OT - Marilyn Manson dropped by record label over abuse allegations

Squirrel Man

Very well Known Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2020
Messages
1,311
Reaction score
1,552
I saw this brewing with a story I read yesterday.

Not really a Manson fan, I saw him co-headlining with Rob Zombie a couple years ago. Manson sucked, awful show, just a lot of screaming and not a lot of energy. Zombie on the other hand - one of the best live performances I've seen, total high energy.

Anyway...

 

Vistalite Black

Ludwigs in the Basement
Platinum Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2015
Messages
4,405
Reaction score
2,407
Location
North Carolina
If any of us were publicly accused of what Bryan Hugh Warner (aka Marilyn Manson) has been accused of, I'm sure our employer would suspend/terminate us, too.

If found guilty, here's hoping he receives a lengthy prison sentence!
 

Squirrel Man

Very well Known Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2020
Messages
1,311
Reaction score
1,552
If any of us were publicly accused of what Bryan Hugh Warner (aka Marilyn Manson) has been accused of, I'm sure our employer would suspend/terminate us, too.

If found guilty, here's hoping he receives a lengthy prison sentence!
I have deep issues with public "convictions" on just accusations without due process but I don't want this to turn political.
 

Mcjnic

DFO Master
Double Platinum Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
3,675
Reaction score
2,503
The first to speak is very convincing and deemed the bringer of truth ... until the accused has a chance to weigh in. Then it becomes a bit more complex.
How many accusers does it take to weigh as much as truth?
No. I REALLY don’t like the guy ... but even I know he’s innocent ... until all sides have had their time in a court of law and only then could he possibly be judged guilty.
Not before.
This is still the law.
 

Dumpy

DFO Veteran
Joined
Aug 12, 2020
Messages
2,103
Reaction score
1,889
Location
Wood River, IL
I didn’t even know that people were still buying his recordings.

It kills me that murderers keep their record deals, but accusations of abuse will get you terminated. But if I didn’t even know he was still around, I am betting that his label was going to drop him one way or another.

If he did what he was accused of, throw the book at him. But due process has gone out the window.
 

musiqman

DFO Veteran
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
1,728
Reaction score
1,167
Location
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Its the “proven untill innocent” that keeps rapists/abusers out of the wind too unfortunately.

As a woman/man its almost impossible to get a conviction when the fact just happened (not even mentioning its even harder to prove or even to speak out), let alone years after the fact. That still doesn’t mean an abuser should get free because time has passed.

It’s like (institutional) racism, one can’t judge(only grasp or estimate) until it gets experienced by one.
 
Last edited:

Vistalite Black

Ludwigs in the Basement
Platinum Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2015
Messages
4,405
Reaction score
2,407
Location
North Carolina
Again, an employer or record company doesn’t need to wait for a court decision to fire you. If you’re a taxi driver or truck driver who is accused of DUI, you’re not going to keep driving until your court date. You’re fired immediately!
 

Mcjnic

DFO Master
Double Platinum Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
3,675
Reaction score
2,503
Again, an employer or record company doesn’t need to wait for a court decision to fire you. If you’re a taxi driver or truck driver who is accused of DUI, you’re not going to keep driving until your court date. You’re fired immediately!
Of course they do ... if we are using the same set of variables as this.
If a law enforcement officer tickets a commercial driver for DUI, that is not the same variable as a late night dancer claiming the commercial driver was driving under the influence.
There are plenty of examples of both, but they are not the same discussion and they are handled extremely differently by the employers.

One is grounds for termination. The LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER is an extension of the system and has been granted the authority as such. It can be disputed. That option is available, and the employer has the decision whether that opportunity will be given. Some give it. Some do not. It is written in the employment agreement and is dependent upon the specific job at the company. Quite a bit of difference in those of a driver and a dispatcher and tech support.

The other ... totally dependent upon the employer. Might run an investigation. Might not. Might just make a note.

You see ... the word of an individual or three does not equal truth. Both sides have their time. Judgement is held until all sides have spoken.
 
Last edited:

Vistalite Black

Ludwigs in the Basement
Platinum Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2015
Messages
4,405
Reaction score
2,407
Location
North Carolina
Of course they do ... if we are using the same set of variables as this.
If a law enforcement officer tickets a commercial driver for DUI, that is not the same variable as a late night dancer claiming the commercial driver was driving under the influence.
There are plenty of examples of both, but they are not the same discussion and they are handled extremely differently by the employers.

One is grounds for termination. The LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER is an extension of the system and has been granted the authority as such. It can be disputed. That option is available, and the employer has the decision whether that opportunity will be given. Some give it. Some do not. It is written in the employment agreement and is dependent upon the specific job at the company. Quite a bit of difference in those of a driver and a dispatcher and tech support.

The other ... totally dependent upon the employer. Might run an investigation. Might not. Might just make a note.

You see ... the word of an individual or three does not equal truth. Both sides have their time. Judgement is held until all sides have spoken.
Mcjnic, maybe my point was too abstract for you. Let me be more direct. Your employer or record company isn't bound by your Constitutional rights. They can fire you without reading you your Miranda rights. They can fire you without allowing you a phone call. They can fire you without your attorney present. They can fire you for things you say. They can fire you for things you do outside the workplace.

If the firing violates your so-called employment agreement, they will find a reason to fire you that doesn't violate your employment agreement.
 

Mcjnic

DFO Master
Double Platinum Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
3,675
Reaction score
2,503
Mcjnic, maybe my point was too abstract for you. Let me be more direct. Your employer or record company isn't bound by your Constitutional rights. They can fire you without reading you your Miranda rights. They can fire you without allowing you a phone call. They can fire you without your attorney present. They can fire you for things you say. They can fire you for things you do outside the workplace.

If the firing violates your so-called employment agreement, they will find a reason to fire you that doesn't violate your employment agreement.
But, this specific line is what I was addressing.
You are stating it emphatically. You‘re fired immediately. That is just not true and that is the only piece I was addressing.
If you’re a taxi driver or truck driver who is accused of DUI, you’re not going to keep driving until your court date. You’re fired immediately!
As to your followup ...
Outstanding response, very close to true, but it is again too generalized and in error.
Yes. Absolutely they can fire at will. BUT Employees and Employers have rights. The actions of one cannot impede on the rights of the other.
That’s where contracts and controls step in. The written word supersedes the verbal and that is why we have settlements. Lots and lots and lots of settlements.
So, yes they can terminate at will ... but there CAN BE repercussions and extraneous variables to deal with due to violations of rights.
We all have the freedom to choose and act. We also deal with the fallout from those ... the good and the bad.
Sweeping generalizations like you’ve posted (and mine, too) are at issue with this. Each is taken and weighed. Kinda tough to discuss this in the manner we’ve attempted.
It is what it is.
 

Dumpy

DFO Veteran
Joined
Aug 12, 2020
Messages
2,103
Reaction score
1,889
Location
Wood River, IL
But, this specific line is what I was addressing.
You are stating it emphatically. You‘re fired immediately. That is just not true and that is the only piece I was addressing.


As to your followup ...
Outstanding response, very close to true, but it is again too generalized and in error.
Yes. Absolutely they can fire at will. BUT Employees and Employers have rights. The actions of one cannot impede on the rights of the other.
That’s where contracts and controls step in. The written word supersedes the verbal and that is why we have settlements. Lots and lots and lots of settlements.
So, yes they can terminate at will ... but there CAN BE repercussions and extraneous variables to deal with due to violations of rights.
We all have the freedom to choose and act. We also deal with the fallout from those ... the good and the bad.
Sweeping generalizations like you’ve posted (and mine, too) are at issue with this. Each is taken and weighed. Kinda tough to discuss this in the manner we’ve attempted.
It is what it is.
All of these items are so broadly interpreted by both government and civil entities. For example: if the said drunk driver doesn’t blow but was arrested for DUI but isn’t convicted, they may or may not be terminated. If a driver blows .06 (under the limit), but gets a conviction, they weren’t technically legally drunk, but it was believed that they were still a danger on the road. Some company’s rules are cut and dried; others only go for what the arrest record says. There is not a singular definitive remedy, situation or set of rules and policies for DUI (one friend is a DUI attorney, the other owns a trucking company) for both laws and company P&P.
 

Mcjnic

DFO Master
Double Platinum Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
3,675
Reaction score
2,503
All of these items are so broadly interpreted by both government and civil entities. For example: if the said drunk driver doesn’t blow but was arrested for DUI but isn’t convicted, they may or may not be terminated. If a driver blows .06 (under the limit), but gets a conviction, they weren’t technically legally drunk, but it was believed that they were still a danger on the road. Some company’s rules are cut and dried; others only go for what the arrest record says. There is not a singular definitive remedy, situation or set of rules and policies for DUI (one friend is a DUI attorney, the other owns a trucking company) for both laws and company P&P.
Exactly!
That is why I said these generalizations don’t lend themselves well to this discussion.
All good points.
Vistalite Black is correct in general terms ... I am correct in general terms.
But we are both incorrect in practice because we can both produce PLENTY of evidence to the contrary.
These discussions are silly, at best.
 

KevinD

Very well Known Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2006
Messages
510
Reaction score
416
Location
New York City
Irrespective of his current case. He doesn't paint a very nice picture of himself in his autobiography.

At one point he was plotting to kill his ex..

“While I didn’t think it was right to take a human life, I didn’t think it was right to deny myself the chance of causing someone to die either, especially someone whose existence meant so little to the world and to herself,” he wrote.

 

Dumpy

DFO Veteran
Joined
Aug 12, 2020
Messages
2,103
Reaction score
1,889
Location
Wood River, IL
Exactly!
That is why I said these generalizations don’t lend themselves well to this discussion.
All good points.
Vistalite Black is correct in general terms ... I am correct in general terms.
But we are both incorrect in practice because we can both produce PLENTY of evidence to the contrary.
These discussions are silly, at best.
After all- there are fifty sets of regulations in the USA pertaining to this; some company P&P pertaining to traffic offenses are tied to the laws by the laws of the state or municipalities in question, others aren’t. There are states where the driving licenses are not tied to the DMV and are actually administered to the department of revenue in the state! My lawyer friend practises law in ten states and is familiar with most states’ DUI laws. Of course he is now working as a bicycle mechanic during his non-compete period.

And yes, I agree with your very last point.
 


Top