Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • Talk Rational: Serious Business, Serious Discussions.

Topic: Harvey Weinstein (Read 1133 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • ksen
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #50
Meanwhile a lead advocate for taking personal responsibility for you life says . . .

http://thehill.com/homenews/media/356721-oreilly-attacks-are-a-horror-show-for-me-and-my-family

Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #51
I can't tell anymore if something has jumped the shark, or if shit just got real.

Former President George H.W. Bush facing third accuser
Quote
A third woman has accused former President George H.W. Bush of inappropriate touching.

Writing on Slate.com, author Christina Baker Kline says her encounter with Bush happened during a photo shoot in 2014, while she and her husband stood on either side of the former president.

Kline is the author of the novels "Orphan Train" and "A Piece of the World." She writes that, upon learning she was a writer, Bush asked: "You wanna know my favorite book?"

"Yes, what is it?," she replied.

"David Cop-a-Feel."

At that point, she writes, Bush grabbed her buttocks just as the photographer snapped a photo. She said she quickly brushed his hand away.

Kline adds that later, a female friend of the Bush family asked her to be "discreet" about the incident.

Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #52
Being a dick comes naturally to republicans
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

  • Monad
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #53
I'm amazed there are not more stories like that about Trump - they must be heavily suppressing stuff for President Pussy grabber

He's very much the Weinstein president

  • meepmeep
  • Administrator
  • zombiecat queen
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #54
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/weighing-the-costs-of-speaking-out-about-harvey-weinstein

Quote
In March, Annabella Sciorra, who received an Emmy nomination for her role in "The Sopranos," agreed to talk with me for a story I was reporting about Harvey Weinstein. Speaking by phone, I explained that two sources had told me that she had a serious allegation regarding the producer. Sciorra, however, told me that Weinstein had never done anything inappropriate. Perhaps she just wasn't his type, she said, with an air of what seemed to be studied nonchalance. But, two weeks ago, after The New Yorker published the story, in which thirteen women accused Weinstein of sexual assault and harassment, Sciorra called me. The truth, she said, was that she had been struggling to speak about Weinstein for more than twenty years. She was still living in fear of him, and slept with a baseball bat by her bed. Weinstein, she told me, had violently raped her in the early nineteen-nineties, and, over the next several years, sexually harassed her repeatedly.

Quote
All told, more than fifty women have now levelled accusations against Weinstein, in accounts published by the New York Times, The New Yorker, and other outlets. But many other victims have continued to be reluctant to talk to me about their experiences, declining interview requests or initially agreeing to talk and then wavering. As more women have come forward, the costs of doing so have certainly shifted. But many still say that they face overwhelming pressures to stay silent, ranging from the spectre of career damage to fears about the life-altering consequences of being marked as sexual-assault victims. "Now when I go to a restaurant or to an event, people are going to know that this happened to me," Sciorra said. "They're gonna look at me and they're gonna know. I'm an intensely private person, and this is the most unprivate thing you can do."

Quote
In the weeks and months that followed the alleged attack, Sciorra didn't tell anyone about it. "Like most of these women, I was so ashamed of what happened," she said. "And I fought. I fought. But still I was like, Why did I open that door? Who opens the door at that time of night? I was definitely embarrassed by it. I felt disgusting. I felt like I had fucked up." She grew depressed and lost weight. Her father, unaware of the attack but concerned for her well-being, urged her to seek help, and she did see a therapist, but, she said, "I don't even think I told the therapist. It's pathetic."

Sciorra never spoke to the police. Neither did the anonymous woman who alleged rape in the earlier New Yorker article, although two others did. The anonymous woman said that, although "I regret not being maybe stronger in the moment," her fears that charging Weinstein publicly might change her life permanently were too great. "It's hard to know. . . . It's like choosing a different life path."

Some of the obstacles that Sciorra and other women believed they faced were related to Weinstein's power in the film industry. Sciorra said that she felt the impact on her livelihood almost immediately. "From 1992, I didn't work again until 1995," she said. "I just kept getting this pushback of 'We heard you were difficult; we heard this or that.' I think that that was the Harvey machine." The actress Rosie Perez, a friend who was among the first to discuss Sciorra's allegations with her, told me, "She was riding high, and then she started acting weird and getting reclusive. It made no sense. Why did this woman, who was so talented, and riding so high, doing hit after hit, then all of a sudden fall off the map? It hurts me as a fellow-actress to see her career not flourish the way it should have."

Quote
The power of the tabloid press to help silence women has been underscored in recent weeks. While there has been an enormous outpouring of support for those who have spoken out against Weinstein, there has also been a backlash. Asia Argento, an Italian actress who alleged, in the earlier New Yorker story, that Weinstein forcibly performed oral sex on her, and also described, in all its nuance, their ensuing relationship, which included consensual sex, told me that, when she decided to speak, she was knowingly sacrificing her reputation. "This will completely destroy me," she predicted.

Since her story was made public, she has fled her native Italy, following public shaming there. The journalist Renato Farina wrote an article about her in the conservative daily Libero, titled "First they give it away, then they whine and pretend to repent." In a radio interview, the paper's editor, Vittorio Feltri, said that Argento should be thankful that Weinstein had forced oral sex on her. Some women joined the chorus, including the commentator Selvaggia Lucarelli. She suggested that it was not "legitimate" to raise an allegation twenty years after the fact.

"I knew, when I spoke up, that things would be difficult. That there would be some who would doubt me, mock me, even malign me. I knew this," Argento told me this week. "But I was unprepared for the naked contempt, the unapologetically hateful public shaming and vilification I received in my own country. Much of it from women. Women! . . . It hurt me. Badly."

Sciorra said that the attacks on Argento and other accusers reinforced her fears about speaking out, but they also finally made her believe that she had no choice but to do so. "The way they're treating Asia, and the way they're treating a lot of women, is so infuriating," she said. The attempts to downplay the significance of Argento's allegations made her realize the importance of her own story. "O.K., you want rape?" she said, addressing those commentators who questioned whether Argento's experience qualified. "Here's fucking rape."

  • el jefe
  • asleep till 2020 or 2024
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #55
the #metoo campaign seems to be paying off.  George Bush sr. and mark Halperin are in trouble now.  I think there have been a few others in the news.

  • borealis
  • Administrator
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #56
The chorus against these women is also getting louder though. Any popular forum/media/comment zone includes large numbers of 'skeptics', MRA 'false rape accusations!' screamers, all the usual deniers and accusers. They are called attention whores, whiny sluts, gold diggers, liars, leeches, accused of having been fine with it when it happened, prostituting themselves for their careers.

It's both horrifying and disgusting, the more so because it is utterly predictable.

  • meepmeep
  • Administrator
  • zombiecat queen
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #57
https://www.thecut.com/2017/10/when-men-treat-assault-stories-like-ghost-stories.html

Quote
This Halloween, however, I'm finding personal accounts of supernatural encounters pretty scary. Not because I see them as any more credible than I did before, but because, for the first time, I've realized that the way I respond to ghost stories is the same way men respond to stories of harassment and abuse.

When someone tells me about a malign presence in their basement or Bloody Mary appearing in their bathroom mirror, I generally don't think I'm being lied to. I understand that the teller is sharing something they find deeply distressing and viscerally real. But I also think I know better. Their explanation goes against everything I know about the world. I've never experienced anything like it, so I have no reason to take their word over my own intuition.

This is the same rationale that fuels widespread dismissal of harassment, pressure, threat, abuse, and assault. It's not that men (and also, to be fair, women who are committed to the status quo) think the women reporting these things are liars. It's just that they think they know better. They believe that you think you experienced harassment, just like I believe that you think you saw a ghost. But just as I'm privately assuming it was probably sleep paralysis or just the house settling, men are privately -- and sometimes publicly -- positing that it must have been a misinterpreted compliment, or oversensitivity, or wishful thinking, or a tendency to take offense. Are we sure the rules weren't different then? Are we sure she wasn't just trying to boost her career? Are we sure that was even his hand?

Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #58
What the fuck

eta Ok, I skimmed that incorrectly the first time through.  That is not a very good lead paragraph.  I thought it was going to be about how we should give more credit to people who tell ghost stories.

  • meepmeep
  • Administrator
  • zombiecat queen
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #59
I thought it was a pretty good analogy, having been on the receiving end of a host of exactly those kinds of rationalizations. It's not about realizing we should believe people who tell ghost stories but about recognizing this impulse a lot of people have to find out what really happened when someone tells them they were harassed/assaulted/abused. I mean, I've always thought, "what the fuck, why do you really have to argue about every last little detail of what I just told you?", but seeing it framed as the same way someone might react to a ghost story makes sense to me now. Dudes have to litigate every little detail because they've never been on the receiving end, rarely witness it themselves, and they have to make sense of it and help you make sense of it because obviously there must be some kind of explanation.

  • ksen
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #60
p sure the explanation is that she experienced sexual harassment/abuse at the hands of a predator

Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #61
I thought it was a pretty good analogy, having been on the receiving end of a host of exactly those kinds of rationalizations. It's not about realizing we should believe people who tell ghost stories but about recognizing this impulse a lot of people have to find out what really happened when someone tells them they were harassed/assaulted/abused. I mean, I've always thought, "what the fuck, why do you really have to argue about every last little detail of what I just told you?", but seeing it framed as the same way someone might react to a ghost story makes sense to me now. Dudes have to litigate every little detail because they've never been on the receiving end, rarely witness it themselves, and they have to make sense of it and help you make sense of it because obviously there must be some kind of explanation.

Yeah but  maybe a better analogy would be something that actually turned out to be true.

Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #62
Yeah, like Bigfoot, alien abductions and the petrodollar.

  • borealis
  • Administrator
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #63
I thought it was a pretty good analogy, having been on the receiving end of a host of exactly those kinds of rationalizations. It's not about realizing we should believe people who tell ghost stories but about recognizing this impulse a lot of people have to find out what really happened when someone tells them they were harassed/assaulted/abused. I mean, I've always thought, "what the fuck, why do you really have to argue about every last little detail of what I just told you?", but seeing it framed as the same way someone might react to a ghost story makes sense to me now. Dudes have to litigate every little detail because they've never been on the receiving end, rarely witness it themselves, and they have to make sense of it and help you make sense of it because obviously there must be some kind of explanation.

Yeah but  maybe a better analogy would be something that actually turned out to be true.

The point, though is that the reaction is the same - often just mildly polite humouring, not even an argument. 'Okay, I believe that's what you think happened (but I don't think your perceptions are reliable).

  • tysixtus
  • TITS GUNS
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #64
"what the fuck, why do you really have to argue about every last little detail of what I just told you?"

yes

ETA

:sosmug:

  • tysixtus
  • TITS GUNS
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #65
I thought it was a pretty good analogy, having been on the receiving end of a host of exactly those kinds of rationalizations. It's not about realizing we should believe people who tell ghost stories but about recognizing this impulse a lot of people have to find out what really happened when someone tells them they were harassed/assaulted/abused. I mean, I've always thought, "what the fuck, why do you really have to argue about every last little detail of what I just told you?", but seeing it framed as the same way someone might react to a ghost story makes sense to me now. Dudes have to litigate every little detail because they've never been on the receiving end, rarely witness it themselves, and they have to make sense of it and help you make sense of it because obviously there must be some kind of explanation.

Yeah but  maybe a better analogy would be something that actually turned out to be true.

The point, though is that the reaction is the same - often just mildly polite humouring, not even an argument. 'Okay, I believe that's what you think happened (but I don't think your perceptions are reliable).

My incredulity -- if I have any, I try not to -- on things like this stems from two things: nobody has ever done something like this to me that bothered me, and I cannot imagine doing it to someone else.

This kind of behavior is utterly foreign to me. I've never even been around a dude doing this to a woman.  I've never been in public and seen a woman harassed by a man, except for those instances where the person is obviously fucked up -- drunk, homeless, mentally ill, etc.  I've never witnessed a woman being catcalled or whistled at (though I was catcalled last year, that that was pretty funny).  But I also don't associate with fucking lowlives who hang out on street corners or porches and run their mouths.

I don't know that I have ever seen office sexual harassment.  I know I have seen general rudeness, e.g. women getting interrupted, but the serial interrupters tend to fucking annoy everyone.  The worst interrupter in my office is a very loud 5"3' woman who cannot stop name dropping for 30 seconds. And ugh, is that annoying.  When I was in the Navy, I did have one boss who was genuinely misogynistic.  He repeatedly made comments like "Women shouldn't serve in the military," etc, right in front of his female subordinates.  He was a greasy piece of shit and eventually got demoted, and when I looked him up after getting out of the Navy he was selling steaks and shrimp door-to-door, and his customer reviews were brutal.  Even when he was bringing people food, they fucking hated him.

Anyway, it doesn't cost me anything to believe that, yes, someone was a dick to you while you were walking home or in class, or that your boss made an inappropriate comment (though you can tell me what the comment was, I might disagree with you on whether or not it is scandalous).  But in general, believing women when they say "This guy did so and so on the Metro" is normal and fine, and I can/will sympathize and try to help, if that is possible.  Because that is shitty.

When we start getting into actual sexual assault, rape, etc, then "Believe Women" is a stupid phrase and antithetical to a just legal system.  There's a whole Wikipedia entry on Emmitt Till, read it.  You cannot just "believe" people when crimes are involved.  That's fucking insane. You need proof, and you need our adversarial system, which means someone is going to question your version of events.
  • Last Edit: October 31, 2017, 04:32:14 PM by tysixtus

  • tysixtus
  • TITS GUNS
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #66
Also, Harvey Weinstein is a disgusting fat sack of shit and Hollywood is a cesspool of worthless degenerates.  Fuck them and their coked-up parties -- these are the fucking scumbags that go and give money the DNC and then presume to tell Americans how to behave, all the while fucking teenagers and falling over 14 year old boys?  I'd round them up into work camps if I thought it would help, they'd probably just end up dying from infected assholes because they don't know how to wipe.

  • meepmeep
  • Administrator
  • zombiecat queen
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #67
Like I said in that post you liked and unliked:
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.

Also there's a difference between what happens in court and what happens in your personal life. If my friend tells me about what some piece of shit did to her, I'm not going to act like we're in a fucking courtroom and demand proper evidence beyond a reasonable doubt before I accept her version of events. But I'm convinced more than ever that the only reasonable action for most women to take is to keep their mouths shut and take it to the grave and pray they don't have any daughters who they have to see suffer the same fucking bullshit every other generation before them has. We might ruin a man's life if we say something so we should just accept the fact that it's preferable that only ours be ruined instead. Like Brock Turner's father said, why ruin another life by punishing my son?

  • tysixtus
  • TITS GUNS
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #68
Like I said in that post you liked and unliked:
Talk about litigating every detail, holy fuck!

Let me give you the old Kevin Spacey apology:

I don't remember that happening, but if it did happen I was drunk, also I am gay.

  • tysixtus
  • TITS GUNS
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #69

Also there's a difference between what happens in court and what happens in your personal life.
I don't know that this is necessarily true anymore.  Social media can ruin a person's life, in some cases worse than a trial.  But you're right -- what are you supposed to do?  Shut up and say nothing?  That's obviously not right.  But just trusting someone's version of events is also probably not the right way to go, if you're talking about a life-altering accusation.  I don't know.

  • borealis
  • Administrator
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #70
Most of the time it isn't a life altering accusation though. It's not like there's hundreds of men in jail for groping a woman's butt or going for a little feel when reaching around her chest. And if you lose your job for that shit, you've no one to blame but yourself for sleeping through the mandatory sexual harassment lectures pretty well every industry now insists on.

Most of the time it's just infuriating bullshit moves pulled on women out of the public eye or just unnoticed in crowds, by strangers or by people you know. Men who would never do that kind of thing rarely see it happen, and there's usually nothing particularly notable about the men that do.

You'd think it would end when you get old, but no. I'm 66, live in the country, rarely go to town. There's still this absolute douchebag of a man close to my age who makes remarks and insinuations and has tried to touch me more than once, at the local historical museum, where we both worked and volunteered, in the damn grocery store, and at a couple local events. He has some skills that are in short supply in a rural area, so he still does some work at the museum, even after me and other women ratting him out and warning others not to trust him. Would he rape someone? I don't know, but his best friend did years ago, and got away with it and went on with his life even though everyone knew about it.

Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #71
I have no doubts that a lot of these guys are predatory and that the testimonies we're getting are by and large true recollections of really horrible behavior on the parts of people in power.

What I do wonder about though is the timing and the fact allegations are primarily coming out against liberal members of Hollywood and general members of the newsmedia, and the fact that Trump has previously threatened to create scandals for those groups (Hollywood and newsmedia) based on insider knowledge if they don't toe the line. Using painful experiences from women's pasts to manipulate the news climate and justify a purge of the newsmedia seems like exactly the kind of horrific and repulsive thing that no reasonable human being would even consider but Trump would revel in, and these scandals have been a windfall for the Trump whitehouse.

  • borealis
  • Administrator
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #72
Jesus Christ teeth. Way to make these women (and a few men) appear - again - to be without agency and reacting to manipulation, poor helpless things.

Or maybe it's just that having a pussy grabbing asshole in the white house has created a climate in which more women are more angry and more willing to step up and say outright that this shit happens all the time and it is not in any way okay for it to have the kind of impact it frequently does on the victims of this bullshit behaviour by men who have power.

Maybe you've not noticed, but it has primarily been women who have enough recognition/career power and years behind them to be reasonably confident that outing predatory and powerful men in their industries will not likely harm them that have come out first with their stories, giving less powerful victims the confidence to follow suit.

Liberal and right wing men have been in the news for being assholes. And frankly, I don't give a shit how liberal they are if they're also shitty people who took advantage of young, vulnerable powerless people that they had the power to harm. If that's the kind of person you are, your 'liberal' politics are a sham anyway, it's just fucking roleplay.

Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #73
I have no doubts that a lot of these guys are predatory and that the testimonies we're getting are by and large true recollections of really horrible behavior on the parts of people in power.

What I do wonder about though is the timing and the fact allegations are primarily coming out against liberal members of Hollywood and general members of the newsmedia, and the fact that Trump has previously threatened to create scandals for those groups (Hollywood and newsmedia) based on insider knowledge if they don't toe the line. Using painful experiences from women's pasts to manipulate the news climate and justify a purge of the newsmedia seems like exactly the kind of horrific and repulsive thing that no reasonable human being would even consider but Trump would revel in, and these scandals have been a windfall for the Trump whitehouse.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sXQoGcMN1U

  • ksen
Re: Harvey Weinstein
Reply #74
What I do wonder about though is the timing and the fact allegations are primarily coming out against liberal members of Hollywood and general members of the newsmedia, and the fact that Trump has previously threatened to create scandals for those groups (Hollywood and newsmedia) based on insider knowledge if they don't toe the line. Using painful experiences from women's pasts to manipulate the news climate and justify a purge of the newsmedia seems like exactly the kind of horrific and repulsive thing that no reasonable human being would even consider but Trump would revel in, and these scandals have been a windfall for the Trump whitehouse.

Why would this even be a concern for you? Even if you're right I don't care about the timing or potential conspiracy to "get" these left leaning guys for being sexual harassers and abusers. They need to be got and it should have happened a long time ago.

I'm not even tempted a little bit to give these guys a pass on the off chance that going after them might help Trump out.