Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Harvey Weinstein scandal (Mod warning in op.)

Options
1…6791112…127

Comments

  • Options
    #242
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,387 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    allym wrote: »
    I didn't say it was like Weinstein. I said it was horrible which it is. And again...she's someone just trying to do her job and he's a big Hollywood star. What was she going to do, smack him across the face? Tell him to fck off on television?

    Regardless of whether she was "willing" or not, she should never have been put in that position by him while trying to do her job. This wasn't a casual night out she is literally at work.

    Would he do that to a male interviewer?

    There's been tonnes of similar clips. I remember some boxer or MMA fighter started essentially dry-humping a female interviewer during the interviewer.

    This is one from live TV where a male presenter grabs his co-presenter and she smacks him.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9mHLoHnJBo


  • Options
    #243
    alchemist33
    Registered Users Posts: 10,969 ✭✭✭✭alchemist33


    Penn wrote: »
    There's been tonnes of similar clips. I remember some boxer or MMA fighter started essentially dry-humping a female interviewer during the interviewer.

    This is one from live TV where a male presenter grabs his co-presenter and she smacks him.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9mHLoHnJBo

    He even looks surprised when she slaps him!


  • Options
    #244
    allym
    Registered Users Posts: 1,368 ✭✭✭allym


    Penn wrote: »
    There's been tonnes of similar clips. I remember some boxer or MMA fighter started essentially dry-humping a female interviewer during the interviewer.

    This is one from live TV where a male presenter grabs his co-presenter and she smacks him.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9mHLoHnJBo

    Fair fcks to her


  • Options
    #245
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,112 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Neyite wrote: »
    He had political friends, DA friends who managed to quash any potential allegations getting as far as a court, he had an army of some of the cleverest lawyers in Hollywood.
    Aye, it's interesting that the same DA who dropped the investigation on the wire tap set up by the Italian model and the police got tens of thousands in donations from Weinstein's company a few months later. Things that make you go Hmmmmm.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #246
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,387 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    alchemist33 wrote: »
    He even looks surprised when she slaps him!

    A Youtube comment summarises it as he says he's been waiting all night for this, grabs her breast, then when she slaps him he says it was a joke and she says it wasn't funny.

    It's insane that he even considered that it might be a good idea, or might be funny.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #247
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,387 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Aye, it's interesting that the same DA who dropped the investigation on the wire tap set up by the Italian model and the police got tens of thousands in donations from Weinstein's company a few months later. Things that make you go Hmmmmm.

    And it's why the Weinstein Company as a whole needs to be torn down. There is no way they didn't know what was happening, not with the numerous settlements and quashed news articles over decades.

    The last few days have been filled with "What did Meryl Streep know?", "What did Judi Dench know?", "What did Matt Damon know?"... hell we even had "What did Hillary Clinton know?"

    The question the media should be going after right now is "What did the board of The Weinstein Company/Miramax/Dimension etc know?"


  • Options
    #248
    Spon Farmer
    Registered Users Posts: 4,201 ✭✭✭Spon Farmer


    allym wrote: »
    I didn't say it was like Weinstein. I said it was horrible which it is. And again...she's someone just trying to do her job and he's a big Hollywood star. What was she going to do, smack him across the face? Tell him to fck off on television?

    Regardless of whether she was "willing" or not, she should never have been put in that position by him while trying to do her job. This wasn't a casual night out she is literally at work.

    Would he do that to a male interviewer?

    Posting the video in this context is pretty comparing the behaviour of the two men and belittling the experience of the women who had to deal with Weinstein.

    No, Affleck should not behave like that nor should he have gone on TV in that condition. He is just making a complete show of himself, but everyone is participating in this - this shows producers, the floor crew, the executives. This isn't even the whole thing - how did it start? Is the host willing or being compelled?

    You said she may be willing but shouldn't be in put in that position but that doesn't make sense. She is either willing or being compelled - she can't be both.

    I'm not defending Affleck at all - he should be mortified everytime he thinks of this - but again, nothing like 18 year old Romola Garai being alone in a hotel room with Weinstein or being sick with worry every time she heard he was visiting the set of Dirty Dancing.


  • Options
    #249
    brevity
    Registered Users Posts: 8,508 ✭✭✭brevity


    Ewan McGregor speaks out:

    https://twitter.com/mcgregor_ewan/status/918057021634727936


  • Options
    #250
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,387 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Spon Farmer wrote: »
    You said she may be willing but shouldn't be in put in that position but that doesn't make sense. She is either willing or being compelled - she can't be both.

    That only makes sense though if she knew what was going to happen in advance. She may not have minded what happened and took it as a joke and no harm done, and that's fine. That would be her position. But Affleck shouldn't have forced her into that position because he had no idea if she'd be okay with it or not, or if she'd be compelled to go along with it and not make an issue out of it in case she risked her position as an interviewer.


  • Options
    #251
    JP Liz V1
    Registered Users Posts: 85,669 ✭✭✭✭JP Liz V1


    Paltrow is an ex of Affleck as well as Pitt

    I wonder who will play sleazy pig Weinstein in a film, step foward John C. Reilly
    https://forumofgames.com/




  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #252
    brevity
    Registered Users Posts: 8,508 ✭✭✭brevity


    Penn wrote: »
    And it's why the Weinstein Company as a whole needs to be torn down. There is no way they didn't know what was happening, not with the numerous settlements and quashed news articles over decades.

    The last few days have been filled with "What did Meryl Streep know?", "What did Judi Dench know?", "What did Matt Damon know?"... hell we even had "What did Hillary Clinton know?"

    The question the media should be going after right now is "What did the board of The Weinstein Company/Miramax/Dimension etc know?"

    ...and when did they know it?

    Yea, there is a lot of deflection. Powerful people run in the same circles, it doesn't mean they know everything about each other or they are in a position to out people.

    I don't hold any blame on people who were abused and afraid to speak out. I think a lot more that their career was in threat.


  • Options
    #253
    Spon Farmer
    Registered Users Posts: 4,201 ✭✭✭Spon Farmer


    Biggest lickspittle on boardz wrote: »
    It's not as bad as Weinstein's behaviour of course, but it is still highly inappropriate, and would be grounds for immediate dismissal in any company around the globe. And all the more shocking from someone who regularly lectures on morality to us 'little' people.

    Not to mention that careers have been destroyed for a lot less. I hope everyone still has their pussy hats...

    Appropriate/inappropriate really don't suit here. He is being a dickhead. That is the word.

    Never heard Affleck lecture about morality so I can't comment on that, but he isn't the first person to do something bad and then lecture others after he has seen the error of his ways. I don't know if he has seen the error of his ways but he was drinking heavily at that time (I think) and is now sober - I don't follow peoples lives like that just bits I heard. If I'm wrong on this count, please let me know.


  • Options
    #254
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,387 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    brevity wrote: »
    ...and when did they know it?

    Yea, there is a lot of deflection. Powerful people run in the same circles, it doesn't mean they know everything about each other or they are in a position to out people.

    I agree, however one member of the board was his brother and the rest, again with all the settlements and payoffs, the rest had to have known of those ones at the very least (and likely about accusations of ones who didn't come forward or try bring a case against Harvey). Even from some of the stories coming forward about how employees within his companies being used to help set up these encounters for Harvey.

    I don't believe for a second that they didn't know about most of the situation.


  • Options
    #255
    DavidLyons_
    Registered Users Posts: 1,252 ✭✭✭DavidLyons_


    brevity wrote: »
    Ewan McGregor speaks out:

    https://twitter.com/mcgregor_ewan/status/918057021634727936
    Well said..... friend an supporter of Roman Polanski....


  • Options
    #256
    al87987
    Registered Users Posts: 688 ✭✭✭al87987


    Weinstein is an old sick bastard, no doubting any of that.

    But I have to say whenever these stories of decades of abuse or scandal come out I always think to myself why didn't they just tell the truth earlier.

    I hear this stuff about being scared, he had power in the industry, potential lawsuits etc...

    I am of the opinion that if you see a serious crime, you report it. If you are the VICTIM of serious crime, you HAVE to report it. Otherwise you're somewhat on the hook for any further crimes perpetrated by aforementioned sicko.

    I'm not saying that silent victims are in the same bracket as this creep but your silence has helped lead to more victims, more crime and damaged how many more lives.

    Sometimes you just have to tell the truth, regardless of personal consequences.


  • Options
    #257
    Spon Farmer
    Registered Users Posts: 4,201 ✭✭✭Spon Farmer


    optogirl wrote: »
    She absolutely doesn't seem a very willing participant. She isnt' doing anything. She looks uncomfortable and out of her depth and has chosen to put up and shut up because in that situation what is she going to do? She's young, at work & put in a rotten position. It made me go red with humiliation for her & I bet lots of other women would say the same. It's so familiar and so disappointing.

    Actually, she does absolutely seem like a willing participant. She is hugging him, laughing, smiling, etc. and she does not look out of her depth.

    I never said she wants to do this nor did I say she wasn't compelled by employers, producers, etc.

    This could be a complete performance on her part or she could be grossed out. That video is not not complete nor do we know what else went on.

    You are just making assumptions. I'm just saying it not clear.


  • Options
    #258
    brevity
    Registered Users Posts: 8,508 ✭✭✭brevity


    DavidLyons_ wrote: »
    Well said..... friend an supporter of Roman Polanski....

    I'm wondering do some of them not consider what Polanski did as "wrong"?

    I mean David Lynch has made some movies that hint at what's going on in Hollywood but then he was in support of Polanski too.


  • Options
    #259
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 26,052 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Spon Farmer wrote: »
    Actually, she does absolutely seem like a willing participant. She is hugging him, laughing, smiling, etc. and she does not look out of her depth.

    I never said she wants to do this nor did I say she wasn't compelled by employers, producers, etc.

    This could be a complete performance on her part or she could be grossed out. That video is not not complete nor do we know what else went on.

    You are just making assumptions. I'm just saying it not clear.

    One thing is crystal clear. The girl is being manhandled by a person who has no idea how she might feel about it, and doesn't care either way.

    She basically has to submit to the mauling. He's a disgusting creep and there's no excusing his behaviour with possible explanations for hers. Her behaviour is not in question, but it sure does take the focus off him.


  • Options
    #260
    Spon Farmer
    Registered Users Posts: 4,201 ✭✭✭Spon Farmer


    alchemist33 wrote: »
    He even looks surprised when she slaps him!

    That is what boggles the mind - the look on his face.

    Can anyone translate what is said before and after?


  • Options
    #261
    Biggest lickspittle on boardz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 558 ✭✭✭Biggest lickspittle on boardz


    Penn wrote: »
    And it's why the Weinstein Company as a whole needs to be torn down. There is no way they didn't know what was happening, not with the numerous settlements and quashed news articles over decades.

    Agreed. They need to be broken up and scattered into the wind, along with a major FBI investigation and criminal prosecutions. See below for an extension into this...
    The last few days have been filled with "What did Meryl Streep know?", "What did Judi Dench know?", "What did Matt Damon know?"... hell we even had "What did Hillary Clinton know?"

    ...continued from above. What Hillary Clinton knew is highly, highly relevant.
    She was happy to accept millions in bribes donations from Weinstein in the form of fundraisers etc.

    But at the same time, she was U.S. Secretary of State while accepting funds from Harvey Weinstein. As with Obama, do you think she didn't know?
    Once again, a recurring feature in Hillary Clinton's career-keeping company with highly dubious characters who happen to throw her serious bucks.

    TL;DR: I suspect she was protecting Weinstein in exchange for 'donations'.
    The question the media should be going after right now is "What did the board of The Weinstein Company/Miramax/Dimension etc know?"

    Absolutely God damn everything, and they'll start squealing like pigs on each other if the Feds get involved.

    And if the rumours are to be believed, the other stuff going on re: Corey Felman etc. will make Weinstein look like a choirboy by comparison...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #262
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    tara73 wrote: »
    I knew you'll come up with the child abuse being what you meant with your 'don't see a gender issue here'. To use this as a proof there's no gender issue is just again, completely wrong. The child abuse in Hollywood is another, (even worse) scandal, not a validation there's no gender issue.

    The user didn't seem to me to be making a comment about this particular situation exclusively and was more speaking about the movie industry in general:
    _Dara_ wrote: »
    Some people want fame that bad. Most people shudder at the thought of fame, in my experience, but there is a large enough minority out there who actively want it and that all contributes towards it being an exploitative industry. I don’t see it as a gender issue either.

    Which is why when I replied to their post I cited the case of the Bollywood actor, Ashish Bisht, that said he had been treated similarly by females in positions of power at the beginning of his career:
    Actor Recounts Casting Couch Experience: Even Ladies Asked Me To Sleep With Them

    "Are you comfortable in bed?" This is a question Ashish Bisht recounts being asked by film producers to newcomers and aspirants -- like him -- looking to make it big in Bollywood.

    Casting couch still exists, says the debutante whose first film "Shab" is releasing on Friday, and who claims experiencing it first hand.

    Without taking names for the fear of "ending my career before it starts", Ashish told IANS here: "I have faced that (casting couch) a lot in the industry. Whenever I was called by some producers, I was straight away questioned, 'Kya tum bed pe comfortable ho (Are you comfortable in bed)?'.

    "When I was new to the city, even the ladies asked me to sleep with them if I wanted work. They called me home and tried to talk dirty with me," Ashish said.

    "There are some film producers in the industry who irritate the hell out of you with their messages. I feel stuck because if I respond, what do I say? And if I don't, they will see that I've read the message. Even if I dodge the topic, they come back to the same question," the 29-year-old said.

    He said it was still happening even if you have a film coming out.

    As for Hollywood, Terry Crews has come out and I'm sure there'll be many other guys with similar stories. Whether it's a powerful man or a powerful woman abusing their position (or an actress or actor that is being exploited) why should that make a difference. I fail to see why we should only be discussing it from one perspective, where the victim is female. Don't see any point in polarising the topic tbh.


  • Options
    #263
    Spon Farmer
    Registered Users Posts: 4,201 ✭✭✭Spon Farmer


    optogirl wrote: »
    There's always a lot of 'as the father of girls' stuff in connection to high profile sexual misconduct - I just think we shouldn't wait until it's potentially 'one of our own' before we express our distaste.
    I am not upset with him ... this reaction, from anyone, just annoys me.

    Yes, but he said he has always thought such behaviour was bad.

    Maybe he has never spoken out before because he has never had call to - I mean what experience does Matt Damon have of sexual harassment?


  • Options
    #264
    Biggest lickspittle on boardz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 558 ✭✭✭Biggest lickspittle on boardz


    While the ball is rolling, let's take a minute to talk about 'celebrity' photographer/alleged rapist and trash culture voyeur, Terry Richardson. Like Weinstein, Richardson has accumulated a notorious list of serious sexual allegations.

    And yet for some reason, he is being protected from on high by someone.
    Thankfully, questions are finally starting to be asked online about his history too:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/17/terry-richardson-new-york-magazine-model

    See if you recognise any of Richardson's pals from a quick google search:

    https://www.google.ie/search?q=terry+richardson&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwil0fiqx-jWAhVlAsAKHUd8ALcQ_AUICigB&biw=1280&bih=590#imgrc=_


  • Options
    #265
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    Terry makes my skin crawl. Ugh. What a creep.


  • Options
    #266
    BillyBobBS
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,568 ✭✭✭BillyBobBS


    al87987 wrote: »
    Weinstein is an old sick bastard, no doubting any of that.

    But I have to say whenever these stories of decades of abuse or scandal come out I always think to myself why didn't they just tell the truth earlier.

    I hear this stuff about being scared, he had power in the industry, potential lawsuits etc...

    I am of the opinion that if you see a serious crime, you report it. If you are the VICTIM of serious crime, you HAVE to report it. Otherwise you're somewhat on the hook for any further crimes perpetrated by aforementioned sicko.

    I'm not saying that silent victims are in the same bracket as this creep but your silence has helped lead to more victims, more crime and damaged how many more lives.

    Sometimes you just have to tell the truth, regardless of personal consequences.

    Which is why the likes of Meryl Streep coming out and going off on a virtue signalling rant against Trump is all the more laughable when she was only to happy to excuse Weinstein's carry on. It's not like she was a young struggling actor and needed a break or the money ffs.

    These type of people make me sick as much as the carry on of Weinstein himself.


  • Options
    #267
    Spon Farmer
    Registered Users Posts: 4,201 ✭✭✭Spon Farmer


    Wibbs wrote: »
    No, I said he may be genuine he may not. Giving some benefit of the doubt there, but then went on to outline my doubts. No contradictions.

    I may have misread your comment but I understand what you mean.

    [/QUOTE]He knows him for years, he has produced films with him, he's friends with his friends. They would certainly be close enough that such rumours which were rife would be known to him. And as I say a close friend of his warned Weinstein off his girlfriend. [/QUOTE]

    Just because Clooney was in Weinstein's social circle doesn't men he knew everything that went on. Socialising with people doesn't make you friends. And even with this well known secret, actress are saying they didn't want to speak out. Maybe Clooney didn't know because people made the same assumption you have - Clooney and Weinstein are friends so why try to talk to him about it.

    Maybe Pitt never told Clooney about what happened to Paltrow? Why is Clooney in the firing line for not knowing but not Pitt, who did know something for sure.
    Wibbs wrote: »
    Yes, I would actually. It doesn't mean I would know, but it would be reasonable for people to think I might. Doubly so if there were circulating rumours within my social set and industry about a friend of mine.

    If two of my girlfriends were hit on by someone, I'd be thinking WTF, again especially of the same someone had a reputation for it.

    So it is okay okay to gossip about you and tag you as guilty by association?
    Wibbs wrote: »
    Well, personally I'd call that a naive take on things.

    Naive by who? Me or Affleck?

    Affleck - yes, but everybody can be naive. Movie stars are not immune to mistakes.

    Me - not in this case, I simply said it seems that McGowan has misinterpreted what Affleck said. Affleck knows it happened to her, but that doesn't mean he must have known about all the others or bears responsibility for it. Weinstein became powerful because he had certain skills in dealing with people. Is it far fetched to believe he could manipulate Affleck?

    I'm not saying for sure Clooney and Affleck didn't know, but there is no evidence that they did. Denying they knew the rumours doesn't make them guilty of anything unless you also want to accuse the women who stayed silent.

    Dragging others down is just taking the spotlight away from the guilty party.


  • Options
    #268
    optogirl
    Registered Users Posts: 2,975 ✭✭✭optogirl


    Might go some way to explaining why people don't speak up - he's an absolute bully who turns the situation around so that it's HER that's embarassing HIM by not complying. This is really ugly stuff http://video.newyorker.com/watch/harvey-weinstein-caught-on-tape


  • Options
    #269
    josip
    Registered Users Posts: 13,724 ✭✭✭✭josip


    Harry Palmr wrote: »
    The idea that Hollywood is still a Jewish town is pretty ludicrous. It's now run by bean counters which run on code.

    Disney - Sean Bailey
    Warners - Kevin Tsujihara, Edward A. Romano, Toby Emmerich
    21st Century Fox - Stacey Snider (yes Jewish)
    Universal - Donna Langley, Jimmy Horowitz, Jeff Shell
    Columbia - Sanford Panitch
    Paramount - Jim Gianopulos

    Does my sarcasm/irony detector need adjusting?


  • Options
    #270
    Grayson
    Registered Users Posts: 16,161 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    BillyBobBS wrote: »
    These type of people make me sick as much as the carry on of Weinstein himself.

    So someone saying something about trump is as bad as a serial sexual assaulter?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #271
    Spon Farmer
    Registered Users Posts: 4,201 ✭✭✭Spon Farmer


    Candie wrote: »
    One thing is crystal clear. The girl is being manhandled by a person who has no idea how she might feel about it, and doesn't care either way.

    She basically has to submit to the mauling. He's a disgusting creep and there's no excusing his behaviour with possible explanations for hers. Her behaviour is not in question, but it sure does take the focus off him.

    Yes, Affleck clearly doesn't care but you don't actually know if she "has to submit". You don't know the story here.

    Just because Affleck is being a creep doesn't make the woman a victim.

    And funny you mentioned taking the focus of a subject - that was my point. Affleck is getting bad mouthed and being made a target while Weinstein is sidelined. Affleck has no more responsibility than anyone else who kept silent.


Advertisement