Dylan cancelled next?

The.Truth. said:
And then maybe "politically correct" if we want to take it way, way back.

We did have a person :poop:🤡 who posted here a while back defending Weinstein and Cosby. The left out Kevin Spacey but I think that was because the point they wanted to make wasn't so much that we should presume innocence but that women are often psychopathic lying harpies sent to destroy men, so Spacey's case wasn't really relevant.
I read that R Kelly's attorneys are very worried that it has come out that he seems to have sexually assaulted at least one male minor and seem to feel that this could really ruin the jurors' opinions of him.

Anyway, I think the term "call-out culture" is better, but I'd really like to know who was "cancelled" just to understand what that means to people.
Click to expand...
A pregnant French teacher bore false witness against me when I was 12. She claimed that I molested her. There was not the faintest truth to the accusation, but people believed her automatically, and I lost my foster home, because of that completely fabricated accusation.
 
She looked like this woman, a murderer who got away with it because no one could believe such a soft spoken woman could do such a thing. Marni Yang is the name of the woman who I'm certain did murder her one night stand's pregnant girlfriend.
Screenshot_20210816-193304_Google.jpg
 
Light Housework said:
A pregnant French teacher bore false witness against me when I was 12. She claimed that I molested her. There was not the faintest truth to the accusation, but people believed her automatically, and I lost my foster home, because of that completely fabricated accusation.
Click to expand...

The problem is that I believe you shouldn't be accused of lying without some evidence but you have told some real whoppers. I have no idea if what you're writing here is true but this story doesn't really make sense.
I would ask questions but I know you'd answer them in horrifying detail so I'm just going to say, "I'm sorry that happened to you," and keep it moving.
 
The.Truth. said:
The problem is that I believe you shouldn't be accused of lying without some evidence but you have told some real whoppers. I have no idea if what you're writing here is true but this story doesn't really make sense.
I would ask questions but I know you'd answer them in horrifying detail so I'm just going to say, "I'm sorry that happened to you," and keep it moving.
Click to expand...
Well, I never even brushed past her, never mind touch her. She absolutely lied.
 
You only had to talk to me a little, to tame me. I wasn't a monster. I was pretty gentle.
 
A little talk would tame me completely. That's all it took. Real talk, not role playing talk.
 
He'll be fine (even if it's true, at his age, with his body of work), but I'd be annoyed by the clickbait headlines. Some people will already be left with the impression that he's definitely guilty.
 
The.Truth. said:
"A spokesman for Dylan, now 80, told the Guardian on Monday that “the 56-year-old claim is untrue and will be vigorously defended”."

My opinion: This statement, to me, is not very strong because of the word "untrue" rather than "false." Also, the claim is not 56 years old unless she's been saying this for fifty-six years which would only make it seem more credible.
It seems like a clumsy use of the "why didn't they say anything sooner" tactic which anyone who knows about these things knows is irrelevant. Many victims do not come forward for decades and the fact that she's talking about it now, if it's true, doesn't make a difference. It could just be that she has decided she doesn't want to keep this secret anymore, assuming again that it's true.

She could be making it all up but if that was the case I'd expect the statement to call it a complete fabrication and make the point that Dylan will be totally exonerated.
Instead we get the message with the words "vigorously defended" that she's going to be going up against a powerful legal force. And the short statement says that the claim will be vigorously defended. I know what it means to say but it's carelessly written and this spokesperson didn't craft this statement very well at all.

I'm only commenting on the statement itself which seems very weak. There is no evidence in the story to form an opinion on whether the claim is true.
Click to expand...
It seems that the words "vigorously defended" mean that they are not open to any kind of negotiation and that they will defend their client in the court. Maybe they are being extorted to make an arrangement, as usually happens. Untrue means not true. Not true is false. It's a boolean.
 
Last edited:
Anonymous said:
www.showbiz411.com

Now Even Bob Dylan Can Feel What It’s Like to Be “Cancelled,” Presumed Guilty By Even Rolling Stone

Yesterday, a crazy woman sued Bob Dylan, our rock poet laureate, Nobel Prize winner, for sexual molestation. She said in her suit that the incident happened exactly in April and May of 1965, at New…
www.showbiz411.com
Click to expand...

I agree the allegation doesn't sound likely - but Bob Dylan lived at the Chelsea hotel in the early 60s. It was a famous bohemian midden.

Edit: apparently the journalist has form.

If he spent half as much time checking his facts as he did complaining about people stealing from him, there wouldn’t be so many errors in his reporting.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Variety: Bob Dylan fans who bought $600 ‘hand-signed’ books with replica autographs will receive refunds from publisher
Replies
0
Views
936
Anonymous
A
A
Bob Dylan - Uncut June 2021
Replies
3
Views
2K
Anonymous
A
A
Dylan was always ahead of The Beatles
Replies
5
Views
2K
nicky wire's legs
nicky wire's legs
A
ebay - must watch: Bob Dylan - 5 signed LPs
Replies
6
Views
2K
Anonymous
A
A
Bob Dylan: The Ultimate Sampler
Replies
0
Views
618
Anonymously
A
Back
Top Bottom