Harvey Weinstein scandal (Mod warning in op.)

kunst nugget

rusty cole wrote: »

A hypothetical....so you've had a nice night with some girl and when she gets home, you get a naughty suggestive txt of say, her in her undies with a wish you were here caption. several txt later, being a bloke you send your Knob!! cos that's what we think with in such circumstances.

I can't fathom why anyone would send a knob picture… it's hardly a thing of beauty. Mine looks like a geriatric Phineas Freak…

JP Liz V1

mad muffin wrote: »

Liam Neeson is going to get it in the neck…

What did he say on LLS, I heard something along lines of witch hunt and did he not believe the Spacey accusations?

I was not really listening tbh

kunst nugget

kunst nugget wrote: »

I can't fathom why anyone would send a knob picture… it's hardly a thing of beauty. Mine looks like a geriatric Phineas Freak…

when you're young you'll stick nipple clamps on it FFS and give the photo pride of place in her inbox!!

I agree, as the owner of a fine specimen, they're hideous to look at. As Dylan Moran once said, it's like a piece of spare meat hanging from the side of a sharks mouth!!

El Horseboxo

There's an important reason why people shouldn't just jump to the conclusion that someone is guilty in any of these cases. And it's nothing to do with not believing a potential victim or belittling a potential crime or defending a potential perpetrator. It's simply to do with due process and a right to be innocent until proven guilty. That can't happen in the media when it's often just one side of the story being told. A side of the story that is fueled on emotional responses.

It's a dangerous precident to set by allowing these trial by media cases to become the norm. Because somewhere down the line an innocent person will get caught up in it. And I don't even necessarily mean someone in the public eye. We all known that actual guilty perpetrators of any sexual crimes are complete scum. So it's easy to take one side with very little facts or on the back of an accusation. But it's a very dangerous road to be setting upon.

cloudatlas

El Horseboxo wrote: »

There's an important reason why people shouldn't just jump to the conclusion that someone is guilty in any of these cases. And it's nothing to do with not believing a potential victim or belittling a potential crime or defending a potential perpetrator. It's simply to do with due process and a right to be innocent until proven guilty. That can't happen in the media when it's often just one side of the story being told. A side of the story that is fueled on emotional responses.

It's a dangerous precident to set by allowing these trial by media cases to become the norm. Because somewhere down the line an innocent person will get caught up in it. And I don't even necessarily mean someone in the public eye. We all known that actual guilty perpetrators of any sexual crimes are complete scum. So it's easy to take one side with very little facts or on the back of an accusation. But it's a very dangerous road to be setting upon.

I get that but in a lot of cases women don't trust due process and with good reason.

Eliza trusted adults and told them about her abuse and nothing happened, no wonder she is horrified seeing him pictured with a young girl.

The lady who raised the problem at the gate theatre was told that she needed other people on board or they couldn't go to print so she had to go to social media and then it transpired that some of the women had sought legal advice and were put off taking action.

I agree with Margaret Atwood but I also agree that there is very little justice where people are legally silenced behind closed doors and the only way for businesses and industry to change is to garner support from people in power and to elicit disgust and revulsion.

mad muffin

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

What did he say on LLS, I heard something along lines of witch hunt and did he not believe the Spacey accusations?

I was not really listening tbh

He dared to disagree with the narrative. The same thing as what happened with Matt Damon.

Earthhorse

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

...whether I choose to believe Aziz is a rapist, however, is another story.

I don't think anyone, including the girl who was interview thinks he's a rapist.

Neyite wrote: »

I find this account of the date very troubling if I'm honest. I think to expect that men can understand non verbal cues or lack of enthusiasm on a first date is troubling.

She participated in sex acts with him and never verbalised her wish to stop but when she did, he stopped immediately, suggested they get dressed and they watched Seinfield and chatted for the rest of the evening. The next day, he was polite and when he found out that her experience was not enjoyable for her, was very apologetic. He's guilty of being a non-observant and possibly selfish lover but not of assault.

I agree he is not guilty of assault (does she accuse of him of assault somewhere I'm not aware of?) but I don't quite agree with the rest of what you say.

Why is it troubling to believe men could read non verbal cues on a first date? Of course we can read non verbal cues we're not morons. Specifically she says she got up and walked away from him put his fingers in her mouth around 30 times or so. I seriously have to question his judgement and character if he cannot understand that non verbal signal; it is hardly subtle.

I think we are being asked to engage in false dichotomies here; either Aziz is a rapist or he did nothing wrong. He did plenty wrong and I hope he actually reflects on his behaviour and learns to be a bit more responsive in his interactions with people.

Dyr

Earthhorse wrote: »

I don't think anyone, including the girl who was interview thinks he's a rapist.



I agree he is not guilty of assault (does she accuse of him of assault somewhere I'm not aware of?) but I don't quite agree with the rest of what you say.

Why is it troubling to believe men could read non verbal cues on a first date? Of course we can read non verbal cues we're not morons.

Non verbal cues like sucking cock?

Earthhorse

Bambi wrote: »

Non verbal cues like sucking cock?

Non verbal cues like getting up and walking away 30 times. My post wasn't that long; try reading it next time.

Dyr

Earthhorse wrote: »

Non verbal cues like getting up and walking away 30 times. My post wasn't that long; try reading it next time.

It wasn't long because you were being selective as f**k in your summation,

Earthhorse

Bambi wrote: »

It wasn't long because you were being selective as f**k in your summation,

Because I was making a point about his inability to read that specific non verbal cue. I wasn't providing a summation. Sorry if that confused the fu*k out of you. Maybe I should post it 29 more times?

metaoblivia

cloudatlas wrote: »

I get that but in a lot of cases women don't trust due process and with good reason.

Eliza trusted adults and told them about her abuse and nothing happened, no wonder she is horrified seeing him pictured with a young girl.

The lady who raised the problem at the gate theatre was told that she needed other people on board or they couldn't go to print so she had to go to social media and then it transpired that some of the women had sought legal advice and were put off taking action.

I agree with Margaret Atwood but I also agree that there is very little justice where people are legally silenced behind closed doors and the only way for businesses and industry to change is to garner support from people in power and to elicit disgust and revulsion.

Bingo. Another case that has gone a bit farther under the radar than some of the other ones mentioned here is that of Larry Nassar, a team USA doctor accused of sexual misconduct by over 140 women, including some high profile Olympic athletes in the US, like Simone Biles. The Indy Star and the Lansing State Journal have done some excellent reporting on the case, and this article below can give you a good idea of how difficult it can be for victims to see any action, even when they do come forward and how that inaction can dissuade other victims from coming forward.
http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/story/news/local/2017/06/01/larry-nassar-and-career-filled-silenced-voices/358394001/

No one wants to see innocent people have their reputations ruined based off of an accusation. But at the same time, some predators can leverage a system so effectively that even multiple reports aren't enough to remove them from their position.

Earthhorse

Earthhorse wrote: »

I think we are being asked to engage in false dichotomies here; either Aziz is a rapist or he did nothing wrong. He did plenty wrong and I hope he actually reflects on his behaviour and learns to be a bit more responsive in his interactions with people.

Or she lied.

The article was compiled by her and the editor of the magazine. No official investigation or verification of her accusations.

I genuinely find it amazing the way everyone is blindly accepting this account as being completely accurate. What do they say about the best lies?

Let's think about this for a second. Aziz was in his 30s and had previous relationships, including a two-year relationship with another celeb. He's a comedian working in the entertainment industry, where apparently women throw themselves at him for any number of reasons. So how could he really be so inept in either the seduction or the arrangement of the sex itself? He sounds like a 15-year-old boy in the article. There are so many logical gaps in her story... and yet, so few people are questioning its accuracy.

RabbleRouser2k

Deleted User wrote: »

Or she lied.

The article was compiled by her and the editor of the magazine. No official investigation or verification of her accusations.

I genuinely find it amazing the way everyone is blindly accepting this account as being completely accurate. What do they say about the best lies?

Let's think about this for a second. Aziz was in his 30s and had previous relationships, including a two-year relationship with another celeb. He's a comedian working in the entertainment industry, where apparently women throw themselves at him for any number of reasons. So how could he really be so inept in either the seduction or the arrangement of the sex itself? He sounds like a 15-year-old boy in the article. There are so many logical gaps in her story... and yet, so few people are questioning its accuracy.

Well, he hasn't denied it, so that's been a major point.

metaoblivia wrote: »

Bingo. Another case that has gone a bit farther under the radar than some of the other ones mentioned here is that of Larry Nassar, a team USA doctor accused of sexual misconduct by over 140 women, including some high profile Olympic athletes in the US, like Simone Biles. The Indy Star and the Lansing State Journal have done some excellent reporting on the case, and this article below can give you a good idea of how difficult it can be for victims to see any action, even when they do come forward and how that inaction can dissuade other victims from coming forward.
http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/story/news/local/2017/06/01/larry-nassar-and-career-filled-silenced-voices/358394001/

No one wants to see innocent people have their reputations ruined based off of an accusation. But at the same time, some predators can leverage a system so effectively that even multiple reports aren't enough to remove them from their position.

The Nassar case is seriously disturbing-100 girls have come forward. Others have taken their lives. But we already know not every girl can speak up about the abuse. One used to babysit his kids, for fear he would molest them.

McKayla Maroney, who was paid $1.25 million as a settlement, as well as an NDA, is now facing a possible $100 000 fine for speaking out about Nassar. Already,certain celebrities have stepped forward offering to pay it. Keep in mind when Maroney signed the agreement, she was a teenager, not an adult.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-5276363/Chrissy-Teigen-offers-pay-McKayla-Maroneys-100k-fine.html

RabbleRouser2k

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

Well, he hasn't denied it, so that's been a major point.

He said that he was surprised at her response when he received the message and apologized for her feeling that way.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/15/16892498/aziz-ansari-sexual-misconduct-response-me-too-movement

"It was true that everything did seem okay to me, so when I heard that it was not the case for her, I was surprised and concerned. I took her words to heart and responded privately after taking the time to process what she had said."

For him, the date and evening went fine and only heard about it going badly when she messaged him the next day. And yet, the automatic response online is to believe her account as being perfectly true.

And let's be honest. If he was to release any detailed information about the night that contradicted her "article", his name would be pulled through the mud even more.

brooke 2

metaoblivia wrote: »

Bingo. Another case that has gone a bit farther under the radar than some of the other ones mentioned here is that of Larry Nassar, a team USA doctor accused of sexual misconduct by over 140 women, including some high profile Olympic athletes in the US, like Simone Biles. The Indy Star and the Lansing State Journal have done some excellent reporting on the case, and this article below can give you a good idea of how difficult it can be for victims to see any action, even when they do come forward and how that inaction can dissuade other victims from coming forward.
http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/story/news/local/2017/06/01/larry-nassar-and-career-filled-silenced-voices/358394001/

No one wants to see innocent people have their reputations ruined based off of an accusation. But at the same time, some predators can leverage a system so effectively that even multiple reports aren't enough to remove them from their position.

And that is exactly why movements such as #metoo ARE important. They help to give a voice to those who are blocked by the system from speaking out. No one wants to see innocent people suffer, but, for too long, real victims of abuse have been prevented from coming forward.

brooke 2

brooke 2 wrote: »

And that is exactly why movements such as #metoo ARE important. They help to give a voice to those who are blocked by the system from speaking out. No one wants to see innocent people suffer, but, for too long, real victims of abuse have been prevented from coming forward.

That But is being as justification for too much recently. And I'm guessing that there are quite a few people who really don't care if innocent people suffer as long as their agenda is promoted and grows. [All you need to do is look at the extreme feminist blogs/articles to see how invested they are]

The system needs serious evaluation and reworking to provide people with a better way to report such crimes, with better protections for them and far better investigation of those crimes. It means that we should be putting pressure for the system to change and improve... not to encourage people to work outside the system publicly destroying a persons' life/reputation without any validated evidence.

A campaign like #metoo is important if it is done in the right manner and promotes healthy change to our society. It's equally important that claims are recorded, validated, statistics generated, etc to create a better understanding of when, where, and how abuse occurs for women.

RabbleRouser2k

brooke 2 wrote: »

And that is exactly why movements such as #metoo ARE important. They help to give a voice to those who are blocked by the system from speaking out. No one wants to see innocent people suffer, but, for too long, real victims of abuse have been prevented from coming forward.

Except the Nassar arrest and court case occurred before the 2017 'metoo' campaign, a year before in essence.

Nassar was fired in 2015, he was accused by two gymnasts in 2016. He was convicted of possession of child porn in June 2017 ( he plead guilty) before the #metoo campaign had begun.

It's just people lumped it into the campaign as some kind of 'validation'.
Nassar was caught based on evidence, and video stored on his pc and hard drives. This is something the metoo campaign hasn't utilized, evidence I mean-it's very much 'trust she said, don't believe the man when he denies it'.

listening to today FM last night they had a segment on the safety of women in Dublin city at night time. This woman comes on and every second phrase was Sexual assault this and harassment that against WOMEN!! then TV3 now have some program on tonight all about "Mammy Guilt"... so guys don't walk through town for fear of attack?? Men cannot feel guilt leaving a sick child at home and going to work??

In December I walked through town for a taxi for two hours!! the first thing My sister said, was you could have been attacked, groups of lads tend to leave women alone and start on guys who are by themselves etc... I'm not saying that's a fact but all this woman solidarity in victimhood is a joke!

rusty cole

rusty cole wrote: »

In December I walked through town for a taxi for two hours!! the first thing My sister said, was you could have been attacked, groups of lads tend to leave women alone and start on guys who are by themselves etc... I'm not saying that's a fact but all this woman solidarity in victimhood is a joke!

There is a growing sense of disregard regarding danger. In the past, women were told honestly of the dangers of going into anywhere at night and were aware of the dangers that could come from other people, whether that being in a street, a bar, etc. Then came the feminist movement of the 90s which suggested that women should dress however they pleased, go wherever they wished, and do whatever they wanted, regardless of the dangers involved. Since those dangers were related to the male gender. It was simply the case of forcing society to change to respect women more.

Now that has backfired with women realizing that they are not safe, that their actions do have consequences and there are many situations which are dangerous regardless of your gender. However, the movement will never recognize it's own responsibility for encouraging women to put themselves in danger, and so the cycle continues with deflection of responsibility, especially from the experts in the media (or those writing books/blogs on the area of female lifestyles)

Being practical and realistic is not in fashion. There is the expectation that the world should be better than it is... that it should simply conform to the wishes of the feminist (and female rights) movement without acknowledging that it simply isn't, and isn't going to improve anytime soon. Therefore, deflection. On to men.

I've walked through the roughest part of Moscow at night, and didn't have a problem. I was ignorant of the danger and I was lucky. Simply that. I've also been stopped and assaulted by five youths, less than ten meters from my home in Ireland. The practical reality is that the world is becoming much riskier. Not necessarily more dangerous but the risk of something bad happening is higher. But... women want their freedoms, and reality is not allowed to interfere with that.

Neyite

Earthhorse wrote: »

I don't think anyone, including the girl who was interview thinks he's a rapist.



I agree he is not guilty of assault (does she accuse of him of assault somewhere I'm not aware of?) but I don't quite agree with the rest of what you say.

Why is it troubling to believe men could read non verbal cues on a first date? Of course we can read non verbal cues we're not morons. Specifically she says she got up and walked away from him put his fingers in her mouth around 30 times or so. I seriously have to question his judgement and character if he cannot understand that non verbal signal; it is hardly subtle.

I think we are being asked to engage in false dichotomies here; either Aziz is a rapist or he did nothing wrong. He did plenty wrong and I hope he actually reflects on his behaviour and learns to be a bit more responsive in his interactions with people.

She accuses him of sexual assault in the article - or rather, states that at some point after the encounter, she realised it was sexual assault.

I'm not saying that men can't read non-verbal cues. They can and do all the time. Men who see a woman who is too drunk to consent and get her friend to take her home or tuck her up in bed are taking a non-verbal cue. I'm saying that we can't entheustically participate and expect ALL men to ALWAYS read non-verbal cues and if they miss one they are by default a rapist.

He did plenty wrong- it sounds like an awful date, and his sexual moves sound cringy and right off a bad porno. I don't think many on this thread are disagreeing there. But it wasn't criminal. It was simply that her non-verbal cues were too subtle for a self-centred man to notice, especially during mutual foreplay which would indicate enthusiastic consent.

The instant she gave him clear indication that she was not into it, he stopped immediately, suggested they get dressed and watch tv. Rapists don't do that.

newport2

Deleted User wrote: »

Or she lied.

The article was compiled by her and the editor of the magazine. No official investigation or verification of her accusations.

I genuinely find it amazing the way everyone is blindly accepting this account as being completely accurate. What do they say about the best lies?

I think truth or lying aside, the trouble is it's only told from one perspective like you say.

I expect you could ask a man and a woman to give an honest account of how a date together went and you would get two quite different stories. On a good or bad date. Both truthful, but through a different set of eyes and interpretations. First dates usually have you a bit on edge, possibly reading and picking up on things in a way you normally wouldn't.

So while I wouldn't disbelieve anything she said, I would believe it's only part of the story, the same as his account would be.

TheDavester

rusty cole wrote: »

listening to today FM last night they had a segment on the safety of women in Dublin city at night time. This woman comes on and every second phrase was Sexual assault this and harassment that against WOMEN!! then TV3 now have some program on tonight all about "Mammy Guilt"... so guys don't walk through town for fear of attack?? Men cannot feel guilt leaving a sick child at home and going to work??

In December I walked through town for a taxi for two hours!! the first thing My sister said, was you could have been attacked, groups of lads tend to leave women alone and start on guys who are by themselves etc... I'm not saying that's a fact but all this woman solidarity in victimhood is a joke!

i listened to that and it felt like Matt was annoyed having to add on males can get attacked as wellafter mentioning everytime its horrible for women..

how hard of them was it to say it Is awful for anyone to go in some areas or at some times instead of trying to be the journal and use it as a gender piece again....Last Word is becoming a radio show version of the Journal.ie

newport2

newport2 wrote: »

I think truth or lying aside, the trouble is it's only told from one perspective like you say.

I don't think we can put aside the possibility of lying. And we shouldn't.

I expect you could ask a man and a woman to give an honest account of how a date together went and you would get two quite different stories. On a good or bad date. Both truthful, but through a different set of eyes and interpretations. First dates usually have you a bit on edge, possibly reading and picking up on things in a way you normally wouldn't.

So while I wouldn't disbelieve anything she said, I would believe it's only part of the story, the same as his account would be.

Agreed. You would get two different accounts.

What you wouldn't get is an article that has been edited and reworked by someone from a magazine seeking the most dramatic and emotional reactions. Which is what editors do.

This isn't the honest account of someone reporting to the police with the knowledge that her account will be investigated in a balanced manner.

TheDavester

TheDavester wrote: »

i listened to that and it felt like Matt was annoyed having to add on males can get attacked as wellafter mentioning everytime its horrible for women..

how hard of them was it to say it Is awful for anyone to go in some areas or at some times instead of trying to be the journal and use it as a gender piece again....Last Word is becoming a radio show version of the Journal.ie

THANK YOU Devastator, I thought I'd sound like a crank but wasnt yer wan flying the women only flag a bit high, whilst Matt is there throwing in the odd "indeed for aheeemm men also it must be said". did you notice how it was all SEXUAL harassment!!

Xmas week I stepped over a girl in Temple bar on the ground in a fetal position, mini skirt over the waist, drunk, knickers showing for the world to see!! that to me is an issue of responsibility.

We all have the right to go swimming in the sea, and in some areas we accept that a shark my one day meander by and have a go!! However wearing a swimsuit chummed with mince meat and steak, may not be a good idea!! If that makes sense!!

eviltimeban

So the question is, will the fall out from the Aziz story (which seems to be support for Aziz) make people reconsider some of the others, like Louis CK for example? In CK's case he didn't force himself upon the two women, he just started jerking off on front of them and they laughed at him while he did it. I know there were other similar cases and Aziz's seems to be just one, but is there enough there to make people go "hold up, this isn't the same thing as a sexual predator / rapist / aggressor"?

What got me was the knee-jerk reaction with the cancellation of shows / removal from cast of movies / etc. This doesn't look like it's gonna happen to Aziz, so should it have happened to Louis?

eviltimeban

eviltimeban wrote: »

So the question is, will the fall out from the Aziz story (which seems to be support for Aziz) make people reconsider some of the others, like Louis CK for example? In CK's case he didn't force himself upon the two women, he just started jerking off on front of them and they laughed at him while he did it. I know there were other similar cases and Aziz's seems to be just one, but is there enough there to make people go "hold up, this isn't the same thing as a sexual predator / rapist / aggressor"?

What got me was the knee-jerk reaction with the cancellation of shows / removal from cast of movies / etc. This doesn't look like it's gonna happen to Aziz, so should it have happened to Louis?

eh yes!! that's abnormal behavior that no person should have to be forced into being present for, yes, sure if you flash yourself at the local playground, isn't that enough to get you on the register?? so what's the difference?? it's a sexual offence to expose yourself and engage in self gratification where it's not consensual an unwanted!! No blurry line there for me I don't think!
sure didn't he admit that he took advantage of his position and it was behavior that was not accepted or requested or elicited by the ladies in question so NO, it's not the same, he's a pervert.. OK he might be a good comedian to many but so what, he's a filth!

eviltimeban

rusty cole wrote: »

it's a sexual offence to expose yourself and engage in self gratification where it's not consensual an unwanted!! No blurry line there for me I don't think!

He asked could he do it. They didn't say no and laughed while he did it.

rusty cole wrote: »

sure didn't he admit that he took advantage of his position and it was behavior that was not accepted or requested or elicited by the ladies in question so NO, it's not the same, he's a pervert.. OK he might be a good comedian to many but so what, he's a filth!

He may be a pervert. He may be filth. Bu that's not the point. And he wasn't that powerful then, he wasn't their boss or responsible for their casting. If anything they were colleagues, as back then he wasn't a big name.

eviltimeban

eviltimeban wrote: »

He asked could he do it. They didn't say no and laughed while he did it.



He may be a pervert. He may be filth. Bu that's not the point. And he wasn't that powerful then, he wasn't their boss or responsible for their casting. If anything they were colleagues, as back then he wasn't a big name.

So it's ok to get your cock out and have a jank as long as they DONT say, it's not cool!! It's not acceptable to dip your lad in the sunday trifle their mate, oh sorry, I just thought as I hadn't been told, then it was ok!!

you shouldn't have to be told that's not cool and a woman shouldn't have to tell you, or anyone for that matter, only your parents! there are places to go and women to pay for that stuff if that's your Bag, so why didn't he?? I'll tell you why, he gets off on them actually having to look at it, even if they're not calling the police, I believe it was unwanted and not acceptable, he's got an obviously deviant nature which comes across in his comedy too.

rusty cole

rusty cole wrote: »

you shouldn't have to be told that's not cool and a woman shouldn't have to tell you, or anyone for that matter, only your parents! there are places to go and women to pay for that stuff if that's your Bag, so why didn't he?? I'll tell you why, he gets off on them actually having to look at it, even if they're not calling the police, I believe it was unwanted and not acceptable, he's got an obviously deviant nature which comes across in his comedy too.

CKs behavior was risky in any sense of the world... and that risk caught up with him. His own stupidity. And it was stupid. Just like these people who take pictures or make videos of their own sex, and become surprised when their ex-lover releases it on the Internet.

We really need to promote some common sense in people again. Don't do **** that can be considered dodgy. It's as simple as that. And I mean that for both men and women.

And while he deserved to be taken to account for his behavior, those female witnesses should have received a slap too for their own part in things. Let's, at least, try to encourage people not to be so damn two-faced in their behavior.