Consept

Not exactly so what i was quoting, which i probably didnt explain properly, is that only 1% of reported rapes lead to a conviction - https://www.city.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2022/04/new-scorecards-show-under-1-of-reported-rapes-lead-to-conviction-criminologist-explains-why-englands-justice-system-continues-to-fail what you posted is that the conviction rate of the cases that go to court is 75%. False claims potentially account for 2-10% of rape cases although this is a hard number to pin down - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45565684 So bottom line there are a lot of people committing rape and getting away with it despite the rapes being reported, which means a lot more that we dont even know of occur as they go unreported. Witness testimony would be considered evidence, as well as text messages. One of the women reported and did a documented rape kit after the incident 10 years ago. These are all credible evidences, but he still may not get convicted as most dont. It is significantly more difficult for the victims to report if the perpetrator is more powerful. How would a 16 year old girl go against someone like Brand? She wouldnt even know where to start. We've seen it over and over again with Weinstein, Epstein, Cosby, Saville etc the reason why they can operate as they do is the power they wield. Yes he did stop as far as we know but ultimately there are people in the world who youve done damage to who will want to get back at you no matter how long it takes. You can leave the mafia but your enemies might still want your head. As i say it might not go to court but he still couldve done it, so how do we square that circle? @danioover9000 Im just making the point that its more nuanced than innocent til proven guilty. Chill no ones attacking anyone

As i said in the previous post, media cannot just accuse anyone at least in the UK there has to be solid evidence, a random accusation wouldnt cut it, which is partly why he got away with it for so long until solid evidence was available. Of course parents need to protect their kids but people that groom have specific strategies to isolate them from their parents so the parents dont even know whats going on. In the doc they talked about how when Brand was seeing the 16 year old he would get her to lie to her parents about staying at a friends house when he would have her picked up. Someone like Brand who is vey powerful and charismatic is more than able to manipulate to get what he wants.

Yeah definitely the evidence should be shown which was what happened in this case and then its up to the public to decide whether they still want to give money and support Brand. Also I agree false allegations should not be allowed, in the UK the current law comes down extremely hard on false allegations, if you take a look at this case - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-49576940 where basically well known celebrity has his name put out there in terms of him committing some kind of sexual assault which he believed there was absolutely no substance to, he sued the BBC and got a few million in damages and legal fees. Point being media outlets can not post just print allegations without substantial evidence otherwise they will get sued and suffer reputational damage. So the media is very careful with naming names. As i said if Brand really feels there is no truth here he should sue, even if he doesnt care about the money it would save his reputation as it did with Cliff Richard. Of course he wont which is not a good indication of innocence. Yes those people shouldve been reported to the police but this was the same with Brand, he had at least a 10 year plus period where he was operating like this. The trouble with celebrities, is that they have a lot of power, that is why its hard to report them, not only that they have lawyers, this is how all these people operated in the way they did, Weinstein, Epstein etc. I would agree that Brand most likely doesnt operate this way any more and it would be nice to say 'ah well slap on the wrist, at least youve cleaned yourself up', but how would you feel if someone raped your sister and didnt get any justice and then even denied it 10 years later? Unfortunately for him karma has caught up

Its not a case of 'guilty until proven innocent', the fact is people can do messed up things and get off on a technicality or because witnesses dont come forward or whatever the reason. In the case of rape and sexual assault the conviction rate in the UK is extremely low, something like less than 5% because its usually one persons word against another. When someone is in the public eye it would be very important for the evidence to be presented to the public, if it isnt true then that person can fight it. Now in the UK liable laws are so tight that no one can just accuse anyone in the mainstream because if it isnt true they could be severely hit. Do you not think it was worthwhile for someone like Epstein to be named? Or should he have just been allowed to keep doing what he was doing until enough evidence was gathered to prosecute. In the UK we had a 'celebrity' DJ called Jimmy Saville (who Brand offered his assistant to sexually on air btw) who for decades went around and raped any young girl he could get his hands, including disabled people in hospital, he died before everything came out and was never prosecuted but dont you think it would be in the public interest for him to have been exposed as early as possible in his career? So this is more nuanced than innocent until proven guilty, to take it to a micro level, if you heard that one of your neighbors was pedophile although never convicted of any crime, would you be happy them to be around your daughter? Would you not be pissed off if you didnt know and then found out later?

If she said no and he continued then it's rape, regardless of whether it was a condom or sex in general. There's no way around that. Unless it was a game which it wasn't according to the texts from Brand

Potentially that could be the case but he was making videos for a few years without having anywhere near the following he has now, things only really kicked off for him during covid, where he got a lot conspiracy theorists and further right people following, which is why he ponders to that crowd now, he's basically audience captured completely. But I think there's been growth in that he's no longer taking drugs and living the lifestyle that he did previously, he's married with kids now I believe. But yeah he's either consciously or unconsciously grifting at this point in terms of his content.

I agree with you, ultimately this is not a criminal case 'yet'. So if Brand is as loving and awakened as he claims he would at least accept the possibility that he could've acted in a way that hurt others during his drug and sex addicted days, especially something like the 16 year old who, just her very age is extremely suspect. If he was truly awakened he would come out with something like 'although my actions weren't technically illegal I know I hurt these women etc'. The fact that he is just blaming people out to get him is actually more in line with narcissism and actions of a cult leader because he's only speaking to his die hard followers. It's a shame because he has shown growth since the days these actions happened but he obviously still has some deeper need for fame and adulation that is still active.

I grew up in the UK and I did kinda like Brand for his comedy and his edgy persona in the late 90s and 2000s , I just wanted to share a few points that I think might give a bit more context to the discussion 1. Around the time that the allegations took place Brand was hugely celebrated in the mainstream for being a highly sexual guy. This is because we had 'lad culture', best way I can describe it to Americans is a kinda frat-boy culture. In which glamour modelling was a big thing (women with their tits out in newspapers and magazines). Scandalous sex stories where women well known men had had sex with sold their stories, binge drinking etc. Brand was given the title of 'shagger of the year' by the Sun newspaper (itself deep into lad culture) for multiple years. Point being here that Brands roguish sexual behavior was completely celebrated in the mainstream, in fact the only time he was admonished that i can remember was when he called an actor (waiter from fawlty towers) to harass him about the fact that he fucked his grand daughter. So I could see how no one pulled him up on this. 2. A few years ago a well known, older celebrity Cliff Richard had his house raided because someone made sexual allegations against him. His name was dragged through the media and he was up to be the next 'rape guy'. However the allegations were completely unfounded and Cliff Richard fought and won his case in court, suing everyone involved. This meant that newspapers and media going forward could not print anything unsubstantiated. Meaning in Brands case the Times and Channel 4 would not publicise anything without having significant proof because if they did Brand could sue the shit out of them. This also speaks to why it took them so long to bring the required evidence together. It's also important to note that if this wasn't true Brand could definitely sue and definitely win significant damages, however it doesn't seem like he is going to sue which would lead us to believe that he knows there's truth in it. 3. It should also be noted that, apparently Brands behavior was an open secret in the comedy circuit in the UK and many comedians have come out to say that his behavior has at least been highly inappropriate. Katherine Ryan a well know comedian, recently said she repeatedly accused Brand of being a sexual predator from the time she worked on a show with him a few years ago. However she never named him, she spoke about what happened but left his name out. This could be because Brand had taken out what's known as a super injunction, meaning that if any media named Brand in regard to whatever he was trying to protect that media outlet would face legal ramifications. I think the point of super injunctions is to protect those that maybe haven't done anything illegal but something that the media might want to report for example on affair. Its kinda like an nda. 4. Rape charges don't really stick in the UK, its something like only 1% of charges end up in prosecution. This is because a lot of the time it's one person's word against another, evidence is very hard to gather. In Brands case the power dynamic was huge, remember that he was loved by the mainstream for his sexual behavior so you can see how women might be reluctant to come forward, especially as we've also seen Brand was not afraid to take legal measures to protect himself. A 16 year old or even an average person is not going to be able to go up against someone like Brand legally. 5. A lot of people are saying his name shouldn't be put out there if it hasn't gone to court etc but he is of course free to sue if he is aggrieved. Also as i said 99% of rape cases don't make it to trial, but that doesn't mean 99% of women are lying. So if someone is in the public eye and there is evidence against them of this nature you could argue that it is in the public interest for people to know and again if he's not happy he can sue and clear his name. 6. Final overall point, I don't think Brand is/was a predator in the same way Tate or Epstein were, I think it was a terrible cocktail of fame, lad culture, celebrating bad behavior, narcissism, addiction and probably other things that led to the situation. It's highly likely that he pushed what he could get away with, with women and its not surprising if that crossed over into assault.

Your response was really good btw, i think it gave a good overview of the root of these issues. The thing is the victimhood, identity politics is the same on all sides with all sides attacking each other and laying blame. But if people could actually just talk and let go of these mindsets sooo many problems could be sorted out. I think our misuse of technology must be the cause of so many mental health issues. Dr K is great as well I watched his conversation with an incel and you could see how this mindset developed from real things that happened, was eating away at this guy.

I agree that in a good relationship both of you will care about the others emotional well-being, this is very important. Sometimes this is not possible, some people are not able to do this because of their issues or whatever the reason might be. There is no judgement against them but obviously you might not want to have deep relationships with people like this as you will be doing the heavy lifting. But the issue with a lot of lonely men is not that they're making lots of friends that are not good at looking after them emotionally, it's that they're just not talking to anyone at all in real life. Whilst simultaneously blaming others for their situation online. So in this case they do need to put themselves out there and work on themselves in terms of being able to look after someone emotionally, so that when someone does come along who can do the same they will be able to receive them. I've worked with teenagers who have problems meeting people and socialising and a lot of the time if not all, it's fear of putting themselves out there. That fear can be so strong that they look for online where they can find some external thing to blame. Redpill has gotten so popular because it does just this. But this dynamic is not unique to lonely men, there are some incredibly toxic female spaces as well. The solution we found is to encourage the teenagers to come together, setup groups activities etc and the change was incredible to say the least

When you make friends you dont straight away have a deep relationship where people are going to take responsibility for your emotional well being. Youre not going to connect with everyone, but obviously the pathway to having deep connections is to start off with acquentances or shallow friends if you like and then develop the ones that are compatible with you into deeper relationships. Any friend you make is not going to be deep straight away it just doesnt work like that and never has. You build trust, connection, love etc its not a given. Any friend ive ever made started off shallow and then built on that. Its not even a given that you have close relationships with your family that has to be worked on and built as well. If you go into relationships with expectations that someone should look after your emotional well-being of course you will be lonely.

The guy in video is not necessarily looking for a girlfriend, this can be done by approaching men as well or just approaching to make friends. Either way you can see that the guy become more positive by the end of the video. As I said your approach is shaming male invalidation out of existence then men will not feel lonely, my approach as shown in the video is get out and talk to people which not only in that video but that guys whole channel of 100s of videos where lonely men develop skills to become less lonely. That is hard-core proof that what I'm saying actually works, where is the real life proof of what you're saying working? Can you not at the very least concede that what I'm saying works given the evidence?

How would your way get better results than what's going on in that video in which it is literal proof of what I'm suggesting actually working in the real world in real time for a lonely man. Can you show me evidence of how your way has ever worked and how a lonely man has become less lonely using what you suggested in this thread?

I'm gonna leave this video here, if you actually want men not to be lonely this is the kinda shit you need to encourage them to do. Notice in the video how he started off crazy nervous and as he did it more he became more and more confident and positive and managed to get numbers even. It would've been easy for him to stop after 1 or 2 terrible interactions and blame the people for it but in reality it was him feeling uncomfortable and making others feel uncomfortable.

@mr_engineer I get the sense from you that you know everything you need to and are set in your way of thinking, so I'm not sure how fruitful this discussion is but thanks for the back and forth anyway

@mr_engineer Being alone is a relationship problem but usually that means that there are things the person who's alone has to work on. Why is it other people's responsibility to be 'better' and adjust to that person? Even if youre convinced that's a thing that should happen why would anyone do it? Are you actively being better to help the grievances of women, or are you learning about racism for black people's issues? Or how about Muslims that feek persecuted are you being better for them? Probably not because most people don't work like that. Also you calling stuff out online makes no difference to the lonely persons life at all, if they start calling people out do you think these women are gonna go, 'I've just been called out by a lonely man online, I'm gonna rethink everything and seek out lonely guys to be friends with'. You live so outside of the real world its hard to have a reasonable conversation with you, which seems to be a pattern of your interactions at least on this forum. So if you personally are deep down wanting to connect with people I can see why you might have problems with the mindset that you have. But either way I'm not judging and if it's working for you and you feel happy about calling out all the wrong you perceive then keep going. Everyone is different I guess.

@mr_engineer Btw you on your bullet points you only had one that was directly part of your life, but I wasn't necessarily talking about you I was saying in general, the people complaining about these 'injustices' can easily live real life without ever really coming into contact with them regularly. Bigger point, don't you think everyone has to go through injustices because of their given identity. Black people have specific struggles, I've personally been stopped by the police numerous times for no particular reason. Women have their struggles, I was at a party just this weekend and one of the guys was bordering on harassment in his pursuit of women at the party. Men of course have struggles as well I'm just saying the solution to these problems is not bitching about another group that you think has more privilege than you, it's to make the best of the hand you've been dealt. You probably don't care that much about the struggles of other groups and that's normal because they don't affect you in the same way. I'm not saying struggles don't exist, I'm just saying this strategy of trying to shame others of caring about your specific struggle is just not gonna work. As I said lonely men need to do what they need to do and is within their influence to get out of that situation if they are not happy about. Blaming others is just enabling them to stay where they are. It's like if you're fat and unhealthy and not happy about it, blaming people that call you fat is not gonna get you healthy, it might feel good shaming people but your arteries are still clogged up

If your problems only exist when you look at your phone or computer and not in your everyday life then the solution should be obvious. How many feminists are minimising you or telling you to change as you go about your day to day life in the real world? Probably none therefore these are not real problems unless you want them to be. Or what about look at your phone but avoid the algorithm that let's you feel like a victim by blocking those channels. This is not hard.

You can call it what you want, what I was giving you is a masculine, problem solving response, which is the kinda response that ironically is demonised in feminist circles. Just because you label a response something it doesn't mean it's not valid. The point is what gets results, meaning what is actually going to help men out of their situation. Your solution seems to be let's call out women that criticise men online, I guess bu leaving comments or posting on forums. My solution is men should get out, maybe go to the gym, get therapy, meet people, don't get involved with culture wars or looking for online enemies or people that enable them online. Essentially I propose taking responsibility you seem to proposing blame. People are free to choose what they think works and I would suggest try both ways and see what leaves you less lonely.

If you are happy being lonely and people are putting you down for that then I can somewhat understand how maybe attacking back makes sense. But the key here is that men don't want to be lonely, it's not something they are proud about and are celebrating, in fact they hate the situation their in and some can even go to the extent of killing themselves because of it. So you can shut down as many people saying negative things as you like, you can ban them from discourse but men will still be lonely it doesn't solve the underlying problem. What does solve the underlying problem is having positive role models, is getting out there, pursuing things etc. What doesn't is constantly arguing online with feminists. Also as I said previously, for every group imaginable there are people speaking online who don't like that group. Should we shut down everyone that ever speaks against a group? Who cares just get out and make your life better, the online world is so different from the real world, you dont encounter probably 1% of the back and forth culture wars that exist online so in actual reality you are free to change your situation whenever you want, what keeps you not changing your situation is this belief in the boogeyman holding you back. Bullshit bro, man up

Topics like this always come down to are you blaming the world or are you taking responsibility for your situation? Internet culture is vast in that you can find enemies anywhere no matter who you are or how you identify, there will be people speaking about how they dont like women, how they dont like men, how they dont like black people, asian, muslim, whatever you identify as you will find someone who doesnt like you. This is partly why people spend so much time online because there are people questioning their very existence as their identity and there are also people validating there existence and defending them against these enemies. We watch this play out as if theyll be an ultimate winner or loser and we get happy when our side wins a debate or an exchange. In reality none of this matters, men might be lonely for a number of reasons but its up to each individual man to work why that is and what he can do to change. Whats funny is taking responsibility for yourself is supposed to be a masculine trait, but it seems in this instance that these lonely men want people to feel sorry for them so its a bit of a contradiction. Now maybe there could be elements where the current social landscape is not favourable to men, but shit happens, I agree up in England as a black male, ive never felt the social landscape was in my favour, so it happens to everyone, its just how you deal with it. Do you become better or do you become bitter? Lonely men need to work out what they can actually do within their own bubble, can they try and meet more people, can they go to clubs or take up hobbies that help them socialise around common interests? If youre sitting at home watching content about how no one cares that youre lonely obviously your not making any moves to remedy that situation. Also this criticism isnt limited to lonely men, this can be for women who blame men for their problems as well, essentially anyone that blames externally and feels that the solution is to bring down another group, you can do it i just dont see how it help your situation.

In theory the scamming men part is illegal as well but it might be a bit complicated to prosecute. I guess it would be more of a moral issue at this point but in the discussion with the psychologist he rationalises by saying he helped lonely men talk to women

Well biologically it's when a boy goes through puberty and becomes an adult which is the actual answer. But I would say a boy becomes a man when he is no longer reliant on other adults directly for his survival and takes responsibility for himself.

I'm making the point that a male dog doesn't have to be anything other than a male dog to be considered a male dog so why is there extra criteria for a 'real' man? Might be more accurate to say what's a successful man or a morally good man

Reading up on it, it's not necessarily aliens it could also be another species of human that died out (probably killed) from 1000s of years ago, so that's a possibility as well