Popular US voice actor(s) are accused of showering underaged fans with unwanted affection

#41
Social Justice Warrior community
How to make me not read an article.
This article has really pissed me off its garbage right wing propagada. Describing someone as a leftist lesbian and expecting me to take them seriously is the biggest joke of the year. The ANNs editor dismissal of the YouTuber is the only thing I agree with they shouldn't have done that, but ANN Are considered trash and we know that.



And these kind of websites is what caused the whole UKA controversy and I haven't forgotten that dw.
 
#42
How to make me not read an article.
This article has really pissed me off its garbage right wing propagada. Describing someone as a leftist lesbian and expecting me to take them seriously is the biggest joke of the year. The ANNs editor dismissal of the YouTuber is the only thing I agree with they shouldn't have done that, but ANN Are considered trash and we know that.



And these kind of websites is what caused the whole UKA controversy and I haven't forgotten that dw.
Lol you're never heard of tolling ignore it.what controversy and I'm no alt righter just incase people on the forums think that I am and I hate the far left and the far right.
 

Rui

Karamatsu Boy
Administrator
#43
Funimation Fires Vic Mignogna From The Morose Mononokean II Following #KickVic Campaign
If that's not a smear campaign than a don't I know what is I mean seriously if he's done something really bad why don't other va and fans go right to police instead of go on Twitter and other places on the net.il say it one more one to get the point across go to the police.
Because he (probably) hasn't broken the law. Workplaces fire employees for misconduct all the time; they don't need them to actually commit a crime to decide they're a terrible employee unworthy of their pay and benefits*. If someone can't work as part of a team, they will eventually find themselves excluded from that team. And from all accounts, Vic has no shortage of people he's upset. Other US dub actors, recording staff, convention staff, his own fans; the list is growing by the day. One of his peers has even been forced to explain why she didn't go to the police after a mob of defenders kept harassing her for speaking out against him without explicitly saying why she was so certain that he was in the wrong:
If we're saying that people can only be excluded from private, fan-based environments where their presence is actively and demonstrably harmful when they have broken the law and been found guilty in court, it disempowers organisers a great deal. You can get away with a heck of a lot of creepy unpleasantness without overtly breaking any laws. It doesn't mean that people should be obliged to keep suffering the culprit's presence when they refuse to stop what they're doing over a period of more than a decade. Should we not be allowed to exclude posters who create spam messages and harass others via PM on AUKN, just because they haven't committed an actual crime in law? We don't do it often because we're relaxed here, but when we say 'stop' and give a warning we expect the other person to heed that warning. If they can't do that and treat their fellow posters with respect, they're gone. This is the same kind of thing.

The time for civility was back when Vic was warned about his behaviour and asked to stop. He didn't stop.

(* For the purpose of this debate making sense I would be enormously grateful if the obvious temptation to derail this example into a lengthy discussion about employee rights and the difficulty of firing people in some situations could be avoided.)

R
 
Last edited:
#44
I mean kissing people without asking who are underage actually does make you a sexual harasser and/or peado. If I went and grabbed a 14 year old and kissed her, I don't imagine her or anyone would take too kindly to it. Just because he's famous doesn't make it different.
Rationally speaking no, it wouldn’t be any different, but the reality of the situation is that a lot of fans probably would appreciate a hug and a kiss from a celebrity they’re a fan of. And if some of those fans don’t appreciate it, but don’t actually let them know that at the time, how are said celebrities supposed to know they are crossing a line? And as far as I know there’s no age of consent for a hug or a kiss on the cheek - The kind of thinking behind these displays of affection has traditionally been to show love and appreciation for fans and supporters rather than used as an excuse for opportunistic sexual creeping (I mean, probably most people were kissed by a parent or grandparent when they were a child and didn’t really want them to, but that doesn’t make those relatives incestual paedos who violated your right to consent) and while of course in some cases (and this particular one) it might be, I think it would be a bit of a shame if everyone became terrified of physical contact with one another because it could potentially ruin their lives and careers.

Obtaining consent is great, but it’s not exactly human nature when people don’t think they’re doing anything particularly objectionable in the first place, and if the people who do object don’t make that known at the time. Without wanting to pass judgment on all the accusations against Philip Green for example, it seems the only thing he could have done to avoid one of them would have been to walk into a room and declare “would everyone who would like a hug from me please stand up, everyone who wouldn’t please remain seated” which is not exactly the kind of thought that would occur naturally to most people, I don’t think.

Perhaps the logical conclusion of all this, so that people don’t have to constantly ask “is it okay if...” is that everybody wears some kind of variation of the autism traffic light badge so those who don’t ever want any physical contact don’t receive it, and those who are okay with it do. Might be a genuinely good idea, maybe I’d get more physical contact with other human beings that way - It could run all the way from “Don’t even shake my hand” to “Down for a casual one night stand” (that is before we split into Party and Proles, and eventually Morlock and Eloi).
 

Rui

Karamatsu Boy
Administrator
#45
And if some of those fans don’t appreciate it, but don’t actually let them know that at the time, how are said celebrities supposed to know they are crossing a line?

Obtaining consent is great, but it’s not exactly human nature when people don’t think they’re doing anything particularly objectionable in the first place, and if the people who do object don’t make that known at the time.
That thinking scales up to some very uncomfortable assumptions if the person taking the action has any gaps in their personal judgement. "Oh, well if I do this, it will make them feel good, so it has no drawbacks for them! I'll just go ahead and do it; they'd go out of their way to protest if they had self esteem and weren't comfortable!"

It takes literally seconds to ask someone, "Hey, want a peck on the cheek for fun?" or "Wanna hug?" before violating their personal space. It costs nothing. It empowers them by inviting them to express their side before letting your own views dominate the interaction, and shows you're a considerate person who puts comfort before personal pleasure. I actually find it quite attractive even in situations where the outcome is already a given. I would argue that it is human nature for many people - I've certainly never once had the compulsion to grab random strangers since I was old enough to understand that I wasn't the centre of the universe. Our level of respect towards others is something that comes from our upbringing, and while I fully understand that some people will be raised in much more touchy-feely environments than others, I don't think either is more natural than the other.

But seeking consent is always less harmful to the other party than not seeking consent might be. Perhaps there is a tiny minority of people who would feel uncomfortable being asked for consent rather than dominated outright, but I'm not sure I've ever heard of any groups who would feel as violated and unhappy in that situation as someone who was kissed or touched against their will. I'll stick with groups I actually know exist for this debate.

There's a strong correlation between anime fans and those who struggle with social skills (and indeed, in anime fans and people with ASD, and I think it's widely known that people with ASD often have sensory issues). It's very evident at cons. But even so, I don't think it's actually normal to want and appreciate random physical contact from strangers in wider society either. If I jump on the tube or a bus right now and let my hand touch that of another passenger holding on to the same support, or sit down next to someone on an otherwise empty bus, or press myself against them (in a completely non-sexual way) because I feel like it and don't dislike the feeling of physical contact to the same degree, I'm still pretty sure that I'll have enough dirty looks and cleared throats to shame any red-blooded Brit into submission within seconds. People like to have their personal space respected by default, and the fact that a lot of people are too scared/relaxed/confrontation-averse/distracted to kick up a fuss doesn't invalidate the value of consent.

I'm all for the 'traffic lights' idea. Let's start off by assuming nobody wants unsolicited physical contact, catcalling or other interference by default, then have all of the people who do want that stuff wear badges to express their level of comfort. Easy. Opt-in systems are easier to run than having the majority of people needing to opt out. We can start today. Since I don't want anyone in the world to touch me, ever, without asking or having reasonable need, I'll go out without a badge and expect my simple dream to come true. I find the "Free hugs!" signage and stuff at cons unbearable but that's a good example of people with far less boundaries than I have getting it right and realising that the onus is on the grabby people to make their intentions clear and direct, not their potential victims.

R
 
Last edited:
#46
Let's start off by assuming nobody wants unsolicited physical contact, catcalling or other interference by default, then have all of the people who do want that stuff wear badges to express their level of comfort. Easy. Opt-in systems are easier to run than having the majority of people needing to opt out.
I feel this is where some of the disagreement about this issue comes from, perhaps a lot of it. I'm not so sure the majority of people would be opting out - As you say, that perhaps comes from people's own backgrounds. I visit pubs and the occasional club, and not only have I seen quite a few people (of both sexes) initiating physical contact with strangers but I've occasionally had it happen to me (not for a few years now I'm old and unattractive, mind) and never by anyone I was particularly attracted to. And honestly, it still never really bothered me very much. I can only presume from what I see that it doesn't bother a great many people very much. Or at least, perhaps not among the Proles. In fact a lot of people seem to be quite into it. I wouldn't initiate anything like that myself because the thought someone wouldn't like it terrifies me, as outlined above, but I feel like probably more than a few relationships or at least casual flings start out with something more akin to body language (which we're now told we shouldn't rely on as consent) than informed verbal consent. I don't really see why some people should have to change the way they live their lives and have done for centuries for the benefit of people who don't like it - It's probably better these kinds of people just don't associate with each other. To some extent they already do - Probably no-one is going to grab someone's a*se in trendy wine bar (an example of something I've personally experienced in a club).

Funny you mention public transport, I once had a guy I was talking to on a train literally take my hand and hold hands with me. I was a little shocked, but I just sat there and held hands with him and kinda wished a bit that I was gay because he seemed nice and was pretty good looking. If it had been a similarly attractive and engaging woman it might have beeen a turning point in my life, who knows? In fact that's pretty much exactly what I'd like to happen, since it would do away with all the other crap involved in hooking up with someone, which I find totally tedious.
 
Last edited:

Rui

Karamatsu Boy
Administrator
#47
I would say that both pubs and clubs are environments where the vast, overwhelming majority of people are there to hook up with others (to various degrees - for many this just means a conversation about sports), so I agree that in places like that more people are likely to be relaxed about their boundaries. I have been to clubs twice in my life - hated the experience - and I think the last time I set foot in a pub was around two years ago. And it was empty aside from my family, who were just there for a meal. Whereas what I consider 'normal' places to be out and about are places like stations, shops and the like; places where the 'experience' is secondary to achieving some clearly defined personal objective. I don't want random strangers grabbing me or chatting me up when I'm buying some bread from Tesco during my lunch break. I would agree that a venue-specific badge system for socially-focused locations could be fair enough if it was communicated in the event rules (though even then, I'd imagine most people would opt-in on arrival anyway).

Anime conventions are not hook-up spots, however, even if it does happen as a side effect of them drawing people together. Many have after-hours discos for that kind of environment. By default, I think most people who attend conventions are there for their hobby first and having intimate physical experiences is likely to come lower in the priority list if it's there at all. I know that when I visit them, I'm thinking of panels, shops and maybe having lunch with friends, not being grabbed and snogged by a voice actor. I'd feel weird about that even if it was one of the seiyuu I adore rather than a dub actor. Teen-me would have felt weird about that too, but lacked the self-confidence to express why it felt wrong.

I don't think that friends who have known one another for ages necessarily need to roll out a legal contract for every single interaction; it's possible for socially fluent people to pick up on boundaries and cues appropriately and sensitively adjust their behaviour (in both directions). But if there's even the slimmest chance that there's ambiguity - which is definitely the case in any situation involving a stranger, a kid you don't know or someone who isn't in their usual state of mind - clearly and non-confrontationally asking is free and simple. As is erring on the side of caution in the first place. Internally asking "Is this fun worth the risk of hurting them, and as a consequence hurting me?" before unilaterally going ahead with something isn't going to turn the entire world into sex-hating crazies. Heck, if fewer people have negative experiences growing up, people will probably be a lot more confident overall.

R
 
Last edited:
#48
Sorry, I was trying to stay out of this but I do feel the need to just weigh in a bit here. In my opinion, the default should be to just assume that any kind of physical contact is unsolicited. Heck, even unsolicited advice gets on my nerves!

One could argue that the context and the environment could possibly dictate people's actions and how they think they can conduct themselves (i.e, if it's a club, assume that because of the environment of booze and hedony that people don't particularly mind being groped, or even approached - it's a social environment and people are presumably there to meet people, have a good time and possibly even something more). Even so, in my mind, someone could be stark naked and screaming for someone to initiate some sort of contact, be it sexual or no, and that (to me) still doesn't then give someone the right to invade that person's space - I even become wary when people just stand too close to me fully clothed! It's just down to awareness, respect and common decency, and doing the right thing.

I don't think it's right or fair to put people into compromising situations. I agree (and have been there myself), that some people are unable to speak up for fear of rocking the boat; that still doesn't make it acceptable to invade space or initiate some sort of physical contact. It's not consent. Even someone watching from a distance can report being affected by sexual contact/harassment, even if the person directly affected by it doesn't see it that way.

This won't be a popular view amongst some of you here (and it's off topic, I know), but even as someone who considers herself modern in terms of attitudes and values, I do feel that in this day and age, as a society, we're becoming more and more afraid to even scratch our backsides without someone reporting it or upsetting the PC brigade. Whatever happened to people actually taking responsibility for their own actions instead of continually pointing the proverbial finger at someone else (or the Government)? Warnings for this, labels for that! Good old fashioned communication has gone out of the window, and vague implications leave too much to chance, but in the case of asking for consent regarding physical contact, as @Rui said - how hard is it to just directly ask someone if they're okay with it instead of just assuming that they'll be cool about it? In the experiences I've had I wish I could go back and just outright say "no" instead of just trying to awkwardly wangle my way out of those situations for fear of causing offence.
 
Last edited:
#49
That thinking scales up to some very uncomfortable assumptions if the person taking the action has any gaps in their personal judgement. "Oh, well if I do this, it will make them feel good, so it has no drawbacks for them! I'll just go ahead and do it; they'd go out of their way to protest if they had self esteem and weren't comfortable!"

It takes literally seconds to ask someone, "Hey, want a peck on the cheek for fun?" or "Wanna hug?" before violating their personal space. It costs nothing. It empowers them by inviting them to express their side before letting your own views dominate the interaction, and shows you're a considerate person who puts comfort before personal pleasure. I actually find it quite attractive even in situations where the outcome is already a given. I would argue that it is human nature for many people - I've certainly never once had the compulsion to grab random strangers since I was old enough to understand that I wasn't the centre of the universe. Our level of respect towards others is something that comes from our upbringing, and while I fully understand that some people will be raised in much more touchy-feely environments than others, I don't think either is more natural than the other.

But seeking consent is always less harmful to the other party than not seeking consent might be. Perhaps there is a tiny minority of people who would feel uncomfortable being asked for consent rather than dominated outright, but I'm not sure I've ever heard of any groups who would feel as violated and unhappy in that situation as someone who was kissed or touched against their will. I'll stick with groups I actually know exist for this debate.

There's a strong correlation between anime fans and those who struggle with social skills (and indeed, in anime fans and people with ASD, and I think it's widely known that people with ASD often have sensory issues). It's very evident at cons. But even so, I don't think it's actually normal to want and appreciate random physical contact from strangers in wider society either. If I jump on the tube or a bus right now and let my hand touch that of another passenger holding on to the same support, or sit down next to someone on an otherwise empty bus, or press myself against them (in a completely non-sexual way) because I feel like it and don't dislike the feeling of physical contact to the same degree, I'm still pretty sure that I'll have enough dirty looks and cleared throats to shame any red-blooded Brit into submission within seconds. People like to have their personal space respected by default, and the fact that a lot of people are too scared/relaxed/confrontation-averse/distracted to kick up a fuss doesn't invalidate the value of consent.

I'm all for the 'traffic lights' idea. Let's start off by assuming nobody wants unsolicited physical contact, catcalling or other interference by default, then have all of the people who do want that stuff wear badges to express their level of comfort. Easy. Opt-in systems are easier to run than having the majority of people needing to opt out. We can start today. Since I don't want anyone in the world to touch me, ever, without asking or having reasonable need, I'll go out without a badge and expect my simple dream to come true. I find the "Free hugs!" signage and stuff at cons unbearable but that's a good example of people with far less boundaries than I have getting it right and realising that the onus is on the grabby people to make their intentions clear and direct, not their potential victims.

R
Have you been to any gigs if you haven't you don't know what your missing. Seeing your favourite bands live is such a rush and i wasn't into mosh pits or to hook up I just went to a band I liked and I miss it because I just can't afford it.
 

Rui

Karamatsu Boy
Administrator
#50
Have you been to any gigs if you haven't you don't know what your missing. Seeing your favourite bands live is such a rush and i wasn't into mosh pits or to hook up I just went to a band I liked and I miss it because I just can't afford it.
I've been to quite a few (though I don't mosh or stand up front as the crowds do get too much, so I've only been right at the front for concerts with seating assigned)! Never had anyone at a gig try to go near me in that way even when I've been to see 'rougher' acts, which is lovely; they were always too excited about the bands and music. In a gig situation it's clear that everyone is going to be packed together so everyone going knows what they're letting themselves in for, just like getting on a crowded train voluntarily and having to tough out the unpleasantness because you want to get home sooner. Whereas at clubs (in my very limited experience) the experience is more about the people themselves and the social interaction is one of the main draws; I guess some people might go due to the dance scene for its own sake? But I could definitely see a club having an explicitly-labelled 'touchy-feely night' for those who are into that, whereas it's hard to imagine that being the default setting for any of my favourite musicians' shows.

I would be quite impressed if I saw someone voluntarily wearing a badge to indicate their preference for unsolicited chit-chat/physical contact even if I would not be able to fulfil their hopes myself. It would show a lot of initiative and respect for others, and probably make the world a better place for those who do yearn for more social contact without knowing how to break the ice. I'm just very much on the side of believing that being left alone should be a fundamental right first and foremost. Too many people have stories of their boundaries being trampled over when showing respect is neither costly nor time-consuming.

R
 
#51
I was always up front near the end of the stage and getting to see Dave mustaine play the solo to holy was was the highlight of the gig for me when I got to see Megadeth for the first time at london astoria and check out the song you'll can find it quite easy on YouTube.
 
#52
I'll just add this to bring it (more or less) back to topic.

Personally, I think it's dangerous to just go on environment and social context alone: people can go out clubbing, well aware that they will likely be on the receiving end of unwanted behaviour due to the nature of the environment, but that doesn't mean they have to be okay with it. They may not be "asking for it", or inviting it. They may not be going out on the pull; they're simply going out to enjoy themselves, but they'll get unwanted attention anyway. By nature of it being a club and that's "just how it is", people might feel thay have to put up with it and shut up about it - actually approaching people and telling them not to stare will hardly yield any result in those particular scenarios, but it doesn't mean that on a personal level that they have to be comfortable with it. People shouldn't have to avoid something they would otherwise enjoy just because of unwanted behaviour that makes them feel violated. However, I'm also aware it's not always practical to be so accomodating either (another bug bear of mine in today's society - we are becoming too accomodating, imo). You could argue, "well, just go somewhere else where you won't be oggled at or groped!" But, to give another example, why should I have to feel the need to take the long route home, simply because there are catcalling scaffold workers along the shortcut? We shouldn't allow our personal choices to be dictated by the behaviour of others.
 
#59
Yay trial by media and the baying Internet mob wins and innocent till proven guilty doesn't matter to some people.
Well I can only presume
Following an investigation
means Funi made the decision, y'know, following an investigation.

And as mentioned by several people earlier itt, you don't actually need to criminally convict someone to fire them. Workplace investigations are enough to do that. If Vic thinks he's been wrongly treated he can presumably take them to an employment tribunal (or whatever they're called over there).
 

Joshawott

Monsieur Monster
AUKN Staff
#60
I've seen a lot of comments on social media citing a "lack" of evidence and demanding that Funimation share what they've found, but... we're not privy to that information, and it's absurd to expect them to publicly release specifics. To sever all professional ties with someone who is a proven draw to their products, they must have found something...
 
Top