Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • Talkrational: You just got told some tough truths about conifers that maybe you weren't ready to hear.

Topic: Harvey Weinstein (Read 1132 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #25
Anthony Bourdain had a good response to that:



NYT also got Gwyneth Paltrow and Angelina Jolie on the record:


Learn something unpleasant almost every day since trump took office.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casting_couch
Love is like a magic penny
 if you hold it tight you won't have any
if you give it away you'll have so many
they'll be rolling all over the floor

  • borealis
  • Administrator
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #26
Two things.
One, is a studio exec really well known enough that you know who that is without needing to google him?
And two, why is this surprising? Men with social power often abuse it. Moral: stay away from dudes like that. Suggestion: Maybe change the way we deal with that sort of predator. Rather than sending them to prison, confiscate all their assets and liquidate them. Give the proceeds to the victims.

No.

1. It doesn't matter if he isn't well known to you. What matters is his being well known and powerful in the industry in which these young women must operate to pursue their careers.
2. Men like that don't just have social power, unless you call all power social power. They can wreck careers, nip them in the bud, poison the well throughout the industry.

Your moral sucks: young women are naïve as shit, still immature, often easily manipulated by men exactly like that, who are even able to enlist people around them to help them take advantage. You're suggesting young women shouldn't pursue careers that put them in contact with 'men like that'. Know what? There are no careers that keep young women away from 'men like that'; men like that are everywhere in positions of authority and influence.

And no. Send these fucking predators to jail.
I think I was unclear. But it did give me a chuckle how everyone jumped my shit. Well done SJW's. Well done.

Anyway, my thought was that liquidating their assets entirely (and future earnings too I suppose) seemed like a worse fate for people who create an identity around abusing that power. Especially when they could have a comfortable retirement as soon as they leave prison which is likely to be soon because money buys shorter prison terms doncha know. The moral bit was clearly from my own privileged perspective. I wouldn't hang around with or do business with someone who was an asshole. But way to paint young women as naive and helpless victims too I suppose.

Young women are very often naïve, in part because their brains haven't even fully matured until well into their early twenties, same as young men, and they lack experience and social knowledge and self-confidence, sometimes to frightening degrees, and nobody said 'helpless' but you.

Often as not, you don't find out some man is an 'asshole' until he's in the process of going all asshole on you personally. Men in positions of authority are protected by that authority - people don't want to lose their jobs/have their careers tanked when all they really have to go on is rumour and hearsay. And even so, people often do pass along warnings, they just don't always reach the people who most need to hear them.

You're unlikely to even know any women who haven't encountered men like Weinstein. A lot of women carry that shit to their graves, because on top of being traumatic, it's humiliating and enraging to realise you've been taken advantage of, that you may not have had any clue how to handle the situation, and that even if you managed to back out without being seriously assaulted, and even if you complained, your prospects are now reduced because the asshole in question has the power to seriously limit your professional future, whether it's in entertainment or academia or business or whatever.

As for taking all their money - wealth has the means to hide itself. So fat chance.

  • ToThePoint
  • search & destroy
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #27
audio tape released (creep factor level 10)
www.nydailynews.com LINK
"This is your life and it's ending one minute at a time."

Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #28
Two things.
One, is a studio exec really well known enough that you know who that is without needing to google him?
And two, why is this surprising? Men with social power often abuse it. Moral: stay away from dudes like that. Suggestion: Maybe change the way we deal with that sort of predator. Rather than sending them to prison, confiscate all their assets and liquidate them. Give the proceeds to the victims.

No.

1. It doesn't matter if he isn't well known to you. What matters is his being well known and powerful in the industry in which these young women must operate to pursue their careers.
2. Men like that don't just have social power, unless you call all power social power. They can wreck careers, nip them in the bud, poison the well throughout the industry.

Your moral sucks: young women are naïve as shit, still immature, often easily manipulated by men exactly like that, who are even able to enlist people around them to help them take advantage. You're suggesting young women shouldn't pursue careers that put them in contact with 'men like that'. Know what? There are no careers that keep young women away from 'men like that'; men like that are everywhere in positions of authority and influence.

And no. Send these fucking predators to jail.
I think I was unclear. But it did give me a chuckle how everyone jumped my shit. Well done SJW's. Well done.

Anyway, my thought was that liquidating their assets entirely (and future earnings too I suppose) seemed like a worse fate for people who create an identity around abusing that power. Especially when they could have a comfortable retirement as soon as they leave prison which is likely to be soon because money buys shorter prison terms doncha know. The moral bit was clearly from my own privileged perspective. I wouldn't hang around with or do business with someone who was an asshole. But way to paint young women as naive and helpless victims too I suppose.

Young women are very often naïve, in part because their brains haven't even fully matured until well into their early twenties, same as young men, and they lack experience and social knowledge and self-confidence, sometimes to frightening degrees, and nobody said 'helpless' but you.

Often as not, you don't find out some man is an 'asshole' until he's in the process of going all asshole on you personally. Men in positions of authority are protected by that authority - people don't want to lose their jobs/have their careers tanked when all they really have to go on is rumour and hearsay. And even so, people often do pass along warnings, they just don't always reach the people who most need to hear them.

You're unlikely to even know any women who haven't encountered men like Weinstein. A lot of women carry that shit to their graves, because on top of being traumatic, it's humiliating and enraging to realise you've been taken advantage of, that you may not have had any clue how to handle the situation, and that even if you managed to back out without being seriously assaulted, and even if you complained, your prospects are now reduced because the asshole in question has the power to seriously limit your professional future, whether it's in entertainment or academia or business or whatever.

As for taking all their money - wealth has the means to hide itself. So fat chance.
Yeah. I know. But it does bug me that we consider prison fair restitution in cases like that. I mean, if that's how we pay our debts to society, there's some piss poor bookkeeping going on. Anyway, I am aware that men can be assholes and that women largely have found themselves in a world where they have to put up with that assholery. It's not a normatively positive thing.
Love is like a magic penny
 if you hold it tight you won't have any
if you give it away you'll have so many
they'll be rolling all over the floor

Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #29
Yes, indeed, but I wish the rest of you fuckers had actually warned me to stay away from rapists and harassers and abusers. I never realized it was that easy.
#It'sSaferToStayInTheKitchen

thought about making this joke, decided it was in bad taste, and had that confirmed when I saw that you had made it!

  • ksen
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #30
Stop trying to appropriate my shitposts.

Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #31

  • nesb
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #32
Two things.
One, is a studio exec really well known enough that you know who that is without needing to google him?
And two, why is this surprising? Men with social power often abuse it. Moral: stay away from dudes like that. Suggestion: Maybe change the way we deal with that sort of predator. Rather than sending them to prison, confiscate all their assets and liquidate them. Give the proceeds to the victims.

No.

1. It doesn't matter if he isn't well known to you. What matters is his being well known and powerful in the industry in which these young women must operate to pursue their careers.
2. Men like that don't just have social power, unless you call all power social power. They can wreck careers, nip them in the bud, poison the well throughout the industry.

Your moral sucks: young women are naïve as shit, still immature, often easily manipulated by men exactly like that, who are even able to enlist people around them to help them take advantage. You're suggesting young women shouldn't pursue careers that put them in contact with 'men like that'. Know what? There are no careers that keep young women away from 'men like that'; men like that are everywhere in positions of authority and influence.

And no. Send these fucking predators to jail.
I think I was unclear. But it did give me a chuckle how everyone jumped my shit. Well done SJW's. Well done.

Anyway, my thought was that liquidating their assets entirely (and future earnings too I suppose) seemed like a worse fate for people who create an identity around abusing that power. Especially when they could have a comfortable retirement as soon as they leave prison which is likely to be soon because money buys shorter prison terms doncha know. The moral bit was clearly from my own privileged perspective. I wouldn't hang around with or do business with someone who was an asshole. But way to paint young women as naive and helpless victims too I suppose.

Young women are very often naïve, in part because their brains haven't even fully matured until well into their early twenties, same as young men, and they lack experience and social knowledge and self-confidence, sometimes to frightening degrees, and nobody said 'helpless' but you.

Often as not, you don't find out some man is an 'asshole' until he's in the process of going all asshole on you personally. Men in positions of authority are protected by that authority - people don't want to lose their jobs/have their careers tanked when all they really have to go on is rumour and hearsay. And even so, people often do pass along warnings, they just don't always reach the people who most need to hear them.

You're unlikely to even know any women who haven't encountered men like Weinstein. A lot of women carry that shit to their graves, because on top of being traumatic, it's humiliating and enraging to realise you've been taken advantage of, that you may not have had any clue how to handle the situation, and that even if you managed to back out without being seriously assaulted, and even if you complained, your prospects are now reduced because the asshole in question has the power to seriously limit your professional future, whether it's in entertainment or academia or business or whatever.

As for taking all their money - wealth has the means to hide itself. So fat chance.
Yeah. I know. But it does bug me that we consider prison fair restitution in cases like that. I mean, if that's how we pay our debts to society, there's some piss poor bookkeeping going on. Anyway, I am aware that men can be assholes and that women largely have found themselves in a world where they have to put up with that assholery. It's not a normatively positive thing.

Putting statutes of limitations aside, rape victims and the like can sue for damages.


  • Doobie Keebler
  • Ridiculous Callipygous
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #34
There is one article in the Wrap (by its founder) alleging that she had a story in the 2000's when she was a writer for NYT that touched on some of this stuff, but they killed it.  She claims it was because of interference from Weinstein, and also that Matt Damon and Russell Crowe called her to influence things as well.

Yeah, and Affleck opened his mouth just recently to defend the scumbag too. IIRC it was in a tweet to another actress who was speaking up, I forget the details. However at the time that came up I did bother to look up and confirm something it made me suspect. According to IMDb it was Weinstein personally with whom he and Damon made the deal with through Miramax to make Good Will Hunting that put the two of them on the map. Miramax provided the largest production share and had the rights to USA theatrical distribution as well as the soundtrack.

The whole thing disgusts me to no end and when this image popped up I got a little rage-y. In the past I had taken my turn in the family rotation and had "bedtime read" a decent chunk of the Potter series to my niece and nephew as they were growing up and I went to most of the movies with them as they were released. For that reason I totally have a soft spot for Emma, silly as that may be.

"I'm over 70 and have never seen such , arrogance, incompetence and Ill -intentions as this President and his aids."    The Dotard     (posted 12 days after his 68th birthday)

  • Pingu
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #35
Two things.
One, is a studio exec really well known enough that you know who that is without needing to google him?
And two, why is this surprising? Men with social power often abuse it. Moral: stay away from dudes like that. Suggestion: Maybe change the way we deal with that sort of predator. Rather than sending them to prison, confiscate all their assets and liquidate them. Give the proceeds to the victims.

Testy, saying "stay away from dudes like that" is at best absurdly naive.  It's like saying "stay away from water".  I doubt there's a woman alive who hasn't inadvertently found herself with a "dude like that", no matter how canny she is. 

There are a heck of a lot of them, and you can't tell them from "dudes who aren't like that" just by looking.

ETA comprehensively ninja'd
  • Last Edit: October 13, 2017, 12:56:26 AM by Pingu
I have a Darwin-debased mind.

Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #36
lol.
Love is like a magic penny
 if you hold it tight you won't have any
if you give it away you'll have so many
they'll be rolling all over the floor

  • Faid
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #37
audio tape released (creep factor level 10)
www.nydailynews.com LINK
OK that literally made me somewhat nauseous.
Who even made the rule that we cannot group ducks and fish together for the simple reason that they are both aquatic? If I want to group them that way and it serves my purpose then I can jolly well do it however I want to and it is still a nested hierarchy and you can't tell me that it's not.

  • MikeS
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #38
IIRC, the lawsuit against Harvey using that tape as evidence was thrown out for "lack of evidence".

  • Doobie Keebler
  • Ridiculous Callipygous
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #39
IIRC, the lawsuit against Harvey using that tape as evidence was thrown out for "lack of evidence".


Actually it wasn't a lawsuit. That tape was part of a sting operation by the NYPD who publicly stated they felt it corroborated the accusations of Gutierrez, the actress wearing the wire to try and get Weinstein to admit to what he did.

It was the NY prosecutor that claimed he didn't feel the tape was good enough to proceed with charging Weinstein.

Fun Fact (IIRC): This was the same NY prosecutor who recently made the headlines for being the one who decided to stop the investigation of Ivanka Trump And Jared Kuschner for possible felony fraud charges related to selling Trump condos.
"I'm over 70 and have never seen such , arrogance, incompetence and Ill -intentions as this President and his aids."    The Dotard     (posted 12 days after his 68th birthday)

  • Doobie Keebler
  • Ridiculous Callipygous
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #40
The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences Expels Harvey Weinstein

The Brits already tossed him (suspended) as well. Next up is the vote by the Producers Guild on Monday.

Quote
The Oscar winner, accused of sexual harrassment and assult, "does not merit the respect of his colleagues," the Academy said in immediately revoking his membership.

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has expelled disgraced mogul Harvey Weinstein from its ranks.

The Academy's 54-member board of governors -- which includes such Hollywood luminaries as Steven Spielberg, Tom Hanks, Whoopi Goldberg and Kathleen Kennedy -- held an emergency meeting at the organization's Beverly Hills headquarters today and voted to strip away Weinstein's lifetime membership.

Following the meeting, the Academy issued a statement saying the board had voted "to immediately expel him from the Academy. We do so not simply to separate ourselves from someone who does not merit the respect of his colleagues but also to send a message that the era of willful ignorance and shameful complicity in sexually predatory behavior and workplace harassment in our industry is over."

The Academy went on to say, "What's at issue here is a deeply troubling problem that has no place in our society. The board continues to work to establish ethical standards of conduct that all Academy member will be expected to exemplify."

The Academy's action, which comes in response to the dozens of allegations that have now surfaced accusing Weinstein of an ongoing pattern of predatory behavior in which he sexually harassed, assaulted and even raped women, is virtually unprecedented.

The Academy's bylaws state that, with a two-thirds vote, the board of governors can eject a member "for cause." In this case, the Academy said "well in excess of the two-thirds majority" voted to expel Weinstein.

Only one other member has ever been expelled in the 90-year history of the Academy: Carmine Caridi, an actor who was found to have violated the Academy's policy against loaning awards season screeners when films he had been sent turned up online.

In Weinstein's case, the decision was all the more dramatic given how assiduously he had courted the Academy's approval over the years. A past master of awards season campaigning, he saw the two companies he ran during the course of his career, Miramax and The Weinstein Company, collect more than 300 Oscar nominations and score five best picture wins. Weinstein himself was personally called up to the stage in 1999 as a producer of Shakespeare in Love when it was named best picture.

Ahead of the meeting, some Academy members did express concerns that such an action would establish a precedent that would require the organization, which also includes such controversial figures as Bill Cosby and Roman Polanski, to begin policing the behavior of its members. But amid the near universal condemnation of Weinstein, the board moved ahead to reject him.

Now, a Hollywood pariah, Weinstein is also facing expulsion from the Producers Guild of America, whose own board is meeting Monday to vote on Weinstein's status in that organization. And earlier this week, the British Academy of Film and Television Arts suspended Weinstein from its ranks.
  • Last Edit: October 14, 2017, 10:15:57 PM by Doobie Keebler
"I'm over 70 and have never seen such , arrogance, incompetence and Ill -intentions as this President and his aids."    The Dotard     (posted 12 days after his 68th birthday)

Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #41
Don't knock the kitchen with its ticking clock, it's the heart of the home, it's the place and time given where a daughter matures into a woman with confidence, esteem and a resolute sense of positive self determination.  Home is the sanctuary then, the place of nurture where as a mother, father, you teach by example through distant tales of those who have gone before, those who in their turn rejected the fabulous trajectories, those stunning opportunities offered and who defiantly relinquished that hard won career tossed mercilessly into the skilled hands of mega industry mogul. 

Choices were made by some not as young naive victims but as purposeful rejectors of menacing predatory cultures.  A walking away then, a form of conscientious objection - particularly relevant in the arts, because to be an artist is to live-out-loud.  Qui tacet consentire videtur, ubi liquid debuit ac potuit.  Nothing, girls, is worth colluding with that monster.  Some women resolutely rejected that path so that you, who choose to follow now, might garner due respect in your chosen field in your or your daughter's lifetime.  Movements take decades, thoughtful men, sons, brothers take heed, bear daughters, granddaughters of their own, ripples are cast upon consciences over generations, over time.

Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #42
Hey everyone, I have a new moral: don't engage with testy because he's a fucking moron.

  • el jefe
  • asleep till 2020 or 2024
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #43
this cy vance person seems to understand his prosecutor job as making sure the law doesn't apply to the rich and powerful

eta: I assume without looking that his job is elected, and he has gotten both campaign contributions and endorsements from the trumps and weinstein

  • el jefe
  • asleep till 2020 or 2024
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #44
I find it depressingly unsurprising that this kind of thing happens a lot in general.  what does surprise me is that so many men in highly visible positions (weinstein, o'reilly, ailes, trump, cosby, etc.) have gotten away with maintaining these bubbles of secrecy for years on end.  even now, in 2017, when everyone has a smartphone, so anything and everything can be recorded and leaked, and be trending on twitter within a half hour.  how the f do they get all the people involved to keep their mouths shut?  my best guess is they are just that good at keeping track of who knows what and keeping everyone intimidated by the threat of retribution.

  • meepmeep
  • Administrator
  • zombiecat queen
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #45
Intimidation via legal threats is part of it. So is the power someone like that can have over so many people's careers and livelihoods.

But also it's kind of hard to stealthily record someone when they catch you off guard. I mean, if you had any idea you'd be having to record someone, well, then maybe you'd have enough warning signs that make it possible for you to get out or avoid the situation in the first place. You don't walk into a meeting thinking, "Hmm, this dude might try to rape me so maybe I need to get on Facebook live just in case." If you suspect that might happen, you just don't fucking go. And I can't imagine being in panic mode trapped with a piece of shit like that and thinking "oh shit I better get my phone out!". To catch the gropers, you'd also have to be recording every minute you're out among other people.

But don't forget to thank the reasonable, thoughtful, intellectual men who always - for the sake of argument, you see - helpfully remind everyone that we need to be cautious about accusations because there are crazy bitches out there who make shit up just to ruin a poor man's life. And don't forget the thoughtful men who are so very deeply concerned that things will go so far that even shaking a woman's hand will land with them going to court over sexual harassment and they're just saying that they're already deathly terrified of having any professional meetings with women or even flirting with a woman at a bar. Because the feminists will crucify them!

You may think you're making a point but what you're telling everyone else is to not bother saying anything because even reasonable people will litigate your accusation to death, and when it's he said/she said, there will always be enough people around who think it's better to err on the side of "not ruining a man's life." So unless you have physical evidence, it is literally pointless unless there are dozens of other people like you saying the same thing happened to them. Even then, you can still get elected President of the United States or end up getting away with it like Cosby or end up being "rehabilitated" and make your way back like O'Reilly. Looking at all of that, why would a single person stick their neck out to say something? It accomplishes basically nothing.

  • Doobie Keebler
  • Ridiculous Callipygous
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #46
this cy vance person seems to understand his prosecutor job as making sure the law doesn't apply to the rich and powerful

eta: I assume without looking that his job is elected, and he has gotten both campaign contributions and endorsements from the trumps and weinstein

Not 100% sure about Trump but I do believe you are correct on the contribution part. It's ringing a bell but it's been a while since I saw something on it. As far as Weinstein goes, absolutely, his connections to Vance were even more solid. For instance ...

Cy Vance Defends Decision Not to Pursue Case Against Harvey Weinstein

Vance laid it off on his underlings (more in the article), but I'm not exactly sold ...

Quote
Mr. Weinstein was represented in talks with the district attorney's office by two defense lawyers with ties to Mr. Vance: Daniel S. Connolly, a former Manhattan prosecutor, and Elkan Abramowitz, who is Mr. Vance's former law partner and a donor to his campaign.

Mr. Vance said on Wednesday the donations had not influenced him. He noted contributions from defense lawyers were legal and were "unfortunately part of running for office."

"No contribution ever in my seven years as district attorney has ever had any influence on my decision-making in a case," he said.

Ok then. If'n you say so.
"I'm over 70 and have never seen such , arrogance, incompetence and Ill -intentions as this President and his aids."    The Dotard     (posted 12 days after his 68th birthday)

  • el jefe
  • asleep till 2020 or 2024
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #47
Intimidation via legal threats is part of it. So is the power someone like that can have over so many people's careers and livelihoods.
right.  and maybe also a self-fulfilling perception that the guy is "untouchable".  must add to the intimidation if it looks like "he can get away with this"
But also it's kind of hard to stealthily record someone when they catch you off guard. I mean, if you had any idea you'd be having to record someone, well, then maybe you'd have enough warning signs that make it possible for you to get out or avoid the situation in the first place. You don't walk into a meeting thinking, "Hmm, this dude might try to rape me so maybe I need to get on Facebook live just in case." If you suspect that might happen, you just don't fucking go. And I can't imagine being in panic mode trapped with a piece of shit like that and thinking "oh shit I better get my phone out!". To catch the gropers, you'd also have to be recording every minute you're out among other people.
good points

But don't forget to thank the reasonable, thoughtful, intellectual men who always - for the sake of argument, you see - helpfully remind everyone that we need to be cautious about accusations because there are crazy bitches out there who make shit up just to ruin a poor man's life. And don't forget the thoughtful men who are so very deeply concerned that things will go so far that even shaking a woman's hand will land with them going to court over sexual harassment and they're just saying that they're already deathly terrified of having any professional meetings with women or even flirting with a woman at a bar. Because the feminists will crucify them!

You may think you're making a point but what you're telling everyone else is to not bother saying anything because even reasonable people will litigate your accusation to death, and when it's he said/she said, there will always be enough people around who think it's better to err on the side of "not ruining a man's life." So unless you have physical evidence, it is literally pointless unless there are dozens of other people like you saying the same thing happened to them. Even then, you can still get elected President of the United States or end up getting away with it like Cosby or end up being "rehabilitated" and make your way back like O'Reilly. Looking at all of that, why would a single person stick their neck out to say something? It accomplishes basically nothing.
right.  or when the police catch the guy being rapey on tape, and the DA whose campaign he contributed to says he doesn't see a case.

  • MikeS
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #48
But don't forget to thank the reasonable, thoughtful, intellectual men who always - for the sake of argument, you see - helpfully remind everyone that we need to be cautious about accusations because there are crazy bitches out there who make shit up just to ruin a poor man's life. And don't forget the thoughtful men who are so very deeply concerned that things will go so far that even shaking a woman's hand will land with them going to court over sexual harassment and they're just saying that they're already deathly terrified of having any professional meetings with women or even flirting with a woman at a bar. Because the feminists will crucify them!
So you're saying that Vice President Pence is on to something for not meeting other women without his wife present?

  • Doobie Keebler
  • Ridiculous Callipygous
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #49

12 years ago at Pam Anderson's roast.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g70XbYd0bZ8
"I'm over 70 and have never seen such , arrogance, incompetence and Ill -intentions as this President and his aids."    The Dotard     (posted 12 days after his 68th birthday)