community-based, non-corporate, participatory media
Rich Makin Meeting Photo
by no name for fear of reprisal or slander.
Friday, Apr. 04, 2003 at 4:45 AM
Justice--Posse 1877 style.
is this better?
by some fat bitch
Friday, Apr. 04, 2003 at 1:14 PM
in my opinion, we should have done this:
I thought so...
by no name for fear of reprisal and slander.
Friday, Apr. 04, 2003 at 1:35 PM
Yeah, so much for civil rights. You ought to be ashamed of yourself.
I knew it !
by 2balls
Friday, Apr. 04, 2003 at 1:38 PM
An insight into the true goal of feminism....
say your piece in person
by krystyna
Friday, Apr. 04, 2003 at 3:37 PM
talking shit over the internet accomplishes nothing - if you have a serious opinion please voice it in a non virtual envronment - the decision to cancel rich mackin was made by those who were willing to show up in person and discuss the issue - you obviously were not there and perhaps you might have understood more if you disconnected the computer cord from your ass and said something in person
i love you and peace
No Christina
by no name for fear of reprisal and slander
Friday, Apr. 04, 2003 at 3:50 PM
You're wrong. Commenting on the rape of Rich Makin via this sight is in fact much more valid than some bullshit "consensus" meeting that seeks to illegally slander, and unemploy a free citizen of this country. Makin has rights, bullshit meetings and false consensus do not negate those rights. You are the guilty ones. You call yourselves "progressive" yet you seek to deprive a human being of justice. Shame on you. By the way, work on your spelling, you seem to be having problems with your name.
?
by some fat bitch
Friday, Apr. 04, 2003 at 4:02 PM
i second what krystyna has to say.
also, if you are so righteous, where were you when we had a meeting? did you bother emailing anyone at 1877 about yr feelings on the matter?
(and as a matter of fact, rich mackin personally told me that he has violated women and that he does have some issues. ) those who care abt the community/1877 met and made a decision, if you do not like it i suggest you become more PRO-ACTIVE rather than RE-ACTIVE.
peace in the middle east.
Dear fat bitch (you picked your name--not me)
by no name fo fear of reprisal and slander.
Friday, Apr. 04, 2003 at 5:30 PM
Whether or not you claim to have been told by someone that they "did something," (in a court they call that heresay, and it is inadmissable) is irrelevant. Are far as being PRO-ACTIVE, it makes little sense to even recognize your petty tribunal. My PRO-ACTIVE response is to ignore your self-important little charade. The real shame here is that Rich feels that for some reason (most probably threats and extortion, which is illegal) he should not be PRO-ACTIVE and seek legal counsel to protect his right to earn a living. Rich, if you read these posts, let me tell you that you've got talent and you don't have to rely on this tiny, narrow-minded group for your professional and social life! Get yourself a laywer, clear your name, shut down this insignifigant bunch of haters and leave this dead-end scene behind. You have a slam dunk case, and the resultant publicity after you win will soon have you speaking for big money at the most respected venues. Don't be afraid of this wicked posse of losers, you can beat them--perhaps present THEM with a list of demands and be free to make your art however you choose, unfettered by the childish bawling of those that seek to oppress you.
INDY MEDIA WAS THE RIGHT PLACE TO AIR THIS ISSUE
by No name for fear of reprisal and slander
Friday, Apr. 04, 2003 at 6:52 PM
To Miss Overweight and Krystyna and others that think anyone shoud have showed up at that meeting .... ARE YOU INSANE ??? Project 1877 was totally tapped into the discussion at this site. There must ahve been a half dozen board on the matter. It even had input from peopel outside the region. But your lynch mob mentality ensured that no one with an opposing viewq point was going to show up in person for fear that they would be the next target of your witch hunty. Shit, it seemed that anyone taking the side of Mr. Mackin was immeduiately seen as an enabler that you wanted to stop. Hell no, I would not show up at your meeting because your conduct scared the shit out of me. Reading the posts as I have from the past week it see,ms clear that you scare alot of people. Your sttement is like saying that the KK is justified in holding a crossburnign at a Affrican-American school because when they had the meeting to decide to do that none of the local opposition showed up to vote agaisnt it.
Your tactics sucessfully kept opposition away because they were afraid and disgusted at the treatment they saw you dealing out to Rich. And Rich decided to stay away because you were threatening him and he was certainly justifiably scared. The Indy Medai site served a very valuable purpsoe in this debate. It protected the identiy of the opposition while providing a (mostly) open forum (I understand that Mr. S. Odamninsane has some reasonable complaint that he may have been silenced on occasion for voicing alternative viewpoints). But here, the anonminity of this website is the onlyu thing that allows us to speak out against your abhorable behavior.
And yes, Rich mackin if you are reading these pages, get a lawyer. You have a social obligation to pursue this case so that this conduct will stop. You probaly have a limited amount of time to pursue your case adn it would likely have to be brought in Pittsburgh. You could probably get a good referral from the Allegheny County Bar Association.
Communism at work
by also afraid
Friday, Apr. 04, 2003 at 8:45 PM
Anarchists acting like communists. Notice all the critics feel the need to conceal their identities? The rhetoric being spouted against Mr. Mackin and tanyone who even remotely questions the whole process of his condemnation, not only smacks of Stalinist Russia, but Bush's America. "If you're not with us, you're against us." Simply because some people still believe in due process, does not mean that they are trying to compromise the feminist goals. Actions such as those taken by 1877 bring a bad name to the whole feminist movement. Rich's admissions and/or guilt does not justify the abhorant conduct and blatant attempt at character assasination of these fellow "activists."
internet carnies
by krystyna
Friday, Apr. 04, 2003 at 9:11 PM
if you would recall a decision to allow rich mackin to perform was made and when people spoke up and said they had a problem with it we took another vote - i was not involved with the indy media discussion and was a third party - the community space is here so that people in the community decide what happens here - not me alone nor anyone else alone - a community - if you need to discuss this further i can be reached at 1877 - give me a call or come in and i will be more than willing to talk to you about the decision - i have lynch mobbed no one and i am very open to listening to your opinions - i do not try to make important or rash decisions over the internet and if a problem needs to be solved i will do so face to face with a human being - i appreciate that you read this and please get back to me
love your friend krystyna
krystyna
by krystyna
Friday, Apr. 04, 2003 at 9:21 PM
sorry i dont keep up on trash talk and i am willing to give my name - please dont attack me when i am trying to explain the fact that if you want to accomplish something, like having rich mackin perform, all you had to do was come and talk to the people at 1877 about it - not over the internet - i am a very easy going person i will not respond with anger to someone who i have never met and never will meet because they operate only online - i will encourage you to contact me for a real dicussion - i understand that issues got heated online and both sides acted in abrasive ways toward eachother - i will not do this - i dont even know you and i hope that i do get to know you - i love you
Pontius Pilate Project 1877
by no name for fear of reprisal and slander
Friday, Apr. 04, 2003 at 9:25 PM
So you 'persona;lly' have clean hands in this matter since it was the 'community' decision? Krys, you can't be that ut of touch, can you. People are not upset or frightened because you simply chose to cacel a show. They are frightened to the bone by your conduct in the process. You felt it okay the slander this many. Someone else rightly pointed out that your logic would permit a community to out or shun a gay teacher. Wake up Krys, wake up.
Statement from 1877
by Jeremiah Larsen
Friday, Apr. 04, 2003 at 9:42 PM
I'm sorry our first show has been the spark of so much slander. This attack on our community space is not warranted.
Without knowing the truth of the situation, we agreed to let Rich Mackin perform so he could address the things people were saying about him. We planned a followup anti-rape workshop and assumed we were being fair to everyone.
When the controversy broke out on IMC, we held a community meeting and unanimously decided to cancel Rich Mackin's show out of respect to his victims of sexual assault.
Because people came forward, we changed our original decision. If you have a problem with us, our shows, or our programs, please talk to us. There's no need to flame us annonymously on the internet.
Jeremiah Larsen
412-363-1877
4805 Penn Ave, Garfield (86B and UV Lines)
http://www.1877.org
Names
by branden
Friday, Apr. 04, 2003 at 9:59 PM
branden@cease.info 412-363-1877 4805 Penn Ave
Krystyna's name is Polish, therefore it's spelled correctly. While an insignificant comment, you've led right to your insensitivity to Krystyna's culture. Should we really feel you are able to give good advice on this subject when you are so rude to belittle someone's language and ethnicity?
We should learn to be more respecting of people's beliefs.
I Don't cadre whether Rich perform
by no name for fear of reprisal and slander
Friday, Apr. 04, 2003 at 9:59 PM
Project 1877, you so completely miss the point. The people complaining here are note saying that they wanted Rich to perform, tgey are saying that they want you to respect people and not crucify them unjustly as you have done. I won't even talk about the tragic irony that your feelings are now hurt because you think you got flamed on line. You truly scare people with your conduct. You probably should have noticed by now that there are at least eight writers on these boards who have independently adopted the moniker of "no name for fear of reprisal or slander" because they are afraid. No one wants your community to brand them as you have Rich Mackin. In short, your first exercise of your community empowerment was a disasterous failure. We hope you will do better in the future, but judging from your response so far I am losing hope.
silly people
by krystyna
Friday, Apr. 04, 2003 at 10:04 PM
so i havent gotten a call from you and i have been waiting all night - its not that my hands are clean it is that no one's are dirty - a decision was made that you could have been a part of - this is my first time on indy media and i cant believe that people are so inflamatory - we are all in this community together - i am wide awake and i will be until i get a call or see you in person- by the way you have no clue about my "conduct in the process" i was a mediator - you did not step up to the position - i did - its easy to shoot the people who work hard to come to a fair conclusion to a problem - maybe if you and others had stepped up to the plate and helped in decision making (in reality not online) then things might have gone your way - when you address project 1877 you are possibly speaking about yourself because you have decision making power here at the space please excercise it - i encourage you to excercise it - hold your own meeting here about what you feel - you are invited -
where do you come from?
by queercore
Friday, Apr. 04, 2003 at 10:32 PM
"...your logic would permit a community to out or shun a gay teacher."
as a queer, i am extremely offended that you compared a "gay teacher" to a fucking sexual assulter. doing so means that i am either gay by choice, or rich mackin assults women because he was born to. do you think it is wrong for a pediphile to lose his/her teaching position? people should be held accountable for deplorable behavior.
To Mr. Queercore - You Misunderstood
by no name for fear of reprisal and slander
Friday, Apr. 04, 2003 at 10:44 PM
Mr. Q, the point was not an that gay men aresexual predator, but that the way that the rich makin issue was handled would be similar to a 'community' by'consensus' determining that it wanted to believe that gay mean are sexual predators. No one is saying that gay men are anything other than men, humans, deserving of respect. The lynch mob of 1877 could quickly turn on anyone. Or someone else could create their own lynch mob to come after anyone else based solely on hearsay, innuendo, half-truth or just plain fabrication.
.
by .
Saturday, Apr. 05, 2003 at 12:09 AM
I'm sorry our first show has been the spark of so much slander.
Project 1877 is now going to claim they're the victims of slander? Maybe I missed Rich Mackin's whole trial and conviction. Oh I didn't? So it's still just the word of a bunch of bigoted womyn?
This attack on our community space is not warranted.
Sorry, but it is. I walk past your space everyday and would have loved to have seen Rich Mackin speak as well as the workshop after him, but the disgusting way you attacked a man based on only the word of others (some of it was second-hand, I'd guess) has completely turned me off to your "community." I think the way you orignally planned to deal with it would have been perfect, but instead you bent to the will of an angry vengeful mob. So now not only have you alienated me but you've alienated my employer who I've talked into sponsering several sexual assault awareness events as well as 2 local bands, a 'zine, and a writer. After Project 1877 closes its doors maybe I'll lease that space and invite Rich back to speak.
Project 1877 Is The Victim???
by =
Saturday, Apr. 05, 2003 at 12:23 AM
Project 1877 is claiming to be the victim of slander and injustice ??? The would be funnier than the S. Odamninsane Day, if Project 1877 was not so sick and perverted in making that assertion.
to the no name
by some fat bitch
Saturday, Apr. 05, 2003 at 8:39 AM
"To Miss Overweight and Krystyna and others that think anyone shoud have showed up at that meeting "
*first of all, i don't identify as "overweight," that is offensive and fat-phobic. and you don't have to apologize for calling me a name that i purposely chose- but also for the record, when a person reclaims a word as their own it doesn't mean you can always use it.
furthermore, if rich mackin had made a racist or homophobic comment or committed a hate crime to a person of color or a queer person, this would not be an issue.
what exactly about the process or the meeting did you find so offensive and frightening? be specific.
"Whether or not you claim to have been told by someone that they "did something," (in a court they call that heresay, and it is inadmissable) is irrelevant. "
*uh, rich mackin told me this information himself. thanks.
i'm done with this useless charade of who has the last word. however, i would be more than happy to meet and discuss this if you would want to.
Some Fat BItch
by no nam for fear of reprisal or slander
Saturday, Apr. 05, 2003 at 10:44 AM
Rich mackin told YOU that HE had reped several women? Rick Mackin told YOU that HE had sexually assualted several women. Then maybe you shoudl go to the police with that information. Or maybe Rich just told you that "he has caused harm" to people. The real charade her Fat BItch is that of Project 1877 and the rest of its cohorts who do not beleive in justice (except maybe lynch mob frontier justice)... I'm done here. Both IMC and PRoject 1877 and this BS backwards community in Pittsburgh are narrow minded bigots adn hypocrits. Your conduct is the same sort of thing that kept people from speaking to or about communisits and socialist causes, gave rise to McCarthyism, sent unwed mother's away to have their babies where no one could find out about their "sin", kept gays and lesbians hidden away in society for much of history, led to (and still does lead to) the unjust persecution of minorities, allowed angry mobs to breakdown the doors of a jail to lynch an innocent negro in the South of the last century, and keeps someone like Mumia locked in his cell. If you peole at 1877 don't see this then maybe your next presentation at that space shoudl be by a lawyer or someone who can educate you about this. If you didn't want him to perform, cancel his contract, but don't lynch him up like you have.
And all of this confrontational threatening about "wanting to meet the people who think you did something wrong here, give me a break. That is like saying that you want to meet them on the street corner in a half hour. Anyone who calls or meets you shoudl expect you to brand them a racist, or "fat-phobe" or womyn hating sexual assaulter. You have the opportunity to discuss this here adn alot of people have been for a week now. Even Project 1877 has used this website to make its views known.
If the radical movement in Pittsburgh requires that I think that it is just fine to hang someone and violate their civil rights just to support some extreme agenda then count me out. You can keep your community Pittsburgh.
Who Made That Rule, and Where Was I When It Was Decided?
by Prodigal Yunzer
Saturday, Apr. 05, 2003 at 10:58 AM
"When a person reclaims a word that doesnt mean that you can always use it"- that sounds like sandbox tyranny to me. Today you offend me, tomorrow you offend me by trying not to offend me which is more offensive. Get a clue.
This appears to comport with the logic that gives support to a charge of RAPE from a woman who shares a bed with a man for nine months. Rape is a crime of violence, nothing different from non sexual battery, unless you mystify the sex act AND buy into the paternalism that reduces a woman's value as chattel by raping her. You have to accept both of those old fashioned discredited paradigms to make this Rich Mackin more than a creep.
This woman decided to allow Rich to mate with her at one instance. In our species the women decide. Is she compelled to permit him to mate with her from now on? No. Should she expect him to share a bed with her and not try to mate with her again and again? Riiiight. Consensual sex is not rape in any circumstance. "Giving in" because it is easier than saying No a thousand times, and trading sex for companionship are not crimes, but how would women look at a man who admitted that then charged rape? How many "baby please"s makes it coercive? Suppose that a violent forcing occurs in the course of an otherwise consensual relationship; would not any member of this community give the victim shelter? And would they in good conscience permit the victim to return to the victimizer without definitive assurances from the victim that everything was cool?
Just because women enjoy more superficial respect in this community than they receive from the community at large does not give them the right to abandon objectivity and some consistency in dealing with others, no matter how many angry sisters stand shoulder to shoulder with them. It is not open season on men, or whites, or any other of the oppressive classes, because you are dealing with individuals, just as you demand respect as an individual.
Who Made That Rule, and Where Was I When It Was Decided?
by Prodigal Yunzer
Saturday, Apr. 05, 2003 at 10:58 AM
"When a person reclaims a word that doesnt mean that you can always use it"- that sounds like sandbox tyranny to me. Today you offend me, tomorrow you offend me by trying not to offend me which is more offensive. Get a clue.
This appears to comport with the logic that gives support to a charge of RAPE from a woman who shares a bed with a man for nine months. Rape is a crime of violence, nothing different from non sexual battery, unless you mystify the sex act AND buy into the paternalism that reduces a woman's value as chattel by raping her. You have to accept both of those old fashioned discredited paradigms to make this Rich Mackin more than a creep.
This woman decided to allow Rich to mate with her at one instance. In our species the women decide. Is she compelled to permit him to mate with her from now on? No. Should she expect him to share a bed with her and not try to mate with her again and again? Riiiight. Consensual sex is not rape in any circumstance. "Giving in" because it is easier than saying No a thousand times, and trading sex for companionship are not crimes, but how would women look at a man who admitted that then charged rape? How many "baby please"s makes it coercive? Suppose that a violent forcing occurs in the course of an otherwise consensual relationship; would not any member of this community give the victim shelter? And would they in good conscience permit the victim to return to the victimizer without definitive assurances from the victim that everything was cool?
Just because women enjoy more superficial respect in this community than they receive from the community at large does not give them the right to abandon objectivity and some consistency in dealing with others, no matter how many angry sisters stand shoulder to shoulder with them. It is not open season on men, or whites, or any other of the oppressive classes, because you are dealing with individuals, just as you demand respect as an individual.
this is so dumb
by queercore
Saturday, Apr. 05, 2003 at 12:21 PM
first of all, i didnt misunderstand. you used a really horrible, and degrading comparison. secondly, if rich raped four of your daughters, would you allow him to speak at your house, based on not violating his rights to freedom of speach, despite how he violated your daughters rights to live freely? ths is not a witch hunt , this is showing respect for four of the millions of women who are victims of sexual abuse yearly.
queercore
by .
Saturday, Apr. 05, 2003 at 1:11 PM
first of all, i didnt misunderstand. you used a really horrible, and degrading comparison.
He used a perfectly fair example and you completely misunderstood (and are still misunderstanding) him. His point was what is the difference between barring a man from speaking anywhere because of supposed allegations of rape and a small town barring a teacher from working there because of allegations that he is gay? In both situations we have mob rule being dictated by "community standards."
secondly, if rich raped four of your daughters, would you allow him to speak at your house, based on not violating his rights to freedom of speach, despite how he violated your daughters rights to live freely?
Classic Straw Man fallacy. Obviously I wouldn't let him speak at my house, but if my daughters won't file charges then what right do I have to follow him around the country preventing him from speaking at anyone else's house? If you argue I have that right (technically it is free speech but it's getting real close to slander) then shouldn't I also have the right to follow you around and prevent you from working by telling people you raped my four sons? Even if you didn't rape my sons? *THAT* is the crucial hole in all of this that the court system fills and which this lynch mob is covering up by sheer shock and manipulation. They know most people are too afraid of seeming sexist to question the story of a "victim" and they are using that to pressure others into following them. It's a larger and more grown up version of the false child molestation cases in the 70's/80's. In fact it's very close to being identical to the Salem Witch Trials.
ths is not a witch hunt , this is showing respect for four of the millions of women who are victims of sexual abuse yearly.
Not a witch hunt? So if I think Rich deserves the benefit of the doubt I'm not showing support for victims of sexual abuse? I'm sexist? Misogynist? If this isn't a witch hunt what would you call it? You really think women don't make up charges sometimes? Here's some facts for you:
In 1993 the FBI tested DNA evidence of men already convicted of rape and found that 1/3 of them didn't match the DNA from the crime scene (Newsweek, Jan 11, 1993. p. 64, Kevin Krajik)
The FBI's BSU (Behavioral Science Unit) study on False allegations in 1983 found that out of 556 rape investigations 220 of them turned out to be false reports/hoaxes.
Here's a good page for you to read:
http://www.anandaanswers.com/pages/naaFalse.html
And here's another good one:
http://www.ncfm.org/fact1.htm
Notice how they all cite their sources. Now in the face of mountains of evidence showing that women do in fact lie about being raped (for everything from loneliness to revenge to trying to get sympathy) how can any of us in good faith destroy a man's life based on nothing more than the anonymous (and in some cases second-hand) word of women who won't give any details or even try to file charges? Because they claim to be part of a progressive/radical scene? That seems neither progessive nor radical, but in fact bigoted and fascist.
I would never dignify you with a face to face meeting.
by no name for fear of reprisal and slander.
Saturday, Apr. 05, 2003 at 1:43 PM
I have taken the moniker "no name for fear of reprisal and slander" for the same reason the first writer used it: THE ACTIONS OF POSSE 1877 SHOW THAT IS IMPERATIVE TO REMAIN ANONYMOUS !!
Dear Christina (I'm full on Polish, and members of my family who are named CHRISTINA spell it like this.), I would NEVER dignify you or your impotent radical community with a face to face meeting! Your repeated, sly attempts at requesting a "face to face" are simply an information gathering technique! The ONLY reason that you wish to meet face to face is so that you can FIND OUT WHO I AM, and expose me to withering slander, and other revenge tactics. If I met you, and you knew my identity, there is NO DOUBT in my mind that my employer would begin to receive e-mails from "wymmin" that I have supposedly assaulted, everyone one of my public performances would be marred by indignant marchers carrying placards of false accusation etc., etc. You losers have proven that you will stoop to ANY low, despicable method to achieve your aims. People are correct in fearing Posse 1877--your behavior proves their fear is justfied.
IT IS TIME FOR PITTSBURGH'S TRUE RADICAL COMMUNITY TO CUT ALL TIES WITH POSSE 1877, AND THEIR McCARTHYIST TACTICS ! THEY RISK DISCREDITING THE HARD WORK AND DEDICATION OF EVERYONE IN THIS COMMUNITY !
Oh, and C-H-R-I-S-T-I-N-A. Don't say "I love you." when you do so, it is a mockery of the concept. Your actions have proven that you are incapable of such basic human compassion.
That's what's needed !
by no name for fear of reprisal and slander
Saturday, Apr. 05, 2003 at 1:54 PM
To the poster who gave the good statistical info of false accusations of rape...
Please consider preparing a piece for publishing on Pgh-IMC about this matter. Your logic is faultless, and your writing is crystalline. No doubt you could raise the level of this debate with a well written piece.
Any lawyers out there?
by no name out of fear of reprisal and slander2.
Saturday, Apr. 05, 2003 at 2:10 PM
To any lawyers that may be reading this debate...
Is there anyway that a concerned citizen can intitiate legal action against Posse 1877 without the cooperation of Rich Mackin? The violation of his rights is so egregious, that I feel it deserves proper attention from the legal system to prevent future occurence, and to protect the free expression of art.
Please advise...
Legal Action Against Project 1877
by No Name FOr Fear of Reprisal or Slander
Saturday, Apr. 05, 2003 at 2:30 PM
I don't know if anyone other than Rich could do anything legally against Project 1877, but I have been thinking that if Project 1877 receives any grant money or public funding that their funding providers should be made aware of what they are doing. They may even have violated the terms of their grant, you know, the fine printy stuff that talks about non-discrimination and civil rights.
What if?
by no name for fear of reprisal and slander3.
Saturday, Apr. 05, 2003 at 2:43 PM
Krys,
What if members of the community contacted you and asked you to hold another consensus meeting to discuss the Mackin situation?
Ok, now what if part of this discussion included the re-booking of Rich Mackin at Project 1877?
Ok, in addition, what if these members of the community asked that a public apology, from 1877 to Rich Mackin be a part of this discussion?
What if, at this same meeting, members of the community asked that any of the people involved in the slander of Mackin--and in the effort to initiate his cancellation--be removed and barred from participating in Project 1877?
And finally, what if all these things happened and a large community contingent showed up to support Mackin and the free, unfettered expression of art?
AND WE OUT-VOTED YOU !
What would you hipocrates do then?
MR. NO NAME IS CORRECT
by no name for fear of reprisal and slander3
Saturday, Apr. 05, 2003 at 3:50 PM
This is exactly like the child molestation cases of the 80s/90s that were terrible miscarriages of justice. And all because the local community decided by consensus that they did not want to disrespect the plight of abused children everywhere, so they might as well sacrifice a few adults. Ask local teacher Michelle(?) Kelly who spent 9 years in a New Jersey Prison thanks to exactly this kind of witch hunt. Or read something by Dorothy Rabinowitz on teh subject (just go do a websearch). What Project (or Posse) 1877 has done is exactly the same.
However, Mr.No Name is not correct that this is 1877's exercise of their right to free speech. That was left behind long ago and it went straight to slander (where Project 1877 seems intent to keep it).
Statistics
by No Name For Fear of Reprisal and Slander4
Saturday, Apr. 05, 2003 at 7:47 PM
Someone out there wanted some statistics related to this debate. Well here are a few for you to consider:
-- there are five bulleting board discussions currently at IMC dedicated to the Project 1877/Rich Mackin matter.
-- There are two calendar notifications posted by Project 1877 ate the IMC website related to the Rich Mackin matter.
-- Of the five discussion strings four of them were started by persons identified with Project 1877
-- A total of 54 separate persons have posted a total of 175 comments as of this time
-- Of the 54 separate posters to these strings, 26 have posted voicing their disapproval of the manner in which Project 1877 has conducted itself, 26 have posted voicing their approval of the manner in which Project 1877 conducted itself in this matter, and 2 persons posted ambivalent or non-responsive postings.
-- The 26 persons who believe that Project 1877 did not conduct itself properly in this matter have posted 54% of the postings to these strings.
-- The 26 persons who believe that Project 1877 conducted itself properly in this matter have posted 44% of the postings to this string.
-- One person at first posted voicing their support of Project 1877�s process but was asking that more information be provided about the assertions of Project 1877. In response to reading the posting of Rosie Streetpixie this person changed their position and voiced their (rather strong) opposition to Project 1877�s handling of the issue.
-- It appears that there are likely 6 persons who have taken to using the moniker �No Name For Fear of Reprisal or Slander.�
-- Seven of the persons posting to these discussions have identified themselves in someway as having a connection to Project 1877.
-- Of the persons voicing their approval of Project 1877 in this matter, only five of them posted more than 3 posts. Two of those person posted ten or more posts.
-- Of the persons voicing their disapproval of Project 1877, ten of them posted more than 3 posts. Only one person posted ten or more posts.
-- Two other Indy Media Sites (Milwaukee and Portland) have posted the same letter that was initially posted here and which started this debate. Each of those sites refers to the Pittsburgh Site and even copies the Pittsburgh letter and discussion title.
-- In each of these other websites readers are urged, based solely on a letter signed by person from Pittsburgh, not to allow Rich Mackin to perform in these communities.
-- None of the other two Indy Media sites refer to any o the discussion which has taken place this past week on the Pittsburgh site.
-- An internet search for �Rich Mackin� brings up these discussions by the discussion names such as �Confront Admitted Sexual Assaulter Rich Mackin�
-- An internet search for the alleged �zine �Baby, I am a Manarchist� yields no results.
-- If each of the discussion strings at this website were consolidated this would be the second most active discussion, only 16 postings behind the very active discussion of the March 20 Rally.
Award winning writer Dorothy Rabinowitz has just published a book that everyone who has posted here should be interested in � �No Crueler Tyrannies: Accusation, False Witness, and Other Terrors of Our Times� http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0743228340/qid=1049589664/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_1/103-1963989-8331806?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
You may also be interested in reading some of the articles on the subject and related civil liberties articles of Nat Hentoff which can be found at http://www.VillageVoice.com
for clarification purposes only
by needless to say at this point
Sunday, Apr. 06, 2003 at 8:42 AM
said by no name:
"Rich mackin told YOU that HE had reped several women? Rick Mackin told YOU that HE had sexually assualted several women."
-I NEVER SAID rape or sexual assualt ever. i said violate, which means to DO HARM or disreguard. to fail to show proper respect for.
whoever you are, you are very good at manipulating words. that is about it.
for the matter, i do not represent 1877. furthermore i think of 1877 as a place, not a posse.
(this is not fishing for a response, i am clarifying a mistake)
This is ridiculous
by John
Sunday, Apr. 06, 2003 at 11:14 AM
johncihon@yahoo.com
Confidental to all the haters out there:
1. I can't believe someone spent time gathering all those ridiculous statistics about this ridiculous discussion.
2. Only Rich Makin himself could sue for libel, and he would have to prove harm. Although (as far as I know) he has not admitted to rape, he has admitted to some sort of improper behaviour. Therefore, legally talk of improper behaviour on Mr. Mackin's part is completely protected. Talk of him being a rapist may be less protected, but he has shown no interest in suing, nor has he explicitly denied being a rapist. Of course, if he has raped anyone (and that I don't know), he would have no grounds to sue for libel.
3. Threats to interefere with the running of 1877, or to file baseless complaints to prevent them from recieving grants may be legally actionable. Remember, Mr. Mackin gave 1877 permission to cancel his performance, and does not seem to be interested in suing. Therefore, threatening to defame the actions of those running 1877 in order to interfere with their running of their organization could be considered racketeering, which incidentally is a criminal matter, whereas libel is generally a civil matter.
4. It's been said before, but this board would be a much more productive place if everybody didn't post anything that they wouldn't say in person.
John
john
by .
Sunday, Apr. 06, 2003 at 12:06 PM
1. I can't believe someone spent time gathering all those ridiculous statistics about this ridiculous discussion.
I didn't really dig them up, I keep them in a bookmarks folder because 2 friends of mine were falsely accused of rape (one because the girl was cheating on her boyfriend with him and got caught, and the other because he owed her money) so when things like this erupt I feel the need to stress that it does happen.
2. Only Rich Makin himself could sue for libel, and he would have to prove harm.
Technically I think he'd be suing for slander, although the whole email issue gets complicated. Showing harm wouldn't be a problem especially if they continue to follow him around preventing him from doing shows.
Therefore, legally talk of improper behaviour on Mr. Mackin's part is completely protected.
I would argue it is perfectly legal to talk about it, but following him around and preventing him from getting work is extremely malicious and definitely actionable. Would you like it if I found out where you had job interviews scheduled and called them before you got there to announce you had raped me? Hell, even if I just said you were sexually agressive around women that would be enough to keep you unemployed.
Talk of him being a rapist may be less protected, but he has shown no interest in suing, nor has he explicitly denied being a rapist
What a great attitude...he hasn't denied he raped anyone so we should be more inclined to believe the women!
Of course, if he has raped anyone (and that I don't know), he would have no grounds to sue for libel.
That's not true. If he raped Woman A and then Woman B said he raped her (even though he didn't) he could still sue Woman B. And he'd be suing for slander, libel is when it shows up in print.
3. Threats to interefere with the running of 1877, or to file baseless complaints to prevent them from recieving grants may be legally actionable.
Sorry, but you are completely wrong on that one. If I disagree with the way project 1877 is running things I can (and will) complain loudly to everyone who has any interest in them. If I can't tell people about the horrible way they handled this entire situation than what is to stop Nike from keeping everyone quiet about their sweatshops?
Therefore, threatening to defame the actions of those running 1877 in order to interfere with their running of their organization could be considered racketeering, which incidentally is a criminal matter, whereas libel is generally a civil matter.
I really love that statement. Let's switch some words around to maybe make you think a bit:
"Therefore, threatening to defame the actions of Rich Mackin in order to interfere with his spoken word shows could be considered racketeering, which incidentally is a criminal matter."
Interesting, no? Although it's not really fair to compare what is being said about Project 1877 right now to what was said about Rich Makin. We're complaining about how Project 1877 handled the Rich Mackin affair, which is something that is not in dispute. It's not illegal to criticize someone's handling of a situation but it is illegal to destroy a man's life with baseless accusations and second-hand horror stories.
4. It's been said before, but this board would be a much more productive place if everybody didn't post anything that they wouldn't say in person.
I would say all of this in person.
Krys, I love you
by nnfforas2
Sunday, Apr. 06, 2003 at 1:22 PM
Dear Krystyna,
Why haven't you responded to "What if?" Do you fear a new consensus from a more enlightened community ?
Let's Reflect On Some Sage Advice
by S. Odamninsane
Sunday, Apr. 06, 2003 at 1:33 PM
Oh how disheartening. I just got done effusing over the success of the First S.Odamninsane Day of Healing and Reflection, and then I return to my reading only to find that you all have allowed these festering sores inflicted by Indy Media and others with no understanding of respect and justice to become re-infected and go untreated since that wonderful Friday. In the hope of spreading the joy and understanding that I am known to slather about like suntan lotion at a Caribbean nudist colony, I am going to try one last time to put an end to the pain and suffering that we are suffering. I am going to suggest that we all take time to stop and think (not necessarily in that order, depending on your particular circumstance and who might be following you) about this matter really really hard. There are standards of behavior and conduct that we must subscribe to in a civilized society (even if you think that being polite or respecting someone else�s rights infringes on your self expression). It should not be too difficult to recognize that you just can not go around demanding that anybody tell you anything or do anything to make slander and deliberate character attacks stop. The next thing that we should try to understand is that we must all learn that the world does not revolve around us and that we need to quit acting like frail flowers while at the same time screaming for all to recognize our strength and independence. We should also realize that the only time you can have your cake and eat it too is on S.Odamninsane Day of Healing and Reflection. And with that, as we consider the plight of Mr. Rich Mackin, I ask that we all take time to reflect on the wisdom of the artists and philosophers who have gone before us. Look to the ancient Rubaiyat, the writings of Keats, the tales of the Bard, the comically effective instructions of Hoffman. In our present situation one almost prescient writing is brought to mind, for this enduring and endearing sonnet may well have been titled �The Ballad of Rich Mackin� if only that great poet/philosopher/artist had known of the weight of the words when he set them from his soul to find our hearts. But if only he knew that the scene that he describes might be considered �violative� of some �respect� that could have him branded a �sexual assualter� he may have been wise to keep his art locked away so that he could be safe from the agree mob that might have assembled to deny him his livelihood. Oh how I hope that this discussion will lead to reflection and peace. Maybe Project 1877 will have one of Pittsburgh�s own prominent spoken word artists, such as No Name For Fear of Reprisal or Slander perform the following classic love sonnet at the Project 1877 venue.
________________
LOVE ME TONIGHT (By A Great Artist/Poet/Philosopher/Part-Time Plumber/Welvis)
I know that it's late and I really must leave you alone
But you're too good to hold that I feel such a long way from home
Yes I know that our love is too new, But I promise Its going to be true
Please let me stay and don't you send me away Oh no no
Aaahh
Tell me baby that you need me, say you'll never leave me
Love me tonight
Hold me now my heart is aching, until the dawn is breaking
Love me tonight
Something is burning inside, something that can't be denied
I can't let you out of my sight, darling
Love me tonight
Let me love you baby
Let me love you baby
Baby love me tonight
I've waited so long for the girl of my dreams to appear
And now I can hardly believe that you really are here
Here in my arms you belong, how can this feeling be wrong
Darling be kind for I'm out of my mind over you
Aaahh
Tell me baby that you need me, say you'll never leave me
Love me tonight
Baby now the pain is stronger, I can't wait a moment longer
Love me tonight
Something is burning inside, something that can't be denied
I can't let you out of my sight darling
Love me tonight
Let me love you baby
Let me love you baby
Baby love me tonight
Love me To ni-i-i-i-ght!
______________________
Now it is up to you. You decide, what�s it gonna be? Yes or No?
what if
by krystyna
Monday, Apr. 07, 2003 at 12:16 AM
i didnt respond to what if because i have a life off the internet and i had better things to do than to respond to people who i dont even think will ever show up in person - i was at a reclaim the streets party in erie and you were on the internet - i dont trust that you will ever unplug yourself - stop calling me a hypocrite because all your information is third party and virtual - i have yet to recieve a call from anyone on this mind numbingly boring message board - sorry im not up to date on all your gossip, but you have no effect on your community until you take action - i love you and hope to hear from you - but not for a coup0le of days because i want you to get outside and breathe some fresh air for once in your life - im very bored with you
??
by krystyna
Monday, Apr. 07, 2003 at 12:20 AM
why would i be afraid of anyone involved with an issue that they will only discuss on the internet - i simply dont have to read what they say and they disappear - im not afraid of people i love - and i love you all
john i love you
by krystyna
Monday, Apr. 07, 2003 at 12:24 AM
please come say it in person - best of wishes, love and flowers for your future children
my name??
by krystyna
Monday, Apr. 07, 2003 at 12:39 AM
holy shit - why does anyone feel it necessary to get bent out of shape by the way i spell my name - my mother spelled it that way - she came here from poland when she was 16 and who the fuck cares!! you have no good argument so you pick stupid shit - you make me laugh at the insignificant bullshit that sprays from your mouth(or should i say fingertips)-wear a fucking mask if you are so afraid of me and then come talk to me - im sure i dont know you - you havent left your computer in awhile - i dont know where any of you came up with the idea that i was even the person responsible for the decision - i support the decision made by people who voiced their opinion to me - dont be so afraid of me - fear breeds hate and violence and you can tell that you have something brewing inside of you by the way you attacked my for the spelling of my name - grow up - im sure you're and expert at online love, and you wouldnt understand how i could love those people that i have never met - well let it be known that i love you - come meet me sometime and maybe you would chill out and we could reasonably discuss any issue that you want - im all ears
one last word for the night
by krystyna
Monday, Apr. 07, 2003 at 12:56 AM
i have never met anyone in my community who could not sit down with me and talk - im sure if the no names were that involved with the community that i am a part of they would have had the sense to talk things out in a real fashion - therefore i feel that those people who have nothing to do with the community offline, need to get involved or stop wasting their time worrying about a venue they never would have come to anyways - i have a deep respect for all the people within the community and i feel as though none of them would be so cowardly as to not approach the issue offline - i thank my community for being real, for being active, and for being reasonable
manarchism
by RAGer
Monday, Apr. 07, 2003 at 10:52 AM
wow this is some textbook shit. I feel like the responses of these dudes is the most predictable/slash dissapointing shit ever. oh well, chrys you kick ass for taking the time to respond but i feel like if these fools dont actually want to be involved in 1877 and instead want to spount bullshit on the internet it is a semi-pointless discussion. I am working on a call for starting up a "men against patriarchy group" and i will keep people updated on that. peace
.
by .
Monday, Apr. 07, 2003 at 11:08 AM
i feel like if these fools dont actually want to be involved in 1877
I'm involved. Been involved. I was at the meeting to discuss the Mackin situation and it disgusted me. I was unable to even voice my opinion for fear of reprisals from the lynch mob screaming for Rich's head. I know of 2 other active participants in 1877 who feel the same way. This was not handled well at all...
Please consider some things about this discussion more carefully
by No Name Either
Monday, Apr. 07, 2003 at 12:10 PM
The raw statistics that someone took to prepare about this discussion which you consider ridiculous was very telling about the nature of this discussion. It seems that the Rich Mackin matter is extremely important to many people in our community. And the level of the discussion seems to be better thought, and offering several alternative analysis of the issue, than most other discussions typically found at these pages. You must by now understand that the �Rich Mackin Matter� being discussed is NOT about sexual assault, but is about the rights of all persons to be free from the tyranny of an agree mob. I would not be so dismissive in calling this discussion ridiculous.
After reading much of the discussion, I felt compelled to provide my insight for the benefit of those here, and hopefully clear up some of the bad information which it appears is the source of some bad decisions on the part of Project 1877. I understand why so many people prefer to remain anonymous and I think that we should respect that right. It is not necessary that the person be identified by name or address or otherwise. We can take their written contribution for its inherent value. We do not need to prejudice our interpretation of their written contribution with any thoughts of the writer�s race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, or other personal bias. We must also respect that the writer may have other reasons for not providing a name, such as employment issues or just the fear that they may inadvertently �violate� the ever changing threshold of respect that would have them then labeled as a sexual assaulter or rapist.
I do not believe that I should be required to use my name in this discussion. It is not relevant. I will, however, give you some background. I am an active supporter of several non-profit, arts, educational and community service organizations. I understand the grant and donation process, and have personally directed contributions to these organizations that I am certain far exceed the operating budget of Project 1877. Grant providers and funding sources are most interested in the community impact and conduct of the organizations that they support and that come to them looking for support. If an organization received funding from a government source some specific terms regulate the conduct of the organization. These would prohibit discrimination for any purpose, use of the funded project as a forum for attacking the rights of any group or individual, or engaging in certain political activities. Any member of the community is free to provide comments on the organization, provided that such comments are truthful. In the case of Project 1877 someone could simple direct the grant provider to these discussions and Project 1877�s own web page. That would not be a false statement nor would it be actionable.
I was told of this discussion by a friend who was shocked that an organization was calling a man a rapist and actively participating in chasing this man across the country repeating this charge in an effort to deny him his trade. I make no judgment on Mr. Mackin or any action he may have ever taken in his short life, but I do make a judgment that he is not to be maligned without a proper airing of the charges in a forum that can protect his rights. This is what our court system provides. I read the other pages related to the Rich Mackin matter and I did not see anything that described the crimes he has been accused of by Project 1877. The description of his actions by Rosie Streetpixie do not describe a rape, unless Ms. Streetpixie is under the age of 18 (in which case she should immediately speak with the legal authorities in her community). Even if Ms. Streetpixie is a juvenile and the acts she describes would, if true, constitute rape, it does not give Project 1877 the right to present these bare allegations as if they are fact. Rich Mackin is still entitled to the protection of the court system, our constitution and legal process.
Project 1877�s comments and those of others on these boards are not protected speech. The conduct may well be both slanderous and libelous. The discussion of the matter, without stating as fact the charges which are yet unproven against this man, would be an exercise of free speech. But in this case the discussion has been as if this man were guilty of committing these terrible acts. But then we are told that he is only guilty of something described as �violating� the respect for another. This is a far cry from admitting to sexual assault (as Project 1877 and others have consistently described his actions). That is where this may become legally actionable. Even if this man chooses not to pursue a legal action does not mean that Project 1877 is permitted to conduct itself as it has.
Project 1877 has ignored the processes that our society has put in place to protect the rights of all of our citizens. If you wish to keep those rights available to yourselves, it is best to respect those rights as they apply to others. If you choose to ignore the interests of justice in the confines of your own organization you may do so, but do not allow your exercise of injustice to move beyond your private domain (such as out to a website or even websites in other communities). Please do not characterize those persons here who promote justice for all members of the community as racist, sexist or hateful. That is both wrong and unproductive. It will also jaundice your own analysis and understanding of these very important issues.
As a member of this community, as a supporter of the arts in this community, and as someone very much concerned about civil rights and liberties, I do not believe that the consensus process which Project 1877 utilizes is healthy for our community. I hope that Project 1877�s interest in radicalizing the community does not mean terrorizing anyone that may find undesirable.
Krys, I love you deeply.
by n.n.f.f.o.r.a.s
Monday, Apr. 07, 2003 at 12:10 PM
Dear Krys,
It seems that exposure to the truth has you babbling like a loon ! Can't defend any of your points with reason or logic--so you lash out against folks about stupid, meaningless shit.
Peace and a heapin' helpin' o love to you, your family, your future ex-husbands, and your various house pets. You monumental loser!
Krystyna
by no name for fear of you violating my civil ri
Monday, Apr. 07, 2003 at 12:19 PM
Many of us out here still want to know why Krystyna will not respond to the poster who wrote the "What if?" message.
FREE RICH MACKIN !!
Confronting Sexual Assault in the Pittsburgh Activist Community
by etta
Monday, Apr. 07, 2003 at 6:56 PM
i'm reposting this here becuase there were no comments when it originally went up..
why havent you all been writing nasty things in
response to this posting? you seem to be doing
such a good job in other places.
Please note that the following is not a statement from the people who were at the meeting just from one person who was there, me, they call me ET-TAR.
Hey, so we had a really positive meeting tonight at 1877 in place of the presence of Rich Mackin. There were about 25 or more people present. We discussed all sorts of things and the people who were left at the end of the meeting (about 15) thought it was a real good start to confronting sexual assault in our community. We talked and talked and broke up into groups and talked some more and then came back and talked again. It was a 6 hour long experience for me. Anyway, we are going to start ongoing discussions about this issue. The next meeting is at Project 1877 at 7pm on Tuesday April 15th. (do a search for Project 1877 on the internet to find the location)
Some of the things we discussed were:
The definitions of sexual assault/sexual harassment
Survivor support
Community Responsibility/ Response to Sexual Assault
What to do with Assaulters
How to keep this issue active in Pittsburgh
Over all it was a really positive, physical as opposed to virtual, experience. There were many posts and comments made about the Rich Mackin event. Many of them were anonymous. I believe many of these posts were made by people who don�t live in Pittsburgh. I also believe that many people who posted that do live in Pittsburgh, who defended Rich so whole heartedly did not attend the meeting. If they were that into him you might assume that they were going to attend his performance and therefore have a �free� evening when they found out the decision of Project 1877 to not allow him to perform. You might think they would come to discuss their OH SO STRONG FEELINGS about the issue.
I�ll put money down that if there was a posting about Iraq, and the U.S. government committing atrocities, people would not think twice about believing and actively working to stop it. But when it�s a survivor of sexual assault being brave and speaking out, people want DNA samples. (what�s up?!)
I encourage all of Pittsburgh to not get so emotional (like I have) over the things people posted anonymously to indymedia. I love indymedia for a million different reasons. Sometimes I like to post anonymous. But about the things I feel most seriously about I have left my name. I have decided it unproductive to believe or respond emotionally to posts where people don�t leave their names or contact info. I encourage people to meet in person or by phone or personal email accounts if at all possible.
DO NOT LET EXCHANGES ON INDYMEDIA DICTATE YOUR OPINIONS OF SERIOUS ISSUES WITH OUT TALKING TO PEOPLE. THIS IS REALLY EFFECTING THE MOVEMENT IN PITTSBURGH. PEOPLE! I IMPLORE YOU!
Pittsburgh! We are awesome! We have so much potential and we can work our problems and differences out! And if we can�t, what exactly are we fighting for anyway?
The internet is an organinzing tool. Don�t make it your world. It is not set up for sooper serious healthy communication. It is a useful tool in alerting communities that sexual assaulters may be coming to a town near you, for instance.
Anyway. People are excited to work on their stuff. If you are interested please come to the next meeting and if you can�t make it, don�t worry, there will be more.
love
ettar
YOU STILL DON'T GET IT !!!
by =
Monday, Apr. 07, 2003 at 8:52 PM
ettar,
It is not that we are into Rich Mackin. We are into civil rights. We all probably wholeheartedly are opposed to the plight of victims of sexual assualt. No one has demonstrated that Rich Mackin is a sexual predator. Our issue is the violation of an individual's rights to fair hearing and presentaiton of facts in a forum that protects their rights. WE DO NOT SUPPORT THE ASSUALT OF WOMEN JUST BECAUSE WE OPPOSE THE WAY IN WHICH PROJECT 1877 HANDLED THIS MATTER AND THE ENSUING SLANDER OF RICH MACKIN. So Please oh Please focus on the issue that we are worked up over. By the way, I am in Pittsburgh. You might also want ot re-read the numerous well thought posts on this subject and the valid reasons for remaining anonymous. As someone said early, it is their right -- judge their words not their name. Why do you need a name. So you can hunt them down and asssualt them because you think their statemetns to be sexist. I am happy htat you had a productive meeting about the problems of sexual assualt. I hoe yo did not have a eeting where you slandered anyone or unjustly persecuted someone.
manarchists backlash
by Colelea
Monday, Apr. 07, 2003 at 11:39 PM
colelea_grrl@hotmail.com
I am a survivor of sexual assualts. I don't know of a single womyn who has not been sexually assaulted. I was raped in a place where I felt safe, surrounded by people I trusted. My attacker actually was caught in the act and convicted, he plead guilty. He was active in the radical/punk community. In his short absence I experienced backlash from many of his friends (all male) many of whom did not know me. I experienced situations of confrontation with them as well as hearing them talk about me, not knowing it was me. I think it is disgusting that men who call themselves radical would call this a witch hunt. Rich Mackin has admitted to much of what he's been accused of although he hasn't been accountable for his actions. Accusing someone of sexual assault especially someone who is a friend/aquaintence is not an easy thing to do. The womyn who came forward about Rich have created a zine in which they document conversations with him (via email, IM's) wherein he apologizes but never really accepts ownership for his actions. If you haven't read this I suggest you do. As for blow by blow accounts of thier assaults, I think that is insulting and painful for them and would it really change your mind if you heard the gorey details? I WAS at the meeting to discuss whether or not to allow him to speak. I came prepared to argue my case because honestly I have grown to expect the closet misogyny from manarchist radicals in this town. I guess my expectations were right on, its a shame. I see my attacker at shows/other places 2-3 times a year. I'm always the one who leaves.........
colelea grrrl
by =
Tuesday, Apr. 08, 2003 at 7:28 AM
I am sorry for your pain. But please note a very important difference in you case and this one...your assaulter was CONVICTED. You did the right thing. You went to the police and filed a complaint, they had a trial, he had a lawyer, a jury following the rules of legal process found him guilty, he was convicted. You didnt decide to publish a zine, put posters on telephone poles or some similar nonsense like posting your allegations all over the internet. I have tried to find this zine that everyone tells me to read but I cannot find it anywhere. And if it only contains more of the same stuff like "he violated my respect" or " I didn't want to have sex with but I said what the hell and roled over and did him but I didnt enjot it" then it absoluteley is not going to change anything. The issue here is not survivor's rights or sexual assualt. It is civil rights. The discussion would not be any different if Project 1877 was going around saying that Rich Mackin was an admitted drug dealler or car thief, but had no proof or brought no charges in court.
Look...
by Evan W.
Tuesday, Apr. 08, 2003 at 8:32 AM
Those who claim assault by Mackin are free to file a criminal complaint, but the court system does not always resolve everything. People also have the right, through *free association,* to exclude another person from performing, speaking, etc. That does not necessarily mean that Mackin's right to free speech was violated (as the Constitution's First Am. provision applies only to state actors, not private parties).
I had a chance to glance through the Manarchist zine, and it seemed pretty convincing that there were people who were victimized in some way by Mackin. He admits to wrongdoing. The only problem is, what wrongdoing is he admitting? I think this matters to some people. There are certainly some acts that are more heinous than others.
While I understand that going into detail about a horrible experience can make one feel violated all over again, I think if people want to call Mackin on his shit, some level of detail might be the best way to do that. Make him confirm or deny what occurred. It's easy for him to agree he was "inappropriate" or "unduly aggressive." This just sounds like people are giving him too much wiggle room if he is a rapist.
See....
by =
Tuesday, Apr. 08, 2003 at 8:47 AM
That's just it...we do not know that he is a rapist, and the court system is the best way to resolve these things (actually, it is the only way. Sorry, you can not take the law into your own hands just because you have some anarchist political philosophy that woudl like to abolition the systems of justice). And you say that you have read the zine and you still don't see what he is admitting to. We also can not define rape as we want to for our own purposes.
Also, this is not about Rich's Free Speech rights. He has none in a private organization that chooses not to hire him. It is about his right s to be free of unjust persecution and not to be slandered. After all of this I am amazed that there are people here who still do not get this.
Judging by the topic
by .
Tuesday, Apr. 08, 2003 at 10:39 AM
This post, as juvenile as it was, was about the decision of 1877 to not host Mr. Mackin, not about anything else. The title refers to 1877, nothing else. 1877 is a consensus ran org. and made a group decision to not host Rich, which Rich offered himself. So please, understand that that is it, a group decided not to host a man who made several members of the group uncomfortable, that is all.
No, You need to understand
by =
Tuesday, Apr. 08, 2003 at 10:45 AM
It may have been about Project 1877's decision, but It has been about the terrible manner in which Project 1877 conducted itself in making that decision. You really need to follow this discussion more closely and quite coming back to the BS about your consensus nonsense. Project 177 is way out of line here. As someone said earlier, Project 1877 is free to do what it wants on its own and as long as it doesnt violate any provisions of any grants that it receives, BUT IT IS NOT ALLOWED TO GO AROUND PUBLISHING UNPROVEN ALLEGTIONS AGAINST ANYONE. THat is the issue here. Even if it was that Project 1877 said the guy was a drug dealer and they didnt want him, they woudl still be slandering him. Wake up People. Or you might be the next one hunted down by the angry mob !!!
?
by ?
Tuesday, Apr. 08, 2003 at 11:39 AM
i was at the meeting, and i do not recall any slandering of rich mackin. a collective decision was made to cancel the performance, with the option given to "1877" by rich mackin himself. this so-called slandering is rumor, and if that is not true, can you give specifics of when the slandering started and what was said? because i missed all of that.
also, the person who is searching for "baby, i'm a manarchist" i have a copy and will gladly lend it out (i'll even leave under a rock in a remote location to protect yr privacy.)
?
by ?
Tuesday, Apr. 08, 2003 at 11:42 AM
also, WHAT material has 1877 published accusing rich mackin of anything?
To ?
by =
Tuesday, Apr. 08, 2003 at 11:56 AM
Read the numerous posts be 1877 and its supporters here. read the postings here which explian clearly what was done wrong. read 1877's own statement. I am done tryng to explian this.
finally
by .
Tuesday, Apr. 08, 2003 at 12:03 PM
are you really truly done???
thank you.
Privacy Policy - IMC
by .
Tuesday, Apr. 08, 2003 at 12:31 PM
With all of this rabble over anomynity, I would like to take this opportunity to remind IMC of its own Privacy Policy. Attempts to identify those persons who wish to remain anonimous would violate our expectations of privacyhere. Any attempts to sureptitiously identify individuals posting here would not only be unprofessional, unethical, a violation of the rights of those persons, and a breach of your own policy statement and agreements with your users, it would be downright wrong (and since we are using the word around here so much, actionable). Thank you for providing this open forum for free debate.
TOPIC WHEN YA SCRATCH IT A LITTLE
by Prodigal Yunzer
Tuesday, Apr. 08, 2003 at 3:29 PM
Is whether a woman who shares a bed with a man for a nine month period and trades sex for companionship can allege that all or some of the sex acts were rape in the retropective of him leaving her for someone else. The answer is yes of course she can.
But we tend not to believe her. We have to pretend to believe her, or people would think us misogynistic. When she goes to the police and asks them to charge him with the violent crime of rape, we can then amend our first opinion. If the charge is brought, and if he is convicted, then of course we can allow ourselves to change our first thoughts, that this was a woman scorned. A woman who shared her personal pain with others who knew and maybe were also stung by this user of women and perhaps had their affections toyed with.
If you decide to take up boxing, and some dude knocks you out in the sparring ring, you cannot charge him with assault. If he does the same thing in the locker room then you can, but don't expect his lawyer to sit there withour accusing you of egging him on. The same thing goes for rape. Rape is nothing special if women are truly equal. Rape is just another way of assaulting someone, and guess what? All assaults are not crimes, but all RAPES are crimes.
If you want to criminalize paternalism, sexism, misogyny, lies to get some ass, or testosterone induced affection, then so be it. But you can't roll it all up and call it rape, and chase a guy around the country trying to remove his way of feeding himself because you convicted him in your illegitimate kangaroo court.
Statistical Update
by NNFFOROS
Tuesday, Apr. 08, 2003 at 10:54 PM
It is oofficial, there are now 205 comments on this topic. If all of the Rich Mackin pages were in one post this would be the most active topic on all of IMC. Way to go Rich !!! I guess it can't be that ridiculous of a topic if it is that popular.
but it is
by .
Wednesday, Apr. 09, 2003 at 8:18 AM
it is that ridiculous tho, because no one has gotten it yet. Charges, accusations, blah blah blah, have nothing to do with them, it has to do with the parties involved... in BOSTON, not one in PGH. The only thing that has to to with anyone here is wether he should have been allowed at 1877. And they had a meeting, and decided not to host him.
If anyone here wanted to have their say in this process they should have gone to the meeting and hashed it out, but no, most people just whinged on the internet all day, and took no steps whatsoever. but here they are still wasting their day blathering on about something they obviously wanted no say in. Don't you people have jobs?
Civil Rights Ar Never RIdiculous
by NNFFOROS
Wednesday, Apr. 09, 2003 at 8:26 AM
Maybe no one wanted to show up and voice a different opinion becasue theyy were afraid that you would turn on them. You still don't get it that it is not a matter of a private organization deciding not to have the guy perform there, but it is about that organization then annoucing to the world that the guy is a criminal (without any proof and without a trial) and slanderingthe guy. ANd anyoen who has voiced a different view of Project 1877's handling of this has been called a sexist or mysoginist here on these boards. THe postings here have been very good and insightful, but you apparently choose to ignore all of that information. Project 1877 conducted itself , at worst, like a lynch mob, and at best, like a high school prom committee. If you are the future of the activist movement in Pittsburgh it is fair to say that you will be the death of it.
untrue
by .
Wednesday, Apr. 09, 2003 at 8:34 AM
First of all, I am nor connected with or representative of 1877. It is based on input from it's members. I know the kids involved, if you went to the meeting an offered a valid point, they would listen to you, they are really a great bunch of kids. But the members decided that he should not be welcome, so they took up _HIS_ offer to not perform. This is the only thing that has anything to do with anyone in pittsburgh, but not you, you'd rather complain than attempt change, so keep on truckin, man.
Truck Off and Keep on Truckin'
by NNFFOROS
Wednesday, Apr. 09, 2003 at 9:41 AM
They fact that they took his offer notto perform is NOT the issue. The issue is the way that they handled this after they made that decision. They present this guy as a criminal. That is a fact. Go back adn read the postings and official statemetns of 1877. That is the problem. THey could have just said that Rich was not going ot perform and that they have decided to have a different program. Instead they had to say Rich is a criminal and becasue he is a criinal we are going to have a program to talk about the type of criminal conduct he engaged in. That is where they went terribly wrong.
And is it not my right to "complain" and is it not that I am trying to effect change through these postings? For if none of us have the right to "complain" then what purpsoes does any of he discussion at this website have. If by doing something you mean I shoudl have "physically prevented" anyone from getting into Project 1877 as was stated by 1877 in their statemetn of what they would do to stop Rich (that's right, go back and check the postings). Quite honestly, I woudl not go to a meeting at 1877. They were entirely biased agaisnt alternative views prior to their meeting. That was apparent by the postings here. They may be great kids, but they need an education on civil rights and human decency.
no
by .
Wednesday, Apr. 09, 2003 at 10:20 AM
seriously, meet these kids and talk to them, they are open to any discussion.
It was not them they were going to block Mr. Mackin from entering the space, it was a different group. 1877 opened itself for discussion of the issues, if you didn't agree with their handling of it, you should have taken it up with them. But you chose to have no say in it, so as I said, keep on truckin man
one last comment
by by ettar
Wednesday, Apr. 09, 2003 at 11:56 AM
ok. so one last comment by me.
i just returned from critical resistance south.
critical resistance is a group that facilitates
regional conferences on prison issues.
there has been criticism of the anti-prison movement
because they are really good at articulating what is
wrong with prisons and trying their guts out to
undo all the egregious acts that make up the
prison industial complex, and the court system.
if anyone spent anytime studying this issue it would
be come obvious that prisons do not give a fuck about rehabilitation. there has also been criticism
of the anti-violence movement because they
are so quick to criminalize people and throw them
into a system which is obviously in effective.
neither movement is seriously addressing as a
whole how to make communities safer places to be.
so many times violence is perpetrated by loved ones.
more times than not.
dealing with sexual assault in radical communities
is definately addressing these issues. we have
talked on end how to not cut people out of
the scene or communities, because more likely than
not they will just move to another community and
do the same thing.
y'all, this is the hardest issue in the world and one
of the cruxes for real social change. it deals with
the problem of "what to do with offenders"
so when someone wrote it is the most popular
issue on indy media, in some ways it made me happy.
it's one of the toughest problems out there and
should be discussed until the day we die.
there will never be an easy solution and
every situation is different.
and im glad the rich mackin scandal has forced this
issue.
i for one would never hate or "lynch" someone
for trying to talk this out.
if everyone who has been participating in this
discussion is truely working for social change
please put your fears behind you.
maybe there can be statements at the beginning
of the real life in person meetings where
people say something like " we might not leave
this meeting in agreement but lets commit to
having a discussion about it and leave our judgements of each other behind"
i dunno.
just a suggestion...
see you in may.
etta
consensus
by matt
Wednesday, Apr. 09, 2003 at 3:12 PM
if everyone from 1877 came to a mutual agreement, that's consensus. if you cared so much, you could have gone to the meeting.
"also afraid" re: communism
by matt
Wednesday, Apr. 09, 2003 at 3:15 PM
throwing the term "Acting like communists" around so freely is pretty vapid. "communism" means a lot of different things to a lot of different people, and there's a world of difference between stalinists and anarchocommunists.
consensus
by matt
Wednesday, Apr. 09, 2003 at 3:23 PM
you don't "out vote" in consensus decision making. you should know what you're talking about before you open your mouth.
also - back to the rape of four daughters example - wouldn't you feel a moral obligation to warn people of this person's actions before they allowed him into their homes?
"And finally, what if all these things happened and a large community contingent showed up to support Mackin and the free, unfettered expression of art?
AND WE OUT-VOTED YOU !
What would you hipocrates do then?"
clarifying again
by krystyna
Friday, Apr. 11, 2003 at 11:48 PM
its me for a final time - none of the objectors know me or the other people who came to the decision, none of you know first hand how we conducted ourselves, none of you know anything about what happened other than the shit you made up about us - there are about four or five of us who are always here and the rest people who made the decision were just as involved with the space as you were except they came out and were willing to represent their opinions to us - we had no rash decision to cancel the show, we asked for input - the input i got was the deciding factor - i knew nothing of the bullshit happening on indy media at the time of the meeting, if i had known i would have personally invited you all - i have plenty of human decency i want to protect the intrests of the people within my community to the utmost extent- your intrests were not voiced where i could here them, when i knew that people were upset i asked myself what i could have done better - all i know is that i acted upon the intrests of those who were willing to discuss it with me - im tired of people who can bitch but who are too afraid to be responsible for decision making or who are too afraid to step up and make a real change - you could have done this but you chose to sit on your ass - you have no one to blame but yourself for the decision - you could have blocked consensus by one vote - you didnt - get over your failure, i understand that you are ashamed that you failed to take action - its a lesson learned in life - i learned that you cant please everyone all the time - i wont try to - i hope you all have figured out that you can accomplish things without hiding behind your computer - come get to know me, come get to know my friends - perhaps someday you can understand the perspective of people who worked hard to make a decision that none of you had the courage to make - i have respect for myself and my community, i have respect for those who show bravery and persistence in action - i respect those people who have engaged in a real dialogue with me concerning the issue - once again you are all invited to call me at the space, for those of you who are concerned we do not have caller id so fear not about you anonymity - i love each and every one of you - please be a part of the community and help to bring about real revolutionary change - see you soon
Krys is a fascist loser.
by n.n.f.f.o.r.a.s
Saturday, Apr. 12, 2003 at 10:21 AM
Krys,
Glad to hear that you, "love each and every one," of us. Gee, I sure hope you don't "love" us the way you guys "loved" Rich Mackin... The violation of Rich Mackin's basic civil rights by Posse 1877 has discreditied 1877 as a radical space--no one will EVER take you seriously again. Wow, thanks for fucking up a good idea Krys! Loser!
n.n.f.f.o.r.a.s.
by not krys, but a hater
Saturday, Apr. 12, 2003 at 2:58 PM
you are ridiculous. super defensive. absurd. you need to get a life, seriously. i think we all understand civil rights perfectly. all this rich mackin shit is bullshit made up, NONE of it ever happened like you claim. i DO NOT see any evidence in 1877's statement, or by the executive director of 1877 that persecutes rich mackin like you claim. maybe we are reading two different things. must be.
Don't Break Up With Me
by Prodigal Yunzer
Saturday, Apr. 12, 2003 at 5:24 PM
Or a "rapist" you will be!
Just you wait and see.
![[masthead]](/images/masthead_140.png)