I'm saying that while these mediations happened, I'm sure, the final product obviously isn't respectful to the survivor's wishes.
I mean, idk, It’s not the /ideal/ situation for him. Plenty of people are never gonna support him still ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ no clue
I think what we all want is to know what the fuck is going on... You don't have to out the survivors identity or give any more details of the original events to say, "The pitchfork article is wrong. The survivor does not approve of and did not agree to these plans." 2 sentences and we know not to renew our support/fandom of this band.
if that's the case than the information in the article is falsified, which okay let's say it is, how the heck am I supposed to know that without someone telling me what actually is going on. It's very difficult without a voice for the survivor, I'm glad Josh is speaking out but he still hasn't given me anything of substance to go off of. I still havn't seen anything that says the information we were given was incorrect.
Yeah, but there was no possibility of him coming back like nothing had happened anyway, so this is probably the best solution for him. makes him look like a good guy. It worked very well, too, everyone shared the article, praising the writing, lending sympathy to him, and this website, which is usually so quick to notice the kind of red flags that can easily be found in this article, also totally fell for it. It's a highly successful plan so far. Meanwhile the survivor seems dissatisfied and, considering the violent reaction from their friends, I'm guessing it's not a good feeling for them.
Plenty of reasons; pressure, guilt, or even that she is okay with it but doesn’t wanna see people talking about it with so much fanfare
Yeah, same here. If he some how pressured her into agreeing to this that's super fucked. But I figured a mediator would mean they probably didnt have direct communication.
well I hope they do that so everyone can finally shut the fuck up because look, since when are we taking the precautionary side of an article that's clearly very biased towards the abuser rather than taking the word of the people close to the survivor? Like? Since when is that something we do on this website? I think it's very logical thinking to trust dozens of people who are friends with the survivor rather than one account from a biased pitchfork article! It's not totally outlandish! this tweet sums up my thoughts, as well as the Josh tweet that says he talked with the survivor TODAY, god damn, you don't get a fresher approval than that
yea, I get that. I'm sure its difficult either way. I'll say this. I'm very happy their identify has managed to stay hidden this entire time. I couldn't imagine what it would be like if people knew who she was.
there's also the very clear possibility that her words were misinterpreted or extrapolated either by the mediator, the band, or the writer of the article, or all of them
Yeah I mean it’s the best it could be after this, so yeah, but I find it hard to believe he’s actually /happy/ with the situation even if he got the best possible outcome
I mean, let's be honest here : I don't give a fuck if he's happy, or slightly inconvenienced, or anything else. I don't sympathise with him. He got the long end of the straw here, clearly.
I don’t trust josh and I have no reason to trust josh. This is based on personal accounts I’ve had told to me and my own experience. It’s absurd to act like I’m not fair in my feelings
These threads are basically where I'm at on this situation right now Until I hear something that points otherwise, Evan falls into the "shitty guy who needs rehab" pot not the "absolute fucking monster" pot, and we know he was seeking therapy before any of this came out because of the whole punktalks thing and also afterwards due to the terms of the supposed mediation. That doesn't mean that pg's return is good, that doesn't mean that Evan deserves support, and anyone has the right to say fuck Pinegrove forever. I absolutely see why someone close to the survivor would say so
I too have been told by some people not to trust Josh in this instance.. I don't want to go too much into it, but I don't think their word is enough for me.
But you're doing the same thing right now about Josh and the others making comments... Also, has Josh been known to lie about this stuff?
So in short, you don't trust anybody actually close to the survivor, but you trust a friend of Hall's to tell you how the survivor feels? Insane. Deflect all you want, but I feel like all that will satisfy you is the anonymous survivor actually coming out and identifying themselves of posting a statement, which they do not want to do. You know who else I've been told not to trust? Hall and anyone close to him!
this nails it on the head for me. I think he FUCKED up big time, and needs to make up for it. I just don't think what he did is completely unforgivable or enough to cancel his career. I understand people not supporting them 100 percent, but I really don't think there is a clear Right or wrong here.
ppl in this thread: idk i don't trust josh and jake for reasons i know but I'm not gna say why :// also ppl in this thread: wow its so annoying that people like josh and jake are on twitter saying we shouldn't trust evan again but they won't say why !!
Wanted to drop this here because it verbalizes something that has been bothering me a little bit didn’t know how to say
Which is clearer The survivor's current feelings fed through several friends of theirs or The survivor's feelings from before the piece and the comeback, fed through a mediator, fed through the band, and again fed through a biased, romanticising journalist