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…4142444647…127

Comments

  • Options
    #1292
    padser
    Registered Users Posts: 2,375 ✭✭✭padser


    anna080 wrote: »
    But the actors who play Kevin and Ken were only ever suspended from production while their cases were ongoing. Michael's (Kevin's) accusations in particular were quite harrowing.
    Sourcing the Daily Mail but sure..

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2278929/Michael-Le-Vell-Coronation-Streets-Kevin-Webster-charged-19-child-sex-offences-including-rape.html

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2317606/Bill-Roache-arrested-Coronation-Streets-Ken-Barlow-charged-rape-15-year-old-girl-1967.html

    They are both back in the show now after acquittal- but Bruno gets the sack based (from what I've read) on an allegation that has yet to have police involvement? That doesn't seem fair to me.


    It doesn't seem fair to you, because it's not.

    We have moved into a place where unproven allegations regularly cost men (it's always men) their jobs either permanently or temporarily pending an investigation.

    While there are some situations where it's necessary (e.g. a teacher) in most cases (e.g. a t.v. show) it's not.

    It's wrong - and just because the it's in response to another wrong (sexual assault) doesn't make it suddenly right.

    People are entitled to be proven guilty before being punished.


  • Options
    #1293
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,115 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    anna080 wrote: »
    It doesn't sit right with me that someone can lose their job on the basis of an allegation alone. I'm not talking about Harvey, we all know the score there. But yer man from Corrie above. An allegation of sexual assault against him and job done and dusted without even any due process?
    It's very unfair and worrying with it. On the one hand we have Weinstein who has an avalanche of accusations with a fair bit of corroboration on top and likely background police investigations walking about in "therapy", yet a single uncorroborated accusation has some other guy fired?

    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
    #1294
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    padser wrote: »
    People are entitled to be proven guilty before being punished.

    Ah no, that's not right at all.

    People are, however, entitled to be investigated before being punished, so the employer can conduct it's own disciplinary hearing if it happened in the work place. Alternatively, a contract may provide for a suspension with pay in certain instances.


  • Options
    #1295
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    Wibbs wrote: »
    It's very unfair and worrying with it. On the one hand we have Weinstein who has an avalanche of accusations with a fair bit of corroboration on top and likely background police investigations walking about in "therapy", yet a single uncorroborated accusation has some other guy fired?

    It's just so wrong. Imagine if I rocked into your work tomorrow and accused you, or your brother or your father of something- and on the basis of that allegation alone you/they got the sack! It's just so fcuked up. It's the complete opposite of the premise of our justice system.
    What is the point in even having courts of law if a single accusation alone can consequentially lose you your livelihood.
    It's really worrying.


  • Options
    #1296
    pjohnson
    Registered Users Posts: 23,388 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    In this new modern world any mention of "rape" may aswell be a instant death sentence for the accused.

    IF they are guilty then they deserve it but if they are innocent they still have the same fate. Its not rocket science to realise not 100% of all claims are 100% true. Yet certain people insist they are always true and should never ever be investigated/questioned. Bizzare but suits an agenda I guess.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1297
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    RabbleRouser2k wrote: »
    Separate post as I'm wondering if people are overreacting, or what. Adam Sandler puts hand on actress knee, then puts hand on other actress knee-thus now he's accused of many things.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-5027717/Twitter-slams-Adam-Sandler-touches-Claire-Foy-s-knee.html

    Oh my god. So now harmless human contact is considered shameful? People have completely lost the run of themselves. Stop the world and let me off please!


  • Options
    #1298
    Mr.Wemmick
    Registered Users Posts: 1,080 ✭✭✭Mr.Wemmick


    anna080 wrote: »
    Oh my god. So now harmless human contact is considered shameful? People have completely lost the run of themselves. Stop the world and let me off please!

    It's the pendulum swing of reaction. Very soon it will all be seen nonsense and we can throw the rapes and assaults out the window and forget them, along with the casual knee touch.

    There is no doubt, a man, who is not a husband/ boyfriend, should not casually touch anyone's knee like that. It is really creepy, very inappropriate and causes embarrassment and stress.. harmless contact would be if you touch someone's hand or shoulder/arm in a normal situation/context e.g to get their attention - appropriate and very normal.


  • Options
    #1299
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    Mr.Wemmick wrote: »
    It's the pendulum swing of reaction. Very soon it will all be seen nonsense and we can throw the rapes and assaults out the window and forget them, along with the casual knee touch.

    There is no doubt, a man, who is not a husband/ boyfriend, should not casually touch anyone's knee like that. It is really creepy, very inappropriate and causes embarrassment and stress.. harmless contact would be if you touch someone's hand or shoulder/arm in a normal situation/context e.g to get their attention - appropriate and very normal.

    Did you watch the clip? He did it first as he was referring to her, and then there was an awkward moment where he playfully did it again because he moved his hand just as she was about to jokingly rest hers on his.
    A total non event.
    But I guess if you were looking to be outraged it's prime fodder.


  • Options
    #1300
    Mr.Wemmick
    Registered Users Posts: 1,080 ✭✭✭Mr.Wemmick


    anna080 wrote: »
    Did you watch the clip? He did it first as he was referring to her, and then there was an awkward moment where he playfully did it again because he moved his hand just as she was about to jokingly rest hers on his.
    A total non event.
    But I guess if you were looking to be outraged it's prime fodder.

    I am not talking about that particular incident, but any casual knee touch which is not wanted, unexpected and inappropriate is not acceptable at all.

    At the end of the day, no one knows Sandler and Foy relationship, they could be shagging each other brains out, so that clip is not a measurement of anything.

    But I guess it's fodder for someone to be outraged at the perceived outrage of that clip.


  • Options
    #1301
    BorneTobyWilde
    Registered Users Posts: 35,880 ✭✭✭✭BorneTobyWilde


    Sandler was talking about his mother and put his hand on her knee, she then went to put her hand on his hand, but he moved it before she could, so he moved it back so she could put her hand on his. It was a comfort moment, not him being over powering and arrogant.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1302
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    anna080 wrote: »
    It's just so wrong. Imagine if I rocked into your work tomorrow and accused you, or your brother or your father of something- and on the basis of that allegation alone you/they got the sack! It's just so fcuked up. It's the complete opposite of the premise of our justice system.
    What is the point in even having courts of law if a single accusation alone can consequentially lose you your livelihood.
    It's really worrying.

    In the interests of accuracy, that's not really how it works, there was an enquiry. And if he feels due process and natural justice was not observed, he is entitled to appeal it, and ultimately head to the Courts.

    So it's not really on the basis of an allegation, it is on the basis of an investigation, findings and a disciplinary procedure. That's the premise of a justice system.


  • Options
    #1303
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    In the interests of accuracy, that's not really how it works, there was an enquiry. And if he feels due process and natural justice was not observed, he is entitled to appeal it, and ultimately head to the Courts.

    So it's not really on the basis of an allegation, it is on the basis of an investigation, findings and a disciplinary procedure. That's the premise of a justice system.

    Fair enough. But there is something really wrong with sacking someone before the police have even concluded their investigation. That's the part that doesn't sit right with me.


  • Options
    #1304
    meeeeh
    Registered Users Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    pjohnson wrote: »
    In this new modern world any mention of "rape" may aswell be a instant death sentence for the accused.

    IF they are guilty then they deserve it but if they are innocent they still have the same fate. Its not rocket science to realise not 100% of all claims are 100% true. Yet certain people insist they are always true and should never ever be investigated/questioned. Bizzare but suits an agenda I guess.
    If you are trying to sell a show any negative publicity is harmful. It's not fair but it's completely logical not to have someone with that kind of baggage in your ensemble. I know nothing about Corrie and even less about man in question but contract can be cancelled for multiple reasons and not all are made public. It's different for those with less public personas. A production line employee can have list of charges without ever affecting profitability of the company.

    It's all about profit, not about what is fair.


  • Options
    #1305
    Neyite
    Administrators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,947 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Neyite


    anna080 wrote: »
    Fair enough. But there is something really wrong with sacking someone before the police have even concluded their investigation. That's the part that doesn't sit right with me.

    To me, the sacking of the Corrie actor based on one uncorroborated allegation is jumping the gun - but I wonder is it that Corrie bosses are happy to use this as a reason to break contract? After all, the allegations towards the blokes who played Kevin and Ken are undoubtably more serious yet they their employment was not terminated. Is it because they were bigger stars and their removal might affect ratings, but this actor is expendable?

    That's just the same Hollywood politics playing out on a smaller stage. HW was not touched until his star was on the wane. As long as a star is generating the ratings which translate to hard cash for the money men behind the scenes, they won't kill their golden goose - no matter what that goose gets up to.

    Look carefully at any 'big' names that are now being accused along with HW. With a bit of digging you'll see that they might not have generated decent box office takings or had a few hits in a while. Their stardom will be descending. They'll be the ones outed and hounded out of town. Thrown to the baying mob. And I'm sure that many will use this as a way of getting rid of competition or rivals in the business too.

    The same rumours towards those at the top of their game, or the ones who are successful and destined to be even more so, won't get a mention.


  • Options
    #1306
    RabbleRouser2k
    Registered Users Posts: 8,294 ✭✭✭RabbleRouser2k


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5028427/Terry-Richardson-exposed-Paris-restaurant.html

    Terry Richardson everyone-a massive piece of excrement. But he's not the only one who pulled these stunts. Damien Hirst would do this 'trick' with the foreskin of his penis, where he'd make it look like chewing gum stuck to his trousers, then ask people for help 'flicking it off'-and laugh to himself. Not all artists are like this-most definitely not-but the utter scumbags practically demand attention.
    padser wrote: »
    It doesn't seem fair to you, because it's not.

    We have moved into a place where unproven allegations regularly cost men (it's always men) their jobs either permanently or temporarily pending an investigation.

    While there are some situations where it's necessary (e.g. a teacher) in most cases (e.g. a t.v. show) it's not.

    It's wrong - and just because the it's in response to another wrong (sexual assault) doesn't make it suddenly right.

    People are entitled to be proven guilty before being punished.

    In recent times, the most high profile teacher sackings were female, after accusations by a male student(s)-there was either one or more. When it went to trial, the teachers were found guilty.

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/bbc-sports-presenter-george-riley-11428775
    The BBC have suspended a presenter based on harassment claims. I think this is a much fairer way of dealing with things. If an accusation is made, suspend pending an investigation.

    I don't agree with how Corrie dealt with this-but it feels like there is something else we're not hearing about. (If not-then those who mocked people when they said there would be a witchhunt might be worried-a few of those who threw stones found they live in glass houses).

    We know the behaviour of many soap actors (including on Corrie) have 'questionable behaviour'-Jack P. Sheperd, for one, has threekids, one after an affair, two with his now ex girlfriend (who forgave him for the affair-despite them being together 15 yrs)-guy's not even 30 yet. Another actor was fired last yr for racist tweets.


  • Options
    #1307
    RabbleRouser2k
    Registered Users Posts: 8,294 ✭✭✭RabbleRouser2k


    Well, the Kevin Spacey floodgates are opening up.

    Anthony Rapp, Star Trek Discovery actor, has alleged Spacey tried to have sex with him when he was 14, and Space was 26.

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/adambvary/anthony-rapp-kevin-spacey-made-sexual-advance-when-i-was-14?utm_term=.xv12YE3g2#.laeL2MlvL


  • Options
    #1308
    Hammer89
    Registered Users Posts: 3,003 ✭✭✭Hammer89


    Hollywood is horrible really, isn't it? This was pretty obvious with the Weinstein stuff, but I've just read Kevin Spacey's statement on the accusation, in which he comes out as gay. It's a bit of a masterstroke in PR because Anthony Rapp's accusation was big news for about an hour, before Spacey's management deflected attention away from the whole 'attempted sexual abuse of a child' angle by telling him to come out.

    That's the story now. You'll see nothing about would-be paedophilia in the headlines as a result. It now looks like Spacey is the brave one for finally addressing rumours that have been swirling around for years. What a horrible c*nt this bloke is. Same goes for his squad of management.


  • Options
    #1309
    blinding
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,466 ✭✭✭blinding


    Didn’t everyone know Kevin Spacey was gay .


  • Options
    #1310
    marklazarcovic
    Registered Users Posts: 6,211 ✭✭✭marklazarcovic


    blinding wrote: »
    Didn’t everyone know Kevin Spacey was gay .

    Not a dig but a perfect example of the deflection his 'coming out' tweet achieved.


  • Options
    #1311
    blinding
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,466 ✭✭✭blinding


    marklazarcovic wrote: »
    Not a dig but a perfect example of the deflection his 'coming out' tweet achieved.
    It seems to have been a very clever legally constructed press release .

    No clear admission and then some deflection . By some accounts his “ cleverness " is not going down to well .


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1312
    BillyBobBS
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,568 ✭✭✭BillyBobBS


    Hammer89 wrote: »
    Hollywood is horrible really, isn't it? This was pretty obvious with the Weinstein stuff, but I've just read Kevin Spacey's statement on the accusation, in which he comes out as gay. It's a bit of a masterstroke in PR because Anthony Rapp's accusation was big news for about an hour, before Spacey's management deflected attention away from the whole 'attempted sexual abuse of a child' angle by telling him to come out.

    That's the story now. You'll see nothing about would-be paedophilia in the headlines as a result. It now looks like Spacey is the brave one for finally addressing rumours that have been swirling around for years. What a horrible c*nt this bloke is. Same goes for his squad of management.

    This kind of carry on is rife in Pedowood i'd say. Spacey not remembering it happened is frightening. How many other times has he tried this on and gotten away with it with minors? What a cess pit.


  • Options
    #1313
    ricero
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,348 ✭✭✭✭ricero


    Kevin spacey a vile and disgusting man now in my eyes


  • Options
    #1314
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    He may have got up on a 14 year old boy but don't worry about that because LOOK OVER HERE he's actually A GAY.


  • Options
    #1315
    Biggest lickspittle on boardz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 558 ✭✭✭Biggest lickspittle on boardz


    ricero wrote: »
    Kevin spacey a vile and disgusting man now in my eyes


    You haven't heard even a fraction of it yet. I will remind everyone that I posted a flight log earlier that revealed Kevin Spacey was a passenger on the notorious Lolita Airways that was being run by convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

    As warped as the whole thing is, these Hollywood types are small time crooks compared to what's coming next...just wait and see.


  • Options
    #1316
    mikeysmith
    Closed Accounts Posts: 326 ✭✭mikeysmith


    The gay community can't be too happy with his statement


  • Options
    #1317
    RobbingBandit
    Registered Users Posts: 18,107 ✭✭✭✭RobbingBandit


    You've gotta wonder just who will be the biggest name to be accused when the dust finally settles on this .


  • Options
    #1318
    mikeysmith
    Closed Accounts Posts: 326 ✭✭mikeysmith


    RobbingBandit wrote: »
    You've gotta wonder just who will be the biggest name to be accused when the dust finally settles on this .

    I'm looking forward to the smug BBC presenter being outed


  • Options
    #1319
    The_Kew_Tour
    Registered Users Posts: 34,069 ✭✭✭✭The_Kew_Tour


    Did Spacey just click the Panic Button and made things worse?


  • Options
    #1320
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    Spacey's statement is fcuking bizarre. "I don't remember that- whoops". Pretty much sums up the first paragraph.
    But it the next paragraph that's a real head scratcher- this story has encouraged me to address other things about my life.....
    Did he just make a connection between supposed paedophelia and homosexuality? Wtf.
    I chose to live as a gay man. I want to deal with this openly and honestly and that starts with explaining my own behavour ...
    You mean explaining the fact you don't remember seducing a 14 year old? Yea being gay doesn't explain that.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1321
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Coming out as gay in response to his attempt at scoring with a 14-year-old is... ugh.

    He probably thought, "hey, people love it when someone famous comes out as gay".


Advertisement