I generally think Zionism is a good example because while the region has centuries long history, Zionism itself is a mainly 20th century ideology that tries to justify a genocidal settler colonial project through the history of Jewish persecution and later, the Holocaust.

I know; but it algorithmically came up on my feed cause I was researching Geller responses last week.

No one says he should be branded; but that if he sought platform, he should have been open about it on said platform.

Geller’s situation is unique in many regards (tho there are too many people who committed SA with fame).

To address this because I’m annoyed at the bad faith framing of my point. I am not talking about abusers private life. There are many conflicting things when it comes to that. I’m specifically talking about a situation where an abuser seeks fame and public platform.

Look at Dan Harmon He came out and openly said what he did, said it was wrong, apologized, publicly detailed what he did wrong, made amends with the person he hurt, and never shied away from questions about it or tried to defend his actions The path is there to redemption, it's just harder

I see a lot of "why should he have to publicize it to the world". Because he chose a public career. If he were a private person he should tell the people around him but he chose to be a public individual, that comes with more responsibility.

Also did you straight up just make this account to go rant about Jacob Geller? Jfc

Accountability is not simply getting th person to no longer do their action, but to also take account and ownership of harm.

And to say you agree with someone calling me a disgusting person for discussing my feelings as a fellow survivor about having shared a platform without knowledge with an abuser I think is rather horrible

There is absolutely valid discussion to be had around. What do we do when the victim is not present in the conversation. But argue that we should not have a conversation and to do so is self centering I think is wild.

If and when she wants to discuss any of this, which she should not be forced to, then we should center her words. But also us discussing our reaction to learning what Jacob did is not a conversation we should completely ignore

I heavily disagree. The victim is allowed to do what she wants and I have my empathy for her. However, we are also allowed to wrestle with the knowledge of what Jacob did. We shouldn’t just ignore it because we haven’t heard from the victim who may not even want to say anything as is her right

Indeed

All this sucks because I truly don’t think Geller is a bad person. And I believe somewhere he wants to grow and regrets what he did, unlike so many men who assault. But he’s also shown he was scared of what true accountability would look like and cost him. And he cared about that more.

Also been getting a lot of this shit in the comments.

"Hurt people hurt people" is an explanation for harm, not an excuse for harm as we often use it as. Even if you are the victim of abuse, that does not excuse you doing abuse in return. Shit like that is what ideologies like Zionism are built on. We only break abuse cycles through accountability.

That is not accountability nor openness. Do I think he should have opened every esssay with "Hi, I'm an abuser!" No, not so harshly. But he could have mentioned it in any of his personal essays, talked about it, been open about it. But he wasn't and didn't.

Geller hid that he had done SA because he knew it would make it harder to get the platform he eventually earned (tho given our rape culture he might have earned it anyways and been celebrated for it). Instead he wanted our empathy for how his violence made him feel while hiding what he did.

I do wonder how many of these people who demand empathy of abusers are the same people who demand, for example, Palestinians must have empathy for colonizers? We constantly demand empathy for those who cause harm while never extending that empathy back.