these allegations have been around a while and he's only recently stepped away, followed by a short time and now this statement, don't think so
First, no one said they are in the "same category" categorically ... but just because you don't personally call emotional abuse, "abuse," doesn't mean it's not. The forms emotional abuse take, and their toll on people, and the psychological and mental health effects, are only recently coming more to light in the mainstream. Like, this is a real thing: http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2014/10/psychological-abuse.aspx Signs of Emotional Abuse | World of Psychology Abuse in Intimate Relationships Emotional abuse | womenshealth.gov Emotional Abuse Can Be As Damaging As Sexual Abuse At least read the first and last article. Because your statement here is not what the science says. The research, the studies, the experts are weighing in more and more all the time on this. The downplaying of emotional abuse only furthers the stigma. That's not good. The misrepresentation of emotional abuse only further clouds people's minds and turns them off to education on the topic.
Okay. I thought all of this happened within the last week. I still wouldn't claim that the band was up to something suspicious due to the wait of the announcement. Would a label interfere with something like this?
i wouldn't say it's "suspicious," just endemic of band culture, particularly in male-heavy scenes like indie rock, for a band to mishandle this by sticking with a perpetrator for too long instead of kicking them out and publicly disowning it like they should. it sounds like they had a pretty good idea of what went on, and they even acknowledge that they protected him wrongly. it's possible a label would, not necessarily legally but with private pressure - again because of the problem of male-heavy scenes that like to figurehead bands and their members.
not to mention they're friends with harry corrigan, which is miraculously not a problem for some people on this site
Yeah, idk, that combined with the timing of the statement is fishy enough for me to pass on them, but I would never tell someone else what they should or shouldn't listen to.
well JJR (who's his uncle or cousin or something and has defended him) is still tour managing big name bands like FYS so...
i don't know why you're using harry's post about an album here? turnover has said nothing publicly about him so who cares?
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Didn't feel comfortable in the thread, still surprised by the lack of consideration this is getting and just feel it's important to note. People can do whatever they want with that information.
I'm just curious of your take on this since you've shown differing stances with acts you have personal attachment to
I've said before that I think biases are okay to have as long as you recognize them, my take is to listen to what makes you happy and helps you to feel mentally/emotionally healthy. I don't have a problem with people listening to Turnover. I have a problem with people failing to recognize their own biases and getting personal with me when I bring up something that is genuinely questionable and worthy of a dialogue