Can we talk about the apparent culture of sexual abuse in the american film industry?

Darth Rosenberg

New member
Oct 25, 2011
1,288
0
0
Johnny Novgorod said:
Silentpony said:
Guarantee you if Miramax had a piece of the MCU or Star Wars or whatever not one person would have come out against him.
Sort of how nobody batted an eye when Joss Whedon was accused of the same sins Weinstein is purging right now.
Is your bias personal or political? Just curious...

No, to say they are the "same sins" is dangerously--- well, I'll be polite and say 'daft'. Care to quote sources - mountains of 'em - of sexual abuse, 'misdemeanors', bullying, and, oh yeah, rape against Whedon? One seems to have broken the law multiple times over decades - the other hasn't, as far as I've heard, broken a single law.

I've not looked at the Joss story for weeks, so I could've missed major revelations, but last I heard we had no first hand accounts from anyone but his wife. As unethical as Joss's actions sound/seem to have been, there's nothing against what could've easily been consensual workplace relationships.

Maybe if it really is more okay to speak out against abusive patriarchy we'll see some accusers of Joss's come forward, but until then, no, they're not remotely the "same sins" of Weinstein.
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
6,530
1,614
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
TheVampwizimp said:
Your argument is so funny it makes me want to cry, when I take into account that you call yourself a progressive conservative. Progressive Conservative. A complete contradiction in terms. And yet you use "lol linguistics" as an excuse to discount the term "rape culture," and then by some imaginative transitive property to somehow also discount the fact that this country is okay with rich white men raping young women.

I mean it, I could cry.
There is (or was) legit a political party in Canada called the Progressive Conservatives. I think its pretty much died off. I think they were around when the last referendum for Qeubec splitting off and I think I might have been in power. That's as much Canadian political history I can recall about the PCs. I think they might have been close to Libertarians - lots of freedom but market based (I'm guessing, only because Zontar said once that he was sort of similar to Libertarians). You know - Canadians be Canadians

stroopwafel said:
Ehmm..no I don't think I mention 'conspiracy' anywhere. Maybe bother to read my post first. Fact is Wiener has been a sleezeball for decades and the timing of the 'harassment' allegations is, how coincidential, right after the media crash and burned his career. That is some display of courage and sincerity. It's like, being fucked twice. First literally and then figuratively. That's probably too much though even for Wiener. :p
So your saying he should get a free pass because they didn't do it timely enough for you or just that women are weak and waiting for his fall? Maybe the courage is talking about being raped irrelevant of timing. It took victims decades to speak out about against priest mainly because the church suppressed all cases before. There have already been reports of Harvey being accused before now and those lead nowhere due to his influence.
I could also imagine that victims would want to escape the situation first rather than taking it on. Maybe see a doctor or psychologist. Maybe they try to suppress it. Maybe get support by trying to take things on. Which, by the look of things, in Hollywood support is left wanting. It sounds like 'support' is just going to give you bad advice.
 

CheetoDust_v1legacy

New member
Jun 10, 2017
88
0
0
Zontar said:
CheetoDust said:
Zontar said:
.

Someone I do like is exposed for sexually assault and potentially rape: "w-w-w-well I can't just bring him up, it's a New Yorker thing" -Literally the reason SNL didn't touch this issue, not even an exaggeration.
Michael Che literally said Weinstein should be in jail after he and Jost did a 5 minute segment about him on Weekend update. Why do you tell so many lies?

Oh my lying eyes.

Must be a progressive thing.
Here's SNL "touching it". Must be a dirty partisan lie thing.


You claimed SNL didn't touch it. Here they are talking about it and explicitly saying Weinstein should be in jail. So yeah, you're lying like a liar would.
 
Dec 10, 2012
867
0
0
Zontar said:
TheVampwizimp said:
Don't believe me? We elected Donald Trump president. And I know, he's your golden boy, so you really won't believe me, but we elected an admitted sexual predator to be our Commander in Chief. He is on record saying that he assaults women.
The only thing he is on record saying is the infamous "grab em by the pussy" comment, and people seem to forget what he said immediately after that, which for the record was "and they let you do it".

It should be considered telling that the group of people who came out against him, who still haven't gone to the police mind you, decided to all come out right in the final weeks of the election instead of during the year before that, or the years between when they alleged the incidents took place and then.

My doubt doesn't stem from the fact he's someone I support, I make no secret of the fact I think he's a terrible person as a person. He's a decent businessman, he seems to be a good father, but he's not a good person. He's just the best politician the US had in a particularly horrible election cycle, and also one that there is no evidence of any sexual assault on his part.

This isn't a situation comparable to Weinstein who has fled the country (or tried, can't remember which), or where the media has gone out of its way to pretend the issue doesn't exist.

I don't even know why I'm arguing this anymore, you have your rebuttals already loaded up, I've seen them before. They're nonsense.
You know this is why the "smug liberal problem" is a thing. This right here is a perfect example of it.

It's especially funny given the fact that the your own points from where I'm sitting seems "already loaded up" given how predictable they are given the fact that despite how many time they've been show down in the past they keep coming back because ideas, no matter how wrong, don't just simply die (which, on a somewhat related note, is how Marxism and those who advocate it like Corbyn can still be taken seriously despite nearly 100 examples of nations attempting those ideas and so far a 100% rate of failure so bad Marxists have to prevent every other system is under the umbrella of Capitalism to prevent theirs isn't the deadliest ideology ever conceived by man).
Well, considering that you did end up using the very same argument to defend Trump that I knew you would, and that you had even used a couple posts above mine, I think I have the right to be a little smug.

And it's also nonsense, like I said. It's conspiracy theory bunk. You believe that the liberal Left is trying to legalize pedophilia and that Hillary Clinton ran a child sex ring out of a New York pizza shop, but that the guy who admitted to grabbing women without consent and has settled numerous sexual assault cases out of court is not a sexual predator. The cognitive dissonance here is terrifying.
 

Fox12

AccursedT- see you space cowboy
Jun 6, 2013
4,828
0
0
Oh joy, more people on both sides using this as ammunition for political debate. People never change.
 

stroopwafel

Elite Member
Apr 29, 2020
3,031
354
88
trunkage said:
So your saying he should get a free pass because they didn't do it timely enough for you or just that women are weak and waiting for his fall? Maybe the courage is talking about being raped irrelevant of timing. It took victims decades to speak out about against priest mainly because the church suppressed all cases before. There have already been reports of Harvey being accused before now and those lead nowhere due to his influence.
I could also imagine that victims would want to escape the situation first rather than taking it on. Maybe see a doctor or psychologist. Maybe they try to suppress it. Maybe get support by trying to take things on. Which, by the look of things, in Hollywood support is left wanting. It sounds like 'support' is just going to give you bad advice.
Like I said, if Wiener did cross the line of physically forcing himself on an actress and had sex or received other favors of that nature without consent the victim could have easily pressed charges and such a subpoena alone would have ruined his career. Saying ''it's 'rape culture'(whatever that is) and Hollywood covering their shit up'' is such bullshit. Everyone in the public eye fears negative press espescially those Hollywood primadonnas. Just look at how the media tore apart Michael Jackson by accusations of a few money hungry parasites who claimed he abused their child(all blatantly false) then suddenly all kind of women smelled blood(or rather, money) and started accusing him of the same. Again the media had a field day destroying an innocent man how delighted do you think they would feel if they could do the same with a Hollywood sleezeball that was actually, well, guilty?

And even if what you say is true that Wiener's 'victims' all took years to recover from his avances then please elaborate how they all crawled out the woodwork at the same moment and only after the media torched his career. I mean goddamn that is some revelation of mass enlightenment there.

CheetoDust said:
Must be a progressive thing. Here's SNL "touching it". Must be a dirty partisan lie thing.


You claimed SNL didn't touch it. Here they are talking about it and explicitly saying Weinstein should be in jail. So yeah, you're lying like a liar would.
Crying with the wolves. The hypocrisy is dripping off his smug face. The media has zero integrity and will parrot anything that is the consensus for highest ratings and viewers. No wonder Trump calls them fakers b/c that's what they are.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
14,996
805
118
stroopwafel said:
Like I said, if Wiener did cross the line of physically forcing himself on an actress and had sex or received other favors of that nature without consent the victim could have easily pressed charges and such a subpoena alone would have ruined his career.
Remember when Roman Polanski raped a 13 yr old girl, admitted to it, fled the US and went on to have a long and successful career? Ir doesn't get more open and shut than that, and it hardly ended his career.
 

stroopwafel

Elite Member
Apr 29, 2020
3,031
354
88
Thaluikhain said:
stroopwafel said:
Like I said, if Wiener did cross the line of physically forcing himself on an actress and had sex or received other favors of that nature without consent the victim could have easily pressed charges and such a subpoena alone would have ruined his career.
Remember when Roman Polanski raped a 13 yr old girl, admitted to it, fled the US and went on to have a long and successful career? Ir doesn't get more open and shut than that, and it hardly ended his career.
Not ended but it's a stigma he still carried with him decades later. And here for actually good reason. I can't remember Polanski not being associated with his crime.
 

CheetoDust_v1legacy

New member
Jun 10, 2017
88
0
0
stroopwafel said:
trunkage said:
So your saying he should get a free pass because they didn't do it timely enough for you or just that women are weak and waiting for his fall? Maybe the courage is talking about being raped irrelevant of timing. It took victims decades to speak out about against priest mainly because the church suppressed all cases before. There have already been reports of Harvey being accused before now and those lead nowhere due to his influence.
I could also imagine that victims would want to escape the situation first rather than taking it on. Maybe see a doctor or psychologist. Maybe they try to suppress it. Maybe get support by trying to take things on. Which, by the look of things, in Hollywood support is left wanting. It sounds like 'support' is just going to give you bad advice.
Like I said, if Wiener did cross the line of physically forcing himself on an actress and had sex or received other favors of that nature without consent the victim could have easily pressed charges and such a subpoena alone would have ruined his career. Saying ''it's 'rape culture'(whatever that is) and Hollywood covering their shit up'' is such bullshit. Everyone in the public eye fears negative press espescially those Hollywood primadonnas. Just look at how the media tore apart Michael Jackson by accusations of a few money hungry parasites who claimed he abused their child(all blatantly false) then suddenly all kind of women smelled blood(or rather, money) and started accusing him of the same. Again the media had a field day destroying an innocent man how delighted do you think they would feel if they could do the same with a Hollywood sleezeball that was actually, well, guilty?

And even if what you say is true that Wiener's 'victims' all took years to recover from his avances then please elaborate how they all crawled out the woodwork at the same moment and only after the media torched his career. I mean goddamn that is some revelation of mass enlightenment there.

CheetoDust said:
Must be a progressive thing. Here's SNL "touching it". Must be a dirty partisan lie thing.


You claimed SNL didn't touch it. Here they are talking about it and explicitly saying Weinstein should be in jail. So yeah, you're lying like a liar would.
Crying with the wolves. The hypocrisy is dripping off his smug face. The media has zero integrity and will parrot anything that is the consensus for highest ratings and viewers. No wonder Trump calls them fakers b/c thatt's what they are.
SNL never mentioned Weinstein!
Yes they did.
Well they didn't mean it!

Good job
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
14,996
805
118
stroopwafel said:
Thaluikhain said:
stroopwafel said:
Like I said, if Wiener did cross the line of physically forcing himself on an actress and had sex or received other favors of that nature without consent the victim could have easily pressed charges and such a subpoena alone would have ruined his career.
Remember when Roman Polanski raped a 13 yr old girl, admitted to it, fled the US and went on to have a long and successful career? Ir doesn't get more open and shut than that, and it hardly ended his career.
Not ended but it's a stigma he still carried with him decades later. And here for actually good reason. I can't remember Polanski not being associated with his crime.
True, but why would Weinstein's career be ruined by an accusation of raping a woman, when Polanski's wasn't after he admitted raping a girl?
 

stroopwafel

Elite Member
Apr 29, 2020
3,031
354
88
Thaluikhain said:
stroopwafel said:
Thaluikhain said:
stroopwafel said:
Like I said, if Wiener did cross the line of physically forcing himself on an actress and had sex or received other favors of that nature without consent the victim could have easily pressed charges and such a subpoena alone would have ruined his career.
Remember when Roman Polanski raped a 13 yr old girl, admitted to it, fled the US and went on to have a long and successful career? Ir doesn't get more open and shut than that, and it hardly ended his career.
Not ended but it's a stigma he still carried with him decades later. And here for actually good reason. I can't remember Polanski not being associated with his crime.
True, but why would Weinstein's career be ruined by an accusation of raping a woman, when Polanski's wasn't after he admitted raping a girl?
Different Zeitgeist. The former was perhaps overly tolerant while the current era is politically correct to the extreme.
 

Murlin

I came here to laugh at you
Jul 15, 2009
535
0
0
Thaluikhain said:
True, but why would Weinstein's career be ruined by an accusation of raping a woman, when Polanski's wasn't after he admitted raping a girl?
Seems like it was a bridge too far this time. Weinstein just had the bad fortune of becoming the catalyst for the controversy.
stroopwafel said:
Different Zeitgeist. The former was perhaps overly tolerant while the current era is politically correct to the extreme.
Goddamn Libruls and their anti-rape stances.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
14,996
805
118
Murlin said:
Thaluikhain said:
True, but why would Weinstein's career be ruined by an accusation of raping a woman, when Polanski's wasn't after he admitted raping a girl?
Seems like it was a bridge too far this time. Weinstein just had the bad fortune of becoming the catalyst for the controversy.
In large part, yeah, luck of the draw, and most of them will continue to get away with it, most like, but I doubt his career is over.

Hell, look who is running the US.
 

Naldan

You Are Interested. Certainly.
Feb 25, 2015
488
0
0
Purge them. Purge them all. Let them rot in jail forever. This goes into politics as well, speculations go. (aside from the disgusting behaviour of Donald Trump, although that one scene recorded is all we've got, afaik)

But I find it more disturbing that this only now gets a spotlight. There wasn't even half as much media attention when actors came out being molested, abused, raped as children. They didn't care, most of the people didn't care.

Now, since feminism became hyper important, abuse gets the attention it deserves. What a fucking disgrace. But at least something gets done somewhere somehow.
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Apr 23, 2020
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
Fox12 said:
Oh joy, more people on both sides using this as ammunition for political debate. People never change.
A woman in my home town died in the Vegas shooting. And when I said this, someone else said something along the lines of "I'm very sorry, people need to keep politics out of this." And I really should have said this to them when it said it to me. No. People don't. Because otherwise, people do and say nothing to change the situation that caused this crap to happen in the first place. Thoughts and prayers should be with the victims, of course, but if we have nothing but thoughts and prayers for the victims, we're going to need a lot of it for all the future victims.
 

Johnny Novgorod

Bebop Man
Legacy
Apr 10, 2020
17,142
1,270
118
Country
Argentina
Darth Rosenberg said:
Johnny Novgorod said:
Silentpony said:
Guarantee you if Miramax had a piece of the MCU or Star Wars or whatever not one person would have come out against him.
Sort of how nobody batted an eye when Joss Whedon was accused of the same sins Weinstein is purging right now.
Is your bias personal or political? Just curious...

No, to say they are the "same sins" is dangerously--- well, I'll be polite and say 'daft'. Care to quote sources - mountains of 'em - of sexual abuse, 'misdemeanors', bullying, and, oh yeah, rape against Whedon? One seems to have broken the law multiple times over decades - the other hasn't, as far as I've heard, broken a single law.

I've not looked at the Joss story for weeks, so I could've missed major revelations, but last I heard we had no first hand accounts from anyone but his wife. As unethical as Joss's actions sound/seem to have been, there's nothing against what could've easily been consensual workplace relationships.

Maybe if it really is more okay to speak out against abusive patriarchy we'll see some accusers of Joss's come forward, but until then, no, they're not remotely the "same sins" of Weinstein.
No bias. An employer has power over an employee, and a relationship or sexual liaison is inherently unequal. Even if it it's technically legal and consensual there may be an element of pressure, manipulation and coercion involved.
 

Silentpony_v1legacy

Alleged Feather-Rustler
Jun 5, 2013
6,760
0
0
Johnny Novgorod said:
Darth Rosenberg said:
Johnny Novgorod said:
Silentpony said:
Guarantee you if Miramax had a piece of the MCU or Star Wars or whatever not one person would have come out against him.
Sort of how nobody batted an eye when Joss Whedon was accused of the same sins Weinstein is purging right now.
Is your bias personal or political? Just curious...

No, to say they are the "same sins" is dangerously--- well, I'll be polite and say 'daft'. Care to quote sources - mountains of 'em - of sexual abuse, 'misdemeanors', bullying, and, oh yeah, rape against Whedon? One seems to have broken the law multiple times over decades - the other hasn't, as far as I've heard, broken a single law.

I've not looked at the Joss story for weeks, so I could've missed major revelations, but last I heard we had no first hand accounts from anyone but his wife. As unethical as Joss's actions sound/seem to have been, there's nothing against what could've easily been consensual workplace relationships.

Maybe if it really is more okay to speak out against abusive patriarchy we'll see some accusers of Joss's come forward, but until then, no, they're not remotely the "same sins" of Weinstein.
No bias. An employer has power over an employee, and a relationship or sexual liaison is inherently unequal. Even if it it's technically legal and consensual there may be an element of pressure, manipulation and coercion involved.
But at that point how does anyone anywhere has safe, consensual sex? If consent can be retroactively withdrawn at any point, for any reason, by any party involved, why would you ever risk sex? And how is that not blackmail?

Come to think of it, why can't Weinstein withdraw his consent? Say all the sex was consensual at the time, and that he never would have agreed to sex were it non-consensual and any woman who is retroactively withdrawing their consent is by definition changing the terms of the sexual encounter, and he wouldn't have agreed to these new terms, ie she doesn't consent, and he is withdrawing his consent, and she in-fact raped him?
Why can't he do that?
 

Pseudonym

Regular Member
Legacy
Nov 4, 2020
802
8
13
Country
Nederland

Rumours and jokes about this stuff are rather common and have been for a long time. In the case of hollywood there is a dangerous mix of power, stardom, people who get away with stuff because they are or are perceived to be geniuses, a lot of actors and actresses being goodlooking.

Some stricter punishments would be nice. Send the guy to prison rather than rehab. I don't care if he is addicted, sexual abuse warrants punishment either way. A bit less of a hero culture (though this is on audiences as well), and a bit less hierarchy probably would help either. Don't allow a single guy to determine who gets hired and who doesn't.
 

Kenbo Slice

Respect your surroundings
Jun 7, 2010
2,699
0
0
Silentpony said:
Johnny Novgorod said:
Darth Rosenberg said:
Johnny Novgorod said:
Silentpony said:
Guarantee you if Miramax had a piece of the MCU or Star Wars or whatever not one person would have come out against him.
Sort of how nobody batted an eye when Joss Whedon was accused of the same sins Weinstein is purging right now.
Is your bias personal or political? Just curious...

No, to say they are the "same sins" is dangerously--- well, I'll be polite and say 'daft'. Care to quote sources - mountains of 'em - of sexual abuse, 'misdemeanors', bullying, and, oh yeah, rape against Whedon? One seems to have broken the law multiple times over decades - the other hasn't, as far as I've heard, broken a single law.

I've not looked at the Joss story for weeks, so I could've missed major revelations, but last I heard we had no first hand accounts from anyone but his wife. As unethical as Joss's actions sound/seem to have been, there's nothing against what could've easily been consensual workplace relationships.

Maybe if it really is more okay to speak out against abusive patriarchy we'll see some accusers of Joss's come forward, but until then, no, they're not remotely the "same sins" of Weinstein.
No bias. An employer has power over an employee, and a relationship or sexual liaison is inherently unequal. Even if it it's technically legal and consensual there may be an element of pressure, manipulation and coercion involved.
But at that point how does anyone anywhere has safe, consensual sex? If consent can be retroactively withdrawn at any point, for any reason, by any party involved, why would you ever risk sex? And how is that not blackmail?

Come to think of it, why can't Weinstein withdraw his consent? Say all the sex was consensual at the time, and that he never would have agreed to sex were it non-consensual and any woman who is retroactively withdrawing their consent is by definition changing the terms of the sexual encounter, and he wouldn't have agreed to these new terms, ie she doesn't consent, and he is withdrawing his consent, and she in-fact raped him?
Why can't he do that?
Just gonna leave this here:
Dude is a creep.