>is the beginning of another level of dystopia none of us wants
This 'dystopia' is called freedom of association and I can confidentially tell you that I personally support the rights of any business to choose who they enter contracts with and not to do business with a likely sex offender, so I think you ought to speak for yourself.
There is no basis on which to compel a private business to host everyone's content and I would in fact consider that to be quite dystopian.
And if you are wrong, are you also willing to apologize for hasty decision making? Or will you hide behind the crowd and say 'well everyone else said X!'
Because that's what is happening right now. People's lives are ruined on the assumption of someone being the big bad. Then when it turns out the situation is far more nuanced and delicate, the social damage is already done. Not just the big guys like Brand, who got enough millions to throw lawyer after lawyer at the case should he be innocent, but also the small guys who have a far weaker position socially and financially.
Suddenly this is the thread that has snapped for you and said this is wrong? For most of modern history an accusation was all that was needed to have you removed from your job. The cops showing up at your office and just 'questioning' your behavior around minors without even making accusations is generally enough to ensure you don't come back the next day. It's one of the reasons I don't post as little information about myself online as I can. Doxxing can have terrible outcomes.
> The cops showing up at your office and just 'questioning' your behavior around minors without even making accusations is generally enough to ensure you don't come back the next day.
For the record, 16 is the age of consent in Britain. No doubt it's fair to have the ick about a 31 year old involved with someone so young, but Brand was never alleged to have been involved with minors.
>Suddenly this is the thread that has snapped for you and said this is wrong?
How about we take our own advice, stop making assumptions and "be nice" as you put it, hm?
>The cops showing up at your office and just 'questioning' your behavior around minors without even making accusations is generally enough to ensure you don't come back the next day.
I'd like you to honestly think deeply about this a few times. Has this really been the same as it was a few decades ago? Why do some countries or areas feel far more comfortable with leaving children around with men, while it seems the US in particular has trouble even imagining a dad wants to spend time with his kids? And why is it primarily the men, when it's become more and more obvious women are just a much perpetrators?
Yes, false accusations and ruining people's lives over them has been a thing since we exist. You ever wonder why so many people freak out the moment they are accused, despite being innocent? But as a society, we can fight and be critical about this. Just like we got rid of witch hunts, so too can we think twice about companies facing next to zero repercussions by hiding in the crowd despite their disproportional power.
All I'm saying is, if you're the coward throwing others under the bus over your own gain, don't be surprised if a rebel fed up with your cowardice decides to do the same. Turnabout's fair play, after all.
And for real: it's just an apology. I'm not telling these companies to pay damages or get dragged to court. It's just a 5 minute effort to say "Oh we were too quick in our judgment, sorry about that". It isn't enough, but it's the bare minimum they can do without having to drag them to court to force it or threatening to take away their position of power. The fact they can't even do that speaks volumes.
>Why do some countries or areas feel far more comfortable with leaving children around with men,
I cannot answer for other countries, but for the US I can answer that we've allowed the "boys will be boys" excuse for pretty much ever when it comes to sexual misconduct. I've made it a point in my life to be a person available to talk to when other people need that. Maybe I've just had bad luck in who has opened up to me, but when a very large percentage of the women I've talked with have talked about sexual misconduct, sexual abuse, or outright rape against them that I realize we have a massive problem in this country. Even worse is I've talked to people decades later that explained confusing things that occurred when I was a teenager and went to church. When you find out the church covers up sexual assault, convinces people not to call the police, and pays for the pastor to move elsewhere you get a grim view on the people in power. It turns out when you cover up for evil behavior, you have to be suspect of all those around you.
If you don't want people to be destroyed by allegations, you need a system that actually investigates discretely, and prosecutes those with evidence against them. In the US we can't even process the back log of rape kits we have around.
>And if you are wrong, are you also willing to apologize for hasty decision making?
Yes, although it would be a first given the severity of the accusations.
But more importantly that's entirely besides the point. You don't need a good reason, or even much of any reason at all to not do business with someone. Case in point, you can decide to not sell a wedding cake to a same sex couple because that offends your religious beliefs. That's a pretty silly and homophobic justification by most people's standards, certainly more controversial than not doing business with a suspected criminal.
But it's a good thing that right exists. If someone is innocently accused take that up with the accuser, don't interfere with the freedom of private business. It's not any third parties decision that ruined them, it's people spreading falsehoods.
This 'dystopia' is called freedom of association and I can confidentially tell you that I personally support the rights of any business to choose who they enter contracts with and not to do business with a likely sex offender, so I think you ought to speak for yourself.
There is no basis on which to compel a private business to host everyone's content and I would in fact consider that to be quite dystopian.