River 116,175 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 11 minutes ago, VampireHeart said: Space Cowboy was not twice her age when she was 19, nor did he tell everyone that they were dating. yeah you are right, totally forgot about the "twice her age" info.. I just hope she will talk it's a good opportunity for her, it's kinda now or never.. So sploosh your juice all over me you Riverboy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katie14 4,828 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 42 minutes ago, VampireHeart said: Space Cowboy was not twice her age when she was 19, nor did he tell everyone that they were dating. You are pretty much the only one. And this topic is not really about what you're here discussing, again. Ok, but you are the one who brought it up. And you want to think im the only one who thinks this way because you want to believe your interpretation is correct. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lego 44,165 Posted March 2, 2016 Author Share Posted March 2, 2016 21 minutes ago, Katie14 said: Ok, but you are the one who brought it up. And you want to think im the only one who thinks this way because you want to believe your interpretation is correct. You are the only one who comes to these threads with exact same argument. I haven't seen anyone else. Others here either think the hints are enough to believe it's him or just think it was someone unknown, but no one is using that argument that he would only be guilty of sexual harrassment/abuse based on the hints. Sorry if I sound rude, I think this tweet makes him look even more guilty. look at these court papers if we could fill in the blacked out parts, we'd know for sure... "the court drew distinction between the fact of relationship and ???????" FreePalestine Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
seashellartfunk 292 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 14 hours ago, Pizza said: A lot of the hints point towards him because he did claim to date her too. I'm just 90 percent sure its him. It's just she's worked with many producers in the past and she even said RedOne was the first producer to not lay a hand on her and before she worked with RedOne she had worked with many producers already. Plus she said the rapist was around 39 years old when that happened (2005) and guess how old he is now? Almost 49. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katie14 4,828 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 4 minutes ago, VampireHeart said: You are the only one who comes to these threads with exact same argument. I haven't seen anyone else. Others here either think the hints are enough to believe it's him or just think it was someone unknown, but no one is using that argument that he would only be guilty of sexual harrassment/abuse based on the hints. Sorry if I sound rude, I think this tweet makes him look even more guilty. look at these court papers if we could fill in the blacked out parts, we'd know for sure... "the court drew distinction between the fact of relationship and ???????" I am just arguing one thing, that in that interview, Gaga is sayings wr can figure out who sexually harrassed her. She is not saying its obvious who raped her because rape specifically wasnt brought up until later on in the interview. Thats literally it. I agree with you about everything else. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Peters 10,738 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 some of you defend kesha but then call gaga a liar in the same breath it's the same people who said she wasn't actually bullied too. emma roberts is an abuser Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FameHookah 4,595 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 5 hours ago, Camore said: WTF is this tweet? Emphasis in UR (as in shading gaga because she didnt write it) He's a fukn bipolar piece of $hit Imma tell my 60k twitter followers to bully him to death Nothing funnier that tons of death threats in spanish WTF is MDNA Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katie14 4,828 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 VampireHeart, Here is another example. Lets say you went on vacation to Florida and you tell your friend you had some bad experiences while you were there and name 5 people who made the experience awful. Later on you talk about one specific incident of getting mugged as your worst experience. Is it obvious who the mugger was? Its only obvious who made your experience bad. Based on this interview alone, We can confidently conclude that Gaga was sexually harrassed by Fusari because we know he produced with her before Redone and she said we can easily figure it out. She never said we could easily figure out who raped her. I am literally just arguing about the semantics of this interview. You are right that other evidence outside this interview points towards him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azor Ahai 18,861 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 10 minutes ago, FameHookah said: Emphasis in UR (as in shading gaga because she didnt write it) He's a fukn bipolar piece of $hit Imma tell my 60k twitter followers to bully him to death Nothing funnier that tons of death threats in spanish 60k twitter followers Should I know you? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpggal 332 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 52 minutes ago, VampireHeart said: You are the only one who comes to these threads with exact same argument. I haven't seen anyone else. Others here either think the hints are enough to believe it's him or just think it was someone unknown, but no one is using that argument that he would only be guilty of sexual harrassment/abuse based on the hints. Sorry if I sound rude, I think this tweet makes him look even more guilty. look at these court papers if we could fill in the blacked out parts, we'd know for sure... "the court drew distinction between the fact of relationship and ???????" I think I read this when it first came out, but now that I'm re-reading it it seems a lot clearer what the blanks are supposed to be. The judge is saying that the alleged purpose of Lady Gaga's testimony was to establish that there was a relationship and that it went sour, but that Gaga used inflammatory and prejudicial words to do so. Meaning, her testimony validated the fact that there was some relationship that went sour, but the way she portrayed it was more severe than that, knowing what we know now, probably abuse/rape. The first blank is probably "abusive," the third blank should be something along the lines of "distinction between the fact of a relationship and the claim of sexual abuse." The other blanks would just be more the specific contents of her testimony, but I'm relatively certain that "abusive" is the word in the first blank (what else modifies "relationship" and is "highly prejudicial"?) and that the third blank is about the distinction between claiming a relationship and claiming an abusive one (again, making the claim but in a way that is "highly prejudicial"). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FameHookah 4,595 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 18 minutes ago, Azor Ahai said: 60k twitter followers Should I know you? I'm a spanish youtuber with almost 400k subs on my main channel idk hahaha I use gaga songs on my videos all the time converting kids into monsters and giving gaga a lot of promo its fun. WTF is MDNA Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lassex 1,169 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 The fact that he's being so disrespectful makes him seem guilty. If he knew he was innocent, he wouldn't have to say anything. Or he would even support her since they know each other. I think we'll never know exactly what he did (and if it was him), but at least this proves that he isn't a good person Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaryJaneHolland 77,348 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 saying that you were raped is not a ****ing joke and it can't be 'attention moment' Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lego 44,165 Posted March 2, 2016 Author Share Posted March 2, 2016 45 minutes ago, rpggal said: I think I read this when it first came out, but now that I'm re-reading it it seems a lot clearer what the blanks are supposed to be. The judge is saying that the alleged purpose of Lady Gaga's testimony was to establish that there was a relationship and that it went sour, but that Gaga used inflammatory and prejudicial words to do so. Meaning, her testimony validated the fact that there was some relationship that went sour, but the way she portrayed it was more severe than that, knowing what we know now, probably abuse/rape. The first blank is probably "abusive," the third blank should be something along the lines of "distinction between the fact of a relationship and the claim of sexual abuse." The other blanks would just be more the specific contents of her testimony, but I'm relatively certain that "abusive" is the word in the first blank (what else modifies "relationship" and is "highly prejudicial"?) and that the third blank is about the distinction between claiming a relationship and claiming an abusive one (again, making the claim but in a way that is "highly prejudicial"). It makes sense, I think he revealed this to media when he lost against Wendy Starland and he or his lawyer blacked out the most important parts. I found it here http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3000821/Lady-Gaga-s-bad-romance-Svengali-ex-boyfriend-Rob-Fusari-exposed-blames-prot-g-e-s-highly-inflammatory-testimony-7million-court-ruling-against-him.html#article-3000821 I understood it was his lawyer's claims her testimony was inflammatory, not judge's? also this part "...to portray mr Fusari as (___________) - I'd guess "sexual predator"? FreePalestine Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Economy 49,533 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 3 hours ago, Katie14 said: Oh so it was you who i was arguing with about this. Gaga was not talking about rape in the 1st part of the interview when she said, "if you look into the history of who i worked witb its not rocket science..." She was talking about the many unconfortable sexual situations she experienced with producers over the years. You cant just connect the later part of the interview with what she said in the 1st part and assume she was talking about being raped. Its a big leap to make. Its possible but not definate. You can think im wrong or think im stupid all you want but i dont think im the only one with this interpretation. This! sorry im no expert in her history so im sorry if i sound ignorant... but everything i heard suggested sexual harrassment. She never specifies how far it went and whether or not it was outright rape u can be sexually abused without it going as far as rape. In fact what she said about not recognizing what happened till years later might suggest it was a more subtle type of abuse that she may have ignored at first maybe she was raped, but we dont know that Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.