|
Post by The Rocketmen on Jan 31, 2020 21:55:06 GMT -5
I think the most frustrating part of all of this is that nobody even talked about this case for around a decade but now because he’s dead so many people feel the need to talk about it. If it wasn’t important enough for you to talk about in the last 10 years then why is it important now? Just let the man Rest In Peace. He's not important to me, but pretending it never happened is childish. If you don't like that we're exploring Bryant as a complete human being, you can feel free to go elsewhere, but trying to sanitize someone's life just because their dead is actually disrespectful to him too. Maybe, just maybe, from something terrible came something good? Maybe because of that moment, he learned and took valuable experience from it and applied it to other areas of his life. A better father to daughters, more respect to his wife and women in general, and recognizing the limits of sexual experiences for a healthier sex life. These are all good things that can come from bad things. It's not bad for us to know and recognize that he is both a star and a sexual abuser simultaneously, just as he was also a dad and maybe a humanitarian. All of these things count. That is the point. Erasing any of those things doesn't fully represent who he was as a person, just as when I die, pretending that I didn't do shitty things just because I'm dead isn't respectful to the person I became because of those moments. Know the whole story. Don't pick and choose. If you pick and choose then you don't really respect or care for that person's life.
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Jan 31, 2020 22:41:51 GMT -5
Nah, naive is talking about peoples lives like they are your own. You were not there, neither was I, so theres not point in wasting energy on things that have no direct effect on your life. Put that energy into yourself or your loved ones, not slander that is rooted in contemplated hypocrisy. 1) When you become a public figure, your life is open to public speculation and discourse. Par for the course. 2) We were not there, but I have listened to 2 accounts of the 2 people who were there. Based on everything I have read, I have chosen to believe her. That does not mean I do not believe he was incapable of feeling remorse, or it may have been a misunderstanding. But all of that is besides the point. I was as much not-there as you were, and you are saying I have no right to an opinion. I would argue we both do. Again, point #1 - it goes with the territory of being a puclic figure. 3) Wasting energy on things that have no direct effect on my life? K, but...racism has no direct effect on my life. Should I just never say anything if I hear someone say something racist? Not to mention, you took as much energy to reply and tell me to let someone rest in peace as I did to talk about the importance of realistic hero-worship, and I think its safe to say more is accomplished by redefining hero worship than letting someone rest in peace. 4) Slander is making a false claim against someone's reputation. I have not done that; I have stated facts. The primary of which continues to be that Kobe himself believed the victim she was raped, and though he disagreed, he felt remorse that his actions caused those feelings. 5) Calling people out for rape is looking out for the best interest of my loved ones, as I have a wife and daughter and would rather they not be raped. Whether it be by a superstar basketball player, or some teenager who has grown up worshiping an athlete who has been taught by our system that people worship sports heroes, and are even willing to forgive and forget their vile actions, such as rape. We have enough Brock Turners running around. I think the most frustrating part of all of this is that nobody even talked about this case for around a decade but now because he’s dead so many people feel the need to talk about it. If it wasn’t important enough for you to talk about in the last 10 years then why is it important now? Because people like you are telling people they are not allowed to talk about it. Because, for me, this is not about Kobe, or the great life he led, with the one fuck-up he likely committed. It's about redefining heroes. Kids grow up needing heroes to be perfect. But that is not reality, and people can be flawed. Kobe is a great example for how people can be flawed. He did a bad thing. He also did great things. My issue is if we are allowed to talk about all the great things (as we should) there is no reason whatsoever we should not be allowed to discuss the bad things. The guy lived a life, not a fairy tale fantasy. Censoring his life accomplishes nothing, and discussing things that have already happened, and are already known and documented, do nothing to tarnish his legacy. If your heroes are that fragile, perhaps they are not heroes to begin with?
|
|
|
Post by xx - Team GAP on Feb 1, 2020 10:43:22 GMT -5
both parties admitted it was consensual. only bad part about it is kobe cheated on his wife... which his wife forgave him for.
kobe is dead and so is this thread.
|
|
|
Post by The Rocketmen on Feb 1, 2020 11:54:57 GMT -5
both parties admitted it was consensual. only bad part about it is kobe cheated on his wife... which his wife forgave him for. kobe is dead and so is this thread. Just because you say something doesn't mean it's true lol Here's more to the point of complicated heroes: Yet in 2018, just seven months after he won an Academy Award for best animated short film, Bryant was dropped from the jury of a film festival. “This is an urgent time to say NO to toxic and violent behavior against women,” read a petition urging organizers of the Animation Is Film Festival to disassociate themselves from Bryant. As he had in the past, Bryant declined to discuss the sexual assault case. He said he was “disappointed” with the decision of the festival organizers but was now focused on changing the world “through diverse stories, characters and leadership.” For a moment, Bryant was back where he had been in 2003 — someone who, like Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey, operated at the pinnacle of his profession but stood accused of a terrible crime. The case against Bryant began on June 30, 2003, when he checked into the Cordillera Lodge and Spa in Edwards, Colo. He was there to have a knee operation at a clinic in nearby Vail. After being led to his room by a concierge, Bryant asked her to return later and give him a private tour of the property. She did, and then Bryant invited her into his room. They both said later that they began kissing, but what happened in the next few minutes became the heart of the dispute. The woman told the police that Bryant had raped her. Bryant said they had consensual sex. Prosecutors seemed to have a strong case. According to court documents, an examination of the woman at a hospital revealed a bruise on her neck and tears in her vaginal wall. Both her underwear and Bryant’s shirt were bloody. Bryant told the police he had not explicitly asked for consent. While the issue of consent has long been at the heart of sex crime laws, how it is understood and taught has evolved — in part because of high-profile cases like the one against Bryant. “No means no” has given way to “yes means yes,” and the idea of explicit consent has become the standard, rather than an expectation that an objecting participant must say no. Almost immediately the case against Bryant became a news media circus, the biggest celebrity prosecution since the O.J. Simpson trial. Quickly though, the accuser’s reputation came under attack. Bryant’s lawyer, Pamela Mackey, said the woman’s name in open court six times during one hearing — even though the police and court officials had tried to preserve her anonymity — and asked if her injuries could have been caused “by having sex with three men in three days.” Television crews camped outside the home of the accuser’s parents, and her name was leaked by the court system three times. Like the Simpson case a decade before, the Bryant case quickly became about much more than what had happened in that hotel room. It was seen through the historical prism of white women falsely accusing black men of sexual violence (the woman in the Bryant case was white). At the same time, the case sparked commentary that perpetuated stereotypes about false accusations of rape. After the case was dropped, Bryant issued a lengthy statement, apologizing to the woman and acknowledging her perspective of their encounter, which is farther than most public apologies go. “Although I truly believe this encounter between us was consensual,” he said in statement, “I recognize now that she did not and does not view this incident the same way I did.” But years after saying “I also want to make it clear that I do not question the motives of this young woman,” Bryant seemingly did just that. And in 2018, reflecting on the sponsors that cut ties with him after he was arrested, including McDonald’s and Coca-Cola, Bryant said they did so because he was too “gritty.” “If something like that had happened in this time, with this movement going on, the repercussions would have been far greater for him than losing a few endorsements,” said Miki Turner, a journalism professor at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles. She first met Bryant at the beginning of his career, when she was a beat reporter covering the city’s Lakers and Clippers basketball teams. Turner left her job covering the Lakers in Bryant’s first year there, then covered the team again 10 years later when Bryant was in his prime – and several years after the rape case. Turner said the case changed Bryant. She said for more than a decade, he and his wife Vanessa offered significant support to women’s sports and those experiencing homelessness in Los Angeles, often without it being publicized. “The difference between the Kobe I knew when he was younger and the Kobe I met again in 2006, was night and day,” Turner said. Obituaries and news reports from some of the nation’s top news companies omitted mentions of the rape trial, which at the time was such a media frenzy it was compared to the OJ Simpson case. Death threats were made against people who mentioned it on social media, and a Washington Post reporter was suspended for sharing an article about it on Twitter. Mark Shaw, a former criminal defense lawyer who worked as an analyst on the Bryant case, said he was concerned about how little attention has been given to the accuser in coverage of Bryant’s death. “Some of the coverage I see just brushes over all this and the victim is left outside the door,” Shaw said. During the initial proceedings, the woman was named in some media reports, despite a Colorado law meant to stop that from happening, and Bryant’s lawyers at the time emphasized her “promiscuity” and history of depression. “It’s a great example of what can happen to somebody who comes forward and makes allegations like this,” Shaw said. “I have no doubt that what happened in the Bryant case dissuaded many women.” Shaw said he was “disturbed” by Bryant’s attitude in the courtroom and believes if the case had gone to trial, Bryant would have been convicted. And despite progress from the #MeToo movement, Shaw said he thinks to this day people’s first instinct is to doubt those who accuse the wealthy and famous of sexual assault. Shaw said: “Now when they really look at it and take the time to look at it, maybe the feeling these days has changed, I hope it has, but at times I’m not so sure it has.”
|
|
|
Post by The Rocketmen on Feb 1, 2020 11:57:47 GMT -5
I realize that no one here, maybe Justin, will actually read all of that, but those are excerpts in understanding Kobe, the rape case, the allegations, the dissuasion of women coming forward against powerful figures, like Weinstein, for the terrible things they did as their own profile will be put in the limelight. And how people are still uttering death threats for talking about the rape allegations against Kobe almost 20 years ago.
Supporting the stance of "don't talk about that bad stuff, he's dead" is bullshit, and people should be ashamed of themselves for taking that stance. It's just a further process of victim shaming by way of stonewalling, and it's honestly a pretty disgusting behaviour to see online, but nothing really surprises me on the internet anymore.
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club on Feb 1, 2020 18:19:49 GMT -5
Holy crap on a fucking cracker, and you guys say I'm fucking bad? WTF?! 🤨
The guy is dead... Arguably the greatest basketball player to ever strap on a pair of high tops, but he's dead, and you 3 are sitting here and arguing over semantics of something that happened off the court, when the reality is that Wilt F'N Chamberlain was the biggest womanizer on the planet, yet he's still considered one of the greats too. 🤷
So, yeah... I look at what Kobe did, and yes, he fucked up... Once; documented. Done. Nothing came out of it cuz there was nothing there. If he'd actually raped that woman, it'd be a Harvey Weinstein situation, and not settled out of court. There's real accusers & cash-in accusers. And yeah, he cheated on his wife, like a dummy... The gal got the paycheck she was after and his wife forgave him. End of story there, as far as I'm concerned.
You can be allowed an "oops"... It's not like Kobe was a documented serial cheater here or anything.
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Feb 2, 2020 1:29:32 GMT -5
I don't care what side you're on, he's still somebody who's now gone. It's disrespectful. Neither of you were there & the man is dead. kobe is dead and so is this thread. This is the mindless appeal to cheap sentimentality, and does not clear victims of any burden of trauma they carry. Or what about this whole, "It's disrespectful" thing. I OWE someone respect JUST because they died? Do you realize how strangely and absolutely totalitarian that is? Further, every single one of you is arguing that because the guy is dead, he is absolved of his crimes. But you will all agree Hitler is different...meaning that you are no longer talking about the FACT that someone is dead, you are talking about the severity of the crimes in question. Which has nothing to do with "the guy is dead". Better question, for each of you, as individuals, and as a collective. What do you guys propose we say about Chris Benoit? Do we never mention him ever? I mean...he died, so we want to respect the hell out of him. But he also died by his own hand after brutally and undisputedly murdering his wife and son. Do...do we pretend he did not do that? What about Chuck Berry. Bloke is dead. Did he never-crime as well? Or Bill Cosby. He's going to be dead soon. When he is, we sweep all of his rape under the rug as well? Just because "he is dead"? I am interested in real answers, not appeals to cheap sentimentality. Crime doesn't give a fuck if the perp was a sports hero. Or a beloved actor. People can be two things. Benoit was a legendary wrestler and also a violent child murderer. Bill Cosby was a beloved black entertainer, pioneer, and serial rapist. Chuck Berry was a rock and roll pioneer, and convicted pedophile and peeping tom.
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Feb 2, 2020 1:44:29 GMT -5
So, yeah... I look at what Kobe did, and yes, he fucked up... Once; documented. Done. You can be allowed an "oops"... It's not like Kobe was a documented serial cheater here or anything. "When asked by officers if he’d ever cheated on his wife before, Bryant replied, “Um, yes, with one other person. And she could actually testify I do that um, I do the same thing, I hold her from the back, I put my hands (inaudible).”
“Her name is Michelle,” continued Bryant, adding she’s a “frequent” partner of his."Source: www.thedailybeast.com/kobe-bryants-disturbing-rape-case-the-dna-evidence-the-accusers-story-and-the-half-confession
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club on Feb 2, 2020 5:18:59 GMT -5
So, yeah... I look at what Kobe did, and yes, he fucked up... Once; documented. Done. You can be allowed an "oops"... It's not like Kobe was a documented serial cheater here or anything. "When asked by officers if he’d ever cheated on his wife before, Bryant replied, “Um, yes, with one other person. And she could actually testify I do that um, I do the same thing, I hold her from the back, I put my hands (inaudible).”
“Her name is Michelle,” continued Bryant, adding she’s a “frequent” partner of his."Source: www.thedailybeast.com/kobe-bryants-disturbing-rape-case-the-dna-evidence-the-accusers-story-and-the-half-confessionHadn't seen anything about a second woman, but even 2 women still hardly constitutes being called a serial cheater, unlike Chamberlain who claims to be in the hundreds or nearly a thousand 😂😂
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Bulldozers on Feb 2, 2020 9:58:59 GMT -5
Can you guys stop quoting me in this thread please, I don’t want to see this anymore.
|
|
|
Post by The Rocketmen on Feb 2, 2020 10:07:38 GMT -5
Can you guys stop quoting me in this thread please, I don’t want to see this anymore. If you're not mature enough to have an honest discussion about someone's entirety of fame, then yeah that's probably for the best. Also xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club it's strange to me that you keep bringing up someone who had a thousand consensual partners while we are discussing someone who publicly admitted a partner did not consent, regardless of marital status.
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Bulldozers on Feb 2, 2020 12:23:38 GMT -5
Can you guys stop quoting me in this thread please, I don’t want to see this anymore. If you're not mature enough to have an honest discussion about someone's entirety of fame, then yeah that's probably for the best. Also xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club it's strange to me that you keep bringing up someone who had a thousand consensual partners while we are discussing someone who publicly admitted a partner did not consent, regardless of marital status. It’s about respecting somebody and not trashing them for something they allegedly did over a decade ago.
|
|
|
Post by The Rocketmen on Feb 2, 2020 16:23:25 GMT -5
So let me get this straight.
If I was, say, physically abused as a child by a school principal, repeatedly, and he was highly respected for what he did in his profession, and he died, I am not allowed to talk about how he, allegedly, physically abused children? Because he is dead?
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Bulldozers on Feb 2, 2020 16:34:33 GMT -5
The difference here is you don’t know what happened. And I never once heard you talk about Kobe before he passed and rather than let us mourn his loss you decide to throw in our faces the one bad thing he could’ve possibly done.
Stop being an asshole Mike and let us pay our respects in our own way without throwing in our faces something bad.
|
|
|
Post by The Rocketmen on Feb 2, 2020 17:16:04 GMT -5
The difference here is you don’t know what happened. And I never once heard you talk about Kobe before he passed and rather than let us mourn his loss you decide to throw in our faces the one bad thing he could’ve possibly done. Stop being an asshole Mike and let us pay our respects in our own way without throwing in our faces something bad. If you read anything I actually wrote, I talked about the importance of this moment possibly leading him to an improved life. It IS important. I don't hate Kobe Bryant. But it's important that we recognize the whole person instead of white-washing everything down. If you need to sulk and mourn, then go ahead? But I am curious of the things that are going to come out about what he did and what he changed in his life BECAUSE of that moment. That is important. It's as important as winning championships.
|
|