Harvey Weinstein scandal (Mod warning in op.)

Shurimgreat · 10-11-2017 05:55PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Misandric horseshite.

Elaborate like a good lad.

Shurimgreat · 10-11-2017 05:57PM

Deleted User wrote: »

HBO has cut ties completely with him. He has been removed from an upcoming special about autism and all of his shows are being removed from their streaming service.

Good enough for me. Career ruined and all his own fault. Whatever about it being a crime or not, its ruined his reputation. Women I'd say wouldn't work with him again unless they like some dude taking out his bits every so often to have a play.

Wibbs · 10-11-2017 05:58PM

Royale with Cheese wrote: »

So by that logic... I love the rolling stones, led Zeppelin, queens of the stone age, Rammstein. Except somebody in there to be next.

Well the Stones had Wyman getting the leg an underage girl, one Mandy Smith, who he later married when she turned 18, however he was "seeing her" when she was 13 and according to her they had sex when she was 14 and he was nearly 50. Led Zeppelin had Jimmy Page, another who was sleeping with at least one underage 13/14 year old when he was in his late 20's. Took her with him on tour. David Bowie another in the mix. There's a long list of rockers sleeping with underage girls, but they seem to get away with it. A) because it happened years ago and scrutiny was generally lower and

they come outa the gate as "depraved rockers, sex and drugs and rock n roll" so I suppose the hypocrisy factor isn't there to nearly the same degree as Hollywood types, who with a few exceptions have always peddled the wholesome, Right on, squeaky clean image.

Mokuba · 10-11-2017 05:59PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Weinstein at all have denied they committed any crime or did anything to anyone.

They are hardly going to hold their hands up and admit it. If they did, they would be heading straight to jail, their careers would be ruined and they'd probably have to pay significant compensation.

Their denials are utterly meaningless.

That is a completely ridiculous and very dangerous thing to say. Some denials could be truthful but you are just going to categorise them all as meaningless.

Scary stuff.

Outlaw Pete · 10-11-2017 05:59PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Elaborate like a good lad.

You're saying, but for the law, men would be "walking the streets all the time flashing and masturbating in front of everyone"...... no idea if you're a man or woman, but that is utter bollox. You make it sound like men are all a pack of sexual deviants, only thing keeping us in check the fear of being arrested.

Mokuba · 10-11-2017 06:02PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

WTF? He was in a room with two women who gave no consent. Your defence of him and the others is going to frankly bizarre lengths.

Next you will be saying Weinstein did nothing!

Did you read the articles?

They gave consent. They gave him thumbs up when he asked, they laughed before and during.

One of the 5 quoted in the sexual assault/misconduct article was on the phone with him. That is insane.

My defense of him is based on the fact that this seems to be turning into something very, very dangerous - where accusations are taken as fact.

Shurimgreat · 10-11-2017 06:02PM

Mokuba wrote: »

That is a completely ridiculous and very dangerous thing to say. Some denials could be truthful but you are just going to categorise them all as meaningless.

Scary stuff.

They might be innocent, the might not be.
They will be judged on if several independent accusers come forward. And there may or may not be a trial. As I said earlier its unlikely these women would make these accusations without valid reasons. Its easy to be deemed a trouble maker and never be given another job.

Do you think a film director for example would hire an actress with a reputation for making truthful or even false accusations of sexual assault? They'd probably think they'd be accused in the wrong next.

server down · 10-11-2017 06:02PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

I believe indecent exposure is a crime.

Otherwise men would be walking the streets all the time flashing and masturbating on front of everyone. They'd be doing it on the train, in the street, on the bus, no crime whatsoever in your eyes. Or maybe just maybe most countries have laws against it. In which case this guy did commit a crime. A repeat offender would probably find themselves on a sex offenders register. In this particular case, he had his tackle out before they even had a chance to say no.

Call me old fashioned but I think women shouldn't have to watch men masturbate on front of them without at least some consent.

It was indoors though. He could possibly claim consent - since they stayed. The legality doesn’t really matter as his career is toast.

Shurimgreat · 10-11-2017 06:04PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

You're saying, but for the law, men would be "walking the streets all the time flashing and masturbating in front of everyone"...... no idea if you're a man or woman, but that is utter bollox. You make it sound like men are all a pack of sexual deviants, only thing keeping us in check the fear of being arrested.

Ah relax. I didn't say all men. A small minority of men would, if there was nothing to stop them. Thankfully there are laws to stop that kind of thing.

server down · 10-11-2017 06:04PM

Mokuba wrote: »

Did you read the articles?

They gave consent. They gave him thumbs up when he asked, they laughed before and during.

One of the 5 quoted in the sexual assault/misconduct article was on the phone with him. That is insane.

My defense of him is based on the fact that this seems to be turning into something very, very dangerous - where accusations are taken as fact.

For old crimes of abuse, multiple accusations from independent sources are often taken as fact.

_Dara_ · 10-11-2017 06:05PM

anna080 wrote: »

I remember thinking could you ever actually trust these people again. One guy seemed genuinely remorseful and even seemed to gain Louis' sympathy, but you have to remember that these people are professional groomers. They know how to get you on side and how to convince you of their decency.

I think I recall another interviewee saying that he would not be able to live amongst the general public again because he would not be able to stop himself flashing. Bleurgh. At least he was honest, I guess.

_Dara_ · 10-11-2017 06:09PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Wonder if Madonna has any accusers waiting in the wings, she certainly seems handsy with her young fans.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q--VdKQ8m_c

Very possibly. She was heavily criticised for that, rightfully. Think is, the girl said she was fine with it. I don’t think it was fine myself personally but if someone doesn’t consider themselves a victim, there’s not much you can do.

10-11-2017 06:10PM

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Louis CK's show is not going to age well.

That reminds me of that infamous appearance Jimmy Saville on Have I Got News For You and how he more or less admitted to doing whatever he can get his hands on.

Yes, there's no comparison between the two whatsoever - Saville was a monster but CK is a delinquent at best, when put against Saville.

But Graham Linehan's comment of, "he was hiding in plain sight", seems to accurately represent CK in that image, which I'm guessing is a screengrab from his show, Louie?

It's interesting that he's openly admitting to it in some regard.

bloodless_coup · 10-11-2017 06:21PM

Bit annoying to have someone like Louis CK being ostracized by distributors and production companies due to some allegations. I am being denied access to his content due to the trending outrage. I couldn't care less what he's done, I'll still watch his shows.

A Little Pony · 10-11-2017 06:21PM

Soon won't have any entertainers on TV.

suicide_circus · 10-11-2017 06:26PM

Deleted User wrote: »

That reminds me of that infamous appearance Jimmy Saville on Have I Got News For You and how he more or less admitted to doing whatever he can get his hands on.

Yes, there's no comparison between the two whatsoever - Saville was a monster but CK is a delinquent at best, when put against Saville.

But Graham Linehan's comment of, "he was hiding in plain sight", seems to accurately represent CK in that image, which I'm guessing is a screengrab from his show, Louie?

It's interesting that he's openly admitting to it in some regard.

Louis made several public cries for help through his material but no one listened. Shame on us all.

A Little Pony · 10-11-2017 06:28PM

suicide_circus wrote: »

Deleted User wrote: »

That reminds me of that infamous appearance Jimmy Saville on Have I Got News For You and how he more or less admitted to doing whatever he can get his hands on.

Yes, there's no comparison between the two whatsoever - Saville was a monster but CK is a delinquent at best, when put against Saville.

But Graham Linehan's comment of, "he was hiding in plain sight", seems to accurately represent CK in that image, which I'm guessing is a screengrab from his show, Louie?

It's interesting that he's openly admitting to it in some regard.

Louis made several public cries for help through his material but no one listened. Shame on us all.

Help for what? Acting like a scumbag? He is a douchebag along with the rest of them. If they can't handle the "Hollywood" type fame then just get out of the business.

Autecher · 10-11-2017 06:30PM

A Little Pony wrote: »

Help for what? Acting like a scumbag? He is a douchebag along with the rest of them. If they can't handle the "Hollywood" type fame then just get out of the business.

It was a joke pal.

Easy Rod · 10-11-2017 06:49PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

You're saying, but for the law, men would be "walking the streets all the time flashing and masturbating in front of everyone"...... no idea if you're a man or woman, but that is utter bollox. You make it sound like men are all a pack of sexual deviants, only thing keeping us in check the fear of being arrested.

You're deliberately misinterpreting the poster's point to get a dig in about misandry.

strandroad · 10-11-2017 07:03PM

Mokuba wrote: »

Did you read the articles?

They gave consent. They gave him thumbs up when he asked, they laughed before and during.

One of the 5 quoted in the sexual assault/misconduct article was on the phone with him. That is insane.

My defense of him is based on the fact that this seems to be turning into something very, very dangerous - where accusations are taken as fact.

Did you read the article?

He was doing it on production sets. Walking around offering your penis show to junior employees = sexual harassment in the workplace = lawsuits, if not criminal proceedings.

Why do you they are all dropping him now? Who wants to pay out compensations or lose production insurance for harbouring him?

brooke 2 · 10-11-2017 07:32PM

doylefe wrote: »

Bit annoying to have someone like Louis CK being ostracized by distributors and production companies due to some allegations. I am being denied access to his content due to the trending outrage. I couldn't care less what he's done, I'll still watch his shows.

'Nothing wrong with being a pervert. I'm a pervert. You're a pervert. Everybody is a pervert.'

Very 'funny' guy. What is there not to love? :rolleyes:

10-11-2017 07:39PM

if you've read army of spies by the new yorker, I'd venture to say, check Corey Haims mothers bank balance in a few months. In terms of damage control, who best for sheen to get a good reference from but the victims mother. It's happened in the past where parents have jacked in work and lived off their kids earnings, cars, holidays mansions etc, all while the kid is being pimped out. many have been emancipated from same parents as a last ditch way to keep their own earnings and prevent exploitation, remember we're talking about kids too. you gotta ask what kind of person you're dealing with. where was she when robert downey Jr took a young teenege haim to live with him for a spell?? why not home to mrs Haim????? yeah she' close to em alright!!

sheen is loaded and what's $2 million to haims mother if she'll vouch it certainly wasn't him. If she knows it definitely wasn't, she must know who it definitely was??? otherwise she's as reliable as sheen. aparently the dogs on the street knew it was him as much as same said dogs new weinstien raped mcgowan...

expectationlost · 10-11-2017 07:45PM

statement from louis ck https://twitter.com/ditzkoff/status/929050106246115329

says he always asked before he took his dick out in front of women but from the NYT article it doesn't sound like he waited for an answer.

strandroad · 10-11-2017 07:50PM

expectationlost wrote: »

statement from louis ck

says he always asked before he took his dick out in front of women but from the NYT article it doens't sound like he waited for an answer.

What a narcissist. He mentions how "admired" he was three times in a short statement.

10-11-2017 07:55PM

what pisses me off is how the likes of SNL comediens like Tina Few can make a career out of mocking bill cosby and sarah palin (and rightly so).

As soon as it hits home, well gosh darn it we're all out of ideas.
Has anyone read jessica chastains view on it??what a lady..
I was happy before I was an actress and if I was blanked in the morning, I'd be fine with that!! class act. she's gone after brian singer as well and good for her.

I'll bet someone outside the USA will be getting a call come charade/award season.. hopefully it's ricky gervais

10-11-2017 08:02PM

strandroad wrote: »

What a narcissist. He mentions how "admired" he was three times in a short statement.

bang on you're right too also "It’s a predicament for them. The power I had over these women is that they admired me. And I wielded that power irresponsibly"

dya think he worded that a certain way ?? trying to be clever?? it was a PRE DICK ament??? wouldn't surprise me at all!!!!:D

HandsomeBob · 10-11-2017 08:45PM

rusty cole wrote: »

if you've read army of spies by the new yorker, I'd venture to say, check Corey Haims mothers bank balance in a few months. In terms of damage control, who best for sheen to get a good reference from but the victims mother. It's happened in the past where parents have jacked in work and lived off their kids earnings, cars, holidays mansions etc, all while the kid is being pimped out. many have been emancipated from same parents as a last ditch way to keep their own earnings and prevent exploitation, remember we're talking about kids too. you gotta ask what kind of person you're dealing with. where was she when robert downey Jr took a young teenege haim to live with him for a spell?? why not home to mrs Haim????? yeah she' close to em alright!!

sheen is loaded and what's $2 million to haims mother if she'll vouch it certainly wasn't him. If she knows it definitely wasn't, she must know who it definitely was??? otherwise she's as reliable as sheen. aparently the dogs on the street knew it was him as much as same said dogs new weinstien raped mcgowan...

Yeah...this is basically my thinking. My attitude towards this woman is dubious as is given her blatant lack of care for her son when he was a child and at his most vulnerable.

brooke 2 · 10-11-2017 08:55PM

HandsomeBob wrote: »

Looks like Haim's mother has torpedoed the accusations against Charlie Sheen.

Obviously she knew her son best but I'd question, regardless of how open her son was with her, the assumption that he would have disclosed a deeply traumatising and confusing period of his life to her.

There seems to be such a consistent level of corroboration coming out of the set of the film in question that it's criminal that Sheen is protected from even being questioned due to the statute of limitations.

I saw an interview with Corey Haim's mother about one year after he died. They had a very close relationship. She was undergoing chemotherapy
when he died and he was taking care of her. What struck me as rather strange was when the interviewer asked her if she wished anything in the
past could have been done differently, she said no, that 'I would not be the person I am today' without her past - or something to that effect. My
eyes popped out of my head when she said this! :eek: Her son was dead!! And she would not have changed anything??? :mad: Perhaps it was
guilt because she seems to have facilitated Corey's career - the family left Canada to move to Hollywood. Corey's sister returned to Canada as
she was not happy in Hollywood. The parents eventually separated, but it was the father who had always seemed to have been more concerned
with the affect of the marriage break-up on the children. She does not like Corey Feldman and wishes he would stay quiet. One wonders why she
seems to be in such a state of denial. Perhaps it would be too difficult to face the truth. My sympathy for her would be limited, because of her
saying that she would not have done anything differently prior to her son's death!! :mad:

brooke 2 · 10-11-2017 09:09PM

Neyite wrote: »

Thing is, that you have to take family dynamics into account. People in these cases usually ask where the parents were, why they let their child go to parties unsupervised, and given that they were 'in' the industry, must have heard rumours swirling about the powerful people and the things that they were rumoured to do. But, some parents - not necessarily Haim's - were content to turn a blind eye as long as the money rolled in. Or they were groomed as well.

Child abusers are usually people close to the family. Sometimes the parent's are fully aware and even actively facilitating it. Some don't want to rock the boat when their child does disclose because they like the lifestyle or social standing they have and don't want to lose it.

Children who were protected are the ones like Elijah Wood, who's parents never let him attend orgies adult parties alone. Then you have the Lindsey Lohans, Corey Haims, and Drew Barrymores who were allowed to have an adult lifestyle before even puberty.

To be honest, I'd take what Mrs. Haim says with a big pinch of salt. There is too much corroboration of her son's abuse from other sources. Too many people have similar stories to Haim's about the same people who abused him. Of course she's going to deny that her son was passed around to paedophiles, and that there was basically unlimited and unsupervised access to the child and that the whole of Hollywood, including every child predator, knew it. To say otherwise would raise serious questions about her duty as his guardian.

+100

One thing I read was about a party attended by Corey Haim when he was very young - his parents were also in attendance. Corey was not enjoying it and went outside where he was found crying by Sarah Jessica Parker and her then boyfriend, Robert Downey Jr. According to Parker, Downey brought Corey home with him and allowed him to live with him for months. How strange was that?
Corey was only a child and it is well known that Downey had drug problems in his youth. Where were Corey's Mum and Dad during this time? Corey's Mum does not want much delving into her past behaviour re Corey's welfare.

brooke 2 · 10-11-2017 09:14PM

DaithiMa wrote: »

Anyone that has any doubts about Corey Feldman's claims needs to watch 'An Open Secret'. The most disturbing thing about it is that most of the perpetrators have got away scot free and in some cases are STILL working on kids TV shows/networks. The place is a cesspit.

Some even went to jail and were able to resume working in the industry after their release. :mad:

Harvey Weinstein scandal (Mod warning in op.)

Comments