|
Well you see, this person was emotionally destroyed but it's okay because it wasn't illegal to do that. Emotionally destroying someone, totally legal.
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 00:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 10:24 |
|
|
King Vidiot posted:Well you see, this person was emotionally destroyed but it's okay because it wasn't illegal to do that. Emotionally destroying someone, totally legal. Also, didn't mean to. Totes my bad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 00:37
|
|
|
Headline: ‘It’s simply untrue’ Body: Well all the allegations are technically factual but I disagree with the stated intent or motivation and besides it was totally legal and cool.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 00:44
|
|
|
The problem isn't just that Dan seems to use his fame to proposition young fans into sex, to then disappear. He does that, but the behaviour that I personally fully consider predatory is that several women accused him of love bombing before the sexual encounters, to then either disappear or keep people hanging but severely limiting communication. A lot of people will misdirect with "youre not owned a relationship after sex", it's the go-to excuse for this behaviour and it works really well even in progressive circles. But the truth is that this involves the manipulating of someone for the purpose of sex, and for the person who was used like this (especially if this was done over a long period of time) it is deeply hurtful, and can even cause trauma in the form of deep mistrust, anxiety/nightmares about your friends or current lover just ghosting you, etc.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 00:45
|
|
|
too late tho, the whole 'CANCEL CULTURE PWNED AGAIN' narrative is basically already formed. people dont give a poo poo about awful behavior so long as it isnt a literal crime
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 00:47
|
|
|
My "sexual contact was entirely legal" response is getting a lot of questions already answered by the response. Honestly you could just write a form letter for the lovely "sorry if you felt offended" response these creeps all put out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 01:16
|
|
|
It read like a boiler plate lawyer response, which it was. I doubt Dan even has the emotional maturity to process what he did, and if he feels bad about damaging that woman (he doesn't seem to) then he could've saved face by coming forward and actually apologizing for hurting her in his own words. But nope, Totally Legal Response from his lawyer because in the end it's all about branding. He loses a minimal amount of viewers for Game Grumps and the company stays in the black. Yay capitalism.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 01:23
|
|
|
Endorph posted:too late tho, the whole 'CANCEL CULTURE PWNED AGAIN' narrative is basically already formed. people dont give a poo poo about awful behavior so long as it isnt a literal crime Terrible Opinions fucked around with this message at 01:45 on Mar 24, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 01:31
|
|
|
Meallan posted:The problem isn't just that Dan seems to use his fame to proposition young fans into sex, to then disappear. Yeah, I keep coming back to this. It would be one thing to be flirty with people and sleep with them but he lied over and over about being in love with them to get them into bed. It's just another way for Soft Boy predators to lure in vulnerable women. Maaaaaaybe he thought his feelings were genuine and was too immature to see what was going on but lmao no, dudes like that know exactly what they're doing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 01:35
|
|
|
Terrible Opinions posted:We both know they also do it when a literal crime is committed, legal technicality is just a convenient bad faith defense. It was the exact defense Lowtax used, come to think of it
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 02:03
|
|
|
What a surprising non-apology.quote:I stand by the fact that any interactions that took place of a sexual nature with the person in question were done so when she was 22 years old and we were both consenting adults, Dan said. To claim I engaged in any predatory behavior is simply untrue. I have made mistakes in the past, and I apologize if my actions or words ever made anyone upset, but those mistakes were never ill-intentioned, exploitative or illegal in any capacity. So I guess that's that then, case closed. Everyone can go back to watching their content as if nothing happened. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vRysBZk6iQ
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 02:34
|
|
|
I was browsing the frontpage of Reddit and I saw a post from the Game Grumps subforum that was mocking the very idea that Dan had done anything wrong. I don't browse Reddit very often, but it was the only time I've ever seen a post from that subforum trending on the front page. Ugh. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 03:42
|
|
|
Tommy Wiseau is exactly how I imagine Dan Avidan would've turned out if he never met Arin.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 03:43
|
|
|
He is from New Jersey, after all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 03:52
|
|
|
Jesus Christ guys it's like you've never been in a bad break-up. If you think getting ghosted is bad stay away from dating apps. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 06:53
|
|
|
Oh cool, another one's decided to Kramer in.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 06:56
|
|
|
Magic Rabbit Hat posted:Jesus Christ guys it's like you've never been in a bad break-up. StOp BeInG sO sEnSiTiVe
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 07:14
|
|
|
Has the real conclusion actually changed from the first day? He isn't a criminal, he's a 40 year old groupie-loving, emotionally abusive SoftBoy creep
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 07:19
|
|
|
Magic Rabbit Hat posted:Jesus Christ guys it's like you've never been in a bad break-up. In the context of a normal relationship you'd have a point, but this is not a normal situation. This is someone who met people he already had power over due to them being a fan of his work, love bombed them to make them feel special, and then ditched them the second he got what he wanted out of the arrangement. That's a completely different thing than "just" bailing on someone when a relationship isn't working out, it's way scummier. If the best thing Dan can say about his behavior is "nothing I did was, by the strict letter of the law, illegal" than gently caress him. There's lot of poo poo that is legal but you don't do because it makes you a scumbag, and turning your fanbase into a sexual hunting ground is well within that area.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 07:33
|
|
|
The best he can say is he behaved exactly like drake or any other grooming rockstars, which is bad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 09:02
|
|
|
Magic Rabbit Hat posted:Jesus Christ guys it's like you've never been in a bad break-up. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 09:09
|
|
|
That's a yikes from me
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 09:19
|
|
|
What I don't really understand is, even if you think these accusations are just totally made up and they're all liars or whatever, you could just... not post, or at least stay out of the way of people actually trying to have a serious discussion. Why is it so important that the pristine image of a video game youtuber be upheld, why would you make your only two posts in months about defending this guy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 09:34
|
|
|
#MeToo hits Games: I just wanted to defend predators
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 09:39
|
|
|
Flannelette posted:The best he can say is he behaved exactly like drake or any other grooming rockstars, which is bad. "Oh I didn't TECHNICALLY do anything illegal, I just acted like a sex pest and abused my position of power and trust to coerce and fool women into having sex with me, after which I ghosted them, leaving them with mental scars and possible trust issues. Oh and the very young women I groomed into having sex with me were of legal age at the time we actually had sex" -- a noted good guy And yet people will defend this piece of poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 09:49
|
|
|
Magic Rabbit Hat posted:Jesus Christ guys it's like you've never been in a bad break-up. You need to get some serious help
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 10:10
|
|
|
Let's see how seriously Game Grumps fans are taking this aaaaaaand I'm not at all surprised.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 18:25
|
|
|
exquisite tea posted:What I don't really understand is, even if you think these accusations are just totally made up and they're all liars or whatever, you could just... not post, or at least stay out of the way of people actually trying to have a serious discussion. Why is it so important that the pristine image of a video game youtuber be upheld, why would you make your only two posts in months about defending this guy. I don't watch GG, I don't listen to NSP, and I don't particularly care about the specifics of a moderately successful Youtuber's relationships as long as its consensual. I have friends who do though, and they were proper gutted when the news broke, so I took a look. What I found was an anti GG subreddit posting conversation snippets wildly out of context, a video sent between legally aged adults, and an incredibly damaging accusation based on a brief text message exchange. Not a day later the original thread poster gets on twitter, apologises for making the accusation, then goes private, but not before signing off that they literally just posted it for clout. Now, rather than acknowledge that they got duped, people in this thread have spent the intervening time brainstorming new reasons to stay mad. I cannot overstate how loving stupid that attitude is. Do you have any idea what happens once these Kiwi Farms adjacent shitheads realise they can weaponize MeToo? All they need is a half believable story they can twist in half and you idiots will do the legwork for them. You can spend the rest of the week calling the GG guy an abuser all you want, i don't care. But not one of you spared a thought for the poor woman whose genuine problem got sensationalised for the sole purpose of damaging a minor celebrity, and how much more difficult this entire episode has made genuine claims of grooming and harassing stick. Do your due loving diligence before you do more damage. E: the post above proves my point. Way to go, idiots, you jumped the gun and sent us back 5 years. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) Magic Rabbit Hat fucked around with this message at 18:56 on Mar 24, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 18:53
|
|
|
Magic Rabbit Hat posted:You can spend the rest of the week calling the GG guy an abuser all you want, i don't care. Kinda doubtful on this point tbh.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 18:56
|
|
|
So Dan Avidan a youtube personality of some note has a large fanbase. He has exploited his fans and uses emotional manipulation to have "consensual" sex, with some deception involved with his fans and he has done this more then once. All of this is totally legal but absolutely scummy. So what is to be done? Is it everyone who knows about the situation moral duty to inform everyone who likes his content? Should you kramer into every internet discussion about Gaming Grumps and post about Dan non-stop until they finally agree to stop watching him? What about people that care only about the content and couldn't careless about the people behind it? Are they wrong for continuing to watch gaming grumps? Should they also be shunned? Personally I know nothing about gaming grumps or Dan. But I do watch youtube content, and I absolutely will never look up who is behind any of the content I watch other then what is on their youtube channel. Just playing the numbers I'm sure someone whose content I watch has done something that is scummy, maybe even illegal, do I have an obligation to run a background check on every youtube channel I watch? Does Youtube? Basically at some point in this line of questioning people ITT are going to disagree with where the line is and as we can see in Inzombiac's screenshot that line for at least those people is at the very beginning of "Who cares what he did, I like the content or him." Where is the line for this thread or is it just up to how the individual moderator feels today?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 19:01
|
|
|
Given that youtube profits from, and indeed encourages, its content creators to form relationships with their fans, I would suggest that at the very least there is something kind of objectionable about them considering those relationships leading to sexual exploitation to just be an acceptable externality to their bottom line. Like, this is the nature of celebrity, especially in the modern day where being able to feel "connected" somehow to the people you watch on your screen is a key selling point, that is the entire reason why streaming is a thing because you can interact with the performer. It is designed to cause people to feel a degree of dependency and attachment to these entirely unqualified, unvetted, and poorly moderated content creators, because that increases viewer retention and watchtime. So either it is youtube (and other platforms) job to take responsibility for where that keeps leading, or you accept that there is no loving way they are ever going to do that as long as they can keep externalizing it, and you reach the conclusion that consequences and/or pressure to act have to come from the people who watch and who don't want their preferred medium of entertainment to just produce a steady stream of sexual predation victims as a byproduct. Or you just say gently caress it I don't care that's alright keep doing that, I dunno. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 19:10 on Mar 24, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 19:05
|
|
|
Magic Rabbit Hat posted:I don't watch GG, I don't listen to NSP, and I don't particularly care about the specifics of a moderately successful Youtuber's relationships as long as its consensual. like yes the people calling him a pedo were taking advantage of poo poo but that doesnt mean hes unable to be criticized
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 19:09
|
|
|
and double lmfao if you think #metoo meant anything before this or if this has done any damage to it whatsoever. it was already over dude. it barely mattered to begin with.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 19:10
|
|
|
Magic Rabbit Hat posted:I don't watch GG, I don't listen to NSP, and I don't particularly care about the specifics of a moderately successful Youtuber's relationships as long as its consensual. Wow, if it was completely and totally made up then Dan made a huge mistake confirming it and then claiming he did nothing wrong! God you loving suck so loving much. A groomed 17 year old that he kept contact with in order to sleep with when it would be safe to do so who he then immediately dumped isn't "consensual" you despicable fuckwit. Seriously get some loving help.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 19:10
|
|
|
also: the person who posted that 'confession' on twitter is not the person who made the post on the subreddit. they're the person who spread it across twitter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 19:11
|
|
|
Endorph posted:also: the person who posted that 'confession' on twitter is not the person who made the post on the subreddit. they're the person who spread it across twitter. This is a very crucial point that every single one of his defenders willingly turns a blind eye towards.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 19:14
|
|
|
ate poo poo on live tv posted:Personally I know nothing about gaming grumps or Dan. But I do watch youtube content, and I absolutely will never look up who is behind any of the content I watch other then what is on their youtube channel. Just playing the numbers I'm sure someone whose content I watch has done something that is scummy, maybe even illegal, do I have an obligation to run a background check on every youtube channel I watch? Does Youtube? I, similarly, had never heard of GG because even though I spent a lot of my youth painfully download 1.44mb zips of warez floppy disk images and spend whatever limited free time I have now playing games, basically everything about YouTube and "game culture" both really tilt me, so to the extent I consume anything it's usually a friend saying "hey check out this game footage" or someone on discord linking some Magic related thing. As a consumer of media, no, I don't think you have any obligation to background check the people who's content you're casually consuming. As a platform, I think YouTube needs to police various things, but ignoring this specific case there's a wide swath of stuff that I'd find to be disgusting personal behavior which would make me not like a content producer, but also which I don't really think it's YouTube's job to police. To me, YouTube's main bar should be "prevent our platform from being used to recruit neonazis / disinformation campaigns / allow predators to connect with victims". This stuff, generally, falls into that third bucket, but I'm not an Alphabet lawyer who knows Google's TOS and where that line is legallly, I also don't care. So, for me, this is the bottom line: human beings, in general, are capable of fantastic cruelty, and so if I am just watching some random video as a one-shot, there's some possibility I am helping monetize a very cruel person's stream, and that's unfortunate but hard to avoid. On the other hand, for the handful of content producers who I do follow on any kind of regular basis, I have a basic desire to understand their core ethical values, and I will stop consuming their content if they diverge from my own. quote:Basically at some point in this line of questioning people ITT are going to disagree with where the line is and as we can see in Inzombiac's screenshot that line for at least those people is at the very beginning of "Who cares what he did, I like the content or him." Where is the line for this thread or is it just up to how the individual moderator feels today?  oh, come on. If you've read this thread for any period of time, you know where the line is. Getting a sixer for being wrong is hardly the worst thing in the world, and people who do so routinely paint a pretty clear picture of their own values.quote:Should you kramer into every internet discussion about Gaming Grumps and post about Dan non-stop until they finally agree to stop watching him?  only if you have a lot of time to waste? How is that relevant to discussion here?OwlFancier posted:Given that youtube profits from, and indeed encourages, its content creators to form relationships with their fans, I would suggest that at the very least there is something kind of objectionable about them considering those relationships leading to sexual exploitation to just be an acceptable externality to their bottom line. Cabbages and VHS fucked around with this message at 19:16 on Mar 24, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 19:14
|
|
|
Wicked Them Beats posted:Wow, if it was completely and totally made up then Dan made a huge mistake confirming it and then claiming he did nothing wrong! God you loving suck so loving much. It was already proven that Dan did not contact her when she was 17 and that text was from her friend. Said text was purposefully misrepresented by the rantgrumps hatesub to appear as it if was from Dan. However, he has definitely hurt at least one person (Kati). Whether or not it was intentional, I have no idea. But he owes her an apology.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 19:15
|
|
|
Endorph posted:also: the person who posted that 'confession' on twitter is not the person who made the post on the subreddit. they're the person who spread it across twitter. There is a moron one post above yours who still thinks Dan groomed a minor, so you tell me if none of this matters.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 19:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 10:24 |
|
|
none of this matters lol because in situations where dudes literally have hosed and groomed children the response has been exactly the same. a few days of handwringing and then back to business as usual and everyone is mocking anyone who dared voice complaint. what have we lost here
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2021 19:18
|
|