So, When are we blacklisting James Barbour?- Page 2

[MCfan2]

Posted: 10/24/17 at 11:48am

I understand the argument that he's already done his time. I do. Criminals should be able to support themselves after they're released.

On the other hand, Chris Peterson makes some good points in that article. For instance, Barbour deliberately used his career to commit his crimes against young girls, and was welcomed right back into that career with open arms the second he got out. And then there was the absolutely horrific victim-blaming that he and his lawyer engaged in. Do all the people who treat him like a matinee idol care one iota about that, or how it affected his victims?

A lot of people acted like Barbour was the victim here (the ATOTC people stood by him through his difficult time! Wasn't that just so darned noble of them!), and brushed off the actual victims. Including Barbour himself. That isn't right, and it's no wonder it left a lot of us angry. And I would hope that the Weinstein case has, at the very least, helped us be able to say openly that it isn't right, and to push back the next time it happens.

[haterobics]

Posted: 10/24/17 at 11:58am

Rainah said: "You don't serve two months in jail and then you're good, go back to your life."

You do, actually. 

He also had probation for three years, during which time he had to get treatment and inform any future directors and producers of the crime in writing.

Whatever you think needs to happen beyond that isn't part of his actual sentence.

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 10/24/17 at 11:59am

It's very telling of our society that we become more upset about a show closing over an underage girl being raped by an older gentleman who exploited his place in the industry 

[newintown]

Posted: 10/24/17 at 12:00pm

Dramamama wrote: "We must, as a society, believe that people CAN change.  If not, then what is the point of any rehabilitation?"

This is an important statement, and shouldn't be glossed over. You'll call me cynical, but, personally, I don't believe in total rehabilitation. I think that, at best, people are able to repress or hide pathological impulses (particularly after having been caught acting out on them), but I don't think they actually overcome them.

To me, the concept of rehabilitation or redemption, as most people seem to see it (and as portrayed in banal narratives like The Cape Man) is mere sentimental fantasy.

Updated On: 10/24/17 at 12:00 PM

[MCfan2]

Posted: 10/24/17 at 12:02pm

I don't believe that. I think rehabilitation and redemption are possible, if the person genuinely wants them and commits to them.

[newintown]

Posted: 10/24/17 at 12:03pm

Yes, I think there will be vehement disagreement on the concept, and no one will change anyone's mind about it.

[haterobics]

Posted: 10/24/17 at 12:04pm

Liza's Headband said: "It's very telling of our society that we become more upset about a show closing over an underage girl being raped by an older gentleman who exploited his place in the industry"

It's more telling that these are being comparatively ranked.

[QueenAlice]

Posted: 10/24/17 at 12:04pm

Liza's Headband said: "It's very telling of our society that we become more upset about a show closing over an underage girl being raped by an older gentleman who exploited his place in the industry"

It's also telling of our society that there seems to often be a witch hunt to search out and destroy people in public forums who have (according to the law) already served their time for past wrong doings.

[MCfan2]

Posted: 10/24/17 at 12:09pm

newintown said: "Yes, I think there will be vehement disagreement on the concept, and no one will change anyone's mind about it."

Very possibly. I have reason to believe it, though. I once worked for a man who had gone to prison. He took all the responsibility, expressed genuine remorse, committed to turning his life around, and after he got out, spent the rest of his life doing everything he could to help disadvantaged people. 

We can't always know whether someone's attitude and life have changed. But sometimes we can.

[newintown]

Posted: 10/24/17 at 12:12pm

The APA cites a 9.9% recidivism rate among sex offenders who have undergone treatment (17.3 % for untreated offenders). (I have no idea how "true" those statistics are.)

So the risk is what the optimistic would call "relatively small." But it depends, I suppose, on how risk-tolerant one is. Most humans seem to believe that "if the risk to me and my family is negligible, then I don't care," with little empathy for other potential future victims.

[Dave28282]

Posted: 10/24/17 at 12:15pm

Also, we must trust the right system and shouldn't focus on a person's completed sentences from the past when doing his/her job. It's the talent that counts.

Or would you rather see him make a career switch to being a dentist, working in a toy store, being a teacher, sports instructor, or whatever? Work is work. People play roles in most jobs anyway.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 10/24/17 at 12:26pm

"Most humans seem to believe that "if the risk to me and my family is negligible, then I don't care," with little empathy for other potential future victims."

But then...what's the answer?  Keep people locked up indefinitely?  I prefer not to get caught up in terms like 'rehabilitation' or 'redemption' when discussing the legal process and incarceration.  If a crime is committed, a sentence served and then no further crimes are committed by the same individual, then that's a successful use of the justice system, in my opinion.  I'll leave redemption to the Abrahamic God who doesn't exist.  

[newintown]

Posted: 10/24/17 at 12:31pm

I may be a fool, but I'm certainly not fool enough to pretend I know the solution to criminal recidivism.

[SmokeyLady]

Posted: 10/24/17 at 12:31pm

MCfan2 said: "I understand the argument that he's already done his time. I do. Criminals should be able to support themselves after they're released.

On the other hand, Chris Peterson makes some good points in that article. For instance, Barbour deliberately used his career to commit his crimes against young girls, and was welcomed right back into that career with open arms the second he got out. And then there was the absolutely horrific victim-blaming that he and his lawyer engaged in. Do all the people who treat him like a matinee idol care one iota about that, or how it affected his victims?

A lot of people acted like Barbour was the victim here (the ATOTC people stood by him through his difficult time! Wasn't that just so darned noble of them!), and brushed off the actual victims. Including Barbour himself. That isn't right, and it's no wonder it left a lot of us angry. And I would hope that the Weinstein case has, at the very least, helped us be able to say openly that it isn't right, and to push back the next time it happens."

Hypocrisy on display.  That is what this all is.  

[Alex Kulak2]

Posted: 10/24/17 at 12:36pm

While I'm usually for forgiveness for prisoners after they serve their sentences, I don't think everything should get to go back to normal after you do stuff to kids like that. I don't think Jared's going to jump right back into commercials after he gets out of jail.

[newintown]

Posted: 10/24/17 at 12:45pm

"If a crime is committed, a sentence served and then no further crimes are committed by the same individual, then that's a successful use of the justice system, in my opinion."

The problem there, of course, is that you can't truly say "no further crimes were committed" until after the individual has died (and maybe not even then...).

As noted, recidivism rates may vary, but are never at 0%. I would say the price of being caught and convicted of a crime includes the fact that there will be some who will feel that you can never be trusted never to commit that crime again.

It's rather naive to believe that a wolf, even one who claims to have embraced vegetarianism, will never eat another sheep.

Updated On: 10/24/17 at 12:45 PM

[johannabarker]

Posted: 10/24/17 at 12:46pm

All my posts are being immediately deleted. Alan, please answer my PM or at least PM me if I'm breaking any rules. I've tried being less inflammatory but it seems like even mentioning his name is enough for it to be deleted. Even a joking post saying I loved him and thought he was talented was deleted.

[haterobics]

Posted: 10/24/17 at 12:55pm

Alex Kulak2 said: "I don't think Jared's going to jump right back into commercialsafter he gets out of jail."

He'd be a lousy spokesperson after not having had their product for 13 years minimum...

[johannabarker]

Posted: 10/24/17 at 1:02pm

Okay, Alan, riddle me this: Why was my thread, the first post of which was "Interesting article" and the link to the article LizzieCurry posted, deleted? I admit I said some things that weren't allowed, in later posts, but I don't understand why the whole thread had to go. I want to know what the great minds at BroadwayWorld were thinking. I know that article has been posted multiple times by other people, and promptly deleted.

Why weren't James Barbour's crimes discussed on the front page of BWW, but some rando British director's (alleged) crimes were? It seems unfair. Is POTO Broadway threatening to pull their advertising dollars? And my thread discussing it was deleted. And my thread about censorship on this board was deleted.

I really wish someone with considerable influence on Broadway would do an interview speaking out against him. 

[johannabarker]

Posted: 10/24/17 at 1:10pm

I've seen multiple racist and inflammatory posts about Oak, but I guess that's okay.