Harvey Weinstein scandal (Mod warning in op.)

Christy42 wrote: »

Does not always have to be verbal but it needs to be there.

It was there....... remaining in that bed after Melaine began to have oral sex with her was conveying consent.

allym wrote: »

Sexual assault is not being dragged down an alley at knife point.

Yeah, I'm aware of that.

If you don’t believe her account then fair enough, that’s your opinion. But to base it solely on the fact that she didn’t react as you would expect someone to is unfair. Again, none of us know how we would react and it’s foolish to think otherwise.

The only one being foolish here is you. This whole nonsense about believing victims just because they say they were a victim is ridiculous, not to mention dangerous. How about we take each accusation on it's own merits before giving our opinions (not that we should be doing so without a trial having first taken place, mind... but here we unfortunately find ourselves).

Edit: actually the victim knowing the perpetrator often makes it worse in terms of processing what’s happening. There’s an element of the brain going “but this is my friend/boyfriend/husband/girlfriend/wife/whoever... they can’t be doing this”. Which makes it harder for people to respond at all

I'm sure it is hard to tell a friend to stop but awkward sex =/= rape.

Timothy (by her own admission) was harassed for hours by Melanie the night before for sex. She said she was trying to sleep and Melanie wouldn't leave her alone. The next night, despite that, she began playing sex games with her and got back into her bed. She allowed Melanie to touch her knowing that she was sexually attracted to her and even let her touch her breasts. Melanie then went down on her and later used a sex toy on her. Again, Timothy is not a paraplegic and so there is no reason why she could not have just pushed her off her and left the room, let alone why she would freeze in that moment and to remain so for an hour or more.

To cut your inevitable strawman argument(s) off at the pass: No I do not think that just because you get in someone's bed that they then have a right to rape you and I absolutely see how someone could genuinely freeze when the person they are in bed with begins sexually assaulting them......... BUT there would need to be a whole different set of circumstances in place for me (or anyone with so much as an ounce of common sense) to accept that could have been what occurred here.

Someone simply does not freeze when someone touches them that moments before they were happy enough to play sex games with and allow them to fondle their boobs. There was no element of shock here. She knew Melanie was into her and wanted to have sex with her and so if you want to put that down to just being my opinion, knock yourself out, but as far as I am concerned my opinion is based on logical reasoning and yours the latest right-on nonsense about how we should believe all accusations because.................................. well, I'm still waiting for a good reason for why we should be doing that.

In that situation who lies there and doesn't say stop?
Who cant say no, dont do that?
She could have got up and left. The excuse of wanting to go to sleep, that her friend had worn her down is, imo, nonsense.

Never heard of either of these two before. Is there a sense of jumping on the bandwagon with some of them?

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

It was there....... remaining in that bed after Melaine began to have oral sex with her was conveying consent.



Yeah, I'm aware of that.



The only one being foolish here is you. This whole nonsense about believing victims just because they say they were a victim is ridiculous, not to mention dangerous. How about we take each accusation on it's own merits before giving our opinions (not that we should be doing so without a trial having first taken place, mind... but here we unfortunately find ourselves).



I'm sure it is hard to tell a friend to stop but awkward sex =/= rape.

Timothy (by her own admission) was harassed for hours by Melanie the night before for sex. She said she was trying to sleep and Melanie wouldn't leave her alone. The next night, despite that, she began playing sex games with her and got back into her bed. She allowed Melanie to touch her knowing that she was sexually attracted to her and even let her touch her breasts. Melanie then went down on her and later used a sex toy on her. Again, Timothy is not a paraplegic and so there is no reason why she could not have just pushed her off her and left the room, let alone why she would freeze in that moment and to remain so for an hour or more.

To cut your inevitable strawman argument(s) off at the pass: No I do not think that just because you get in someone's bed that they then have a right to rape you and I absolutely see how someone could genuinely freeze when the person they are in bed with begins sexually assaulting them......... BUT there would need to be a whole different set of circumstances in place for me (or anyone with so much as an ounce of common sense) to accept that could have been what occurred here.

Someone simply does not freeze when someone touches them that moments before they were happy enough to play sex games with and allow them to fondle their boobs. There was no element of shock here. She knew Melanie was into her and wanted to have sex with her and so if you want to put that down to just being my opinion, knock yourself out, but as far as I am concerned my opinion is based on logical reasoning and yours the latest right-on nonsense about how we should believe all accusations because.................................. well, I'm still waiting for a good reason for why we should be doing that.

Nope. Not consent. Look at it the other way. Melanie knew she had been refused sex at several points. You would think she would have looked for something more solid than lying still for consent at that point.

I have said consent needs to be actively given. Doing nothing is not giving consent I don't know how many times that needs to be repeated.

Not backing what the men have done but here is an example where people find it funny that a woman gropes a guys privates and they all laugh about it saying it is different even though they guy ended up blocking the girl from social media

siblers wrote: »

Was watching The Apprentice during the week, one female contestant was taking measurements of a male model's trouser size, she was being super pervy and measured from his penis at one stage. It was only laughed off.

If a guy did the same to a woman, he'd be kicked off the show.

It actually received a considerable amount of criticism online and in the media over it. One example below. Was trending on twitter.

http://amp.timeinc.net/nme/news/tv/apprentice-criticised-showing-objectification-male-models-2169273?source=dam&__twitter_impression=true

Biggest lickspittle on boardz wrote: »

Disgraced publicist Max Clifford has died in prison. I wonder if he kept documents to be distributed after he died?
He would definitely know where the bodies are buried, so to speak:

https://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/britain/disgraced-publicist-max-clifford-dies-after-collapsing-in-jail-36394622.html

Wouldn't matter now-the guy is so disgusting, and his own secrets more disturbing, that nobody would care.

Why did it take so long to get rid of this guy

Deleted User wrote: »

There's a tonne of people who are extremely likeable once the camera is on them, but is a total complete jerk in public life.

Also quite a few that are just annoying on camera, but then meet em off camera, they're actually pretty darn nice.
Colette Fitzpatrick was one of the few I've met who's nice off and on camera. Had no issue taking selfies with teens at some business presentation.