Harvey Weinstein scandal (Mod warning in op.)

nullzero wrote: »

Your argument implied that men are predisposed to rape/sexual assault. You wrote it, re read it and think about what it says, you made a bold statement accusing posters on this forum of being likely to sexually assault you in a work environment.
Again, you wrote it, it makes a very uncomplimentary comment on those disagreeing with your argument in plain English.

The victim act comment referred to the sexual assault you felt you would be on the receiving end of from the people here who were disagreeing with you.

You have taken the time to write a post that disregards the gravity of your previous post which I originally replied to, it also disregards the very constitution of that post and attempts to represent it as meaning something entirely different (at least I can only assume that you are doing that).

You accused poster's here of "hatred and resentment" of the woman in question which is if you're honest just your take on people's opinions, which you misrepresented and stated as fact.

There's nothing hilarious at all here, you made sweeping statements in plain English and then said they meant something else.
You don't seem capable of forming a cohesive thought never mind an argument and you're trying to make me look unreasonable for not agreeing with your insulting opinion which is patently illogical.

To be fair she didnt imply rape "she stated feel her up"

Senature wrote: »

To all those who are blaming this woman for being groped at a business meeting, I hope to f*ck I never work with any of you. Just in case I flick my hair out of my face and maybe smile at you and you then decide that means I want you to feel me up repeatedly despite me never touching you.

Also nothing in rest of her comments implies all men are rapists either

Senature wrote: »

The very start of the meeting, before they greet each other, he locks the door and then instead of shaking her hand he hugs her and runs his hands up and down her back. She did nothing to initiate any of this or encourage it, and is now on the back foot for the whole rest of the meeting as she feels weird and uncomfortable. At the time she also presumeably had no idea that he had a history of inappropriate sexual advances towards women, something which every commentator here is now aware of as they cast their judgments on her.
For even putting forward a question about a previous poster's comment I have been labelled a feminist and am apparently wearing blinkers. So unless I agree with the notion that she led him on my opinion is obviously misguided, misinformed, man hating or whatever else has been decided. The video does not at all prove he raped her, but I think it does prove sexual harrassment at that meeting. Feeling concerned because occasionally people make false allegations which can have a horrific effect on those accused is valid and worth discussing and finding better solutions for how cases are dealt with generally. Treating and discussing everyone who makes an allegation with such hatred and resentment is horrible and totally needless.

However i dont agree with the bold part, i think she new full well what he was like and played it too her own advantage, while else record the encounter?

nullzero wrote: »

....you made a bold statement accusing posters on this forum of being likely to sexually assault you in a work environment.

If she so much as flicked her hair out of her face or smiled any of us too and yet that sanctimonious tripe got a dozen thanks....

I hope to f*ck I never work with any of you. Just in case I flick my hair out of my face and maybe smile at you and you then decide that means I want you to feel me up repeatedly despite me never touching you.

If someone needs to exaggerate to this degree well their position can't be all that strong to begin with.

nullzero wrote: »

Your argument implied that men are predisposed to rape/sexual assault. You wrote it, re read it and think about what it says, you made a bold statement accusing posters on this forum of being likely to sexually assault you in a work environment.
Again, you wrote it, it makes a very uncomplimentary comment on those disagreeing with your argument in plain English.

The victim act comment referred to the sexual assault you felt you would be on the receiving end of from the people here who were disagreeing with you.

You have taken the time to write a post that disregards the gravity of your previous post which I originally replied to, it also disregards the very constitution of that post and attempts to represent it as meaning something entirely different (at least I can only assume that you are doing that).

You accused poster's here of "hatred and resentment" of the woman in question which is if you're honest just your take on people's opinions, which you misrepresented and stated as fact.

There's nothing hilarious at all here, you made sweeping statements in plain English and then said they meant something else.
You don't seem capable of forming a cohesive thought never mind an argument and you're trying to make me look unreasonable for not agreeing with your insulting opinion which is patently illogical.

I do not think men are predisposed to sexual assault and implied nothing of the sort. The comment I made relating to smiling and flicking my hair was a sarcastic direct response to the numerous posters who were and continue to suggest that she was via her body language (including hair flicking) inviting him to put his hands on her in places and ways that are completely abnormal for a business meeting. I was trying to point out how ridiculous an argument that seems when placed in the context of any normal working environment.
I see it like this - at the start of the meeting, he locks the door and touches her inappropriately which makes her feel uncomfortable. Was she touching him back while he was rubbing her arm or back? No. Did she try to kiss him? No. Did she respond positively when he seems to have put his hands on her thighs? No. Did he back off? No. Did he keep pushing it? Yes. Did she leave or make a fuss? No. Did she continue to try to close the deal despite feeling uncomfortable? Yes.
Most of the other posters here seem to see a smiling woman who was flirting with a man and trying to use any attraction he felt for her as a way to close a deal and yes Harvey was a bit sleezy or whatever, but she deserves pretty hefty criticism for everything she did/didn't do etc. Often in very insulting language, not simply by way of observation. The overwhelming majority of posts here focus negatively on her and her actions, not on him for acting the way he did. That is what I mean by hatred and resentment being shown towards her.
Finally, there's no need to insult me by saying I don't seem capable of forming a cohesive thought never mind an argument.

Senature wrote: »

I see it like this - at the start of the meeting, he locks the door and touches her inappropriately which makes her feel uncomfortable.

And that was wrong as has been pointed out by many of the posters you are lambasting.

Was she touching him back while he was rubbing her arm or back? No.

Did anyone say she was? No.

Did she try to kiss him? No.

Did anyone say that she did? No.

Did she respond positively when he seems to have put his hands on her thighs?

YES!!!!

Here she is from the very moment Harvey starts feeling her up under the table:













Now, had she not reacted like she did above, then she would have had a clear cut case of sexual harassment THE MOMENT he put his hands on her, as while she gave him permission to flirt, no court would have considered her doing that as her consenting to be felt up...... but not only did she not make it known she did not want to be touched, on the contrary, her body language screams that she is fine with it and she even verbally gives him permission to keep it when she says "We can do both".

Did he back off? No.

Why would he? She did not give him any indication that she was uncomfortable with what he was doing other than at one point saying his hand was too far up her skirt for her liking. Sleazy mofo for ever touching to begin with, no question, and if he did that to other women I hope he faces the consequences for having done so, but come on, this woman made it obvious she had no problem with it, hence him asking her to go for a drink no doubt.

Did he keep pushing it? Yes.

Again, he was getting all the signals he should do.

Like I said before, nobody keeps on fishing in a lake where they never get a bite and so it was always quite clear that Weinstein must have been getting some positive results over the years from his reprehensible behavior, and in my opinion, this woman was one such case.

If I'm wrong and he did indeed rape her at the hotel she met him at, then I hope he does time, but she should really have went to the police at the time, there was no good reason for her not to have.

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Since when was going for a job as model for an underwear company and being asked to be shown in your knickers f**king abuse ?????

Going way too far this garbage now.

Janney was eager to comply until Weber asked him to get completely nude.

Weber asked the two brothers to remove their shirts and, according to Janney, “pretend to be boyfriends.

Weber asked him to remove his shirt and pants, and later his underwear, and then proceeded to touch him inappropriately.

Weber asked him to do “breathing exercises” that involved non-consensual touching of the chakras, including the root chakra, which is located around the genitals. “I didn’t understand what he was doing, and he didn’t explain it,” recalled Geerman, who said he left the shoot so disturbed he told his mother, who was waiting outside the studio: “I don’t want to do this anymore

I believe this would be some of the accusations, did you even read the article?

First of a two part sit down interview with Asia Argento.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/dailymailtv/index.html?vid=1768936

Bill Cosby jailed but not sure how long in total he got as 3 to 10 years mentioned

Busy Philipps coming out against Freaks and Geeks co-star James Franco in her new book

I see David McSavage apologising for defending Al Porter. It's in today's copy of the Star.

(I only bought it based on the front page article about a former RTE reporter and her husband being arrested).

Sarah Silverman says she consented to Louis CK masturbating in front of her in the past...... only before her had 'power'.

(Oh, ignore the part where she says she's always truthful. We know that's not true).





https://twitter.com/SarahKSilverman/status/1054476111873228800

https://www.indiewire.com/2018/10/sarah-scott-kip-pardue-sexual-harassment-accusation-sag-aftra-1202016110/

Actor on Marvel's The Runaways is accused of sexual misconduct and similar Weinstein behaviour...

Creepier still is he doesn't deny it, and 'claims he misread the situation'... Yeek.

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Have any of the high profile people been charged with anything yet or what's the story?

No and they never were likely to given that most of the high profile accusers went on to have sexual relationships with Harvey after they allege that he had raped them. Rose McGowan didn't but having read her book I can assure you her story was so absurd that it was never going to see the inside of a court.

The Lucia Evans case............




....was thrown out recently when it was revealed that a witness had come forward and said that Lucia had told them that what happened between her and Harvey was consensual and that she did it for acting work. A cop in the NYPD had kept that information from the prosecution though.

Next court date is December 20th where he faces five charges of assault on two other women (one from 2006 and the other in 2013). The latter of which doesn't look at that strong either.

https://variety.com/2018/biz/news/harvey-weinstein-accuser-screening-day-of-rape-1203084155/

Not much is being said about the 2006 case though which suggests to me that it's the strongest the prosecution have as almost all other cases have had Harvey's lawyers demanding that the charges relating to it be dismissed for one reason or another.

Bambi wrote: »

It is outrageous that she has more balls than most male comedians

Actually she has more balls than the Pearl clutching Marys knocking around these days masquerading as men

She hasn't tho-she's been caught lying over and over. If that's 'balls' then I must be rocking cannonballs down there.

Then she goes on to say she 'regrets' her jokes in the past. If anything, she's worse.
If you wanna see a comedian who sticks to their guns-look at Daniel Tosh. People went apespit over his jokes about rape-he stood there and defended them, as well as his right to make those jokes. When folks got angrier still, he told em where to go.

There are better women comedians out there-I'm really liking Taylor Tomlinson right now. She's an up and coming comedienne.

But the problem is the media are focusing on 'Hannah Gadsby' as this 'wave of the future' when really she harkens back to flipping Jenny Jones.

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

CBS paid Eliza Dushku over 9 million over claims made by her against Bull co-star Michael Weatherly, she was written out of the show after complaining

A very strange case, emblematic of the culture going on in CBS, what with Les Moonves literally having a paid PA who's sole 'service' was to provide fellatio.
All that misogyny bled down to employees.

Apparently it was going on for decades-Cybill Shepard alleges that her show was cancelled after rebuffing Les Moonves on a night out.

https://www.vulture.com/2018/12/cybill-shepherd-claims-inappropriate-conduct-by-les-moonves.html

Illeana Douglas has made similar claims against Moonves. Claiming she was fired from a pilot in 1997.

Not CBS related, but the author of a DC comic, Bordertown, has been accused of rape, grooming of young girls, and possible paedophilia.
His team on the book, the artist and colourist, have both left the book following the allegations made in a blog post by one Cynthia Naugle.

No word as to whether the book will be cancelled-it was seemingly being promoted as the 'star lead series' of the Vertigo line of books-now it's future is up in the air. (I genuinely thought they might be trying to make a TV show out of it-considering it's Vertigo).
But his behaviour had been noted by many who knew him-including unwanted advances, and other creepy stuff.
Not a good luck for DC comics, especially so soon after the Eddie Berganza 'ten years of sexual harassment' debacle.

Laois_Man wrote: »

What? He didn’t even try it on?

He can brag all he wants.

She can deny all she wants.

He can't prove he did or didnt it with her(or her consent) with out her saying otherwise

She denys it happened he looks like a sap trying to say it did

Actor Geoffrey Rush (From Pirates of the Carribean) is accused of sexual misconduct by Yael Stone, from Orange is the New Black.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/16/opinion/metoo-defamation-geoffrey-rush-yael-stone.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage