I thought I'd start this to move the misguided negations of Steve's legacy to another thread and free up the memoriam for a more positive vibe.

I know Steve had wanted to right his perceived wrongs and so forth in recent years. However, I resent the need to apologize for something you might have said or done at a time when your audience was a handful of misfits and acolytes rather than anyone with a mind to push a couple buttons on a computer to dig up dirt on you. Moreso, I think it stifles dissent. We're sorely missing dissent, and ultimately that plays into the hands of "the man". This board is hardly immune to it. Many C/NC are filled with discussion of some less glowing aspects of a person, rather than what they accomplished or the overall make-up of their character.

As the name implies this kind of internet purity test is just another dumb thing to get likes and mindless adherence to societal norms at risk of looking foolish. Ultimately the irony is that being provocative and pushing buttons used to be something that was done to shock squares and subvert normality, a wink-wink, to those who were clued in enough to realize you were being sardonic, and maybe even bring about some discourse on uncomfortable topics that might otherwise be swept under the rug.

Conversely, I'm sure some dorks got their feelings hurt along the way.

In FM Steve's case, while I appreciate him being open and reflecting on careless and embarrassing things he said, painting him as a one time 'edgelord' doesn't seem quite right either. Even at his most offensive he was sticking up for the little guy, not some modern Elon sycophant nazi the term usually applies to now. That said, he was hardly some kid in a garage band by the time the band name "Rapeman" came around so he brought it on himself a bit.

I'm not against shock value or irony in theory, however, just like death metal or power electronics or filthy hip hop, those things have been done for decades now and you REALLY better bring something new to the table. Otherwise you're probably just being a dick.

I didn't want to write it over in the memorial thread, but I think the generous thing to do in this case is to open up to the idea that people who may be posting and pursuing such things may be survivors of abuse themselves (or otherwise affected by it, in their family, circle of friends, surroundings, intergenerational trauma) who feel erased and unseen when someone is celebrated who seemed, from their perspective, to condone (on some level) what happened to them (again funneled and extropolated through their very personal perspective), even if you think they are misreading everything in this case or responding to miniscule parts of a person's vast experience in public and private. Just let them have their feelings and express them. No one has to protect anyone's legacy, especially here where there are no lies involved, just citation of published materials.

I've seen a few "articles" going around about Steve's connection to Peter Sotos. Their motivations for attacking him is his strong public support for trans people and coming to terms with his problematic behavior in the past. Also, it’s part of a larger attempt to link being trans or supporting trans people with pedophila. It's disgusting to see people putting this forth while they also detest cancel culture. I hate the internet.

Every cunt has a megaphone. All you can do is pay no mind to dunces.

Edit: Also worth keeping in mind that it takes far less effort to snipe than it does to be out doing tangible good in the world.

Addendum: of course don't let them get away with it if they are literally rightwing provocateurs.

jimmy spako wrote: Fri May 10, 2024 3:53 pm I didn't want to write it over in the memorial thread, but I think the generous thing to do in this case is to open up to the idea that people who may be posting and pursuing such things may be survivors of abuse themselves (or otherwise affected by it, in their family, circle of friends, surroundings, intergenerational trauma) who feel erased and unseen when someone is celebrated who seemed, from their perspective, to condone (on some level) what happened to them (again funneled and extropolated through their very personal perspective), even if you think they are misreading everything in this case or responding to miniscule parts of a person's vast experience in public and private. Just let them have their feelings and express them. No one has to protect anyone's legacy, especially here where there are no lies involved, just citation of published materials.

By rule of statistics, there are certainly many people who are as you described, and there are many people who are indeed going on about these old writings for different reasons that have nothing to do with being a survivor of abuse. There are also many people, including myself and several of my friends, who are survivors of abuse that find the conversation around this stuff deeply triggering and are disgusted by people who we perceive as falling into the latter category of sharers.

At the end of the day, I have yet to see a single case of this conversation being "productive", but I have absolutely zero judgement towards any other survivors of abuse who have found solace in speaking out against these writings - I just don't think they're the majority or even close. And while I obviously cannot speak on whether or not any individual case is indeed a survivor processing this information, I think most leave plenty of indications about which category they may fall into, even ignoring right-wing trolls.

Also, if there's one thing that I find more enraging than anything, it's when people try and speak on behalf of victims when they weren't asking to be spoken for. Using an example I mentioned in the other thread: I did not personally mourn the death of XXXTentacion whatsoever, he was an evil, evil man and one of the biggest shames is that he died before he could be held accountable for some truly heinous behavior. But his most famous victim, Geneva Ayala, publicly lashed out against all the people cheering on his death on her behalf.

I can certainly empathize with that feeling, and I know several other survivors who can also empathize with it. When it comes to trying to open up about what I went through, having people talk about how my abuser deserves to be killed is my second-biggest PTSD trigger after being accused of being a liar. I have my doubts that most of the people shaming others just for memorializing Steve and saying shit like "fuck anyone who still mourns him" actually give a single shit about what victims want.

An addendum - even working under the belief that Steve wasn't a pedophile (which is my belief), those writings are disgusting. He SHOULD have been held more directly accountable for them while he was alive. However, the conversation around them where even just saying "I'm not sure whether or not he was actually a nonce" gets YOU accused of being a nonce is absolutely not helpful for victims.

I think Steve's story and how confidently and reflectively he took some of his former statements and actions to task is something to aspire to. I don't believe that the OP here is clearly calling that virtue signaling, but I think it's important to say that it's not. If anything it's demonstrating one's short comings and accounting for them. It's personal growth in public which takes balls.

While I agree auditing everyone's legacy has diminishing returns I'm not sure if it's the first thing I think of as virtue signaling. I guess it's kind of 'cancel culture' (horribly loaded term) which is a sort of virtue signaling. I'm hoping our culture can evolve to a happy medium that doesn't tolerate the Weinsteins, Trumps and Cosbys on the one hand, but also doesn't tell someone who publicly covered a rap song with a racial epithet in highschool that they'll never work in this town again.

My ex-partner/partner/it's complicated posted something about Steve on Facebook (I still don't Facebook) and got the Peter Sotos shit in response, next minute there's an internet argument going on between her and some randoms and she's having to block people she doesn't even know. I'm not sure what it is that prompts people to do this sort of thing. I know there's a sense of wanting to make the truth be known, and I've felt that impulse myself before, but at the same time, hey, you're spreading stories about somebody you don't actually know shit about, at the worst possible time in the worst possible way. Maybe take a step back. And really, if you had something to say about Steve you could have easily said it to him directly any time, so fuck you. If I could engage Steve in a long and furious argument about mathematics, then you could have had the guts to call him a pedo to his face instead of turning up now and being a fucking ghoul.

...is what I might have said if I was on Facebook.

All of us who loved Steve's work and were inspired by him are in shock right now; for everybody else it hasn't registered at all. Interesting to see which people.