Dogpiling is so embarrassing to witness. People need to actually read the source properly before forming flawed conclusions and sharing them with others. Then again, the Internet practically thrives on this poisonous culture...
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Bryan Cranston shares his thoughts regarding societal forgiveness of sexual abusers [title edit]
- Thread starter Khanimus
- Start date
Let's maybe let this new board be a fresh start where there is some room for nuanced discussion of even controversial opinions, which this frankly shouldn't even be controversial it's basically just the idea that rehabilitation is possible, instead of just a rush to dog pile onto someone without any actual thought or level headed discussion. Maybe make OP's that aren't meant to be just clickbate while leaving out all context and maybe actually reading what actually happened or was said before rushing to post how outraged you are.
Don't see anything wrong with the statement, especially to arouse such vicious replies. Honestly the first page comes off like a bunch of children, embarassing presentation of what is supposed to be a mature community. I can appreciate this comes a little too close on the heels of some of the abusers putting the cart before the horse by mentioning second chances prior to any meaningful action, time or consideration. This doesn't change what the statement is about though, and it's about rehabilitation. Something that a lot of our justice systems are supposed to be built around but fall shockingly short of.
Crying TOXIC and exaggerating the amount of dogpiling in these threads is also dumb.
As a society it is your obligation. The victim of a crime does not get to determine the length of a sentence. That's up to the judge, and the judicial rules which are in theory established by the government and society. We also create the rehab programs intended to salvage these people.
Obviously victims are more important to sympathize with, but it seems like some in this thread would propose that rehabilitation clinics be removed altogether in favor of giant pits that we toss offenders into.
This is an interesting point. "As a society". I wonder, do we as individuals really have a meaningful say in what happens as a society. Take Spacey as an example - it's not us who would hire him for a job, that's someone in the industry he works. Hell, with enough money thrown at PR pretty much anyone could make a comeback (say hi to Mike Tyson, convicted rapist and megastar), the public acceptance is engineered by the media. As an individual, what you or I think is meaningless (hi again Mike Tyson, how the fuck do you keep getting work again?). It's how forgiving the machinery of fame is, or how corrupted it can be.
To be fair, it's pretty hard to exaggerate the dogpiling that took place. There's pages and pages of it. It was hyperbolic in and of itself.
I'm in complete agreement with this.
Shit like "what's Cranston hiding" "Cranston about to be exposed" goes far beyond page 1
And it's wrong and sad, but past page 1 they were almost anecdotical I think (should need to re-read the thread fully, I saw it yesterday) , the majority of responses have been thoughtful I think.
At this point I think there's more posts about "shit's like the old forum" or "nothing changed" that shitposts like "Cranston has something to hide".
I think he articulated what I think is the correct answer to this question pretty well.
Condemnation (whilst fully deserved now and for the foreseeable future) should not be a permanent, inescapable state for anyone. That also doesn't mean forgiveness is inevitable, it just means there should be a route to forgiveness or at least acceptance that the past actions of the individual do not reflect the current state of the individual. As with all forgiveness, it's given on a case by case basis, it requires contrition on behalf of the accused, not just once, but proven through actions over a period of time (appropriate to the case).
Condemnation (whilst fully deserved now and for the foreseeable future) should not be a permanent, inescapable state for anyone. That also doesn't mean forgiveness is inevitable, it just means there should be a route to forgiveness or at least acceptance that the past actions of the individual do not reflect the current state of the individual. As with all forgiveness, it's given on a case by case basis, it requires contrition on behalf of the accused, not just once, but proven through actions over a period of time (appropriate to the case).
The fact is that we want more people to change, to promote a culture of openness and self criticism among the great number of those not yet caught who are causing all kinds of different degrees of harm. Liberally declaring people unforgivable or beyond redemption is fatalistic, black & white moral nonsense.
I think a lot of it is just justifiable anger and youth. It happens to everyone staring down a mountain of complacency and moral and ethical failures entrenched in the culture, stirred by a fervor to fight against it.
Last edited:
There must always be a path to forgiveness of sin.
But it must first start with admission and heavy contrition, as Cranston said.
But there must always be a path. Even if it's a difficult path for the accused/predator. Even if it's nigh impossible for them to walk, extended by to the volume and/or history of their offenses, a light at the end of a long and painful journey must be extended by the rest of us and able to be realized by them.
And this doesn't mean re-extending the original levels of trust nor does it suggest that anyone should forget their past deeds; only that they can move on with their lives in a more positive direction...and so that we can too.
But it must first start with admission and heavy contrition, as Cranston said.
But there must always be a path. Even if it's a difficult path for the accused/predator. Even if it's nigh impossible for them to walk, extended by to the volume and/or history of their offenses, a light at the end of a long and painful journey must be extended by the rest of us and able to be realized by them.
And this doesn't mean re-extending the original levels of trust nor does it suggest that anyone should forget their past deeds; only that they can move on with their lives in a more positive direction...and so that we can too.
I'm almost always pro-rehab, but I do agree with this sentiment: These people should not be allowed to be excessively wealthy any longer.
It's high time that we remove the abusive criminals from the 1%.
It's high time that we remove the abusive criminals from the 1%.
I don't understand why he was even asked this question, no one but the victims of these people should have a say in their future in the industry.
Wait, what?
If someone pays amends for their crimes either via the judicial system or via public eye through rehabilitation or community service, etc... they should be able to build their lives and career back up to whatever they can achieve
Are you going to police ex cons and make sure they aren't ever wealthy again and where do you draw the line
Even if so, none of them will be able to rebuild their careers.
Thats something that would take years, even if possible, and they are old as fuck already.
You're probably right, and that's fine
But the possibility should always be there, if we are truly promoting the idea of rehabilitation and reintegration into society
Once someone pays their debts, they need to be given all the same rights and abilities they had before
Yeah letting victims decide the punishment doesn't sound like a bad idea AT ALL..
Someone doing this shit for 30 years pushing into their 50's or 60's? Yeah, there's no path towards redemption there. They should literally be paying for that shit until they're rotting in the ground. Someone like Weinstein especially had hundreds, if not thousands of victims extrapolated outward from his most direct efforts.
There is no redemption here, only compensation. Those people should be grateful just to be allowed within society at all at this point.
There is no redemption here, only compensation. Those people should be grateful just to be allowed within society at all at this point.
"These sorts of acts"? Are you fucking serious? I suppose the answer to your question lies in how much tolerance you have for an individual who sexually preyed on young boys for decades.
I'm frankly stunned by this post.
Last edited:
It's cheap and disengenuous of you to say a poster tolerates sexual abuse when they say there is room for forgiveness.
The poster I quoted is literally asking whether, for instance, decades of predatory pedophilia makes a person irredeemable. I was simply expressing my incredulity at such a question.
Old men who assaulted boys, men, and women for decades all the way till they got outed by their victims a few weeks ago aren't going to change and try to gain redemption. Like be realistic here.
User warned: hypocritical shitposting, insults
I think he says something completely reasonable and relevant in this day of "outrage culture". Just my vote.
This is a really dismissive and low-effort post. Or, "Dumb".
It's a safe answer, but it's the only correct answer. I think it also depends on are they a serial sexual offender or was it a one off terrible mistake/miscommunication. I think there's a huge difference between what George allegedly did 30 years ago and what Lewis CK did and tried to hide.
Exactly, assuming he didn't do anything worse than what's come out, I could see CK being able to find a level of redemption. Some others? Absolutey not.
Happy to see the thread title was changed.
A lot of people are dwelling on the idea of Spacey and Weinstein being redeemed. As Cranston answered the question which asked if "the weinstein's and spacey's can come back" like he said its case by case basis.
I personally think the two of them are too far gone, although Spacey said he is going in for rehabilitation.
But I feel Cranston's view is more fitting to the Vince Ingento's or the one time offenders. Reading that thread felt incredibly wrong, especially as he was putting his statement out and people were instantaneous in passing judgement/ripping his first tweet apart or that he probably had them prepared.
In these isolated cases, I think that forgiveness can be achieved.
A lot of people are dwelling on the idea of Spacey and Weinstein being redeemed. As Cranston answered the question which asked if "the weinstein's and spacey's can come back" like he said its case by case basis.
I personally think the two of them are too far gone, although Spacey said he is going in for rehabilitation.
But I feel Cranston's view is more fitting to the Vince Ingento's or the one time offenders. Reading that thread felt incredibly wrong, especially as he was putting his statement out and people were instantaneous in passing judgement/ripping his first tweet apart or that he probably had them prepared.
In these isolated cases, I think that forgiveness can be achieved.
It's incredible how people are suddenly so willing to talk about rehab and forgiveness for sex offenders... when it comes to their favourite celebrities.
Take any thread about an average (as in, non-celebrity) man who gets caught with kiddy porn but never touched anyone, and you'll get unanimous condemnation and hate and how he should be branded for life.
Kevin Spacey actually molests kids, and has shown this behaviour for decades and was never stopped until now. Oh it's Kevin Spacey, uhhh... Let's talk about forgiveness and rehab. And by rehab I mean expensive spas for super-rich people (with pool and fitness centre, of course).
Take any thread about an average (as in, non-celebrity) man who gets caught with kiddy porn but never touched anyone, and you'll get unanimous condemnation and hate and how he should be branded for life.
Kevin Spacey actually molests kids, and has shown this behaviour for decades and was never stopped until now. Oh it's Kevin Spacey, uhhh... Let's talk about forgiveness and rehab. And by rehab I mean expensive spas for super-rich people (with pool and fitness centre, of course).
We have serial sexual abusers in positions of power being exposed. They got away with it for years. There was no justice for their victims, and only a small degree now as we learn about the actual decades of abuse. And the press is already asking people whether they can be forgiven? Unreal. Have some compassion and responsibility instead of trying to get clicks.
And, no, not everyone can be redeemed. Harvey Weinstein is irredeemable. He's hurt too many people for too long. And I don't think anyone in this thread saying that nothing is unforgivable actually believe that. I'm sure I could list a actions and people you don't think are forgivable.
Also, the chances of Weinstein actually learning his lesson or whatever trite crap are about nil.
And, no, not everyone can be redeemed. Harvey Weinstein is irredeemable. He's hurt too many people for too long. And I don't think anyone in this thread saying that nothing is unforgivable actually believe that. I'm sure I could list a actions and people you don't think are forgivable.
Also, the chances of Weinstein actually learning his lesson or whatever trite crap are about nil.
Because is about the general concept of redemption and forgiveness.
Both of which you are not guaranteed to have even when you put in the work. Sometimes you just gotta live with it.
Agreed, but like you know, everything is about context. (I'm not talking about in particular here trying to defend Weinstein or the likes of him)
Except his comments are about Weinstein and Spacey specifically...?
Also, this right fucking here.
How many of you folks were expressing the same sentiments of forgiveness and redemption about Bill O'Reilly or Roger Ailes? Spacey and Weinstein should be treated no differently.
Last edited:
If there was ever a time for "outrage culture" it'd be against rich powerful men who used their power tp sexually abuse and rape women, children and other men
Ehh... read the quote, is in the first post of this thread.
Or how about you watch the video, where he makes those comments specifically in response to a question about Spacey and Weinstein.
I mean, you're not wrong, but it's Cranston's timing that's suspect.
Nobody is ready to talk about forgiveness for thesepeople - we're still in the midst of the hunt. [like, do NOT broach that topic right now, or soon].
Give it some years Cranston [especially after your last controversial comments].
Nah'mean?
Like, yeah - this is a little more prescient right now.
Cranston really needs to bide his time better.
Everyone: please stop posting about dogpiles, "embarrassing" posts, witch hunts, the old place, "we're supposed to be better", etc.
This is no less toxic than the knee-jerk reactions or other bad posts we've seen; in fact, it's worse. Why? Because a knee-jerk reaction is at least sincere and in good faith, though it is misguided and can be obnoxious. But misguided reactions can be corrected with facts. Whining about dogpiles, witch hunts, etc. is more about making yourself sound superior than actually contributing anything.
We're going to start cracking down on this kind of smug shitposingt a bit more in the future. For now, please stop it and get back on topic. You can agree or disagree with Cranston without insulting the rest of the community. Thank you.
This is no less toxic than the knee-jerk reactions or other bad posts we've seen; in fact, it's worse. Why? Because a knee-jerk reaction is at least sincere and in good faith, though it is misguided and can be obnoxious. But misguided reactions can be corrected with facts. Whining about dogpiles, witch hunts, etc. is more about making yourself sound superior than actually contributing anything.
We're going to start cracking down on this kind of smug shitposingt a bit more in the future. For now, please stop it and get back on topic. You can agree or disagree with Cranston without insulting the rest of the community. Thank you.
I don't see a huge difference between knee-jerk reactions and drive-by shitposts as far as being valuable contributions to discussion, but okay. They're both thoughtless bon mots that you have to wade through in order to uncover a substantive thread of conversation. One is just contrarian.
There is nothing justifiable about it. You're on the Internet, there is a buffer. You can step away if you get emotional. There is no excuse for those people to not read the article other then to be the first hot take in the thread. Nothing Cranston said could be strained as bad by any left wing liberal, something I'm guessing all of those posters classify as. How can we (I bet many of them on the first few pages) be against the US prison system then say hey fuck Brian for saying not to write everyone off
I agree with Cranston as in, if a pedophile for exemple, have thoughts, but seek guidance to help with his problems and he doesn't do anything bad, i can see him getting a second chance, i mean, it IS a mental disorder, im sure we can work this out someday.
