Saturday, November 15, 2014

Jian Ghomeshi, Feminist Activist & Violent Predator

Dr. Alan Gunty gives his analysis of the Jian Ghomeshi allegations and the paradox of a predator disguised as a sensitive feminist male alley.


Jian Ghomeshi was a feminist. Not only did he identify himself as one as early as his freshman year at York University (and possibly earlier than that), he also put into practice feminist values. He was a women's studies student and while president of the student union advocated for increased funding for the York University Women's Centre. He even co-founded a pro-choice network on campus.



Jian Ghomeshi also allegedly physically and sexually abused women. And he did so from a position of authority as a celebrity of CBC radio. He took advantage of his power to abuse and silence women who are just now finally coming together to destroy the patriarchal and institutional veil that was draped over his trysts. So if feminism and education about feminism are so crucial for women's equality, then how did this slip through?


TweetTunnel.com

If a person, much less a man, can hold and practice feminist values which espouse equality for women while committing acts of violence against them, then how effective is feminism as a means to end said violence? This is the reality of abuse towards women that feminism now faces.

 


Feminist theory has long stated that the patriarchal causes of abuse towards women could be reduced and eventually eliminated with adequate social reprogramming. From rape culture to street harassment, men's attitudes and beliefs towards women collectively influence an ethos which affects a society at large. By helping to influence the beliefs of young, college-aged men, said ethos would change into a female positive one, thus reducing abuse.


The "Ghomeshi wasn't a REAL Feminist" fallacy.

But it should be clear that Jian Ghomeshi was as educated and enlightened as any person who subscribes to feminist core beliefs of social change. And in working on campus and actually advocating progressive, feminist values, he went to lengths much greater than an average person paying lip service to the cause. He was both a participant and a driver of changing men's beliefs towards women.




To respond to the cries of, "this is why we need feminism:" Are we to believe that if Jian Ghomeshi had just read more feminist literature, donated more money to women's shelters, or avoided supporting misogynistic video games that he would have not beaten those women? Or, conversely, if he had never taken that women's studies course at school would he have done much worse? It would seem unlikely.



So was Jian Ghomeshi a feminist who abused women, or a misogynist who believed in feminism? He was both and that is the problem. Ghomeshi didn't beat women because he wasn't a feminist, he beat them because it had nothing to do with feminism. He, like criminals, rationalize any internal behavior that they would easily dismiss as being immoral in another person. "If you kill me it's murder, but if I kill you it's self-defence; if you steal it's theft, if I steal it's a necessity to survive." Ghomeshi beat women, but could have easily committed various other offences unrelated to women.

Ghomeshi held mutually exclusive beliefs because he found a way to rationalize them, and no amount of educational influence can touch that. The Jian Ghomeshi scandal is the perfect example of what feminism cannot do (at least not on its own), and why feminism as a sole solution to violence against women is inadequate.

More Like This:

Why Haven't Feminists Given York the Shaming it Deserves?

How to Get Sentenced to Death in Iran

A Fitting End For Donald Sterling via Capitalism


Science Illiterate Public? Science Illiterate News Media...

Sunday, November 9, 2014

The Naomi Klein Takedown of Jian Ghomeshi circa 1992

An article running on the Huffington Post Canada has been making the rounds in the fallout of the Jian Ghomeshi story.  The article includes excerpts of a piece written in 1992 by Naomi Klein and has been posted to Facebook by Mick Sweetman, chair of the board of directors of Canadian University Press. Featured below is Klein's article, a woman whose observations and skewers of Ghomeshi and his Moxy Fruvous group are strikingly prescient given the last several days:


Dr. Seuss, Fruvous, the CBC and you
The Varsity confronts Moxy's sober and sobering acappella satire
Published, Oct. 5, 1992 in The Varsity newspaper (University of Toronto)

By Naomi Klein 
Varsity Staff 

For ethical reasons, I will begin by admitting that my motives for interviewing Moxy Fruvous were less than pure. Truth be told, it was more of a vendetta than an interview. I think my feelings are best explained in verse — Fruvous-style. 

I don't like them that's the key, I do not like them on the CBC. 

I do not like them on a stage, I do not like them on a newspaper page. 

I would not listen to them on the air, I would not marvel at their flowing hair. 

I would not, could not, don't you see? I do not like them, so just let me be. 

I do not like their faux-politics. I've had enough of that Moxy-schtick. 

I do not like them at a pro-choice rally, I do not want to meet them in an alley. 

I do not like their P.C. ham, I hate them hate them, Sam I am. 

Moxy Fruvous, in case you have been frozen in time, is the latest brand of nursery school all-Canadian rock. Healthy, squeaky clean and painfully well groomed, this semi-acappella band's cartoonish quality recalls an all-male Josie and the Pussycats. 




Why this level of hostility? For starters, there was a period this summer when I seemed unable to turn on the radio, see a band that I do like, or even walk down the street without being assaulted by the friendly sounds of Fruvous. The most disturbing occasions were: a benefit for the Ontario Coalition for Abortion Clinics where Moxy Fruvous upstaged Morgentaler, the opening of Molson Place which was billed only as Holly Cole but featured a surprise cameo by, you guessed it, Moxy Fruvous, and the Toronto Star picket line where the boys entertained the workers with lyrics even cheesier than the paper's Lifesection. They were tailing me. I swear it. 

Although I had already heard Moxy Fruvous' headline-rhymes several times on CBC radio, I was still taken aback when, on one somber morning following the Toronto riot, I turned on CBC's Sunday Morning only to hear the boys cooing a Dr. Seuss condemnation of police brutality. Where were you when...  




Predisposition aside, I still believe that I went into the interview with an open heart and an objective mind. I even started with a joke to put the band at ease. The pre-interview press material included a Toronto Star article which opened with the warning that if there is one thing the Fruvous boys hate, it is the description that they are the "Nylons-meet-Barenaked ladies." 

"So, you guys are like the Nylons-meet-the Barenaked Ladies, right?" I said as I sat down with the four band members last July. My remark was met with stony stares and sulky glances. I then spent the next 10 minutes backpedaling, trying to explain irony to a group which bills itself as political satirists. Yikes, this was not going well. 




In the words of band member Mike Ford, Moxy takes satire mighty seriously. "Our job as satirists is to discover the irony inherent in the issue or with a public perception that is off." Well then, as the self -proclaimed satirist of these satirists, the irony in these political humorists is that they are neither effectively political not particularly humorous. 

Their lyrics, which tackle issues ranging from cross border shopping to Harbourfront development to the Gulf War, are hit-you-over-the-head-we're-so-sensitive political, while their presentation, which includes stupid hats, improv troop antics and mime, is goofy slapstick. They coat their pill with jam and thus make themselves easy for the likes of Peter Gzowski to swallow. Fruvous—which writes to order for the CBC—is pureMorningside

Moxy member and former president of the York Federation of Students Jean Ghomeshi disagrees: "I think there are some really great messages in these lyrics that I'm very proud of. It's a pop medium but it has its message. As long as we can play the kind of things we want, we are using Moxy Fruvous to help the causes." 



A pet cause is the pro-choice movement. Ghomeshi sports an OCAC t-shirt and boasts that they played a rally and a benefit. I know, I was there. At the benefit in question, the crowd separated into two factions: those who thought these cheesy white boys should get the hell off stage and those who thought these sensitive young men should be commended for bringing the cause to the mainstream — and for having great hair. There's the Toronto left for you. 

David Matheson, who plays Sam in "Green Eggs and Ham", is less convincing. Asked if they cater their politics to their medium, Matheson admits "We're not going to write something they are going to freak out over." 


Levelheadedness, is perhaps not the most sought-after quality one looks for in a rock band. But then they're not really a rock band, are they? The Fruvous-phenomenon, however, is not something you can just chalk-up to Paul Mitchell. Their fans span a hugely wide age-range from swooning underaged drinkers to crotchety CBC fans with opera glasses. It cannot be denied that Moxy Fruvous is appealing to something. But what? Ghomeshi puts forward one theory: 

"The reason people like what we do is that there are so few young people doing political satire. When we played Voice of Women we were symbols of young progressive males. That gives them hope for the future." 


So why do I feel this sense of impending doom? Slick and sanitized, Moxy Fruvous is not the only Canadian pop band to emerge that clearly goes to bed before 9:00 and won' t make the decent gesture of returning hero-worship with self abuse. Not only don't these guys drink alcohol, you'd be hard pressed to catch them drinking tap water. 

On a hot night last summer, band member Murray Foster bounced into a bar where he was playing later that evening munching a green pepper. 

They will eat green peppers in a bar, they will eat green peppers in a car, eat them eat them, you may go far.... 

View the Huffingtonpost Article here.

Monday, October 27, 2014

Jian Ghomeshi Denies Rape Allegations He Made Preemptively...of Himself?

Author of "1982" claims to be victim of Orwellian scheme out of "1984."


After an excruciating week in Canada we have laid to rest a soldier lost in a senseless attack on our nation's capital. Now this morning we return to distractions in Canada's largest city for a look at the people whom our brave men and women of the armed forces risk their lives every day...

Jian Ghomeshi is, er, was the most popular radio personality on CBC until yesterday when the broadcaster dropped him with almost no explanation. What a shock, exclaimed so many, at the perceived unjust dismissal of such a sweet, sheepish, and endearing fellow. Within minutes of the news, the backlash began with accusations of the CBC bowing to some force within the government.


Ghomeshi gained a lot of sympathy when Billy Bob Thornton
bullied the sweet and sensitive radio host in 2009.

In order to try and get ahead of the story so to speak, the former rock star turned pop-culture commentator posted a lengthy message on Facebook. To paraphrase, the message boils down to an assertion that "look guys, you're gonna here some stuff about how I'm a rapist so I'm letting you know that I'm not so anything you hear later isn't true and it's a conspiracy by my crazy ex-girlfriend."

Substitute sexual assault for "smoked crack" and you've got a play straight out of the Rob Ford handbook: deny, deny, deny and accuse, accuse, accuse.  Ghomeshi claims that because he's into kink, rough sex and bdsm and that his personal life is being used as a smear campaign to discredit him.


Sparring with the late Christopher Hitchens.

The only thing smutty here is his attempt to use his sexual preference, and implicitly a community of people who share that preference and its celebration of consent, as a red herring: I’ve been fired from the CBC because of the risk of my private sex life being made public as a result of a campaign of false allegations pursued by a jilted ex girlfriend and a freelance writerIt's not Ghomeshi's private sex life that seems to be the issue with the prudes at the CBC - it's the allegations of lack of consent that are disturbing. 


Last year, Carla Ciccone wrote an account of a very disturbing encounter
with an unnamed Canadian celebrity.  The hints were pretty clear at the time of
whom she was speaking and Carla faced a vicious backlash form Ghomeshi fans.

Comparing his preemptive strategy to that of Toronto's embattled Mayor Rob Ford there is a familiar pattern. Whereas Ford's alcohol abuse was an open secret at city hall predating his escapades at the Garrison Ball and long before the allegations of crack use, it's been an open secret to some that Jian Ghomeshi has engaged in "creepy, rapey" behavior.  Like the professor who "everyone knows" is having sex or making creepy uninvited moves on a student, there is no solid evidence beyond hearsay and personal anecdotes.  Should that be sufficient to ruin a man's career and reputation?




Well, when he posts a long explanation on Facebook in which he implicates himself in something that no one has yet to accuse him, stating a number of times "they set out to try to find corroborators to build a case to defame me." It creates a very disturbing and familiar impression.  That's saying nothing about how such a response serves as an attack against potential victims of sexual assault who are afraid to come forward.


There is heated discussion on campuses about combating rape, namely
finding a balance between protecting victims while preserving
due process for the accused.

Hiring a PR firm and going on the offensive as Ghomeshi has, (he's threatening to sue the CBC for $50 million) instead of hearing his refutation through a lawyer is a clear attempt to cash in on the good karma that his seemingly affable personality has built in the last several years.  The question is, will the strategy that spelled the end for Rob Ford's drug allegations, save Ghomeshi from accusations that are far more serious?

Saturday, September 20, 2014

How to Get Sentenced to Death in Iran: All You Need is an Internet Connection



Imagine a world free of irony and satire, one where dissent and public discourse was governed by such equivocal statutes that their mere utterance or reproduction thereof carried the same punishment as murder or rape. Publish an image like the one above - or embed a link to an image like the one above, or post a comment supporting an image like the one above - and you would find your self stripped of your property, locked in solitary confinement and forced to endure a grotesque parody of due process to decide your fate.

For the hundreds of thousands of Iranians on social media, it can take less than an image like the one above to be found in violation of state law. In the case of Soheil Arabi, a blogger who operated several Facebook pages which are alleged to have violated Branch 76 of the Tehran Criminal Court's obscenity laws, the result has been a death sentence handed down on September 16th - a sentence Arabi had until today to appeal.

 


It's a story which has garnered virtually no major media coverage which is not surprising, considering the temerity with which American, Canadian, and British media engage the horrifying elements of the Islamic world, that is, if they address them at all. One perverse but positive result of the rise of ISIS is the group communicates clearly and in plain English when addressing threats to the West, and command the attention of CNN.


You may be thinking that comparing Iran to ISIS is not entirely fair or accurate.  Except that the goal of ISIS is to establish the same system of Sharia Law in an Islamic Caliphate not unlike the ramshackle system established under the 1979 takeover by the Islamic Republic. Iran abandoned almost all its secular government and judicial infrastructure and embraced Sharia law for 30 years under the Ayatollah Khomeini. The Islamic Republic serves an example of a major middle eastern state - one in which men are treated like animals, and women regarded as even less - from which we can extrapolate an idea of what ISIS seeks to install on a national level.  




Although the Iranian system has evolved away from some of the most apparent Sharia traditions, the judicial system still maintains strict blasphemy laws, the interpretation of which can be very broad indeed.  The charges against Soheil Arabi as detailed by the Independent include an obtuse condition for what could loosely be called leniency:


Article 262 of the Islamic Penal Code states insulting the Prophet carries a punishment of death, however, article 264 of the Penal Code says if a suspect claims to have said the insulting words in anger, in quoting someone, or by mistake, his death sentence will be converted to 74 lashes.




In the idealized Caliphate envisioned by ISIS, one would have trouble imagining so forgiving a condition as article 264. For the citizens of Iran, no outside influence is needed in promulgating restrictions to freedom of expression. As recently as last month, one Grand Ayatollah, a man named Nasser Makarem Shirazi, declared that access to high-speed internet and 3G is not only "against Sharia," but a crime "against moral standards."  Having posted the remarks on his website (the irony evidently lost on the man), one could dismiss them for the crack-pottery they are except the reality is such insistence that "Judicial officials must not remain indifferent about this vital issue," carry the weight of his station needed to find a receptive audience.

In the meantime, Soheil Arabi is standing trial on further charges of "propaganda against the state." His execution date is yet to be scheduled.

Sunday, August 24, 2014

At Last, Photographic Evidence of Fairy Folk

After two weeks of nothing but horrible shitty news in the world, isn't it time that we got back to other not-so-heavy but important matters...sexy ass fairies.


In April of this year, Professor John Hyatt claimed to have captured fairies in photographs taken in the forests of Lancashire, UK. Hyatt, who lectures on art research at Manchester Metropolitan University, has released the  pictures entitled "Rossendale Fairies," to the Whitaker Museum in Rossendale where they are currently on display.


The Rossendale Fairies.

"I was just taking sunset through the trees and when I enlarged the photographs later in the studio, I saw these figures," he wrote. "They are not doctored apart from I increased the size of a detailed section of a larger photograph along with the DPI to stop them being just large pixels -- normal size enhancement techniques.


John Hyatt, Fairy Hunter.

It was a bit of a shock when I blew them up, I did a double take," he told the Manchester Evening News. “I went out afterwards and took pictures of flies and gnats and they just don’t look the same." 



This is a real documentary.



Shockandahh's in house Cryptozoologist; Amy Allen; elaborates on the subject. “There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that is another authentic fairy sighting. No further research is required to prove this photo is 100% proof that fairies exist."


The Cottingley Fairies photos were proof enough for Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.


"Everything is there in the photo; tiny arms, legs, a head and wings. As summer comes to an end, the magical fairy folk begin to gather food and supplies in anticipation of winter, the fairies are clearly collecting their harvest of mushrooms, berries and water for fall. This is typical behaviour for this time of year.”




So there you have it, folks.  Photographic evidence of tiny humanoids casting enchantments. Your move, Bigfoot.