2 minutes ago, nekkichi said:

I'm not sure what you're having an exact problem with in this case - is it the cancel culture that turns someone's downfall into spectacle w/o actually going beside the supeficial drama,

 

or is it the gossip and OTT speculation that often surfaces during somebody's narrative getting into the internet gossip mill? (which is not even inherently bad - in most cases, it's based on real habits of so and so, often downplayed by whoever they messed with out of shame or whatever other reasons.)

Kind of both. And it is bad; if someone's wronged you that badly, go to the police. It's clearly not being downplayed out of shame if they're willing to let the whole world know about it and who they are instead of the one group of people who can actually deal with it discreetly. Besides, if they downplay it, that just makes the person who wronged them look good because the gossip just comes off as a petty invasion of privacy at their expense (which it usually is anyways). It's not helping anyone, and gossip is just immature anyways. I remember you saying in the random thoughts thread (I think it was that thread) that our brains our built to process that kind of thing, but like I said there, they're also built to process having a tiger chase us, hence our fight-or-flight response. My point is, just because you can do something, that doesn't mean you should. I really don't get why people don't just do the sensible thing and go to the police in these cases instead of trying to become some sort of online martyr, or if the person who did something scandalous hasn't technically done anything wrong/immoral/harmful, why they don't just shut the hell up and let people live their lives in peace. I think it's important to consider both sides of the argument instead of just the one you see, because if you're only given one side, you can only believe/sympathise with half of something at most.

[nekkichi 6043]

6 minutes ago, Gesu said:

I really don't get why people don't just do the sensible thing and go to the police in these cases instead of trying to become some sort of online martyr, or if the person who did something scandalous hasn't technically done anything wrong/immoral/harmful, why they don't just shut the hell up and let people live their lives in peace. I think it's important to consider both sides of the argument instead of just the one you see, because if you're only given one side, you can only believe/sympathise with half of something at most.

you are coming from a perspective of someone in a healthy mental state, with no history of drug abuse (often encouraged by the abusers) and sexual assault overlapping with a place (in this case - entertainment industry where everyone knows everyone) trapping you indefinitely in the hands of abuser, 

 

and if you look up any public appearance by, say, Rose McGowan, you'll probably see the difference between two of you pretty clearly.

 

I'm not sure where your own desire to give sexual predators their valued privacy comes from whereas I've never had a chance to see your opinion on idk everything else, from James Charles-gate (most recent) to endless examples of revenge porn cases - often involving the aforementioned later cancelled faves; what is the idea behind giving people who can already afford to corner someone and slip their dick in to feel even safer knowing that even the internet social/equality warriors will never know the tea?

14 minutes ago, Gesu said:

 It's not helping anyone, and gossip is just immature anyways.

it actually is helping quite a lot of people who rub in the same circles, and gossip becomes a tool of warning that so and so is very good at their game and should be avoided; I think your concept of maturity implies some sort of saving face, while not demanding keeping legs crossed and managing the dick/power tripping urges in the first place.

 

7 minutes ago, Gesu said:

I really don't get why people don't just do the sensible thing

how-do-i-explain-it.gif