140 characters of ADHD

by | December 2, 2014

I have been mean to Twitter lately, and I apologize. But only because I recently found some useful info on it… but I’m not going to talk about that, because… who cares.

And before I could ponder the wonders of modern technology, I found this perusing the news… more stupid

It’s weird, before the big sex scandal, I could not have told you what a ghomeshi was. Person, place, thing? I do try… and avoid the gossip mills that seem to be everywhere today, including but no limited to television. I prefer facts. Ghomeshi was fired not for any crime, but because his bosses thought his apparently ‘consensual’ sex was disgusting. Now it appears it may have been less than consensual. But much like Ferguson, no one waits for the grand jury, everyone has an axe to grind, and any cherry picked fact… is grist for the mill.

The star article is telling. It’s not that people misunderstood the Flare article. It seems clear to me, that the twitter ragers simply did not read it. They may have read the title of the article, and connected that with a url to Flare, but I’m sure that would come close to their 140 character attention span limit… no need to read further.

So I read the story with a furrowed brow, expecting to be shocked by the magazine’s unfortunate lapse in judgment. I planned to spend five minutes in the glow of my laptop screen, shaking my fists with disbelief as I sub-vocalized flowery passages about Ghomeshi’s blue socks or the modern cut of his trousers.

Followers demand quick feels… feeds… and up to the minute rage. And even if you get a detail, here or there, wrong, it’s the principle of thing. #thosewhocanttwitter

7 thoughts on “140 characters of ADHD

  1. Pingback: Fortunately, The Thought Police Have No Badges | Canadian Atheist

  2. Indi

    Ghomeshi was fired not for any crime, but because his bosses thought his apparently ‘consensual’ sex was disgusting. Now it appears it may have been less than consensual. But much like Ferguson, no one waits for the grand jury, everyone has an axe to grind, and any cherry picked fact… is grist for the mill.

    Now *that* is complete bullshit. That’s what Ghomeshi has claimed, certainly, but the facts just don’t support his story. If you’re not aware of the facts of the case, maybe it would be wiser to not comment on them, rather than spouting off in ignorance.

    CBC – by their own admission – was aware of his sexual antics and the existence of accusations against him for months (possibly even years, but *certainly* many months), and they supported him. The guy in charge actually went on camera for a detailed interview on the subject and said quite frankly that standing by Ghomeshi when it was just allegations and hearsay is standard protocol – it is what they would do when any of their public personalities is the subject of unsubstantiated allegations. This – never mind what Ghomeshi pretends – was not simply a case of corporate cowardice at the first whiff of deviant sex.

    They only fired him after the accusations and the evidence started to reach critical mass, so they asked him to come and soothe their concerns, and he responded by showing them a video of the kind of sex he likes. The main “concern” they wanted soothed was that they had physical evidence of assault (injuries that women had), and they wanted him to explain them away. His video was – in his mind – supposed to show how the injuries could occur in consensual sex. But apparently it made them realize, “holy crap, there *is* something to these allegations”. We don’t know what they saw on the video, but it was enough for them to change their tune – even after several months supporting him *knowing about his preference for rough sex* – and quickly scrub all signs of their association with him.

    Maybe you need someone to do your thinking for you, but most people with a functioning mind of their own don’t need to wait for a jury conviction when they have enough evidence piled up in front of them to reach a reasonable conclusion. CBC had in front of them: several complaints from employees, tons of corroborating scuttlebutt (Ghomeshi’s antics were a shock to the public, but in the circles he moved in, and among the people he worked with, they were apparently common knowledge – there are even stories posted online over several years, though none named him), word that *several* women were planning on filing official complaints and maybe even charges, physical evidence corroborating the assault claims, and then video evidence that the allegations are – at the very least – very plausible. That’s more than enough information for them to come to a reasonable and justified conclusion.

    For the record, there’s also apparently a lot of evidence that hasn’t been revealed to the public, but has been floating around the key people involved. Dozens of celebrities leaped to Ghomeshi’s defence at first – at the CBC there was Ron Mclean, and there was also Lights (who has worked closely with Ghomeshi), and even Elizabeth May; they all made spirited defences of Ghomeshi. But all of them very abruptly changed their tune after a day or two – *we* don’t know why, but maybe we’ll find out when everything comes out in trial.

      1. Indi

        Yeah, okay, you’re using as your source an interview that is 1) with someone not actually directly involved (read your own link, she says that she didn’t even see the videos); 2) a month out of date in a story that has developed rapidly; and 3) is mostly made up of claims that have, by this point, been proven to be false – ironically, by an investigation done by the CBC’s own reporters (there is also a third party investigator looking into things, but she hasn’t released anything yet). I repeat, if you aren’t going to keep up with the story, maybe it would be wiser not to spout off about it.

        1. Joe Post author

          Yes I supplied one.
          No you did not supply one.

          All you did was move the goalposts.

  3. brady

    it isn’t bad having ADHD. i know that because doctors think i have ADHD but are not sure cause I’m 2 young 4 da diagnosis


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.