Accountability in Music • Page 172

I think it's the type of music they play, people who are into hard rock will care less

 

I don’t think people’s favorite genres have anything to do with it.

 

Okay I legitimately thought about this all day. I hope it makes sense re: Pinegrove.

 

Just as a counter-point I used to love QOTSA and haven't listened to them since that video surfaced

 

Been seeing a lot of gross shit about the pingrove article. There's also been so much gatekeeping about this situation from people "in the know" which is totally incongruant with accountability for someone who is a public figure.

It seems, from the article, that Evan has gone through the accountability process that his victim felt was appropriate. It just seems a little gross that people who are "on the victims side" have so much of a hard time showing the victim respect. If we dont respect the accountability process when it works for victims no one will ever willingly be a part of it.

Listen or don't listen to this album. I have no skin in tge game. But at least respect the victim.

 

Definitely makes sense. I have a lot of thoughts in a similar vein that I can’t fjlly articulate due to: I’m on the go right now, but I think it has to do with a larger issue within this corner of music which is how accountability and justice is not ever fully discussed or read upon and it’s very rarely ever recognized as the process it is. It’s often used as a “immediately forgive once u get an apology that has the right language or ur a bad activist” and I don’t mean this situation but just the larger environment. It’s hard to translate a process used specifically in smaller activist circles who are based around this kind of thinking to a music environment that doesn’t have s coherent physical place or group or what not, and that can be a problem. My other is the involvement of pitchfork, tho I overall do know Jenn pelly is credible the whole website doesn’t have a great track record and it’s always going to be questioned of who’s best interest is a piece like this run under. Obviously the main mediation involves those directly involved with the situation, and the main goal should be being able to function in some sort of interpersonal circle or life again. The redeeming of a platform stems from that but may not overlap directly depending on the situation and not everyone has answers for that, I sure don’t. I would love if it stemmed in a more socially conscious way but a lot of ppl (and to clarify for tone, I absolutely do not mean youreelf or anyone specifically) are just hoping they can “do the right thing” so they can listen guilt free. This is getting too long for mobile but finally it’s wondeeing why a abuser or someone who was put on the spot can clarify things such as the looking at fans from he crowd after the fact, and this is sticky because was he legit not able to say it properly due to the Allen thing of is he changing his story after seeing reactions to look better and seem less threatening. And that brings back pitchfork, and if they’re the best platform to decide and publish that. I don’t know, I feel like it’s a conversation that needs to be had, and then we need to almsot have a conversation ABOUT that conversation and what and who it should entail. This is very incoherent because I’m on a train, I just wanted to get thoughts out there especially bc this is one of the first things I’ve read today where it seemed like the right things were being thought of.

 

The question is does that process guarantee a full public platform back to you and the reason that is a discussion is because it was initiated by a public and large reaching music site

 

I think this is a really articulate stance, and one that I respect but personally can’t hold for myself

I think to your point, since the victim is choosing to remain anonymous (which is valid) we have to draw our own conclusions. Unfortunately, my conclusion based on things I’ve seen outside of this article makes me, personally, feel that I can’t start to rebuild that trust

 

Totally fine. I’m probably never going to listen to this band again. I literally only ever started listening to them because Autumn was involved with Evan and we’re friends. But I can’t in good conscience tell other people they’re bad or supporting bad people when we just really can’t know the full extent of the situation and were never meant to. If Sheridan had never said anything, it’s likely none of this would have ever happened and while I hate that, it is important context.

 

This is definitely what I’m struggling with because by all public accounts, the only abuse of platform was saying a weird thing about how fans acted in the crowed. The rest of what happened happened in the “private” sector so to speak.

I get a lot of your longer post too- and definitely don’t feel like you have to respond, because I know how stressful it is to feel like you should comment when other shit is happening off the internet. But I think you have a lot of great points and if you wanted to articulate them further, I’d love to read them.

 

It just feels like, how do I make an informed decision about this situation when people continually say "you dont know the whole story" and then never tell you what this information that makes this so black and white for them. It feels like the people who do this use other peoples experiences as bait to make themselves more interesting.

 

Yeah I agree too, and that’s why I’m glad you wrote this up. I think i basically agree with you 100%. No one is a bad person if they decide they’re comfortable with listening to the band after this

 

Didn't the singer from The Story So Far drop kick a female fan off the stage? The venue banned the band and the owner said in his 14 years there never saw anything like it. People still talk about that band on this site all the time like it never happened.

 

This is true, like you said in your tweet thread it's the weird thing of something became public that wasn't intended to, which I think is part of what makes it so sticky. This is a lot easier to type with a keyboard though, haha.

When it has come to situations like this in music, the phrases of restorative justice and accountability has been thrown around as vague ideas of what need to be done without really examining what they are, how they need to be molded for this situation, and is it applicable. The legal system fails both those who are accused of a crime and those who have had harm done to them due to the way the legal system does not have the peoples best interest in mind, but rather protecting a government and part of that is upholding systems of oppression. We know that black and latino men are given life ruining and traumatic sentences for crimes a white man wouldn't even get called to court nonetheless fined for, we know a lawyer will run a smear campaign on a women accusing a man of rape, we know how prison labor is modern day slavery and the recent news with how california inmates have to fight dangerous fires for little to no money but couldn't get a job as a firefighter once they serve they time due to their sentence. It's all around unethical and no one wants to deal with it and especially don't want to support it. Restorative justice is an alternative focusing on seeing the humanity and creating a more direct and clear dialogue while still understanding theres harm to be repaired and the ways in which we do so are not always the same for each situation. In addition there's integrating both the victim and perpetrator back into their respective communities. This is a process largely used in schools, workplaces, religious communities, activist groups and so on. While music can count as a workplace, we know it's not a traditional one. It's figuring out how to translate it into a situation that deals with a public platform and in some ways, fame, that is tricky.

Now it's a little different for every place, I'm just using the main .org site for a generic way to word this, but one of the main reasons why restorative justice focuses on reintegration of the offenders is because they currently face a lot of boundaries trying to become healthy citizens again. They site trouble with housing, transportation, access to food and clothes, jobs, and so on. They're mainly talking about those who were either incarcerated (you can lose food stamps if in prison, be denied housing, i talked above about being denied jobs that not only are you qualified for and were also forced to do for less than minimum wage) and not so much the situations we deal with in music. I guess my questions are, is playing music in a public and large platform, getting interviews on pitchfork and such, necessary to the process. It can be argued that music is a community but it's not coherent in the way a neighborhood or activist space or place of faith is, especially for a band capable of and probably planning to tour internationally. If it does seem like a logical step, is it one that is too quick? It has been less of a year, and it seems like a running start to return to the public eye. It can be argued it's a job, but he has enough support that it seems he can find one somewhere else, possibly even within music, without having an entire platform. As you brought up in the reply i have quoted, it is partially due to the fact that as far as we know, the main misconduct wasn't tied to having a platform, and this is where it's a bit more sticky. Maybe, in different context, I'd be more lenient to that. Part of my wariness is due to the way that there is barely every enough material pushback to get someone to even step away, and he did seem to be willing to in the first place so there is some trust there. However, we're starting to enter this time period after the large boom in me too stories where men are making their way back, some we know for sure who didn't do the work pitchfork writes that Evan did. Maybe it is not fair that he is punished for situations he is not involved in in some eyes, but currently it does not seem like the correct time, nor done gradual enough for it to not set a precedent to those other situations and abusers. I think this band, being the first to really do a leave and come back because of abuse, is part of why this strikes a nerve.

In addition, though I will condemn specific misogynist coded/straight up misogynists comments toward Pelly, pitchfork is not know for it's best ethics. When a piece is written on a music site, with someone who was involved with the bands music, with a note that an album by said band is being dropped in two days, it's not going to build a trusting dialogue. The motives will always feel questioned, even if Pelly came into it wanting it to be a 100% ethical and open piece, there is too many unsettling factors. In addition, the narrative around this started and ended with Pinegrove teams dialogue/point of view. Part of this is due to the victims privacy and wishes, which is completely and totally fair. But since it's already in a context that is not entirely trustworthy, it comes into questions if his clarification/more in depth point of view is honest (possible, as the original statement also came out of an untrustworthy situation with Sheridan Allen), or if it is damage control for what he knew people were most upset by/he needed to explain to seem better. There's a lot of unknowns, and it's a weird situation in a world we have to be pessimistic about to feel safe in.

Sorry this became an essay, but i hope it makes a lot more sense than my first message because rereading it i dont even know exactly what i was on about. Also, I hope explaining everything in the beginning didn't seem condescending or implying that you specifically didnt know, i just like having a good starting point/background before i go into some shit

 

Also the Opera VPN isn't actually a VPN so jokes on OP.

Opera browser's VPN is just a proxy, here's how it works - Help Net Security

 

And movies!! My local public library has a fantastic selection.

 

Sigur Ros Drummer Orri Páll Dýrason Accused of Sexual Assault

This is horrific

 

If you’re wearing a BN shirt to a show in September 2018 there’s no way you’ve been living in a cave the past year and are simply making a heinous statement right? Saw someone coming out of the Foxing show with that.

Which made it all the more bad because Foxing actually had a Chicago-based org called Our Music, My Body set up a booth at the show tonight and give an explanation about the group on stage after Foxing’s first song.

 

Tbh I'm always surprised at the stuff people genuinely don't know in regards to these things. I don't rly follow bands like I used to like I listen to their music but couldn't pick members out of a line up and if I didn't come to this site I prob wouldn't rly know of any allegations because this is rly the only place I go to for music related stuff. And with how quickly artists try to sweep things under the rug and how stans try to bury and sugarcoat, and not to mention not everyone is deeply involved in the ~scene or whatever it's def possible imo.

I'd side eye but also like I'm constantly surprised at the basic and well known pop culture things people don't know so idk idk

 

yeah casual fans tends to know very little about any of this. there are obviously people who know what jesse did that still wear their merch, but even then i feel like even they know deep down its a bad look

 

My ex recently messaged me and had no idea what happened to Brand New. Didn’t even know they put out an album.

 

FUCK

 

Maybe it's just me, but I'd expect someone who's at least in the know enough to show up to a Foxing concert to be aware about what's going on with BN. Then again, maybe we're all just so in the know, that it's hard to picture what's going on with more casual fans? IDK.

 

how does showing up to a foxing concert make you in the know?