Harvey Weinstein scandal (Mod warning in op.)

NI24 · 10-01-2018 7:46am

HandsomeBob wrote: »

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

http://www.vulture.com/2018/01/tessa-thompson-walks-back-criticism-of-lena-dunham.html

Lena Dunham's in the 'TimesUp' movement? But she's a molester, and rape defender. And its noticeable that the
'Non white' ladies are being treated like crud.

The Times Up movement is already falling apart. Im even reminded of how the 'Gun Control' movement, despite the shooting of Gabby Giffords 7 years ago, fell to pieces within months.

The statement Dunham made when the writer on Girls was accused was clumsy, but the idea behind it was probably the most well meaning and decent thing she's shown since I've become aware of her. There isn't anything wrong with supporting a friend who has been accused of a horrific crime and I'd like to think that any of us would do the same for a friend instead of throwing them underneath the bus. The problem is that Lena should have kept it to herself instead of issuing such a bizarre statement.

The problem with the movement is the same with any movement without one coherent voice; the bigger it gets, the more it splinters into sub groups who comandeer the message and define it differently.

I completely agree. For the first time I had respect for the little pebble pusher. Then her friend's lawyers claimed the victim was shaking them down for money and subsequently retracted that claim and I went back to disgust. You don't defend friends like that.
Incidentally, my sister was going through her old fashion magazines and came upon an article about the guy's wedding to his wife. Apparently Lena did an interpretive dance at their wedding. She must have had to pay them.

RabbleRouser2k · 10-01-2018 8:30am

_Dara_ wrote: »

I’ve avoided most of the Golden Globes coverage because... vom. Is it true that there was no mention of male victims?

I only watched Oprah’s speech on mute. She’s a consummate populist. I just... can’t. But the standing ovation at the end. Barf. Especially hurts to see actors I love like Frances McDormand and Sam Rockwell getting involved in the back-slapping. Nooooo!

If you count one joke made at Kevin Spacey's expense, yep, nothing. Wasn't even anything made about 'Hollywood's fave perviest uncle George Takei' (His words, btw) but then again he's hardly Hollywood anymore-he's more a twitter persona nowadays, and since the allegation against him, even that is fading out.

NI24 wrote: »

There have been dozens of post lambasting Meryl and Rose for what they did or didn't do and a handful denouncing the men. I see reality.

Look at the title-Weinstein is the one whose getting bashed the most. But to my recollection, besides Weinstein, Matt Damon, Ben Affleck, Kevin Spacey, Dustin Hoffman, Dan Schneider, Danny Masterson, John Travolta, Bryan Singer, Brett Ratner, James Franco, Woody Allen, JAmes Woods, Max Landis, Eddie Berganza (comic book editor) etc have been blasted on these boards (the latter probably not as much as others).

Rose and Meryl have gotten coverage in the last few pages, but hardly the entirety.

Apparently Lena Dunham isn't in the TimesUp initiative, she turned up for a photo op. That's why Tessa Thomson called her out.

https://nylon.com/articles/tessa-thompson-times-up-campaign

NI24 · 10-01-2018 8:36am

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

_Dara_ wrote: »

I’ve avoided most of the Golden Globes coverage because... vom. Is it true that there was no mention of male victims?

I only watched Oprah’s speech on mute. She’s a consummate populist. I just... can’t. But the standing ovation at the end. Barf. Especially hurts to see actors I love like Frances McDormand and Sam Rockwell getting involved in the back-slapping. Nooooo!

If you count one joke made at Kevin Spacey's expense, yep, nothing. Wasn't even anything made about 'Hollywood's fave perviest uncle George Takei' (His words, btw) but then again he's hardly Hollywood anymore-he's more a twitter persona nowadays, and since the allegation against him, even that is fading out.

NI24 wrote: »

There have been dozens of post lambasting Meryl and Rose for what they did or didn't do and a handful denouncing the men. I see reality.

Look at the title-Weinstein is the one whose getting bashed the most. But to my recollection, Matt Damon, Ben Affleck, Kevin Spacey, Dustin Hoffman, Dan Schneider, Danny Masterson, John Travolta, Bryan Singer, Brett Ratner, James Franco, Woody Allen, JAmes Woods, Max Landis, Eddie Berganza (comic book editor) etc have been blasted on these boards (the latter probably not as much as others).

Rose and Meryl have gotten coverage in the last few pages, but hardly the entirety.

Most of those men aren't silent and complicit (like Meryl); they (supposedly) actively committed crimes against women. I'm talking about the men who worked with Weinstein.

suicide_circus · 10-01-2018 8:42am

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42630108

Well well well....

RabbleRouser2k · 10-01-2018 8:46am

NI24 wrote: »

Most of those men aren't silent and complicit (like Meryl); they (supposedly) actively committed crimes against women. I'm talking about the men who worked with Weinstein.

Then look at the Tarantino, Clooney posts-Tarantino's career is so over, he's having to resort to doing a Star Trek movie. Without the Weinsteins, he's done.

Also, look at the praise people gave Jessica Chastain for calling out Bryan Singer-not even worried if she never acts again.

suicide_circus wrote: »

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42630108

Well well well....

Yeah, the feminists on twitter are already lambasting her...cos she has 'white privilege'. Ugh, that phrase, it's like they have nothing else up their sleeve.
And ask em to explain it, they got nothing.

Dylan Farrow's calling out the posers, which there are many of.

https://www.themarysue.com/when-is-woody-allens-time-up/

Wibbs · 10-01-2018 8:53am

NI24 wrote: »

Most of those men aren't silent and complicit (like Meryl); they (supposedly) actively committed crimes against women. I'm talking about the men who worked with Weinstein.

I certainly lambasted them and guys like Brad Pitt who had two exes "approached" by Harvey and he said nothing and did nothing to point him out.

Not just men BTW, Miramax had a lot of women working there too and a few have since come forward saying they were aware of sleazy goings on. They kept silent too.

suicide_circus wrote: »

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42630108

Well well well....

I can see a backlash coming. Monsters like Harvey need to be exposed and that's a gaol society should set, but the attention seeking that has coasted in on the back of that goal, particularly from celeb talking heads will start to make people question more.

NI24 · 10-01-2018 8:58am

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

suicide_circus wrote: »

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42630108

Well well well....

Yeah, the feminists on twitter are already lambasting her...cos she has 'white privilege'. Ugh, that phrase, it's like they have nothing else up their sleeve.
And ask em to explain it, they got nothing.

Are they lambasting her for going on French TV this year to defend Roman Polanski? Are they lambasting her for defending him at a retrospective of his work? According to her, the attacks against him made her "not proud to be a woman".

NI24 · 10-01-2018 8:58am

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

suicide_circus wrote: »

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42630108

Well well well....

Yeah, the feminists on twitter are already lambasting her...cos she has 'white privilege'. Ugh, that phrase, it's like they have nothing else up their sleeve.
And ask em to explain it, they got nothing.

Are they lambasting her for going on French TV this year to defend Roman Polanski? Are they lambasting her for defending him at a retrospective of his work? According to her, the attacks against him made her "not proud to be a woman".

suicide_circus · 10-01-2018 9:03am

Wibbs wrote: »

I can see a backlash coming. Monsters like Harvey need to be exposed and that's a gaol society should set, but the attention seeking that has coasted in on the back of that goal, particularly from celeb talking heads will start to make people question more.

With such movements there is always a risk, perhaps an inevitability, that it will go too far and have unintended consequences. In this open letter these French women are warning against a new sexual puritanism and defending the right to attempt to seduce, even clumsily. It's a ballsy move in the current climate you have to say!

strandroad · 10-01-2018 9:03am

suicide_circus wrote: »

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42630108

Well well well....

Catherine Deneuve can **** right off, trying to "steal a kiss" or grope is an assault. If she has longings for days past she can always hire someone to "persistently and clumsily seduce" her at work. I for one do not wish to live in a Mad Men world.

RabbleRouser2k · 10-01-2018 9:04am

NI24 wrote: »

Are they lambasting her for going on French TV this year to defend Roman Polanski? Are they lambasting her for defending him at a retrospective of his work? According to her, the attacks against him made her "not proud to be a woman".

Hollywood is a glass house, where everyohe is afraid to throw stones.

Wibbs · 10-01-2018 9:04am

NI24 wrote: »

Are they lambasting her for going on French TV this year to defend Roman Polanski? Are they lambasting her for defending him at a retrospective of his work? According to her, the attacks against him made her "not proud to be a woman".

They should be. I would. Just another celeb out of touch with reality.

strandroad · 10-01-2018 9:09am

suicide_circus wrote: »

How many couples met in the workplace? Should this practice be illegal?

"Surprise" gropes and kisses Deneuve describes are illegal. It's harassment.

suicide_circus · 10-01-2018 9:11am

strandroad wrote: »

"Surprise" gropes and kisses Deneuve describes are illegal. It's harassment.

That's not what my post was addressing

strandroad · 10-01-2018 9:13am

suicide_circus wrote: »

That's not what my post was addressing

But that's what Deneuve understands as "hitting on". It's not asking someone out for coffee and getting a yes or a no. It's physical attempts.

suicide_circus · 10-01-2018 9:23am

strandroad wrote: »

But that's what Deneuve understands as "hitting on". It's not asking someone out for coffee and getting a yes or a no. It's physical attempts.

Playing devil's advocate here but Deneuve's preference as a woman seems to be the prospect of unsolicited clandestine touchy advances. It's about choices. She chooses to live like that and found at least 100 other French women to sign up!

*HR department note: I do not support unsolicited clandestine touchy advances in the workplace

seenitall · 10-01-2018 9:25am

I'd bet it's been a good while since anybody attempted to "hit on" Deneuve, as she understands it. (And no, not because "she's an old hag", but because of her iconic status in France.)

She was young in a completely different era, and in France to boot. What we consider dangerous sexual harassment now, was actually deemed merely clumsy attempts at seduction then - it was a very chauvinistic society by present-day standards.

She probably just forgot that time has (supposedly

) moved on since the days of her being a young actress having to physically fend off every perv with any amount of power in the film industry. Which given the pervading culture of the time, she probably considered just a part of the job.

strandroad · 10-01-2018 9:27am

suicide_circus wrote: »

Playing devil's advocate here but Deneuve's preference as a woman seems to be the prospect of unsolicited clandestine touchy advances. It's about choices. She chooses to live like that and found at least 100 other French women to sign up!

Lovely but it's the kind of preference that is best resolved by finding someone who shares the same kink, or a professional

Not by advocating it to be a standard for everyone.
It's just like spanking!

RabbleRouser2k · 10-01-2018 9:50am

seenitall wrote: »

I'd bet it's been a good while since anybody attempted to "hit on" Deneuve, as she understands it. (And no, not because "she's an old hag", but because of her iconic status in France.)

She was young in a completely different era, and in France to boot. What we consider dangerous sexual harassment now, was actually deemed merely clumsy attempts at seduction then - it was a very chauvinistic society by present-day standards.

She probably just forgot that time has (supposedly ) moved on since the days of her being a young actress having to physically fend off every perv with any amount of power in the film industry. Which given the pervading culture of the time, she probably considered just a part of the job.

So in short you're using internalised misogyny as an excuse. She's not allowed an opinion, one which 100 other women share. Okayyyy...

My grandmother lived to be a 100, she changed her attitude toward things very often during her life, adapting with the times and changing her attitude as she learned and experienced changes in the world.
Deneuve has been at the forefront of feminism, long before most of these ladies who denounce her now were even born.
Shes the one who said 'A woman has to be intelligent, have charm, a sense of humor, and be kind. It's the same qualities I require from a man.'
What they are angry about is over a 100 women, and many more who did not sign, are not cowtowing to their whims. That the 'Timesup' and 'Metoo' Movements are young, and already falling apart is what's been taken away from this.
There is a difference between sexual harassment and flirting. We all know the difference. But empirical feminists see no difference.
And just as an example, why did so few women come forward to defend Tessa Thomson, a woman of colour, when she was essentially forced to apologise to Lena Dunham for a genuine grievance? Its the usual blinkers on.

NI24 · 10-01-2018 10:06am

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

My grandmother lived to be a 100, she changed her attitude toward things very often during her life, adapting with the times and changing her attitude as she learned and experienced changes in the world.
Deneuve has been at the forefront of feminism, long before most of these ladies who denounce her now were even born.
Shes the one who said 'A woman has to be intelligent, have charm, a sense of humor, and be kind. It's the same qualities I require from a man.'
What they are angry about is over a 100 women, and many more who did not sign, are not cowtowing to their whims. That the 'Timesup' and 'Metoo' Movements are young, and already falling apart is what's been taken away from this.
There is a difference between sexual harassment and flirting. We all know the difference. But empirical feminists see no difference.
And just as an example, why did so few women come forward to defend Tessa Thomson, a woman of colour, when she was essentially forced to apologise to Lena Dunham for a genuine grievance? Its the usual blinkers on.

Are you serious? She can have any opinion she wants but there's no doubt she's a product of her culture and time. If she says stupid things, she's going to get criticized. If she and 100 other women want to kiss the butt of creeps, then good riddance to bad rubbish. She obviously doesn't understand the difference between flirting and harassment. In conclusion, she's wrong wrong wrong.

Ulysses Gaze · 10-01-2018 10:10am

Looks like Franco is in a little trouble....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5248487/James-Franco-smiles-despite-sexual-harassment-claims.html

Wibbs · 10-01-2018 10:16am

One question does arise about this let's wear black "protest" at the Golden Globes. Why didn't the women boycott it en masse? Do similar with the Oscars. Go off and book a room somewhere else that same night. That would send a clear signal they actually wanted change. But then they wouldn't get their face and fashion choices and "bravery" splashed across the wires. I don't think it would even occur to them.

seenitall · 10-01-2018 10:29am

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

So in short you're using internalised misogyny as an excuse. She's not allowed an opinion, one which 100 other women share. Okayyyy...

My grandmother lived to be a 100, she changed her attitude toward things very often during her life, adapting with the times and changing her attitude as she learned and experienced changes in the world.
Deneuve has been at the forefront of feminism, long before most of these ladies who denounce her now were even born.
Shes the one who said 'A woman has to be intelligent, have charm, a sense of humor, and be kind. It's the same qualities I require from a man.'
What they are angry about is over a 100 women, and many more who did not sign, are not cowtowing to their whims. That the 'Timesup' and 'Metoo' Movements are young, and already falling apart is what's been taken away from this.
There is a difference between sexual harassment and flirting. We all know the difference. But empirical feminists see no difference.
And just as an example, why did so few women come forward to defend Tessa Thomson, a woman of colour, when she was essentially forced to apologise to Lena Dunham for a genuine grievance? Its the usual blinkers on.

So, in short, as per Deneuve, a 100 other women, your grandmother and yourself - "trying to steal a kiss" is not sexual harassment. Okaaaay yourself. Only I don't know what all the fuss in Hollywood is about then. Poor misunderstood Harvey, he was only clumsily flirting after all.

Penn · 10-01-2018 10:37am

Wibbs wrote: »

One question does arise about this let's wear black "protest" at the Golden Globes. Why didn't the women boycott it en masse? Do similar with the Oscars. Go off and book a room somewhere else that same night. That would send a clear signal they actually wanted change. But then they wouldn't get their face and fashion choices and "bravery" splashed across the wires. I don't think it would even occur to them.

I think that would be fairly contrary to what they're trying to achieve though. They want to be seen, they want their pictures in the papers and they want articles about how they wore black because a big point they're trying to make is that it needs to be talked about. It needs to be visible. That they shouldn't have to hide. Many of them also brought women's rights activists as their guests, and many in their interviews on the red carpet vocalised issues such as calling out E! directly for a female presenter who left because her male co-presenter was getting paid far more than her for the same job.

There are many forms of protest, and boycotting it would have obviously been a viable one. But I don't think there's an issue with the way they did go about it. It's having their cake and eating it too in many regards, but I don't think it's an issue.

strandroad · 10-01-2018 10:39am

Wibbs wrote: »

One question does arise about this let's wear black "protest" at the Golden Globes. Why didn't the women boycott it en masse? Do similar with the Oscars. Go off and book a room somewhere else that same night. That would send a clear signal they actually wanted change. But then they wouldn't get their face and fashion choices and "bravery" splashed across the wires. I don't think it would even occur to them.

To voluntarily remove themselves and give field to who wanted them removed, blackballed or controlled? That's illogical.
What I would like to see is the exact opposite, the likes of Sorvino or Judd or Rapp or Sciorra invited and speaking, showing that they are still in the fold. I didn't follow the event and don't know if they were there, but they should. Perhaps they didn't want to.

Wibbs · 10-01-2018 11:00am

Penn wrote: »

I think that would be fairly contrary to what they're trying to achieve though. They want to be seen, they want their pictures in the papers and they want articles about how they wore black because a big point they're trying to make is that it needs to be talked about. It needs to be visible. That they shouldn't have to hide.

That's why I added the bit about holding their own get together.

strandroad wrote: »

What I would like to see is the exact opposite, the likes of Sorvino or Judd or Rapp or Sciorra invited and speaking, showing that they are still in the fold. I didn't follow the event and don't know if they were there, but they should. Perhaps they didn't want to.

IIRC Judd was there, well she'll turn up to any protest she agrees with. Never mind she's a bit "troubled". This is the same Judd that has compared that eejit Trump winning the presidency to her being molested as a child and that the Trump result was worse. :rolleyes: Don;t think the other names were there. I'd imagine if they were they'd be front and centre in the pics of the event.

Neyite · 10-01-2018 2:35pm

Wibbs wrote: »

One question does arise about this let's wear black "protest" at the Golden Globes. Why didn't the women boycott it en masse? Do similar with the Oscars. Go off and book a room somewhere else that same night. That would send a clear signal they actually wanted change. But then they wouldn't get their face and fashion choices and "bravery" splashed across the wires. I don't think it would even occur to them.

I wondered that too, but on another forum saw the point being made that this was an awards ceremony for their work too so why should they miss out on that due to the actions of others.

That said, the black dresses thing seemed to me to be little more than a Facebook temporary filter to virtue signal and in reality doing very little to change the actual problem. And the gesture lost any credibility when all those in the black dresses stood up for a standing ovation for Kirk Douglas, and applauded James Franco and other men on the night who have similar allegations to the ones Spacey and Weinstein faced.

JP Liz V1 · 10-01-2018 2:38pm

strandroad wrote: »

To voluntarily remove themselves and give field to who wanted them removed, blackballed or controlled? That's illogical.
What I would like to see is the exact opposite, the likes of Sorvino or Judd or Rapp or Sciorra invited and speaking, showing that they are still in the fold. I didn't follow the event and don't know if they were there, but they should. Perhaps they didn't want to.

Ashley Judd was at the Globes but not sure if she was ever on stage though

PopePalpatine · 10-01-2018 2:47pm

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

http://www.vulture.com/2018/01/tessa-thompson-walks-back-criticism-of-lena-dunham.html

Lena Dunham's in the 'TimesUp' movement? But she's a molester, and rape defender. And its noticeable that the
'Non white' ladies are being treated like crud.

The Times Up movement is already falling apart. Im even reminded of how the 'Gun Control' movement, despite the shooting of Gabby Giffords 7 years ago, fell to pieces within months.

I'm thinking more along the lines of other movements which originated on/gained traction through Twitter, such as #Occupy or #Black(/insert minority group here)LivesMatter. The extremes of those movements (communists/anarchists for the former, Mugabe Did Nothing Wrong/Fuck White People-types for the latter) got amplified by their opponents and the moderates melted away.

kunst nugget · 10-01-2018 2:49pm

Neyite wrote: »

I wondered that too, but on another forum saw the point being made that this was an awards ceremony for their work too so why should they miss out on that due to the actions of others.

That said, the black dresses thing seemed to me to be little more than a Facebook temporary filter to virtue signal and in reality doing very little to change the actual problem. And the gesture lost any credibility when all those in the black dresses stood up for a standing ovation for Kirk Douglas, and applauded James Franco and other men on the night who have similar allegations to the ones Spacey and Weinstein faced.

Could people have been clueless about the Douglas allegations when giving him a standing ovation? - I'll admit to not knowing anything about it until I heard people giving out about it on Twitter. And, like I said already, all I've seen is an accusation by anonymous poster on a gossip website. Has there been anything concrete said about him or any actual accusations made against Douglas?

cloudatlas · 10-01-2018 2:57pm

PopePalpatine wrote: »

I'm thinking more along the lines of other movements which originated on/gained traction through Twitter, such as #Occupy or #Black(/insert minority group here)LivesMatter. The extremes of those movements (communists/anarchists for the former, Mugabe Did Nothing Wrong/Fuck White People-types for the latter) got amplified by their opponents and the moderates melted away.

Same thing happened with Occupy that happened with the Arab Spring there is a collective sense of something must change but there is conflicting opinion and disorganisation which leads to panic and a search for anyone that can fill that gap, in which case the Arab Spring movement turned to the military, the occupy movement splintered and the different groups went in different directions.

Neyite · 10-01-2018 3:19pm

kunst nugget wrote: »

Could people have been clueless about the Douglas allegations when giving him a standing ovation? - I'll admit to not knowing anything about it until I heard people giving out about it on Twitter. And, like I said already, all I've seen is an accusation by anonymous poster on a gossip website. Has there been anything concrete said about him or any actual accusations made against Douglas?

I'm not sure, but I don't think so. It appears to be an open secret in Hollywood pretty much since it happened.

I think that NW's rape, beating and hospitalisation are all on record, and it's known that she went to a hotel to meet a very famous man at the height of his fame about a film role at dates that closely correspond to the attack. I'm not sure, but I think it was on record somewhere at some point it was KD she was supposed to meet, but possibly over the years any naming has been redacted. She was 16, and it was 1954. He would have been 38 and was by then a huge star with plenty of award nominations under his belt.

kunst nugget · 10-01-2018 3:29pm

Neyite wrote: »

I'm not sure, but I don't think so. It appears to be an open secret in Hollywood pretty much since it happened.

I think that NW's rape, beating and hospitalisation are all on record, and it's known that she went to a hotel to meet a very famous man at the height of his fame about a film role at dates that closely correspond to the attack. I'm not sure, but I think it was on record somewhere at some point it was KD she was supposed to meet, but possibly over the years any naming has been redacted. She was 16, and it was 1954. He would have been 38 and was by then a huge star with plenty of award nominations under his belt.

I honestly can't find anything substantive on it - a lot of articles quote the gawker article that quotes the anonymous comment on a gossip website. If someone has a link to anything beyond shadowy rumours, I'd be interested in reading it.

10-01-2018 3:44pm

Pretty disappointing about Franco tbh. I just don't get people.

Synode · 10-01-2018 4:09pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Pretty disappointing about Franco tbh. I just don't get people.

The accusations against him seem extremely band wagoney

10-01-2018 4:19pm

Synode wrote: »

The accusations against him seem extremely band wagoney

Some do but there's enough proper dodgy ones (rather than just invitations) to give credence to.

ceadaoin. · 10-01-2018 4:37pm

Synode wrote: »

The accusations against him seem extremely band wagoney

The stuff about his film school has been around for months. Supposedly there was going to be an expose about it which didn't happen. Other stuff about his behaviour on college campuses was years ago. It's not just because he won a golden globe or because of the Weinstein stuff.

Synode · 10-01-2018 4:41pm

ceadaoin. wrote: »

The stuff about his film school has been around for months. Supposedly there was going to be an expose about it which didn't happen. Other stuff about his behaviour on college campuses was years ago. It's not just because he won a golden globe or because of the Weinstein stuff.

A woman is accusing him of asking her to pose nude in something for $100. What's the problem here? He asked, she said yes.

Another is saying he tried to force her to perform oral sex on him in a car. Did he force her or try to? Was he messing around or deadly serious. These type of accusations lessen the impact of the real ones imo

Lux23 · 10-01-2018 4:46pm

Synode wrote: »

The accusations against him seem extremely band wagoney

Ah, there have been rumours about him for a while. And there was that time he admitted to coming on to a 17-year-old girl.

ceadaoin. · 10-01-2018 4:46pm

kunst nugget wrote: »

I honestly can't find anything substantive on it - a lot of articles quote the gawker article that quotes the anonymous comment on a gossip website. If someone has a link to anything beyond shadowy rumours, I'd be interested in reading it.

I think it first appeared in a biography about her years ago, without naming him, but has been an open secret pretty much since it happened. A quick Google yesterday showed it being discussed on message boards at least back in 2004 and KDs name being mentioned.

Lux23 · 10-01-2018 4:47pm

Synode wrote: »

A woman is accusing him of asking her to pose nude in something for $100. What's the problem here? He asked, she said yes.

Another is saying he tried to force her to perform oral sex on him in a car. Did he force her or try to? Was he messing around or deadly serious. These type of accusations lessen the impact of the real ones imo

How is forcing someone to perform oral sex messing around? By try to, do you mean ask?

JP Liz V1 · 10-01-2018 4:48pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Pretty disappointing about Franco tbh. I just don't get people.

Will it hurt his Oscar chances now?

Synode · 10-01-2018 4:52pm

Lux23 wrote: »

How is forcing someone to perform oral sex messing around? By try to, do you mean ask?

He didn't force her to. She didn't give him oral sex per the accusations

Neyite · 10-01-2018 4:52pm

kunst nugget wrote: »

I honestly can't find anything substantive on it - a lot of articles quote the gawker article that quotes the anonymous comment on a gossip website. If someone has a link to anything beyond shadowy rumours, I'd be interested in reading it.

It seems to me that there's been a big clean up of stuff online. When I first read about it a few years back there was loads more articles. I remember seeing details of her injuries, timelines, and different actors who were close to her, plus her family quoted at length. Now it's all the gawker type links and that's not where I originally read it.

Synode · 10-01-2018 4:53pm

Lux23 wrote: »

Ah, there have been rumours about him for a while. And there was that time he admitted to coming on to a 17-year-old girl.

The age of consent in New York is 17

ceadaoin. · 10-01-2018 6:04pm

Synode wrote: »

The age of consent in New York is 17

I'm sure he's careful to stick within the law. Still, a late 30s man pestering a 17 year old to come to his hotel room is off putting to say the least. When I think back to myself at that age, I was pretty much still a child.

But you're right, nothing illegal about it. Combined with the other stuff it does show a pattern of behaviour though.

I do like him as an actor, doesn't mean he isn't a bit of a creep

Ipso · 10-01-2018 6:31pm

So Michael Douglas has gone on a pre-emptive interview about claims form 30 years ago. The worse one is that he masturbated in front of a woman but the others are about colorful language and language of a sexual nature in front of (not directed at) the complainant.
Hopefully the attention seekers will eat themselves this year and serious allegations are dealt with by the justice system and twitter will be used for memes.

RabbleRouser2k · 10-01-2018 6:47pm

strandroad wrote: »

To voluntarily remove themselves and give field to who wanted them removed, blackballed or controlled? That's illogical.
What I would like to see is the exact opposite, the likes of Sorvino or Judd or Rapp or Sciorra invited and speaking, showing that they are still in the fold. I didn't follow the event and don't know if they were there, but they should. Perhaps they didn't want to.

This was mentioned in an earlier post-they weren't there because they were not invited. Sorvino, Sciorra, Rose McGowan, Darryl Hannah, etc etc were all left out in the cold. (Possibly because they called Meryl out on her crap-note how the first ten minutes the camera had to 'remind' us Meryl was there).

The staying home would have been a good thing, I feel. (A few actresses did that, including Anne Hathaway-but she was under the weather. Or at least, she claimed she was). But unfortunately, it's business to promote designers dresses. And actresses get free stuff for doing that-so they went, cos free stuff.

Even Angelina Jolie and Jennifer Aniston didn't make peace for one night, to show 'solidarity'...pffft.

The NYT have cancelled an event that was to be held for James Franco and his new movie.

https://www.thewrap.com/new-york-times-cancels-james-franco-panel/

Ipso wrote: »

So Michael Douglas has gone on a pre-emptive interview about claims form 30 years ago. The worse one is that he masturbated in front of a woman but the others are about colorful language and language of a sexual nature in front of (not directed at) the complainant.
Hopefully the attention seekers will eat themselves this year and serious allegations are dealt with by the justice system and twitter will be used for memes.

https://www.thewrap.com/michael-douglas-interview-preemptively-deny-sexual-misconduct/

Like father, like son, eh? (Yeah, I tried to hold back saying that, but it crept out).

Greta Gerwig is trying to save face now, saying she won't work with Woody Allen again.
http://people.com/movies/greta-gerwig-says-she-will-not-work-for-woody-allen-again-after-sexual-misconduct-allegations/

Spielberg needs to grow a pair. Seriously.
https://www.thewrap.com/steven-spielberg-responds-to-natalie-portman-best-director-quip-at-the-golden-globes/

JP Liz V1 · 11-01-2018 1:23am

Ipso wrote: »

So Michael Douglas has gone on a pre-emptive interview about claims form 30 years ago. The worse one is that he masturbated in front of a woman but the others are about colorful language and language of a sexual nature in front of (not directed at) the complainant.
Hopefully the attention seekers will eat themselves this year and serious allegations are dealt with by the justice system and twitter will be used for memes.

I wondered why he missed the Golden Globes

_Dara_ · 11-01-2018 7:58am

Urgh, saw a clip of Natalie Portman’s ‘male nominees’ comment. Very snide. And smug. Maybe there was female directors who could have been considered but that’s not the fault of the nominees. It was what it was at that point. The implication that they don’t deserve their nominations. Plus she would have known that the camera would be focussing on their faces. Talk about putting them in an awkward position. Just struck me as very opportunistic and bandwagony - “here’s my moment to make an important statement!”.

Crap like that undermines good stuff that is happening.

Harvey Weinstein scandal (Mod warning in op.)

Comments