Henry Cavill forced to apologize for #metoo comments

DavidLyons_ wrote: »

I'm reporting the posts for constantly attempting to derail the thread and trying to provoke other posters with half truths and twisting their words.

It's for the poor creatures own good.

To be honest, surely everyone should just put on the oul ignore list and/or not reply. Deliberate trolling or not.

There is no debate to be had with missus. For everyones sanity. Ignore!

DONTMATTER wrote: »

I'm out of here again. We've really reached the depths when posters are calling rape victims professional whingers.

I called professional whingers, professional whingers. I said nothing about victims of rape. There's a chasm of a difference there I feel you are purposely misconstruing for your own ends.

DONTMATTER wrote: »

The only doubting and unbelieving in this thread is from the angry men towards the women who bravely told their stories through the metoo campaign. They have been attacked, called professional whingers, been called mental, basically been told to shut up about it!

First of all, I'm not at all angered by professional whingers on social media. They will never have any bearing on my life in any way, shape or form, I have no reason to feel threatened by it because I simply don't take EL James wannabes hoping to be featured in Buzzfeed, Salon, etc, seriously. I have no issue with them because the movement isn't about actually achieving anything or changing anything, it's simply about providing an echo chamber for professional whingers.

A case in point - Lena Dunham, one of the more 'influential' influencers behind the movement, is the same person who wrote in books that were published, about how she sexually abused and molested her younger sister. Lena the same person who declared that all women should be believed, yet when it hit close enough to home that one of her friends was accused of inappropriate sexual behavior with a woman, Lena immediately tried to discredit the woman and claim that she shouldn't be believed. Lena is the same person who lent her support to a Presidential candidate who denied and discredited many women who claimed to have been sexually harassed. That's Hillary btw, who denied and tried to discredit those women.

With 'supporters' like that behind the 'movement', who needs fcuking critics? :pac:

LLMMLL wrote: »

It’s a little disingenuous to suggest that this is about convictions in court after I’ve pointed out numerous times that the vast majority of metoo experiences posted do not name a man and have absolutely nothing to do with court.

Yet there are still plenty of men on this thread who said they would not believe a woman’s story. One even saying a million experiences would not convince him.

Stones in glass houses mate, and not for the first time either. You made the initial allegation, then withdrew it when you couldn't back it up, then put it forward again in the form of a question asking me were you wrong. I figured at that point there was nothing to be gained from your dancing ever so disingenuously around what you appeared to be driving at but didn't have the balls to come straight out and say it, like many of the stories of the metoo movement - I didn't bother continuing to entertain that nonsense.

LLMMLL wrote: »

You’re reading something into my posts that I never said.

You're kidding, surely? :pac:

DONTMATTER wrote: »

You don't have to believe every story, that's not the point.

Eh? And all this time you've been critical of anyone who doesn't believe the stories of what you call these brave women! Who made you the arbiter of who is and who is not to be believed? Lena Dunham? That's one of the main issues with the metoo movement generally - everyone wants to be top dog and underdog at the same time - the person with the greater victimhood status is to be regarded with the most authority to determine who shall be believed and who shouldn't, according to their judgement.

That only works on people who already feel obligated to support your ideology. For those that don't, your judgement is meaningless. It doesn't matter to me that I'm a terrible person by your standards (take a ticket like :pac:), because what are you going to do about it? "Criticise them" as LM suggested? That's only feeding your own ego, because you imagine your criticisms are taken seriously by those who don't buy into your ideology as well as those who do. It makes you look good to other supporters of your ideology, which is what as far as I'm concerned the metoo movement has always been about - a small band of miscreant millenials with far too much time on their hands, trying to outdo each other in displaying how virtuous they are (except of course when it's themselves the fingers are being pointed at, a la Lena Dunham and Hillary Clinton).

LLMMLL wrote: »

I have zero idea what you’re talking about. By allegation you mean this?:



I’d hardly class it as an allegation, unless the allegation is that you’re a normal person. I don’t think believing the experiences of a large number of people who share that experience is a negative thing. I think it’s normal. And I assumed that you, like most people, would believe an experience that a large number of people shared.

You then went on to say that you would doubt the experiences of a MILLION people.

I did not “withdraw my allegation” due to not being able to back it up. I changed my view on you. I saw that actually you were not the type of person who believes large numbers of people who share a personal experience.

And I’m perfectly happy with that. My view is that anyone can read your post about not believing a million people and draw their own conclusions.

In fact rereading your post that doesn’t even make sense. As I never restated it as a question. What I did restate as a question was the “allegation” that you wouldn’t believe the experience of a million people. But that “allegation” was never withdrawn.

It seems you’ve got a lot of different things mixed up in your head. And frankly your language of “allegations” and “withdrawing” is playin the victim.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Again, you're being disingenuous here. I did not say that I didn't believe the experiences of a million people. I don't believe their claims of their experiences. That's entirely different to the narrative you're trying to suggest. I also said it wouldn't matter if it was one person or a million people all claiming to have had the same experience. Without evidence, their claims are simply of no value, worthless.

Millions of people make claims every day of their experiences, and it would require people to be incredibly gullible if people were simply to take them at their word without evidence. Contrary to your belief, more people do question narratives which they disagree with and do not believe, and that's normal too. If the world worked the way you perceive it should work, then nobody would question anything, and people would simply believe everything without question.

Then it would simply be a question of who can create the more believable narrative, in order to gain the support of the most gullible people in any given society.

Again I don’t even feel the need to argue against this logic. I think it speaks for itself. And the narrative I’m supposedly trying to suggest seems completely accurate to me.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Well that's the point, isn't it? Of course any narrative you put forward is going to be completely accurate to you, in much the same way as a professional whingers narrative is entirely accurate to them. It's worthless to anyone else though, and whether you or anyone else chooses to believe their narrative is still entirely your own business. I don't see any reason to make it mine.

Again that’s not the way belief works no matter how much you try to claim it is.

By your assertions, I want to believe there are high levels of sexual harassment, it’s all a choice, and if there were 1 million posts, where 1 was a woman complaining about sexual harassment and the other 999,999 were
Women saying they don’t experience any sexual harassment I’d believe the 1 woman because it’s a choice and what I want to believe.

That is nonsense of course. Belief is not a matter of choice but of credibility. And 1 million similar experiences are very credible. I note in your previous post you talked about people sharing millions of experiences everyday as if they’re all unrelated. The key fact is that they are common experiences. They share features. So your conclusion that I must believe any experience that any random person shares is false. I believe COMMON experiences shared by MANY people.

And these terrible allegations I’ve supposedly
Made against you is that you don’t. Which you repeated in your above posts. And like I said, I think that speaks for itself

DONTMATTER wrote: »

Here's what that poster said in their original post:

"As far as I can see the metoo campaign certainly has achieved it's aims of validating a certain class of professional whinger. It hasn't had any effect on people's daily lives other than anyone I know personally regarding it with contempt and ridicule."

And then repeated these claims a number of times including in the last post. There's no squirming out of it. It's a disgusting thing to say about women who have gone through horrific ordeals.

Women who have posted their stories of being raped, harassed, abused etc don't deserve to be labeled as whingers. Full stop. There's no ifs, buts or maybe's.

But maybe if

DONTMATTER wrote: »

New poster on my ignore list. Welcome on board.

Yay!

DONTMATTER wrote: »

There you go again, the metoo movement isn't all about rape victims, you've just called them professional whingers again!
I don't know who Lena Durham is, you seem a bit obsessed about them though. That's not healthy.
I have no interest in celebrity. I'm worried about the thousands upon thousands of women who have suffered abuse, harassment and rape. You don't have to believe them all, you just have to accept they're not all lying and it's a huge problem.
But someone who refers to abuse survivors as professional whingers won't get that.

I did say the metoo movement has enabled professional whingers. I didn't say anything about victims of rape. I was the first one to point out that many victims of rape and sexual assaults do not have the same access to social media as professional whingers, so it is entirely professional whingers are driving the narrative of the metoo movement, not the victims of rape and sexual assault.

You're not the first person who claims to have never heard of Lena Dunham, to be fair not many people actually have heard of her, and even less people care who she is, which is a good thing because she's forever discrediting the causes she claims to represent. She's a liability to any movement, which is why some people in the metoo movement point out that while she may claim to be representative of their cause, they would prefer to disassociate themselves from her narrative -

Last Sunday, “Thor: Ragnarok” actress Tessa Thompson schooled Lena Dunham after the “Girls” creator Instagrammed a photo of herself mugging alongside a bevy of A-listers who spearheaded the Time’s Up initiative.

“Lena was not anywhere present in our group during the countless hours of work for the last two months,” Thompson commented, before lashing out at the star on Twitter for supporting “Girls” writer and producer Murray Miller in November after he was accused of rape by actress Aurora Perrineau.

“The truth remains: Many women, particularly women of color, don’t feel safe and seen. To those women, like Aurora Perrineau — I see you. I am with you. This must be clear,” Thompson tweeted.

Adding fuel to the fire, Tarana Burke — the creator of the #MeToo hashtag and Michelle Williams’ guest at last Sunday’s Golden Globes — weighed in, tweeting #IstandwithTessa.


And Dunham stands alone.

The #MeToo era has no time for Lena Dunham


The huge problem is that many of the people involved in the metoo movement are saying that women should be believed, and then contradicting themselves by saying that they themselves don't believe all women. That is a huge problem, for them. It's certainly not my problem, but someone who tries to claim that I associate professional whingers like Lena Dunham with victims of rape, definitely doesn't get that, because for them it doesn't appear to be about supporting victims of rape at all, but rather it appears to be entirely about offering their virtual support to people who already agree with their narrative - professional whingers just like them.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The huge problem is that many of the people involved in the metoo movement are saying that women should be believed, and then contradicting themselves

Lena Dunham is many of the people involved in metoo? I thought she was just one person.

LLMMLL wrote: »

Lena Dunham is many of the people involved in metoo? I thought she was just one person.

Seriously? She is but one example to illustrate the point I was making. There are many more, millions even :pac:

But I don't need to cite the examples and experiences of millions when both yourself and DON'TMATTER have already pointed out that even you don't believe that all women who bravely choose to share their stories should be believed. Who is or is not to be believed is entirely predicated upon whom you choose to believe, based entirely upon the credibility of their narrative.

I don't need personal and subjective narratives to convince me as to who or what I do, or don't, or should or shouldn't believe. I can simply examine evidence presented from a number of different sources to build an overall picture rather than simply relying on a particular individual narrative which you choose to present as evidence. The one thing I do agree with you on is that belief is indeed based upon credibility, and if you have none, then that's an issue for you, not for me, as I'm well aware of just how prevalent the issue is in reality, contrary to your narrative that it is as widespread in society as you claim it is.

I didn't take the opening poster at their word either, because I would have been entirely wrong to have done so, and I said as much in my very first post on this thread -

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Here's a link, which offers a bit of context -


'Insensitivity was absolutely not my intention' - Henry Cavill apologises after #MeToo comments


So he wasn't forced to apologise, he chose to.

He wasn't making the point you think he was making though, nor did he intend the point he did make to be taken out of context, and he makes that point himself -


Your opening post is the kind of editorial liberties he was referring to, or rather more specifically the editorial liberties taken by the editors of GQ Australia magazine in this case to present a narrative of Henry Cavill and his opinions in a way in which he had not intended.

It's not much of a story really tbh, both sides seeing what they want and all that.

I'm with DONTMATTER on this one -

DONTMATTER wrote: »

I just went for a massive ****. I enjoyed every moment of it.

I think the point of her post was that celebrities opinions aren't relevant to most people. It's about the only good point they've made in this whole thread tbh :pac: