nullzero Registered User
#3,601

partyjungle said:
You're ignoring the fact that this guy can make or break your career. He had a crazy amount of power in that industry.


Not in her industry as somebody already pointed out.

Senature Registered User
#3,602

nullzero said:
Senature said:
Hilarious! What I said is above, your misrepresentation of what I said along with illogical argument is below...

No matter what I say I seem to be accused of saying or implying otherwise.


This literally makes no sense whatsoever.


You said I needed to stop misrepresenting others peoples opinions and then followed that by saying 1. I implied I could be raped for simply flicking my hair at somebody and 2. I was somehow suggesting most men are rapists. I did not post that, so actually you are misrepresenting my opinion.

You also said I should leave the victim act and attempt to construct a logical argument. As I have already made logical arguments in numerous posts, your response seemed quite illogical to me. What victim act?

From that viewpoint, I found your response both ironic and amusing, hence my comment Hilarious.

Does it make sense now?

You not agreeing with my point of view does not make my arguments illogical.

PlaneSpeeking Registered User
#3,603

Outlaw Pete said:
Here's the video for those who haven't seen it.




Outside of Copper's, I've rarely seen anyone more clearly up for it.

nullzero Registered User
#3,604

Senature said:
You said I needed to stop misrepresenting others peoples opinions and then followed that by saying 1. I implied I could be raped for simply flicking my hair at somebody and 2. I was somehow suggesting most men are rapists. I did not post that, so actually you are misrepresenting my opinion.

You also said I should leave the victim act and attempt to construct a logical argument. As I have already made logical arguments in numerous posts, your response seemed quite illogical to me. What victim act?

From that viewpoint, I found your response both ironic and amusing, hence my comment Hilarious.

Does it make sense now?

You not agreeing with my point of view does not make my arguments illogical.


Your argument implied that men are predisposed to rape/sexual assault. You wrote it, re read it and think about what it says, you made a bold statement accusing posters on this forum of being likely to sexually assault you in a work environment.
Again, you wrote it, it makes a very uncomplimentary comment on those disagreeing with your argument in plain English.

The victim act comment referred to the sexual assault you felt you would be on the receiving end of from the people here who were disagreeing with you.

You have taken the time to write a post that disregards the gravity of your previous post which I originally replied to, it also disregards the very constitution of that post and attempts to represent it as meaning something entirely different (at least I can only assume that you are doing that).

You accused poster's here of "hatred and resentment" of the woman in question which is if you're honest just your take on people's opinions, which you misrepresented and stated as fact.

There's nothing hilarious at all here, you made sweeping statements in plain English and then said they meant something else.
You don't seem capable of forming a cohesive thought never mind an argument and you're trying to make me look unreasonable for not agreeing with your insulting opinion which is patently illogical.

1 person has thanked this post
sexmag Registered User
#3,605

nullzero said:
Your argument implied that men are predisposed to rape/sexual assault. You wrote it, re read it and think about what it says, you made a bold statement accusing posters on this forum of being likely to sexually assault you in a work environment.
Again, you wrote it, it makes a very uncomplimentary comment on those disagreeing with your argument in plain English.

The victim act comment referred to the sexual assault you felt you would be on the receiving end of from the people here who were disagreeing with you.

You have taken the time to write a post that disregards the gravity of your previous post which I originally replied to, it also disregards the very constitution of that post and attempts to represent it as meaning something entirely different (at least I can only assume that you are doing that).

You accused poster's here of "hatred and resentment" of the woman in question which is if you're honest just your take on people's opinions, which you misrepresented and stated as fact.

There's nothing hilarious at all here, you made sweeping statements in plain English and then said they meant something else.
You don't seem capable of forming a cohesive thought never mind an argument and you're trying to make me look unreasonable for not agreeing with your insulting opinion which is patently illogical.


To be fair she didnt imply rape "she stated feel her up"

Senature said:
To all those who are blaming this woman for being groped at a business meeting, I hope to f*ck I never work with any of you. Just in case I flick my hair out of my face and maybe smile at you and you then decide that means I want you to feel me up repeatedly despite me never touching you.


Also nothing in rest of her comments implies all men are rapists either

Senature said:
The very start of the meeting, before they greet each other, he locks the door and then instead of shaking her hand he hugs her and runs his hands up and down her back. She did nothing to initiate any of this or encourage it, and is now on the back foot for the whole rest of the meeting as she feels weird and uncomfortable. At the time she also presumeably had no idea that he had a history of inappropriate sexual advances towards women, something which every commentator here is now aware of as they cast their judgments on her.
For even putting forward a question about a previous poster's comment I have been labelled a feminist and am apparently wearing blinkers. So unless I agree with the notion that she led him on my opinion is obviously misguided, misinformed, man hating or whatever else has been decided. The video does not at all prove he raped her, but I think it does prove sexual harrassment at that meeting. Feeling concerned because occasionally people make false allegations which can have a horrific effect on those accused is valid and worth discussing and finding better solutions for how cases are dealt with generally. Treating and discussing everyone who makes an allegation with such hatred and resentment is horrible and totally needless.


However i dont agree with the bold part, i think she new full well what he was like and played it too her own advantage, while else record the encounter?

2 people have thanked this post
partyjungle Registered User
#3,606

Outlaw Pete said:
Here's the video for those who haven't seen it.





The part where she goes "Data is so hot" goes completely against what she's saying in hindsight

1 person has thanked this post
Outlaw Pete Registered User
#3,607

nullzero said:
....you made a bold statement accusing posters on this forum of being likely to sexually assault you in a work environment.


If she so much as flicked her hair out of her face or smiled any of us too and yet that sanctimonious tripe got a dozen thanks....

I hope to f*ck I never work with any of you. Just in case I flick my hair out of my face and maybe smile at you and you then decide that means I want you to feel me up repeatedly despite me never touching you.


If someone needs to exaggerate to this degree well their position can't be all that strong to begin with.

3 people have thanked this post
partyjungle Registered User
#3,608

Outlaw Pete said:
If she so much as flicked her hair out of her face or smiled any of us too and yet that sanctimonious tripe got a dozen thanks....


If someone needs to exaggerate to this degree well their position can't be all that strong to begin with.



It makes a better point in context

2 people have thanked this post
Senature Registered User
#3,609

nullzero said:

Your argument implied that men are predisposed to rape/sexual assault. You wrote it, re read it and think about what it says, you made a bold statement accusing posters on this forum of being likely to sexually assault you in a work environment.
Again, you wrote it, it makes a very uncomplimentary comment on those disagreeing with your argument in plain English.

The victim act comment referred to the sexual assault you felt you would be on the receiving end of from the people here who were disagreeing with you.

You have taken the time to write a post that disregards the gravity of your previous post which I originally replied to, it also disregards the very constitution of that post and attempts to represent it as meaning something entirely different (at least I can only assume that you are doing that).

You accused poster's here of "hatred and resentment" of the woman in question which is if you're honest just your take on people's opinions, which you misrepresented and stated as fact.

There's nothing hilarious at all here, you made sweeping statements in plain English and then said they meant something else.
You don't seem capable of forming a cohesive thought never mind an argument and you're trying to make me look unreasonable for not agreeing with your insulting opinion which is patently illogical.


I do not think men are predisposed to sexual assault and implied nothing of the sort. The comment I made relating to smiling and flicking my hair was a sarcastic direct response to the numerous posters who were and continue to suggest that she was via her body language (including hair flicking) inviting him to put his hands on her in places and ways that are completely abnormal for a business meeting. I was trying to point out how ridiculous an argument that seems when placed in the context of any normal working environment.
I see it like this - at the start of the meeting, he locks the door and touches her inappropriately which makes her feel uncomfortable. Was she touching him back while he was rubbing her arm or back? No. Did she try to kiss him? No. Did she respond positively when he seems to have put his hands on her thighs? No. Did he back off? No. Did he keep pushing it? Yes. Did she leave or make a fuss? No. Did she continue to try to close the deal despite feeling uncomfortable? Yes.
Most of the other posters here seem to see a smiling woman who was flirting with a man and trying to use any attraction he felt for her as a way to close a deal and yes Harvey was a bit sleezy or whatever, but she deserves pretty hefty criticism for everything she did/didn't do etc. Often in very insulting language, not simply by way of observation. The overwhelming majority of posts here focus negatively on her and her actions, not on him for acting the way he did. That is what I mean by hatred and resentment being shown towards her.
Finally, there's no need to insult me by saying I don't seem capable of forming a cohesive thought never mind an argument.

Senature Registered User
#3,610

The point I actually made was

To all those who are blaming this woman for being groped at a business meeting...

I hope to f*ck I never work with any of you. Just in case I flick my hair out of my face and maybe smile at you and you then decide that means I want you to feel me up repeatedly despite me never touching you.

Sarcastically and squarely aimed at only those who are more or less suggesting that she was asking for it because she flicked her hair, smiled etc.

1 person has thanked this post
Outlaw Pete Registered User
#3,611

Senature said:
I see it like this - at the start of the meeting, he locks the door and touches her inappropriately which makes her feel uncomfortable.


And that was wrong as has been pointed out by many of the posters you are lambasting.

Was she touching him back while he was rubbing her arm or back? No.


Did anyone say she was? No.

Did she try to kiss him? No.


Did anyone say that she did? No.

Did she respond positively when he seems to have put his hands on her thighs?


YES!!!!

Here she is from the very moment Harvey starts feeling her up under the table:













Now, had she not reacted like she did above, then she would have had a clear cut case of sexual harassment THE MOMENT he put his hands on her, as while she gave him permission to flirt, no court would have considered her doing that as her consenting to be felt up...... but not only did she not make it known she did not want to be touched, on the contrary, her body language screams that she is fine with it and she even verbally gives him permission to keep it when she says "We can do both".

Did he back off? No.


Why would he? She did not give him any indication that she was uncomfortable with what he was doing other than at one point saying his hand was too far up her skirt for her liking. Sleazy mofo for ever touching to begin with, no question, and if he did that to other women I hope he faces the consequences for having done so, but come on, this woman made it obvious she had no problem with it, hence him asking her to go for a drink no doubt.

Did he keep pushing it? Yes.


Again, he was getting all the signals he should do.

Like I said before, nobody keeps on fishing in a lake where they never get a bite and so it was always quite clear that Weinstein must have been getting some positive results over the years from his reprehensible behavior, and in my opinion, this woman was one such case.

If I'm wrong and he did indeed rape her at the hotel she met him at, then I hope he does time, but she should really have went to the police at the time, there was no good reason for her not to have.

3 people have thanked this post
Outlaw Pete Registered User
#3,612

Senature said:
Sarcastically and squarely aimed at only those who are more or less suggesting that she was asking for it because she flicked her hair, smiled etc.


Nobody has said that her smiling was "asking" to be felt up, but her smiling, leaning in and verbally saying she was okay with it (as it was happening) without question, was encouraging Weinstein to continue.

2 people have thanked this post
rusty cole Registered User
#3,613

Marie curie died from radium poisoning in the name of research, for the betterment of science and thus the world. Her husband was dragged under a stage coach and died a horrendous death. 2 bloody Nobel prizes for chemistry and physics..how strong a wonam do you have to be.....

and this is what we're left with, wingers video taping themselves waving a steak in a lions mouth and crying when he bites!! he's dirt bag doing what dirt bags do.
crying when they're beaten in a tennis match! you're a sexist, I'm a strong woman!! yeah yeah yeah!!

3 people have thanked this post
nullzero Registered User
#3,614

Senature said:
The point I actually made was

To all those who are blaming this woman for being groped at a business meeting...

I hope to f*ck I never work with any of you. Just in case I flick my hair out of my face and maybe smile at you and you then decide that means I want you to feel me up repeatedly despite me never touching you.

Sarcastically and squarely aimed at only those who are more or less suggesting that she was asking for it because she flicked her hair, smiled etc.


Now you're saying it's sarcasm.
Why did you not indicate that before now?
Or are you trying to save face?

1 person has thanked this post
JupiterKid Registered User
#3,615

It’s not just the young women, now 15 former male models accuse photographer Bruce Weber of sexually harassing and molesting them...

https://www.businessoffashion.com/articles/news-analysis/bruce-weber-sex-abuse-allegations-mount

1 person has thanked this post

Want to share your thoughts?

Login here to discuss!