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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah, there’s giving someone the benefit of the doubt and then there’s thinking you, as a total outsider, know better than somebody’s employer. While I’m not in favour of very public smear campaigns against individuals somebody is rarely fired without good reason, and if they are there are appropriate legal means for them to seek recourse. If people want fairness, then surely the fair thing to do is to let the involved parties handle the situation?

If people had come to my defence like this when I got fired from ASDA... actually I wouldn’t have been particularly grateful since I wanted to be fired from ASDA.
 
Last edited:
ayase said:
That... seems like a totally superfluous statement. Was he also a secret racist?
Click to expand...

I would guess that it's a shout out to previous complaints about Vic rather than anything directly related to the current matter. It's been reported several times over the years that he has been rude and dismissive to his fans whenever they mention BL and he's consequently built up something of a reputation as a homophobe (he's a pretty outspoken Christian, so this isn't exactly unexpected, but the complaints have been circulating for a long, long time and I don't know how deep they go). I would guess that some of the things he's said/done on that front have led to complaints in the past, and this is Funimation's way of acknowledging them as a side effect of the recent commotion.

I think it would be inappropriate of Funimation to publish the full details of their investigation but if he's making their other staff uncomfortable - something that has been made abundantly obvious over the last few days - it's understandable why they're ready to get rid of him. Contrary to the narrative in certain corners of the Internet, it is seldom socially advantageous to stand up against a popular figure and declare yourself a victim. Seeing companies like RT and Funimation taking the claims as credible implies that there's a lot of questioning going on behind the scenes, given how long their relationship has lasted up until now.

R
 
Rui said:
I would guess that it's a shout out to previous complaints about Vic rather than anything directly related to the current matter. It's been reported several times over the years that he has been rude and dismissive to his fans whenever they mention BL and he's consequently built up something of a reputation as a homophobe
Click to expand...
Ah. As someone who’s not a huge follower of English VAs that’s not something I was aware of, cheers.
 
Rui said:
I would guess that it's a shout out to previous complaints about Vic rather than anything directly related to the current matter. It's been reported several times over the years that he has been rude and dismissive to his fans whenever they mention BL and he's consequently built up something of a reputation as a homophobe (he's a pretty outspoken Christian, so this isn't exactly unexpected, but the complaints have been circulating for a long, long time and I don't know how deep they go). I would guess that some of the things he's said/done on that front have led to complaints in the past, and this is Funimation's way of acknowledging them as a side effect of the recent commotion.

I think it would be inappropriate of Funimation to publish the full details of their investigation but if he's making their other staff uncomfortable - something that has been made abundantly obvious over the last few days - it's understandable why they're ready to get rid of him. Contrary to the narrative in certain corners of the Internet, it is seldom socially advantageous to stand up against a popular figure and declare yourself a victim. Seeing companies like RT and Funimation taking the claims as credible implies that there's a lot of questioning going on behind the scenes, given how long their relationship has lasted up until now.

R
Click to expand...
It’s why his casting in Free all along has raised so many questions to me all along. If it isn’t romantic (till the films) the fandom of Free is something different.
 
It surprises me to see that people take the fact that companies cut ties with him as some form of evidence that the accusations are true and/or more is going on. Generally if an employer wants to get rid of you, they will find a way to do so. There's always a reason why they want to let you go and the "actual" reason they let you go, which are hardly ever the same. Sadly, I've seen it happen more than once to friends and families.

Especially for jobs like voice acting, which I assume is project based and sub-contracted (is that what it's called?), it's extremely easy to terminate the current contract or at the very least don't contract someone for future projects.

Anyway, not taking either side of the argument as I simply don't (nor can) know the details. I've never even heard of this guy before the whole ordeal. What does scare me a bit is the ease in which people take stance without substantial evidence (and act upon it). At this point it doesn't even matter what the truth is, as it pretty much seems a done deal.
 
He was one of FUNis biggest names, just cast as Broly again in their biggest film release ever I really don’t think they wanted to get rid of him. The only other person I can remember them getting rid of was the original MC of DxDs VA as he was convicted of child sexual something so FUNi rarely removes actors
 
The baying Internet mob thing works both ways, too. Vic's fans (who he has whipped up on previous occasions) have been openly threatening the people speaking out at him, and from the way he handled his 'apology' video he was encouraging this kind of victim-blaming hostility. Having one employee baiting teenagers to intimidate a company's other employees doesn't lead to a healthy workplace environment even if you completely ignore all of the complaints from non-professionals.

R
 
Rui said:
The baying Internet mob thing works both ways, too.
Click to expand...
One of the reasons I'm not a huge fan of this sort of thing being done publicly, because the vast majority of the public are the kind of tabloid reading imbeciles who take sides based on their feelings and gut impulses to trust people they like and distrust people they don't. Yeah, it's hard to believe the quiet religious guy who lived up at the farm skinned people and turned them into lampshades, or that the sweet young girls lied and got a dozen people executed for witchcraft, but sh*t happens, and it's best left to people with better knowledge of the situations than us to sort out.
 
thedoctor2016 said:
He was one of FUNis biggest names, just cast as Broly again in their biggest film release ever I really don’t think they wanted to get rid of him.
Click to expand...
That does make it somewhat unlikely that they wanted to get rid of him before this whole ordeal. But still, it could very well be that the reason they wanted to cut ties with him is due to the accusations, but the actual reason they "found" after "investigation" could very well just be some incorrect paperwork or tardiness or some whole other reason all together. That's what I tried to convey; while it's certainly not unrelated, the action itself doesn't really indicate one way or another. (Although the tweets from FUNi seem to frame it as such, now that I actually read them).

Rui said:
The baying Internet mob thing works both ways, too.
Click to expand...
Oh definitely and both ways it's equally scary. If only people would stop and think before they act.
 
I’m feeling more on the side of Vic’s as the only “evidence” is mostly pics that are years old and at cons and this comes from Vic literally just hugging people with a few given pecks on the cheek I mean I love hugs but apparently this is people who were apparently nervous kids
Then again I want to act like a decent human being and not some beastly lunatic on this sensitive matter

ayase said:
it's hard to believe the quiet religious guy who lived up at the farm skinned people and turned them into lampshades, or that the sweet young girls lied and got a dozen people executed for witchcraft
Click to expand...
I really don’t think Ol’ Ed is a good analogy here. Nothing put on twitter will stand in court, in fact, there’s something leaked and going around that a certain group of people wanted to edit his con pictures, which would stand in court against them as slander, meanwhile, Ol’ Ed never bothered anyone but his house was full of funiture made out of people, plenty of evidence for... something, I would question the sanity of such a person.


I would think the witch trail analogy is much better, but probably because I only see sites like twitter as a gathering of amateur witch hunters anyway
 
Yeah this is now going top heavy towards his defence it looks like FUNI sacking him officially well no longer using his services has flipped the opinion. And now we are slandering other people the only good thing he said was don't insult on either side of the debate, but here we are slandering people. And I dont believe the pictures its the accounts there was one from when he was a Junior Minister 30 years ago and I doubt the woman made it up. He hasn't even tried adequately to defend himself saying two sides to every story to me means he done stuff that could equate bad, but he would say there was consent.
 
What evidence do people actually expect there to be, incidentally? Are we not going to entertain the possibility that someone who has made literally dozens of people feel like prey might have behaved in an improper manner unless we get salacious live footage of them actually breaking the law? There's no reason to seek out evidence of him doing that when it's not the matter being discussed. I don't see how people can continue to deny the other stuff, namely that he doesn't respect boundaries (he literally admitted this himself!) and that he treats con staff like trash (we even have testimony from a fellow AUKNer in this very thread before things really blew up, and the guy doesn't come across the pond all that often).

Nobody involved owes the peanut gallery anything. It's easy to ask for 'evidence' but I'm not sure what people want to see that goes beyond watching dozens of industry professionals putting their own careers on the line to speak out about his sustained history of bad behaviour. Personally, I became considerably less 'on the fence' from watching Vic's own reactions than from hearing any third party testimony. The insincerity of a successful guy in his mid-50s shunting the blame onto a bunch of teenagers makes me sick.

Here's a quote from a VA colleague of Vic's who is being flamed off the Internet right now which summarises the current situation:
There were investigations conducted by multiple companies with evidence, testimony, and proof. There were dozens of men and women participated. The companies don't have to share that information with you because you're not an attorney or law enforcement.
Click to expand...

It's good to be sceptical and it's good to keep an open mind, but when there's a metric ton of testimony against the guy from dozens of unaffiliated sources and literally nothing to the contrary other than Internet mobs screaming at the people speaking out to shut them down, I'm not sure that denying that something is going on is very productive. Or open minded.

R
 
Captaaainuniverse said:
I’m feeling more on the side of Vic’s as the only “evidence” is mostly pics that are years old and at cons and this comes from Vic literally just hugging people with a few given pecks on the cheek I mean I love hugs but apparently this is people who were apparently nervous kids
Then again I want to act like a decent human being and not some beastly lunatic on this sensitive matter


I really don’t think Ol’ Ed is a good analogy here. Nothing put on twitter will stand in court, in fact, there’s something leaked and going around that a certain group of people wanted to edit his con pictures, which would stand in court against them as slander, meanwhile, Ol’ Ed never bothered anyone but his house was full of funiture made out of people, plenty of evidence for... something, I would question the sanity of such a person.


I would think the witch trail analogy is much better, but probably because I only see sites like twitter as a gathering of amateur witch hunters anyway
Click to expand...
What about the account of the woman who claims he tried to groom her for sex when she was 15 and he was 25, that was from 1989 long before he'd even begun work in voice acting.
 
Rui said:
It's good to be sceptical and it's good to keep an open mind, but when there's a metric ton of testimony against the guy from dozens of unaffiliated sources and literally nothing to the contrary other than Internet mobs screaming at the people speaking out to shut them down, I'm not sure that denying that something is going on is very productive. Or open minded.
Click to expand...
Totally agree with what you wrote. I generally think that when people ask for evidence it's not so much denying (nor actually wanting evidence), but more questioning why one should assume the accusations to be true. That being said, the way you phrased the above doesn't quite sit right with me. It might just be something we differ in opinion or I might misinterpret it as English isn't my native language (so correct me if I got it wrong).

It seems to imply that the lack of evidence (available to us) is compensated by the many testimonies against him from various sources and it almost sounds that not seeing that as an acknowledgement equates denying it. While I do agree that it's a clear sign that something is going on, to me it indicates we (as outsiders) can't really say either way, which isn't the same as defending. In an ideal world (at least to me) only the people direct involved would resolve the issue, outsiders will eventually notice the consequences (which they will anyway) and the case is closed. Exactly that is currently happening with the added "damage" that (parts of) both sides are dealing, which to me is not constructive in any way nor fair.
(This is literally the only discussion I've sort of read regarding this issue, as at least here the discussions are civil. Perhaps had I seen more of the "direct" discussions out there I wouldn't have worded the above as I did)
 
Let me be clear here, I don't believe in taking anybody's claims of guilt or innocence at face value and it's totally irrelevant how long ago/recently they claim things happened or how old they were/are at the time. Are teenage girls automatically more believable than middle aged men? No. Are allegations from 20 years ago more believable than ones from last week? No.

I do however believe your employer has a right to investigate you if they have reasonable suspicion you've been doing things that could bring the company into disrepute, and fire you if they find that you have been via things like multiple corroborating witnesses. It's also not unreasonable that anyone else (be they potential employers or private citizens) has the right to choose not to associate with you in the future if they don't like your attitude or behaviour. At least that's how the world works for non-celebrities.
 
Last edited:
Anime1977 said:
vic migogna is takeing legal action.New Report Reveals Funimation Previously Conducted Investigation Into Vic Mignogna - It Was "Inconclusive" - Bounding Into Comics
Click to expand...
That's some wonderful journalistic integrity there - Citing an article outlining all of the allegations against Vic but failing to mention any of that and instead leaping on a single sentence which proves nothing - Inconclusive means inconclusive, that there wasn't enough evidence to take action against him rather than that there was none. And this was apparently an earlier investigation ("Summer 2018") than the one that eventually got him dropped. I don't exactly hold Gawker/Gizmodo/whatever they're called now in high regard, and some of that io9 article is manipulative and sensationalist too, but at least it's somewhat more even handed and not just cherry picking to suit a particular agenda.

Also the idea anyone would contribute to a gofundme for the legal defence of someone considerably richer than most people and whose guilt or innocence they have no way of personally determining just beggars belief, and shows what partisan bull**** this whole thing has become. Condemning someone without knowing the truth isn't fair, but nor is blindly defending them without seemingly knowing or caring what the truth is.
 
Last edited:
ayase said:
That's some wonderful journalistic integrity there - Citing an article outlining all of the allegations against Vic but failing to mention any of that and instead leaping on a single sentence which proves nothing - Inconclusive means inconclusive, that there wasn't enough evidence to take action against him rather than that there was none. And this was apparently an earlier investigation ("Summer 2018") than the one that eventually got him dropped. I don't exactly hold Gawker/Gizmodo/whatever they're called now in high regard, and some of that io9 article is manipulative and sensationalist too, but at least it's somewhat more even handed and not just cherry picking to suit a particular agenda.

Also the idea anyone would contribute to a gofundme for the legal defence of someone considerably richer than most people and whose guilt or innocence they have no way of personally determining just beggars belief, and shows what partisan bull**** this whole thing has become. Condemning someone without knowing the truth isn't fair, but nor is blindly defending them without seemingly knowing or caring what the truth is.
Click to expand...
I have heard of one of his accusers getting something like a gofundme too, they say they are using it in case they have some legal action against them but they also mention that they are being evicted from where they live
Vic's gofundme us about 100 grand
This other person's gofundme is five grand. That's not an exceedingly expensive lawsuit, that's a down payment for a new place
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top