Harvey Weinstein scandal (Mod warning in op.)

Christy42 · 18-12-2017 1:39pm

Underground wrote: »

McGowan is the same person who was standing up on stage at some #metoo event with her first balled up in the air black panther style. She is absolutely revelling in this to the point where it seems to be more about the publicity for her than something actually being done about the sexual harassment. "Rose army", ffs.

This dressing in black idea is predictably pathetic aswell. Wouldn't it make a far bigger statement if women in Hollywood agreed en masse to not attend the golden globes? Oh but no, they have to be seen on the red carpet so that's not happening. Half of them would be wearing black to the bloody thing anyway. The narcissism is never ending.

I note complaints against these sort of protests always seem to end up with the suggestion of go protest at home where no one can see you which would rather defeat the point of the protest.

Amazing these days at the sheer amount of wrong ways to protest something. There always seems to be someone saying a protest has been done the wrong way recently.

Underground · 18-12-2017 1:42pm

Christy42 wrote: »

I note complaints against these sort of protests always seem to end up with the suggestion of go protest at home where no one can see you which would rather defeat the point of the protest.

Amazing these days at the sheer amount of wrong ways to protest something. There always seems to be someone saying a protest has been done the wrong way recently.

On the contrary, I think an awards show with a total absence of women from the event (especially with all the revelations of abuse against women we have had this year) would be extremely conspicuous and would call massive attention to itself.

Christy42 · 18-12-2017 1:46pm

Underground wrote: »

Christy42 wrote: »

I note complaints against these sort of protests always seem to end up with the suggestion of go protest at home where no one can see you which would rather defeat the point of the protest.

Amazing these days at the sheer amount of wrong ways to protest something. There always seems to be someone saying a protest has been done the wrong way recently.

On the contrary, I think an awards show with a total absence of women from the event (especially with all the revelations of abuse against women we have had this year) would be extremely conspicuous and would call massive attention to itself.

Would you get all women? I don't even think you will get all women in black. Out of sight is out of mind.

18-12-2017 1:49pm

Underground wrote: »

McGowan is the same person who was standing up on stage at some #metoo event with her first balled up in the air black panther style. She is absolutely revelling in this to the point where it seems to be more about the publicity for her than something actually being done about the sexual harassment. "Rose army", ffs.

This dressing in black idea is predictably pathetic aswell. Wouldn't it make a far bigger statement if women in Hollywood agreed en masse to not attend the golden globes? Oh but no, they have to be seen on the red carpet so that's not happening. Half of them would be wearing black to the bloody thing anyway. The narcissism is never ending.

Totally agree.

If I'm right, when the "Oscars so White" campaign happened, a lot of Black people did actually boycott the Oscars. At least they followed through with some degree of actual protest.

Underground · 18-12-2017 1:56pm

Christy42 wrote: »

Would you get all women? I don't even think you will get all women in black. Out of sight is out of mind.

Unfortunately no, I don't think it's realistic to get all women to boycott. McGowan and Streep et Al have already demonstrated that they are all too willing to bloviate ad nauseum about this to the actual detriment of their cause. But how about nominees for awards not turning up? That would be a relative handful of women but would still make an important statement.

But I think a mass boycott would be the most effective and also easiest method of protest,it just requires a willingness to turn down an invite to a red carpet event.

Christy42 · 18-12-2017 2:54pm

Underground wrote: »

Christy42 wrote: »

Would you get all women? I don't even think you will get all women in black. Out of sight is out of mind.

Unfortunately no, I don't think it's realistic to get all women to boycott. McGowan and Streep et Al have already demonstrated that they are all too willing to bloviate ad nauseum about this to the actual detriment of their cause. But how about nominees for awards not turning up? That would be a relative handful of women but would still make an important statement.

But I think a mass boycott would be the most effective and also easiest method of protest,it just requires a willingness to turn down an invite to a red carpet event.

Honestly I think all the "this is the wrong way to protest" arguments are stupid. We are in a thread about people committing sexual assault and yet the main object of discussion becomes whether or not someone protesting it is a bit vain?

How does that make any sense? To be honest I have seen "yeah the important cause is valid but instead let's discuss how Y decided to discuss the issue" to many times to give it serious consideration at this point. I mean how is that important? If you think she is doing it for vanity ignore her and focus on the issue instead.

It is a distraction. Nothing else.

RabbleRouser2k · 18-12-2017 7:34pm

Underground wrote: »

On the contrary, I think an awards show with a total absence of women from the event (especially with all the revelations of abuse against women we have had this year) would be extremely conspicuous and would call massive attention to itself.

I agree. You've seen all the red carpet 'ooh, girl, what are you wearing?' *camera slowly pans up and down actress* 'Well, it's some dress made from a now extinct animal that was killed to make this expensive abomination' shows.
Imagine the blank hour or three that would exist because there is no fashion.
But no actress will do that.

Amber Tamblyn's being an annoying fishwife.

http://www.indiewire.com/2017/12/amber-tamblyn-asia-argento-react-rose-mcgowan-criticism-golden-globes-protestors-1201908657/

Underground wrote: »

McGowan is the same person who was standing up on stage at some #metoo event with her first balled up in the air black panther style. She is absolutely revelling in this to the point where it seems to be more about the publicity for her than something actually being done about the sexual harassment. "Rose army", ffs.

This dressing in black idea is predictably pathetic aswell. Wouldn't it make a far bigger statement if women in Hollywood agreed en masse to not attend the golden globes? Oh but no, they have to be seen on the red carpet so that's not happening. Half of them would be wearing black to the bloody thing anyway. The narcissism is never ending.

I think 'wearing black' is not doing much, tbh. She's unstable, always has been-and probably has a major drug problem, tbh. She used to hang with Marilyn Manson, after all.

Deleted User wrote: »

Totally agree.

If I'm right, when the "Oscars so White" campaign happened, a lot of Black people did actually boycott the Oscars. At least they followed through with some degree of actual protest.

Sadly, no-just the Smiths stayed home. (Will and Jada). Everyone else went. The following year, there were 'many' black actors and actresses nominated-but people only remember that for the cock-up that was made of the 'best picture' award.

As Dylan Farrow pointed out, and Ronan too-these ladies, including Kate Winslet, will go there, wear black, and then defend Woody Allen, or Roman Polanski, most notably Streep.
Hollywood is sick, 'wearing black' only highlights everything wrong in the place.

cloudatlas · 19-12-2017 12:04am

Underground wrote: »

McGowan is the same person who was standing up on stage at some #metoo event with her first balled up in the air black panther style. She is absolutely revelling in this to the point where it seems to be more about the publicity for her than something actually being done about the sexual harassment. "Rose army", ffs.

This dressing in black idea is predictably pathetic aswell. Wouldn't it make a far bigger statement if women in Hollywood agreed en masse to not attend the golden globes? Oh but no, they have to be seen on the red carpet so that's not happening. Half of them would be wearing black to the bloody thing anyway. The narcissism is never ending.

In fairness she is probably really scarred by what happened to her.

darkdubh · 19-12-2017 12:43am

wetlandsboy wrote: »

Forgive me if this has already been posted, but the New Yorker has an interesting story speculating about why R Kelly is conspicuous by his omission from the current narrative:
https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/why-has-r-kellys-career-thrived-despite-sexual-misconduct-allegations

The stuff that goes on in the world of hop hop/R N B must be unreal considering the involvement of scrotes like Suge Knight.

JP Liz V1 · 19-12-2017 12:48am

The actors should go dressed in black dresses

DavidLyons_ · 19-12-2017 8:20pm

https://www.rte.ie/entertainment/2017/1219/928368-meryl-streep-responds-to-rose-mcgowan-criticism/

What a bunch of cunning stunts. McGowan is coming across really poorly at this point but I'd imagine part of the hypocrisy she's calling Streep out for is her support of the likes of Polanski.

I must say, I reckon Streep is a really nasty, ruthless person altogether.

RabbleRouser2k · 19-12-2017 11:35pm

DavidLyons_ wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/entertainment/2017/1219/928368-meryl-streep-responds-to-rose-mcgowan-criticism/

What a bunch of cunning stunts. McGowan is coming across really poorly at this point but I'd imagine part of the hypocrisy she's calling Streep out for is her support of the likes of Polanski.

I must say, I reckon Streep is a really nasty, ruthless person altogether.

Anything to get that Oscar-it was only months ago she was 'braggin' about the Oscars she won.
Even her 'Harvey needed me more than I needed him' comes across as really self absorbed-but I don't believe she 'didn't know'.
She knew about Polanski, she knows about him, and she's not gonna give up her chances of an award.
Her 'pontificating' and 'spouting nonsense' about Maggie Thatcher makes her look like the dimwit most of us suspected she was.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/meryl-streep-targeted-by-street-artists-she-knew-posters-1069400

Street artists are not buying her crappy story. Hence the 'She knew' banner.

RabbleRouser2k · 19-12-2017 11:38pm

TJ Miller accused of rape.

His show's been cancelled-the Gorburger, whatever that was.

Most on twitter are saying things like 'yeah, not a surprise'.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/comedy-central-cancels-tj-miller-series-gorburger-show-1069327

Outlaw Pete · 19-12-2017 11:40pm

I note she had a bit of a dig at Rose with the emboldened line of her public letter:

“It hurt to be attacked by Rose McGowan in banner headlines this weekend, but I want to let her know I did not know about Weinstein’s crimes, not in the 90s when he attacked her, or through subsequent decades when he proceeded to attack others.

I wasn’t deliberately silent. I didn’t know. I don’t tacitly approve of rape. I didn’t know. I don’t like young women being assaulted. I didn’t know this was happening.

“I don’t know where Harvey lives, nor has he ever been to my home.

I have never in my life been invited to his hotel room.

I have been to his office once, for a meeting with Wes Craven for “Music of the Heart” in 1998.

HW distributed movies I made with other people.

HW was not a filmmaker; he was often a producer, primarily a marketer of films made by other people- some of them great, some not great. But not every actor, actress, and director who made films that HW distributed knew he abused women, or that he raped Rose in the 90s, other women before and others after, until they told us. We did not know that women’s silence was purchased by him and his enablers.

HW needed us not to know this, because our association with him bought him credibility, an ability to lure young, aspiring women into circumstances where they would be hurt.

He needed me much more than I needed him and he made sure I didn’t know. Apparently he hired ex Mossad operators to protect this information from becoming public. Rose and the scores of other victims of these powerful, moneyed, ruthless men face an adversary for whom Winning, at any and all costs, is the only acceptable outcome. That’s why a legal defense fund for victims is currently being assembled to which hundreds of good hearted people in our business will contribute, to bring down the bastards, and help victims fight this scourge within.

Rose assumed and broadcast something untrue about me, and I wanted to let her know the truth. Through friends who know her, I got my home phone number to her the minute I read the headlines. I sat by that phone all day yesterday and this morning, hoping to express both my deep respect for her and others’ bravery in exposing the monsters among us, and my sympathy for the untold, ongoing pain she suffers. No one can bring back what entitled bosses like Bill O’Reilly, Roger Ailes, and HW took from the women who endured attacks on their bodies and their ability to make a living.. And I hoped that she would give me a hearing. She did not, but I hope she reads this.

I am truly sorry she sees me as an adversary, because we are both, together with all the women in our business, standing in defiance of the same implacable foe: a status quo that wants so badly to return to the bad old days, the old ways where women were used, abused and refused entry into the decision-making, top levels of the industry. That’s where the cover-ups convene. Those rooms must be disinfected, and integrated, before anything even begins to change.”

'Purchased' is an interesting choice of words I felt as nobody can purchase silence unless it's 'for sale'.

I think the in-house bickering has only just begun.

HandsomeBob · 19-12-2017 11:49pm

As I said earlier in the thread, I always got the feeling that Rose was encouraged to speak out and was then left to fend for herself even though she clearly needed support networks.

From the beginning Rose seemed ill equipped to handle the fallout on her own and it doesn't surprise me that this latest outburst has been flipped on her by the likes of Streep.

People asked why Ronan Farrow wasn't considered for Time POTY....this is why. He broke the story but a) after how long was it an open secret and b) what has he done to protect his sources.

20-12-2017 12:10am

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

I think 'wearing black' is not doing much, tbh. She's unstable, always has been-and probably has a major drug problem, tbh. She used to hang with Marilyn Manson, after all.

Was that not after the time she was allegedly raped?

I'm a little uncomfortable with the attacks on her. If she is a rape victim, she is entitled to deal with it as see she's fit imo.

seenitall · 20-12-2017 12:30am

If I were a friend or family, I think I'd be really worried about Rose McGowan at the moment. I do hope she has someone watching out for her a bit.

Underground · 20-12-2017 12:58am

cloudatlas wrote: »

In fairness she is probably really scarred by what happened to her.

Oh absolutely, I wouldn't dispute that for a second.

RabbleRouser2k · 20-12-2017 1:10am

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

I note she had a bit of a dig at Rose with the emboldened line of her public letter:

'Purchased' is an interesting choice of words I felt as nobody can purchase silence unless it's 'for sale'.

I think the in-house bickering has only just begun.

And people wonder why I'm not a feminist-no actually, wait, they don't. (I'm egalitarian, tbh.) This was always, sadly, gonna happen-but it happened quite a while ago. Rose used a terrible analogy of the 'N word' when comparing it to women. Couple that with 'women leave twitter for a day' which backfired and caused more division, as well as accusations that 'Rose is only siding with White women'.

Deleted User wrote: »

Was that not after the time she was allegedly raped?

I'm a little uncomfortable with the attacks on her. If she is a rape victim, she is entitled to deal with it as see she's fit imo.

Her family escaped a cult, she was a child model (And you know the creeps that are there), a runaway who hung out in rough areas, and then divorced her parents when she was 15. She was pretty messed up long before she got to Hollywood. Hollywood just added to it-she was fresh meat for them, sick as it is to imagine.

Minderbinder · 20-12-2017 2:36am

I said it to my wife a few weeks ago. These women will eventually turn on each other. It’s what women do. It’s why women can rule their own home but men rule the world.

I see Matt Damon came out with some very reasonable comments that seems to have provoked the truly neurotic into action.

JP Liz V1 · 20-12-2017 2:47am

Minderbinder wrote: »

I said it to my wife a few weeks ago. These women will eventually turn on each other. It’s what women do. It’s why women can rule their own home but men rule the world.

I see Matt Damon came out with some very reasonable comments that seems to have provoked the truly neurotic into action.

I think if a female with no ties to the Affecks and Weinstein had said Damon's comments they're would be less outrage, it is difficult for anyone to comment currently in Hollywood especially a male without backlash

RabbleRouser2k · 20-12-2017 3:32am

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

I think if a female with no ties to the Affecks and Weinstein had said Damon's comments they're would be less outrage, it is difficult for anyone to comment currently in Hollywood especially a male without backlash

I would argue any opinion in Hollywood right now is under greater scrutiny. Meryl Streep's wording was very inconsiderate. I don't think she thought her words through at all.

Minderbinder wrote: »

I said it to my wife a few weeks ago. These women will eventually turn on each other. It’s what women do. It’s why women can rule their own home but men rule the world.

I see Matt Damon came out with some very reasonable comments that seems to have provoked the truly neurotic into action.

Yes and no. He's been rather clueless with how he's reacted to the Weinstein thing. Especially his appearances on Jimmy Kimmel and other shows where they danced around/ didn't address it.
But those who are attacking him are equally as clueless. If I see another 'you're a white man/ white privilege' etc from white people/ white women...it will be too soon.
They are determined to crucify Damon, condemning him for his silence. And then with Meryl they insist on reminding us 'she's not the problem/ enemy'. Well, neither is Damon. Condemning him for his silence, while praising Meryl for hers, just because she's a woman (And women can't think for themselves' apparently) is ridiculous.
She's equally to blame, possibly moreso because she was in the industry for much longer. She knew was already established, while Damon and Affleck were still new to the movie scene. She had more power, more prominence than they did.
The very people who scream 'equality' don't think there is equal blame in this case. Well, I personally do. The twitter folks are saying 'men should look out for women'-well, so should women look out for other women, and also for men. They condemn those who didn't speak up, but the women were apparently 'scared into silence'.
I would argue very much that 'Meryl knew'. And so did many, many others.
And even now, Kate Winslet is defending Woody Allen, and Meryl is still defending Polanski. Hell, Rose McGowan defended convicted paedo Victor Salvas.

20-12-2017 8:09am

Minderbinder wrote: »

I said it to my wife a few weeks ago. These women will eventually turn on each other. It’s what women do. It’s why women can rule their own home but men rule the world.

If I said that to my wife, she'd tell me where to go, and very quickly.

She'd also have the intelligence to point out that nonsense generalisations about men and power could be an ugly reference, when the whole topic is about men and the abuse of power in the entertainment industry.

20-12-2017 8:34am

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

TJ Miller accused of rape.

His show's been cancelled-the Gorburger, whatever that was.

Most on twitter are saying things like 'yeah, not a surprise'.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/comedy-central-cancels-tj-miller-series-gorburger-show-1069327

Miller's show got cancelled? That sucks. Dude was on the cusp of becoming a big enough star, with the likes of Deadpool and other appearances.

https://mobile.twitter.com/rosepetalpistol/status/943155950864781313

This is a post from Miller and his wife, which makes it seem like it's not as it seems.

cloudatlas · 20-12-2017 12:36pm

Minderbinder wrote: »

I see Matt Damon came out with some very reasonable comments that seems to have provoked the truly neurotic into action.

He said about Louis C.K.'s statement 'we can work with that'.... no we can't work with it my flat mate was flashed in the park two police officers came round and took it incredibly seriously, they also said that another lad had been caught on the other side of the city for doing this and he was prosecuted, it is serious and it is worth speaking out about it because this is how these guys get caught, to diminish it, compare it with something else is to reduce the harm or the fear felt by those women and my flatmate who was shaky and needed a cup of tea and a sit down after the incident so Matt Damon is living in a little fantasy world where none of these things threaten him and doesn't have a clue what he's on about.

Penn · 20-12-2017 1:14pm

cloudatlas wrote: »

He said about Louis C.K.'s statement 'we can work with that'.... no we can't work with it my flat mate was flashed in the park two police officers came round and took it incredibly seriously, they also said that another lad had been caught on the other side of the city for doing this and he was prosecuted, it is serious and it is worth speaking out about it because this is how these guys get caught, to diminish it, compare it with something else is to reduce the harm or the fear felt by those women and my flatmate who was shaky and needed a cup of tea and a sit down after the incident so Matt Damon is living in a little fantasy world where none of these things threaten him and doesn't have a clue what he's on about.

I think that's the issue people are taking with what Damon said; saying "X is worse than Y", while largely true, is minimising the effect of Y. People's point is that both X and Y are bad and neither should ever be accepted, so it doesn't matter which can be deemed to be worse.

kunst nugget · 20-12-2017 1:23pm

Penn wrote: »

I think that's the issue people are taking with what Damon said; saying "X is worse than Y", while largely true, is minimising the effect of Y. People's point is that both X and Y are bad and neither should ever be accepted, so it doesn't matter which can be deemed to be worse.

Does him saying rape is worse than a slap on the arse equate to him condoning slapping arses?

20-12-2017 1:24pm

Penn wrote: »

I think that's the issue people are taking with what Damon said; saying "X is worse than Y", while largely true, is minimising the effect of Y. People's point is that both X and Y are bad and neither should ever be accepted, so it doesn't matter which can be deemed to be worse.

He even said that it all needs to be addressed, he didn't say to just forget about everything that wasn't a full-on rape.

Penn · 20-12-2017 1:34pm

kunst nugget wrote: »

Does him saying rape is worse than a slap on the arse equate to him condoning slapping arses?

No, again I think people's issue is that neither are acceptable, so Matt Damon is wrong to be trying to distinguish between them in this context, or saying those who only slapped arses should/could be forgiven.

It's not that he's condoning it, it's that he's inadvertently saying "Y is bad, but it's not as bad as X, so maybe those who did Y could be forgiven as they aren't as bad as those who did X", and I think people's issue with that is that it diminishes those who had to suffer Y.

I just think he's trying to make a point that really doesn't need to be made. If X and Y are both wrong, the point that X is more wrong than Y doesn't matter.

Penn · 20-12-2017 1:38pm

Deleted User wrote: »

He even said that it all needs to be addressed, he didn't say to just forget about everything that wasn't a full-on rape.

I'm aware, and nobody is claiming that he did.

kunst nugget · 20-12-2017 1:53pm

Penn wrote: »

It's not that he's condoning it, it's that he's inadvertently saying "Y is bad, but it's not as bad as X, so maybe those who did Y could be forgiven as they aren't as bad as those who did X", and I think people's issue with that is that it diminishes those who had to suffer Y.

Do you think someone who has their arse slapped will suffer the same trauma as someone who is raped?

Penn · 20-12-2017 2:00pm

kunst nugget wrote: »

Do you think someone who has their arse slapped will suffer the same trauma as someone who is raped?

No, I'm saying both are bad and shouldn't be tolerated.

Outlaw Pete · 20-12-2017 2:00pm

I note that Sir Ian McKellen's recent comment at an Oxford University address has been met with scorn also, where he recounted how back in the 60's some actresses would make it known to some directors that they were willing to have sex for roles.

https://twitter.com/empathywarrior/status/942968296835506176

You can watch the relevant segment from 41mins in..................

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVH0nM4_IaU

kunst nugget · 20-12-2017 2:14pm

Penn wrote: »

No, I'm saying both are bad and shouldn't be tolerated.

Should we prosecute them with the same severity so as not to diminish the person who suffered the slapped arse?

Penn · 20-12-2017 2:37pm

kunst nugget wrote: »

Should we prosecute them with the same severity so as not to diminish the person who suffered the slapped arse?

No, because that would be f*cking stupid.

kunst nugget · 20-12-2017 2:58pm

Penn wrote: »

No, because that would be f*cking stupid.

So what's the issue with Matt Damon giving the opinion that he thinks that a slapped arse isn't as bad as rape?

Penn · 20-12-2017 3:20pm

kunst nugget wrote: »

So what's the issue with Matt Damon giving the opinion that he thinks that a slapped arse isn't as bad as rape?

Again, it's not that the opinion itself is wrong, it's that it doesn't matter which is worse. Neither should be tolerated, nor should minimising sexual assault as "Well, it's not as bad as being raped..." in order to defend those (or say maybe they should be forgiven) who slapped women's arses or masturbated in front of them against their will.

Ash.J.Williams · 20-12-2017 3:23pm

Penn wrote: »

No, I'm saying both are bad and shouldn't be tolerated.

who tolerates rape?

kunst nugget · 20-12-2017 3:32pm

Penn wrote: »

Again, it's not that the opinion itself is wrong, it's that it doesn't matter which is worse. Neither should be tolerated, nor should minimising sexual assault as "Well, it's not as bad as being raped..." in order to defend those (or say maybe they should be forgiven) who slapped women's arses or masturbated in front of them against their will.

So, if a guy stupidly slapped a girl's arse once back in the early 90s, there's no hope for redemption for him?

Wanderer2010 · 20-12-2017 3:33pm

Weinstein is 65??????? I would have only put about 52 or 53 on him. :eek:

Penn · 20-12-2017 3:34pm

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

who tolerates rape?

Finally, a question dumb enough to make me wonder why I'm bothering posting in this thread.

Venom · 20-12-2017 3:34pm

kunst nugget wrote: »

So what's the issue with Matt Damon giving the opinion that he thinks that a slapped arse isn't as bad as rape?

Well the virtue signaling crowd do need something to be baying at.

20-12-2017 3:35pm

kunst nugget wrote: »

So what's the issue with Matt Damon giving the opinion that he thinks that a slapped arse isn't as bad as rape?

If you reduce what people come to think of as 'real' assault to only the very worse cases, it creates a situation where people feel as though they can't complain about the smaller stuff - smacking, harassing, groping etc, and where it's seen as not a big deal. It's not even remotely comparable to rape, but that doesn't mean it's acceptable or that it's not a big deal to harass or slap a person. It's very dismissive.

You don't use the very worst case scenario as a yardstick to judge crimes at the other end of the scale.

If a family wakes up to a burglary and have lost all their stuff, and another family is held hostage and beaten up and have their stuff taken, it doesn't make the first family less burgled and they have every right to feel victimized and aggrieved because what happened to them matters too.

It's not the same level of trauma, but that doesn't mean it should be overlooked.

Of course there is a scale. Just because something isn't at the worst end of the scale doesn't mean it should be dismissed as not a big deal. it adds up.

That said, I know what he was trying to say, but think he would have been wiser not to say it at all or to have chosen his words better.

20-12-2017 3:37pm

Candie wrote: »

If you reduce what people come to think of as 'real' assault to only the very worse cases, it creates a situation where people feel as though they can't complain about the smaller stuff - smacking, harassing, groping etc, and where it's seen as not a big deal. It's not even remotely comparable to rape, but that doesn't mean it's acceptable or that it's not a big deal to harass or slap a person. It's very dismissive.

You don't use the very worst case scenario as a yardstick to judge crimes at the other end of the scale.

If a family wakes up to a burglary and have lost all their stuff, and another family is held hostage and beaten up and have their stuff taken, it doesn't make the first family less burgled and they have every right to feel victimized and aggrieved because what happened to them matters too.

It's not the same level of trauma, but that doesn't mean it should be overlooked.

Of course there is a scale. Just because something isn't at the worst end of the scale doesn't mean it should be dismissed as not a big deal. it adds up.

That said, I know what he was trying to say, but think he would have been wiser not to say it at all or to have chosen his words better.

I really can't see the issue with what he said. He even went out of his way to say that all such behaviours should be confronted.

kunst nugget · 20-12-2017 3:55pm

Candie wrote: »

If you reduce what people come to think of as 'real' assault to only the very worse cases, it creates a situation where people feel as though they can't complain about the smaller stuff - smacking, harassing, groping etc, and where it's seen as not a big deal. It's not even remotely comparable to rape, but that doesn't mean it's acceptable or that it's not a big deal to harass or slap a person. It's very dismissive.

You don't use the very worst case scenario as a yardstick to judge crimes at the other end of the scale.

If a family wakes up to a burglary and have lost all their stuff, and another family is held hostage and beaten up and have their stuff taken, it doesn't make the first family less burgled and they have every right to feel victimized and aggrieved because what happened to them matters too.

It's not the same level of trauma, but that doesn't mean it should be overlooked.

Of course there is a scale. Just because something isn't at the worst end of the scale doesn't mean it should be dismissed as not a big deal. it adds up.

That said, I know what he was trying to say, but think he would have been wiser not to say it at all or to have chosen his words better.

It's perfectly understandable to feel aggrieved if you get slapped on the arse- it's complete arsehole behaviour and completely unacceptable, it's the notion that somehow rightfully treating rape as a more serious issue is diminishing your right to feel aggrieved so we have to treat them both equally that I think is a bit odd.

cloudatlas · 20-12-2017 6:57pm

Who cares if there is a spectrum, it's all ****king awful stuff, they should be discussing how to prevent it not waffling on about how they classify different abusive behaviours.

Ash.J.Williams · 20-12-2017 7:08pm

Penn wrote: »

Finally, a question dumb enough to make me wonder why I'm bothering posting in this thread.

I was wondering the same

HandsomeBob · 20-12-2017 7:43pm

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

I note that Sir Ian McKellen's recent comment at an Oxford University address has been met with scorn also, where he recounted how back in the 60's some actresses would make it known to some directors that they were willing to have sex for roles.

https://twitter.com/empathywarrior/status/942968296835506176

You can watch the relevant segment from 41mins in..................

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVH0nM4_IaU

McKellan seemed weirdly ill prepared for that question as he was rambling and seemed uncomfortable. But in the main, what he said was nothing to be outraged about. He merely stated a fact of his experience in Hollywood without condoning anything.

21-12-2017 1:14am

cloudatlas wrote: »

Who cares if there is a spectrum, it's all ****king awful stuff, they should be discussing how to prevent it not waffling on about how they classify different abusive behaviours.

He said it should all be confronted.

RabbleRouser2k · 21-12-2017 1:24am

Deleted User wrote: »

Miller's show got cancelled? That sucks. Dude was on the cusp of becoming a big enough star, with the likes of Deadpool and other appearances.

https://mobile.twitter.com/rosepetalpistol/status/943155950864781313

This is a post from Miller and his wife, which makes it seem like it's not as it seems.

Apparently it was the reason he was kicked out of college. (His dad is a lawyer, so that helped prevent a 'scandal').
And pretty much everyone knew TJ as 'that guy who raped a chick in college'.

https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2017/12/make-them-leave.html

There are allegations of harassment on other projects too.

https://www.thewrap.com/tj-miller-accused-of-harassment-by-porn-star/

Even an alleged case of roofieing.

https://twitter.com/dalias85/status/943182637765599232

Seems everyone has a 'story' about the guy's douchebaggery.

Harvey Weinstein scandal (Mod warning in op.)

Comments