Prune Tracy wrote: » It's not an opinion - it's speculation, which is usually based on some evidence. As said, to expose his behaviour - why wouldn't it be that? It's less of a leap than your conclusion. I understand your empathy for men in the face of crazy demonisation of men at the moment - I share your views there. But jeez, I'm not gonna be going down the road of then demonising women and downplaying domestic abuse against one - particularly when I'm a woman!
PeterParker957 wrote: » I take your point there, not my intention to demonise women per se but I may let my empathy take me too far. You can understand reading something that "all men either have harassed women or will do" and i look at my friends, my dad and my brother and think "f**k you they will".
eviltwin wrote: » Get off the internet. There is none of this kind of thing in the real world.
A Little Pony wrote: » He's a genius, a great director. Not arsed about the rest.
PeterParker957 wrote: » You haven't met the bat crap crazy fruit loop I have to work with. She believes that any woman making an accusation of harassment, abuse or rape should be automatically believed and "respected" for speaking up. She's also used "patriarchy" and "phallic society" and wasn't taking the p**s!
Prune Tracy wrote: » A Little Pony wrote: » He's a genius, a great director. Not arsed about the rest. You're downplaying domestic violence by a non Muslim man? Such a shocker! :)
eviltwin wrote: » So she's a nutter. She's not representative of feminism or women as a whole.
brainfreeze wrote: » I always wonder with these type of articles, how to the writers pick their targets? There is nothing wrong with a moral outrage hit piece every now again, however the article starts with: Mark Wahlberg has done far worse things than Mel Gibson. What makes Mel Gibson special and Mark Wahlberg normal? Why did she choose one over the other? Mel Gibson has said racist things, Mark Wahlberg has committed racial violence, even blinding a man for simply being Vietnamese. Why is Mark, the far more violent man, more forgivable than Mel? Answer: The Journalist doesn't know enough about either subject. Her gaps on Gibson are even acknowledged in the article - she probably has no idea about Wahlberg. This is not journalism, this is a badly researched rant created to capitalize on your emotions. This is the standard of a blog post.
Pac1Man wrote: I can't help but root for the guy!
AlanG wrote: » I agree with much of the article but I do believe there has to be room for redemption and reform in society. If he has learned from his past and they have gone through the courts then he should not be blacklisted. This is not the case with Roman Polanski who is convicted and on the run for the rape of a child but seem seems to be considered a great guy in Hollywood. Harrison Ford should be blacklisted for how he supports Polanski.
Dubh Geannain wrote: » But Will Ferrell killed Blue
Jayop wrote: » A Little Pony wrote: » He's a genius, a great director. Not arsed about the rest. Beat the wife no problem, have an abortion you're a disgusting baby killer, right? Parody.
_Dara_ wrote: » Very glad someone mentioned Marky Mark's disgusting crime. I've heard people (elsewhere, not on boards) excuse him on the grounds that he was young. You know what? He wasn't that young. I think most 16, 17, 18 year olds know not to go around blinding innocent folk. Oh but he's so dreamy that his crime is no big deal. :rolleyes:
PeterParker957 wrote: » He didn't blind anyone. The guy himself said he lost his sight in that eye years before. It was a horrible crime but facts are facts.
AlanG wrote: » This is not the case with Roman Polanski who is convicted and on the run for the rape of a child but seem seems to be considered a great guy in Hollywood. Harrison Ford should be blacklisted for how he supports Polanski.
PeterParker957 wrote: » No he shouldn't.
AlanG wrote: » Do you have a basis for why you think a person making millions for and collecting prizes for a fugitive paedo rapist should not be an outcast in a decent society. Polanski is living the high life thanks to the support and advocacy of the likes of Ford. I would live to hear why you think Harrison Ford's actions are ok.
_Dara_ wrote: » Very glad someone mentioned Marky Mark's disgusting crime. I've heard people (elsewhere, not on boards) excuse him on the grounds that he was young. You know what? He wasn't that young. I think most 16, 17, 18 year olds know not to go around blinding innocent folk. I see above that he didn't blind that guy. Oh right, well then the racially-motivated assault is gggrrrraaand so. Oh but he's so dreamy that his crime is no big deal. :rolleyes:
_Dara_ wrote: » he wasn't that young. Old enough to know right from wrong.
Plague Maiden wrote: » The person that raised the issue was concerned with quality research and unearthing Wahlberg's hidden history, so I think it's only right that the facts be known. He didn't blind anyone. If we're going to hold people to task then let's at least limit it to acts that they've actually committed.
