Benefit gig & moral quandary — WWTBD?

[mellowinman]

Don't do it!

 

[InhumanResource]

My trio are committed to performing a cocktail set 1 month from now at an annual dinner/silent auction to support a European concert trip by our local high school's choir. Third year we've done it. Drummer's son is in the choir.

Just learned from a reliable source that the headliner is under title IX investigation (inappropriate remarks/misogyny to students) where he teaches (an institute of higher ed that's nowhere near the HS, venue, or town). Shared the info with bandmates, mostly as an FYI. We haven't yet discussed.

Had we known this when asked to perform, I'd have taken a hard pass. But we've made the commitment for the kids (we don't care who headlines) and I feel in my gut that we should stick to it. I'm not worried about student safety at the event—it's an open space with parents everywhere. I also have no wish to amplify the controversy (innocent until proven guilty + I'm not a gossip); I just plan to set up, sleepwalk through an hour set, and split.

So what would you do?

I think you should pay attention to the outcome of the investigation, but until then it's just an investigation. There may not be any merit to it (and I certainly hope there is not).

 

[edencab]

just don't sleepwalk through gig is my only $0.02..

 

[gln1955]

A Title IX investigtion on a college campus could be anything, or nothing at all. In the current academic climate, anyone can find themselves wrapped up in this. Until it is resolved, no one should assume anything about the accused.

Play the gig just like any other.

 

[mwbassace]

...is a principle in criminal law (only) by which the full force of criminal penalties cannot be exercised against a person until their guilt has been proven to the standards of judicial evidence (beyond a reasonable doubt).

Has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with whether a band, or anyone else, considers it appropriate to be associated with you.

Society has, and SHOULD have, lots of sanctions against wrong and harmful behavior other than criminal conviction.

You were quite eloquent up till your last paragraph which stopped short of being right. That part is the accused party actually having done said behavior. They might be 100% innocent.

 

[Smooth_bass88]

Wouldn’t like it so much, but ultimately you’re not directly associated with said person so I’d probably do the gig and move on.

 

[Ewo]

I'd do the show. It's to benefit the kids, right?

IMHO, the "cancel culture" dynamic is an ugly social dysfunction. I'd avoid feeding it.

 

[hrodbert696]

You were quite eloquent up till your last paragraph which stopped short of being right. That part is the accused party actually having done said behavior. They might be 100% innocent.

Obviously I could have developed the point more fully, but I didn't think it was necessary. Of course, if a person is 100% innocent, then no one should sanction them.

The issue here is certainty of knowledge. We are often in situations where our knowledge is not very certain, and we have to make decisions based on the limited or flawed information we have and the potential risks and rewards of the different possible scenarios that information allows for.

Suppose there's a guy at work that I get a creepy vibe from. Mannerisms he has, comments he drops, create a hint that there's something not kosher about him. He asks a friend out on a date and she asks me what I think. On the one hand, I don't want to start gossip and destroy his life with a false rumor, so I'm not going to say, "stay away from him, I bet he's a rapist," as though I knew. But on the other hand, it would be irresponsible of me not to tell her that something feels wrong to me and I would say no if I were her. You measure your response to the state of your knowledge and the scope of the possible consequences.

So in the OP's case - if he feels that there's substance to the claims against this headliner, and if he feels that it's sufficiently serious that he doesn't want his band associated with the guy, then he's absolutely within his rights to step away. The charges may not be proven, but he can make that judgment call.

 

[zubrycky]

Do it. It's not your fault, it's not your problem, no sane person will blame you for anything and it's a benefit gig for the kids.

 

[2F/2F]

There is no dilemma here. Not even worth a thought, let alone an online thread. Opening up for someone in a professional setting is in no way an endorsement of their personal life...and who knows what the facts are. Let the investigators do their jobs; you do yours.

 

[lermgalieu]

You don’t work for the headliner. I see no problems.

 

[nickpc]

Your post says " under investigation ". In other words, he has not been found guilty of anything.

Nor charged at this point. There are investigations all the time that never go anywhere. For me that wouldn't be enough to consider dropping out of this kind of event.

 

[Highroler79]

Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?

Believe all Whaman

 

[JRA]

So what would you do?

i'm a musician: i play gigs! sounds like you're a politician or a social architect. good luck with your limits and boundaries!

 

[Huw Phillips]

It’s not for the Penn state football team is it ?

 

[The Biz]

“innocent 'till proven guilty” crowd seems convinced he's done nothing wrong and is just caught up in some cancel culture conspiracy by some conniving student.

 

[jdh3000]

My trio are committed to performing a cocktail set 1 month from now at an annual dinner/silent auction to support a European concert trip by our local high school's choir. Third year we've done it. Drummer's son is in the choir.

Just learned from a reliable source that the headliner is under title IX investigation (inappropriate remarks/misogyny to students) where he teaches (an institute of higher ed that's nowhere near the HS, venue, or town). Shared the info with bandmates, mostly as an FYI. We haven't yet discussed.

Had we known this when asked to perform, I'd have taken a hard pass. But we've made the commitment for the kids (we don't care who headlines) and I feel in my gut that we should stick to it. I'm not worried about student safety at the event—it's an open space with parents everywhere. I also have no wish to amplify the controversy (innocent until proven guilty + I'm not a gossip); I just plan to set up, sleepwalk through an hour set, and split.

So what would you do?

Honor the commitment.
You are not associated with this headliner in any other way; you can't help who they slumped you in there with, and it's for a good cause. I think most people will look at the latter.
I'm sure there have been groups on tour with headliners who got busted for all sorts if things, but they went ahead and fulfilled their contract.

 

[48thStreetCustom]

I think it's important to live up to your commitment. If you receive any criticism, be honest and acknowledged your internal conflict. And then say your heart has always been to support raising money for kids. If you receive enough criticism, then you can drop out with a clean conscience and say you will be happy to play the following year.

 

[grinx]

have some fun with it!

play an entire set of songs with jail or prison in the title......

Jailbreak - Thin Lizzy
Jailhouse Rock - Elvis
Folsom - JC

you get the idea....

repeat ad nauseam

 

[Ellery]

My trio are committed to performing a cocktail set 1 month from now at an annual dinner/silent auction to support a European concert trip by our local high school's choir. Third year we've done it. Drummer's son is in the choir.

Just learned from a reliable source that the headliner is under title IX investigation (inappropriate remarks/misogyny to students) where he teaches (an institute of higher ed that's nowhere near the HS, venue, or town). Shared the info with bandmates, mostly as an FYI. We haven't yet discussed.

Had we known this when asked to perform, I'd have taken a hard pass. But we've made the commitment for the kids (we don't care who headlines) and I feel in my gut that we should stick to it. I'm not worried about student safety at the event—it's an open space with parents everywhere. I also have no wish to amplify the controversy (innocent until proven guilty + I'm not a gossip); I just plan to set up, sleepwalk through an hour set, and split.

So what would you do?

He is under investigation, and has not been convicted of any crime. The real moral quandary is, should you jump to conclusions without facts and join the lynch mob? If you were wrongly accused, wouldn't you want the benefit of the doubt?