CDZ You cannot fix social ills with a "wink & a nod!"

[usmbguest5318]

The Weinstein affair is just the latest manifestation of the litany of social ills that beset the U.S. We've got racial injustice which we hear about daily from all over the country. Weinstein's behavior is yet another example of sexual injustice which, though of late it's been rearing its head from within the media and entertainment industry, I suspect is no less abundant in other sectors. Both are ridiculously pervasive, and neither should be.

From the New Yorker article. "From Aggressive Overtures to Sexual Assault: Harvey Weinstein’s Accusers Tell Their Stories":

Asia Argento, an Italian film actress and director, told me that she did not speak out until now—Weinstein, she told me, forcibly performed oral sex on her—because she feared that Weinstein would “crush” her. “I know he has crushed a lot of people before,” Argento said. “That’s why this story—in my case, it’s twenty years old; some of them are older—has never come out.”

Wow. So Ms. Argento determined that her not being "crushed" was more important than other women not having to endure that man's unwanted advances and prurient overtures. So much for doing the right thing. And yet, now, finally, some woman said "f*ck the BS, I'm not going to sit idly by and in silence let this keep happening."

employees described what was, in essence, a culture of complicity at Weinstein’s places of business, with numerous people throughout the companies fully aware of his behavior but either abetting it or looking the other way. Some employees said that they were enlisted in subterfuge to make the victims feel safe. A female executive with the company described how Weinstein assistants and others served as a “honeypot”—they would initially join a meeting, but then Weinstein would dismiss them, leaving him alone with the woman.

Argento was obviously not alone in here compliance, but that doesn't excuse her, or any other individuals -- men or women -- from looking askance at that crap and letting it persist for two damn decades or more. Everyone damn one of them knew better.


Human civilization is supposed to have evolved beyond the troglodyte state, yet were one to judge by what we hear of abuse and harassment visited upon aspiring women by men, one is hard pressed to confirm that we have. It's not just the Weinstein matter, it's O'Reilly, Trump, Cosby, and others, and there's no sense to their doing so. Those men and others like them are wealthy enough and powerful enough that nary a one of them had to force themselves on a woman; there were surely plenty of women who would have "put out" willingly.

Plenty of men who are nowhere near as rich and influential as those guys know that to be so. Rich and powerful dudes aren't the only ones who have extramarital affairs and recreational dalliances with consenting women who are only barely known to them. It takes two to "tango," and women -- women of every color, creed, and nationality and all around the world -- like to "dance" just as much as men do.


Quite simply, these sorts of social ills, abuse and wrongdoing are not going to stop until people unfailingly refuse to tolerate it. Does that mean each of us may be called to risk personal financial gain as a result of decrying injustices? Yes, it might; however, yours, my and no other individual's net worth is not a greater end than is the ethical solvency of our society.

And let me be clear. I'm not talking about behaviors and mindset of which one normatively may disapprove. I'm talking about talking about malfeasant action(s) taken against one or more other individuals. One can think whatever one wants about women, men, minorities, gays, whites, adherents to a faith-based belief system, children, etc., but in the U.S. one does not have the imprimatur to abuse, assault, neglect, physically impose oneself on, harass or intimidate them.

 

[OldLady]

The Weinstein affair is just the latest manifestation of the litany of social ills that beset the U.S. We've got racial injustice which we hear about daily from all over the country. Weinstein's behavior is yet another example of sexual injustice which, though of late it's been rearing its head from within the media and entertainment industry, I suspect is no less abundant in other sectors. Both are ridiculously pervasive, and neither should be.

From the New Yorker article. "From Aggressive Overtures to Sexual Assault: Harvey Weinstein’s Accusers Tell Their Stories":

Asia Argento, an Italian film actress and director, told me that she did not speak out until now—Weinstein, she told me, forcibly performed oral sex on her—because she feared that Weinstein would “crush” her. “I know he has crushed a lot of people before,” Argento said. “That’s why this story—in my case, it’s twenty years old; some of them are older—has never come out.”

Wow. So Ms. Argento determined that her not being "crushed" was more important than other women not having to endure that man's unwanted advances and prurient overtures. So much for doing the right thing. And yet, now, finally, some woman said "f*ck the BS, I'm not going to sit idly by and in silence let this keep happening."

employees described what was, in essence, a culture of complicity at Weinstein’s places of business, with numerous people throughout the companies fully aware of his behavior but either abetting it or looking the other way. Some employees said that they were enlisted in subterfuge to make the victims feel safe. A female executive with the company described how Weinstein assistants and others served as a “honeypot”—they would initially join a meeting, but then Weinstein would dismiss them, leaving him alone with the woman.

Argento was obviously not alone in here compliance, but that doesn't excuse her, or any other individuals -- men or women -- from looking askance at that crap and letting it persist for two damn decades or more. Everyone damn one of them knew better.


Human civilization is supposed to have evolved beyond the troglodyte state, yet were one to judge by what we hear of abuse and harassment visited upon aspiring women by men, one is hard pressed to confirm that we have. It's not just the Weinstein matter, it's O'Reilly, Trump, Cosby, and others, and there's no sense to their doing so. Those men and others like them are wealthy enough and powerful enough that nary a one of them had to force themselves on a woman; there were surely plenty of women who would have "put out" willingly.

Plenty of men who are nowhere near as rich and influential as those guys know that to be so. Rich and powerful dudes aren't the only ones who have extramarital affairs and recreational dalliances with consenting women who are only barely known to them. It takes two to "tango," and women -- women of every color, creed, and nationality and all around the world -- like to "dance" just as much as men do.


Quite simply, these sorts of social ills, abuse and wrongdoing are not going to stop until people unfailingly refuse to tolerate it. Does that mean each of us may be called to risk personal financial gain as a result of decrying injustices? Yes, it might; however, yours, my and no other individual's net worth is not a greater end than is the ethical solvency of our society.

And let me be clear. I'm not talking about behaviors and mindset of which one normatively may disapprove. I'm talking about talking about malfeasant action(s) taken against one or more other individuals. One can think whatever one wants about women, men, minorities, gays, whites, adherents to a faith-based belief system, children, etc., but in the U.S. one does not have the imprimatur to abuse, assault, neglect, physically impose oneself on, harass or intimidate them.

You know, I was SOOOO bummed out about people's reaction to the Access Hollywood tape. It obviously didn't matter to them.
But it occurred to me with this Weinstein thing--people ARE beginning to react and show they care about it. The two guys from Fox. Now this guy. And they are BIG important men losing their jobs, not just tokens. Maybe it restores my faith in humankind a bit. Perhaps all is not lost.

 

[SeaGal]

Wait!...you left out Bill Clinton and JFK.

Human civilization has not and never will evolve beyond human nature. We've got a dark side that is difficult to restrain at times.

We cannot cure social ills, we cannot prevent harm, we can only legislate against it, and prosecute when it occurs.

'Show me a nation without moral standards, and I will show you a nation drowning in immorality.' I can't say that this behavior is more or less common than in the past - all we can do is apply the law equally, without excuse, when bad behavior rears its head.

Most of us do unfailingly refuse to tolerate it (abuse, assault, etc)...doesn't prevent the few from doing it. All we've got to keep the wolves at bay, or at least behind bars, is the rule of law, which is why it must be protected.

 

[Weatherman2020]

The Weinstein affair is just the latest manifestation of the litany of social ills that beset the U.S. We've got racial injustice which we hear about daily from all over the country. Weinstein's behavior is yet another example of sexual injustice which, though of late it's been rearing its head from within the media and entertainment industry, I suspect is no less abundant in other sectors. Both are ridiculously pervasive, and neither should be.

From the New Yorker article. "From Aggressive Overtures to Sexual Assault: Harvey Weinstein’s Accusers Tell Their Stories":

Asia Argento, an Italian film actress and director, told me that she did not speak out until now—Weinstein, she told me, forcibly performed oral sex on her—because she feared that Weinstein would “crush” her. “I know he has crushed a lot of people before,” Argento said. “That’s why this story—in my case, it’s twenty years old; some of them are older—has never come out.”

Wow. So Ms. Argento determined that her not being "crushed" was more important than other women not having to endure that man's unwanted advances and prurient overtures. So much for doing the right thing. And yet, now, finally, some woman said "f*ck the BS, I'm not going to sit idly by and in silence let this keep happening."

employees described what was, in essence, a culture of complicity at Weinstein’s places of business, with numerous people throughout the companies fully aware of his behavior but either abetting it or looking the other way. Some employees said that they were enlisted in subterfuge to make the victims feel safe. A female executive with the company described how Weinstein assistants and others served as a “honeypot”—they would initially join a meeting, but then Weinstein would dismiss them, leaving him alone with the woman.

Argento was obviously not alone in here compliance, but that doesn't excuse her, or any other individuals -- men or women -- from looking askance at that crap and letting it persist for two damn decades or more. Everyone damn one of them knew better.


Human civilization is supposed to have evolved beyond the troglodyte state, yet were one to judge by what we hear of abuse and harassment visited upon aspiring women by men, one is hard pressed to confirm that we have. It's not just the Weinstein matter, it's O'Reilly, Trump, Cosby, and others, and there's no sense to their doing so. Those men and others like them are wealthy enough and powerful enough that nary a one of them had to force themselves on a woman; there were surely plenty of women who would have "put out" willingly.

Plenty of men who are nowhere near as rich and influential as those guys know that to be so. Rich and powerful dudes aren't the only ones who have extramarital affairs and recreational dalliances with consenting women who are only barely known to them. It takes two to "tango," and women -- women of every color, creed, and nationality and all around the world -- like to "dance" just as much as men do.


Quite simply, these sorts of social ills, abuse and wrongdoing are not going to stop until people unfailingly refuse to tolerate it. Does that mean each of us may be called to risk personal financial gain as a result of decrying injustices? Yes, it might; however, yours, my and no other individual's net worth is not a greater end than is the ethical solvency of our society.

And let me be clear. I'm not talking about behaviors and mindset of which one normatively may disapprove. I'm talking about talking about malfeasant action(s) taken against one or more other individuals. One can think whatever one wants about women, men, minorities, gays, whites, adherents to a faith-based belief system, children, etc., but in the U.S. one does not have the imprimatur to abuse, assault, neglect, physically impose oneself on, harass or intimidate them.

You know, I was SOOOO bummed out about people's reaction to the Access Hollywood tape. It obviously didn't matter to them.
But it occurred to me with this Weinstein thing--people ARE beginning to react and show they care about it. The two guys from Fox. Now this guy. And they are BIG important men losing their jobs, not just tokens. Maybe it restores my faith in humankind a bit. Perhaps all is not lost.

Went on for years with ALOT of people knowing what he was doing.

And not a peep.

 

[OldLady]

The Weinstein affair is just the latest manifestation of the litany of social ills that beset the U.S. We've got racial injustice which we hear about daily from all over the country. Weinstein's behavior is yet another example of sexual injustice which, though of late it's been rearing its head from within the media and entertainment industry, I suspect is no less abundant in other sectors. Both are ridiculously pervasive, and neither should be.

From the New Yorker article. "From Aggressive Overtures to Sexual Assault: Harvey Weinstein’s Accusers Tell Their Stories":

Asia Argento, an Italian film actress and director, told me that she did not speak out until now—Weinstein, she told me, forcibly performed oral sex on her—because she feared that Weinstein would “crush” her. “I know he has crushed a lot of people before,” Argento said. “That’s why this story—in my case, it’s twenty years old; some of them are older—has never come out.”

Wow. So Ms. Argento determined that her not being "crushed" was more important than other women not having to endure that man's unwanted advances and prurient overtures. So much for doing the right thing. And yet, now, finally, some woman said "f*ck the BS, I'm not going to sit idly by and in silence let this keep happening."

employees described what was, in essence, a culture of complicity at Weinstein’s places of business, with numerous people throughout the companies fully aware of his behavior but either abetting it or looking the other way. Some employees said that they were enlisted in subterfuge to make the victims feel safe. A female executive with the company described how Weinstein assistants and others served as a “honeypot”—they would initially join a meeting, but then Weinstein would dismiss them, leaving him alone with the woman.

Argento was obviously not alone in here compliance, but that doesn't excuse her, or any other individuals -- men or women -- from looking askance at that crap and letting it persist for two damn decades or more. Everyone damn one of them knew better.


Human civilization is supposed to have evolved beyond the troglodyte state, yet were one to judge by what we hear of abuse and harassment visited upon aspiring women by men, one is hard pressed to confirm that we have. It's not just the Weinstein matter, it's O'Reilly, Trump, Cosby, and others, and there's no sense to their doing so. Those men and others like them are wealthy enough and powerful enough that nary a one of them had to force themselves on a woman; there were surely plenty of women who would have "put out" willingly.

Plenty of men who are nowhere near as rich and influential as those guys know that to be so. Rich and powerful dudes aren't the only ones who have extramarital affairs and recreational dalliances with consenting women who are only barely known to them. It takes two to "tango," and women -- women of every color, creed, and nationality and all around the world -- like to "dance" just as much as men do.


Quite simply, these sorts of social ills, abuse and wrongdoing are not going to stop until people unfailingly refuse to tolerate it. Does that mean each of us may be called to risk personal financial gain as a result of decrying injustices? Yes, it might; however, yours, my and no other individual's net worth is not a greater end than is the ethical solvency of our society.

And let me be clear. I'm not talking about behaviors and mindset of which one normatively may disapprove. I'm talking about talking about malfeasant action(s) taken against one or more other individuals. One can think whatever one wants about women, men, minorities, gays, whites, adherents to a faith-based belief system, children, etc., but in the U.S. one does not have the imprimatur to abuse, assault, neglect, physically impose oneself on, harass or intimidate them.

You know, I was SOOOO bummed out about people's reaction to the Access Hollywood tape. It obviously didn't matter to them.
But it occurred to me with this Weinstein thing--people ARE beginning to react and show they care about it. The two guys from Fox. Now this guy. And they are BIG important men losing their jobs, not just tokens. Maybe it restores my faith in humankind a bit. Perhaps all is not lost.

Went on for years with ALOT of people knowing what he was doing.

And not a peep.

Yes. Did I say people are BEGINNING to react and show they care about it?
Maybe being rich and powerful won't always give men a right to be pigs to their employees. We can only hope.

 

[Defiant1]

You can't claim buyer's remorse 20 years later.

 

[MarathonMike]

I'm glad that sexual predators like Weinstein, Cosby, Weiner etc are being outed and prosecuted. I do not agree that this is a new phenomenon reflecting the alleged sick state of America. Hollywood producers as far back as the 30s and 40s routinely had sex with their would-be starlets paying their "entry fee" into the business. That is where the term "casting couch" comes from. And yes two of the most notorious Presidents who had no problem using their position of power to take advantage of women were Bill Clinton and JFK.

 

[usmbguest5318]

The Weinstein affair is just the latest manifestation of the litany of social ills that beset the U.S. We've got racial injustice which we hear about daily from all over the country. Weinstein's behavior is yet another example of sexual injustice which, though of late it's been rearing its head from within the media and entertainment industry, I suspect is no less abundant in other sectors. Both are ridiculously pervasive, and neither should be.

From the New Yorker article. "From Aggressive Overtures to Sexual Assault: Harvey Weinstein’s Accusers Tell Their Stories":

Asia Argento, an Italian film actress and director, told me that she did not speak out until now—Weinstein, she told me, forcibly performed oral sex on her—because she feared that Weinstein would “crush” her. “I know he has crushed a lot of people before,” Argento said. “That’s why this story—in my case, it’s twenty years old; some of them are older—has never come out.”

Wow. So Ms. Argento determined that her not being "crushed" was more important than other women not having to endure that man's unwanted advances and prurient overtures. So much for doing the right thing. And yet, now, finally, some woman said "f*ck the BS, I'm not going to sit idly by and in silence let this keep happening."

employees described what was, in essence, a culture of complicity at Weinstein’s places of business, with numerous people throughout the companies fully aware of his behavior but either abetting it or looking the other way. Some employees said that they were enlisted in subterfuge to make the victims feel safe. A female executive with the company described how Weinstein assistants and others served as a “honeypot”—they would initially join a meeting, but then Weinstein would dismiss them, leaving him alone with the woman.

Argento was obviously not alone in here compliance, but that doesn't excuse her, or any other individuals -- men or women -- from looking askance at that crap and letting it persist for two damn decades or more. Everyone damn one of them knew better.


Human civilization is supposed to have evolved beyond the troglodyte state, yet were one to judge by what we hear of abuse and harassment visited upon aspiring women by men, one is hard pressed to confirm that we have. It's not just the Weinstein matter, it's O'Reilly, Trump, Cosby, and others, and there's no sense to their doing so. Those men and others like them are wealthy enough and powerful enough that nary a one of them had to force themselves on a woman; there were surely plenty of women who would have "put out" willingly.

Plenty of men who are nowhere near as rich and influential as those guys know that to be so. Rich and powerful dudes aren't the only ones who have extramarital affairs and recreational dalliances with consenting women who are only barely known to them. It takes two to "tango," and women -- women of every color, creed, and nationality and all around the world -- like to "dance" just as much as men do.


Quite simply, these sorts of social ills, abuse and wrongdoing are not going to stop until people unfailingly refuse to tolerate it. Does that mean each of us may be called to risk personal financial gain as a result of decrying injustices? Yes, it might; however, yours, my and no other individual's net worth is not a greater end than is the ethical solvency of our society.

And let me be clear. I'm not talking about behaviors and mindset of which one normatively may disapprove. I'm talking about talking about malfeasant action(s) taken against one or more other individuals. One can think whatever one wants about women, men, minorities, gays, whites, adherents to a faith-based belief system, children, etc., but in the U.S. one does not have the imprimatur to abuse, assault, neglect, physically impose oneself on, harass or intimidate them.

You know, I was SOOOO bummed out about people's reaction to the Access Hollywood tape. It obviously didn't matter to them.
But it occurred to me with this Weinstein thing--people ARE beginning to react and show they care about it. The two guys from Fox. Now this guy. And they are BIG important men losing their jobs, not just tokens. Maybe it restores my faith in humankind a bit. Perhaps all is not lost.

You know, I was SOOOO bummed out about people's reaction to the Access Hollywood tape. It obviously didn't matter to them.

I couldn't agree with you more! To this day, I am ashamed of my countrymen for allowing a man like that, particularly having along with the "Access" episode a litany of other instances of despicable treatment of women spanning decades right up to the present. People, Trumpkins and conservative sycophants, deign to engage in exculpatory moral relativism regarding Trump's misogyny and that of Bill Clinton. As far as I'm concerned, one is no better than other, but what's different is that we didn't have an unabashed personal attestation of pride about it from Bill Clinton, and certainly not such an avowal that was known of and made before election day.

There is nothing "right" about a man having the attitudes he does toward over half the population, women, winning the U.S. presidency. I don't care how much one didn't like Hillary's policies or her, she did not out of hand, and on a wholesale gender level, objectify women. AFAIAC, every man and woman who voted for Trump must own that by doing so, they have minimally acquiesced to the notion that such behavior and mindset is acceptable. It is not! Never! Not ever!

I have a daughter. She very smart, capable and multi-talented, and she's flat-out hot. She has lofty goals that there is no good reason she should not achieve. I hate that she might have to endure the sort of treatment that curs like Trump, Ailes and Weinstein, powerful men who one day may be "gatekeepers" to her success, may attempt to subject her. She'd give up a potential opportunity before she let herself be treated that way. I'm proud that's what she'd do, and equally I'm saddened that she may have to do so, thereby scuttling her chance(s) to achieve whatever be her goal(s).

Even worse is the knowledge that no matter my influence, or that even of men of far greater wealth and power, there is nothing I or they can, given the pervasiveness of the depravity of which I write, do to ensure that she'll almost certainly never face that crap. On the contrary, because she's "hot," it's all the more plausible that she will have to deal with it at some point.

How any father or mother can feel differently about their own daughter, and at the same time and give the "wink & nod" of tacit approbation to such behavior by their peers, is beyond me.

this Weinstein thing--people ARE beginning to react and show they care about it.

They are, and it's a step in the right direction, but it's far from sufficient.

Maybe it restores my faith in humankind a bit. Perhaps all is not lost.

I'm not ready to go that far. I'm not because Weinstein, O'Reilly, and Ailes did not run for POTUS after having done their dastardly deeds, bragged about them and then won. Quite simply, my faith will not begin to be restored until we send packing from political office every one of the misogynists.

I think it has to start there because it's where there's enough scrutiny to find out about it. It's where no deep-pocketed company is going to pay for silence in order to protect itself as well as the predator. It's the realm where people, fathers and mothers can, by their voices and votes alone, make it very clear that they aren't going to tolerate it.

 

[usmbguest5318]

I'm glad that sexual predators like Weinstein, Cosby, Weiner etc are being outed and prosecuted. I do not agree that this is a new phenomenon reflecting the alleged sick state of America. Hollywood producers as far back as the 30s and 40s routinely had sex with their would-be starlets paying their "entry fee" into the business. That is where the term "casting couch" comes from. And yes two of the most notorious Presidents who had no problem using their position of power to take advantage of women were Bill Clinton and JFK.

I know you're right about those traditions.

• The point is to say that it's every bit as important that persons in power stop letting their peers get away with it.
• The point is that people wanting "whatever" from those persons in power not let them get away with it because every time a "minion" lets it happen to them, at least one more "minion" is going to have to suffer the same odious behavior until one of them says "no more."

The point is that sh*t needs to stop. NOW!!! If I had my way, there'd be an quarterly "Out the Misogynists" day.

 

[OldLady]

I'm glad that sexual predators like Weinstein, Cosby, Weiner etc are being outed and prosecuted. I do not agree that this is a new phenomenon reflecting the alleged sick state of America. Hollywood producers as far back as the 30s and 40s routinely had sex with their would-be starlets paying their "entry fee" into the business. That is where the term "casting couch" comes from. And yes two of the most notorious Presidents who had no problem using their position of power to take advantage of women were Bill Clinton and JFK.

JFK and Bill Clinton's affairs were with consenting women, I believe. We know Monica L was because she clearly said so. I don't know who JFK had affairs with, but if he pushed himself on them because he wrote their paycheck, yes, that was wrong.
See, what Ailes, O'Reilly and Weinstein did isn't just typical randy male behavior freely engaged in with equally randy coworkers or acquaintances like Clinton and JFK did. It was abusing their power over women to force them to do their bidding. Too many pronouns there, but hope you get the gist. If a woman really needs that paycheck on Friday or has a great deal of ambition and doesn't want to leave a company that is otherwise offering her opportunities, it puts her in a hard place to refuse the boss. It's a damnable situation to be in. It is a very simple offer: trading sexual favors for success. In the case of Weinstein, it sounds as if the women kept quiet because he was so important to their acting careers. Everyone needed/wanted him on their side or knew they would at some point.
This isn't just about having an affair.

 

[TNHarley]

The Weinstein affair is just the latest manifestation of the litany of social ills that beset the U.S. We've got racial injustice which we hear about daily from all over the country. Weinstein's behavior is yet another example of sexual injustice which, though of late it's been rearing its head from within the media and entertainment industry, I suspect is no less abundant in other sectors. Both are ridiculously pervasive, and neither should be.

From the New Yorker article. "From Aggressive Overtures to Sexual Assault: Harvey Weinstein’s Accusers Tell Their Stories":

Asia Argento, an Italian film actress and director, told me that she did not speak out until now—Weinstein, she told me, forcibly performed oral sex on her—because she feared that Weinstein would “crush” her. “I know he has crushed a lot of people before,” Argento said. “That’s why this story—in my case, it’s twenty years old; some of them are older—has never come out.”

Wow. So Ms. Argento determined that her not being "crushed" was more important than other women not having to endure that man's unwanted advances and prurient overtures. So much for doing the right thing. And yet, now, finally, some woman said "f*ck the BS, I'm not going to sit idly by and in silence let this keep happening."

employees described what was, in essence, a culture of complicity at Weinstein’s places of business, with numerous people throughout the companies fully aware of his behavior but either abetting it or looking the other way. Some employees said that they were enlisted in subterfuge to make the victims feel safe. A female executive with the company described how Weinstein assistants and others served as a “honeypot”—they would initially join a meeting, but then Weinstein would dismiss them, leaving him alone with the woman.

Argento was obviously not alone in here compliance, but that doesn't excuse her, or any other individuals -- men or women -- from looking askance at that crap and letting it persist for two damn decades or more. Everyone damn one of them knew better.


Human civilization is supposed to have evolved beyond the troglodyte state, yet were one to judge by what we hear of abuse and harassment visited upon aspiring women by men, one is hard pressed to confirm that we have. It's not just the Weinstein matter, it's O'Reilly, Trump, Cosby, and others, and there's no sense to their doing so. Those men and others like them are wealthy enough and powerful enough that nary a one of them had to force themselves on a woman; there were surely plenty of women who would have "put out" willingly.

Plenty of men who are nowhere near as rich and influential as those guys know that to be so. Rich and powerful dudes aren't the only ones who have extramarital affairs and recreational dalliances with consenting women who are only barely known to them. It takes two to "tango," and women -- women of every color, creed, and nationality and all around the world -- like to "dance" just as much as men do.


Quite simply, these sorts of social ills, abuse and wrongdoing are not going to stop until people unfailingly refuse to tolerate it. Does that mean each of us may be called to risk personal financial gain as a result of decrying injustices? Yes, it might; however, yours, my and no other individual's net worth is not a greater end than is the ethical solvency of our society.

And let me be clear. I'm not talking about behaviors and mindset of which one normatively may disapprove. I'm talking about talking about malfeasant action(s) taken against one or more other individuals. One can think whatever one wants about women, men, minorities, gays, whites, adherents to a faith-based belief system, children, etc., but in the U.S. one does not have the imprimatur to abuse, assault, neglect, physically impose oneself on, harass or intimidate them.

You know, I was SOOOO bummed out about people's reaction to the Access Hollywood tape. It obviously didn't matter to them.
But it occurred to me with this Weinstein thing--people ARE beginning to react and show they care about it. The two guys from Fox. Now this guy. And they are BIG important men losing their jobs, not just tokens. Maybe it restores my faith in humankind a bit. Perhaps all is not lost.

they are reacting because a media org published a story on it.
Sorry, i still laugh when people bring up that tape. It is so typical, yet, people want to get outraged about it LOL

 

[OldLady]

The Weinstein affair is just the latest manifestation of the litany of social ills that beset the U.S. We've got racial injustice which we hear about daily from all over the country. Weinstein's behavior is yet another example of sexual injustice which, though of late it's been rearing its head from within the media and entertainment industry, I suspect is no less abundant in other sectors. Both are ridiculously pervasive, and neither should be.

From the New Yorker article. "From Aggressive Overtures to Sexual Assault: Harvey Weinstein’s Accusers Tell Their Stories":

Asia Argento, an Italian film actress and director, told me that she did not speak out until now—Weinstein, she told me, forcibly performed oral sex on her—because she feared that Weinstein would “crush” her. “I know he has crushed a lot of people before,” Argento said. “That’s why this story—in my case, it’s twenty years old; some of them are older—has never come out.”

Wow. So Ms. Argento determined that her not being "crushed" was more important than other women not having to endure that man's unwanted advances and prurient overtures. So much for doing the right thing. And yet, now, finally, some woman said "f*ck the BS, I'm not going to sit idly by and in silence let this keep happening."

employees described what was, in essence, a culture of complicity at Weinstein’s places of business, with numerous people throughout the companies fully aware of his behavior but either abetting it or looking the other way. Some employees said that they were enlisted in subterfuge to make the victims feel safe. A female executive with the company described how Weinstein assistants and others served as a “honeypot”—they would initially join a meeting, but then Weinstein would dismiss them, leaving him alone with the woman.

Argento was obviously not alone in here compliance, but that doesn't excuse her, or any other individuals -- men or women -- from looking askance at that crap and letting it persist for two damn decades or more. Everyone damn one of them knew better.


Human civilization is supposed to have evolved beyond the troglodyte state, yet were one to judge by what we hear of abuse and harassment visited upon aspiring women by men, one is hard pressed to confirm that we have. It's not just the Weinstein matter, it's O'Reilly, Trump, Cosby, and others, and there's no sense to their doing so. Those men and others like them are wealthy enough and powerful enough that nary a one of them had to force themselves on a woman; there were surely plenty of women who would have "put out" willingly.

Plenty of men who are nowhere near as rich and influential as those guys know that to be so. Rich and powerful dudes aren't the only ones who have extramarital affairs and recreational dalliances with consenting women who are only barely known to them. It takes two to "tango," and women -- women of every color, creed, and nationality and all around the world -- like to "dance" just as much as men do.


Quite simply, these sorts of social ills, abuse and wrongdoing are not going to stop until people unfailingly refuse to tolerate it. Does that mean each of us may be called to risk personal financial gain as a result of decrying injustices? Yes, it might; however, yours, my and no other individual's net worth is not a greater end than is the ethical solvency of our society.

And let me be clear. I'm not talking about behaviors and mindset of which one normatively may disapprove. I'm talking about talking about malfeasant action(s) taken against one or more other individuals. One can think whatever one wants about women, men, minorities, gays, whites, adherents to a faith-based belief system, children, etc., but in the U.S. one does not have the imprimatur to abuse, assault, neglect, physically impose oneself on, harass or intimidate them.

You know, I was SOOOO bummed out about people's reaction to the Access Hollywood tape. It obviously didn't matter to them.
But it occurred to me with this Weinstein thing--people ARE beginning to react and show they care about it. The two guys from Fox. Now this guy. And they are BIG important men losing their jobs, not just tokens. Maybe it restores my faith in humankind a bit. Perhaps all is not lost.

they are reacting because a media org published a story on it.
Sorry, i still laugh when people bring up that tape. It is so typical, yet, people want to get outraged about it LOL

It is NOT that typical. Grow up, TN.

 

[TNHarley]

The Weinstein affair is just the latest manifestation of the litany of social ills that beset the U.S. We've got racial injustice which we hear about daily from all over the country. Weinstein's behavior is yet another example of sexual injustice which, though of late it's been rearing its head from within the media and entertainment industry, I suspect is no less abundant in other sectors. Both are ridiculously pervasive, and neither should be.

From the New Yorker article. "From Aggressive Overtures to Sexual Assault: Harvey Weinstein’s Accusers Tell Their Stories":

Asia Argento, an Italian film actress and director, told me that she did not speak out until now—Weinstein, she told me, forcibly performed oral sex on her—because she feared that Weinstein would “crush” her. “I know he has crushed a lot of people before,” Argento said. “That’s why this story—in my case, it’s twenty years old; some of them are older—has never come out.”

Wow. So Ms. Argento determined that her not being "crushed" was more important than other women not having to endure that man's unwanted advances and prurient overtures. So much for doing the right thing. And yet, now, finally, some woman said "f*ck the BS, I'm not going to sit idly by and in silence let this keep happening."

employees described what was, in essence, a culture of complicity at Weinstein’s places of business, with numerous people throughout the companies fully aware of his behavior but either abetting it or looking the other way. Some employees said that they were enlisted in subterfuge to make the victims feel safe. A female executive with the company described how Weinstein assistants and others served as a “honeypot”—they would initially join a meeting, but then Weinstein would dismiss them, leaving him alone with the woman.

Argento was obviously not alone in here compliance, but that doesn't excuse her, or any other individuals -- men or women -- from looking askance at that crap and letting it persist for two damn decades or more. Everyone damn one of them knew better.


Human civilization is supposed to have evolved beyond the troglodyte state, yet were one to judge by what we hear of abuse and harassment visited upon aspiring women by men, one is hard pressed to confirm that we have. It's not just the Weinstein matter, it's O'Reilly, Trump, Cosby, and others, and there's no sense to their doing so. Those men and others like them are wealthy enough and powerful enough that nary a one of them had to force themselves on a woman; there were surely plenty of women who would have "put out" willingly.

Plenty of men who are nowhere near as rich and influential as those guys know that to be so. Rich and powerful dudes aren't the only ones who have extramarital affairs and recreational dalliances with consenting women who are only barely known to them. It takes two to "tango," and women -- women of every color, creed, and nationality and all around the world -- like to "dance" just as much as men do.


Quite simply, these sorts of social ills, abuse and wrongdoing are not going to stop until people unfailingly refuse to tolerate it. Does that mean each of us may be called to risk personal financial gain as a result of decrying injustices? Yes, it might; however, yours, my and no other individual's net worth is not a greater end than is the ethical solvency of our society.

And let me be clear. I'm not talking about behaviors and mindset of which one normatively may disapprove. I'm talking about talking about malfeasant action(s) taken against one or more other individuals. One can think whatever one wants about women, men, minorities, gays, whites, adherents to a faith-based belief system, children, etc., but in the U.S. one does not have the imprimatur to abuse, assault, neglect, physically impose oneself on, harass or intimidate them.

You know, I was SOOOO bummed out about people's reaction to the Access Hollywood tape. It obviously didn't matter to them.
But it occurred to me with this Weinstein thing--people ARE beginning to react and show they care about it. The two guys from Fox. Now this guy. And they are BIG important men losing their jobs, not just tokens. Maybe it restores my faith in humankind a bit. Perhaps all is not lost.

they are reacting because a media org published a story on it.
Sorry, i still laugh when people bring up that tape. It is so typical, yet, people want to get outraged about it LOL

It is NOT that typical. Grow up, TN.

Yes it is. Did you always hang out with the boys? Locker room? Bathroom? Strip clubs with your buddies? convos with your buddy after sex or a night on the town? It is VERY typical.
It isnt me that needs to grow up...........

 

[usmbguest5318]

The Weinstein affair is just the latest manifestation of the litany of social ills that beset the U.S. We've got racial injustice which we hear about daily from all over the country. Weinstein's behavior is yet another example of sexual injustice which, though of late it's been rearing its head from within the media and entertainment industry, I suspect is no less abundant in other sectors. Both are ridiculously pervasive, and neither should be.

From the New Yorker article. "From Aggressive Overtures to Sexual Assault: Harvey Weinstein’s Accusers Tell Their Stories":

Asia Argento, an Italian film actress and director, told me that she did not speak out until now—Weinstein, she told me, forcibly performed oral sex on her—because she feared that Weinstein would “crush” her. “I know he has crushed a lot of people before,” Argento said. “That’s why this story—in my case, it’s twenty years old; some of them are older—has never come out.”

Wow. So Ms. Argento determined that her not being "crushed" was more important than other women not having to endure that man's unwanted advances and prurient overtures. So much for doing the right thing. And yet, now, finally, some woman said "f*ck the BS, I'm not going to sit idly by and in silence let this keep happening."

employees described what was, in essence, a culture of complicity at Weinstein’s places of business, with numerous people throughout the companies fully aware of his behavior but either abetting it or looking the other way. Some employees said that they were enlisted in subterfuge to make the victims feel safe. A female executive with the company described how Weinstein assistants and others served as a “honeypot”—they would initially join a meeting, but then Weinstein would dismiss them, leaving him alone with the woman.

Argento was obviously not alone in here compliance, but that doesn't excuse her, or any other individuals -- men or women -- from looking askance at that crap and letting it persist for two damn decades or more. Everyone damn one of them knew better.


Human civilization is supposed to have evolved beyond the troglodyte state, yet were one to judge by what we hear of abuse and harassment visited upon aspiring women by men, one is hard pressed to confirm that we have. It's not just the Weinstein matter, it's O'Reilly, Trump, Cosby, and others, and there's no sense to their doing so. Those men and others like them are wealthy enough and powerful enough that nary a one of them had to force themselves on a woman; there were surely plenty of women who would have "put out" willingly.

Plenty of men who are nowhere near as rich and influential as those guys know that to be so. Rich and powerful dudes aren't the only ones who have extramarital affairs and recreational dalliances with consenting women who are only barely known to them. It takes two to "tango," and women -- women of every color, creed, and nationality and all around the world -- like to "dance" just as much as men do.


Quite simply, these sorts of social ills, abuse and wrongdoing are not going to stop until people unfailingly refuse to tolerate it. Does that mean each of us may be called to risk personal financial gain as a result of decrying injustices? Yes, it might; however, yours, my and no other individual's net worth is not a greater end than is the ethical solvency of our society.

And let me be clear. I'm not talking about behaviors and mindset of which one normatively may disapprove. I'm talking about talking about malfeasant action(s) taken against one or more other individuals. One can think whatever one wants about women, men, minorities, gays, whites, adherents to a faith-based belief system, children, etc., but in the U.S. one does not have the imprimatur to abuse, assault, neglect, physically impose oneself on, harass or intimidate them.

You know, I was SOOOO bummed out about people's reaction to the Access Hollywood tape. It obviously didn't matter to them.
But it occurred to me with this Weinstein thing--people ARE beginning to react and show they care about it. The two guys from Fox. Now this guy. And they are BIG important men losing their jobs, not just tokens. Maybe it restores my faith in humankind a bit. Perhaps all is not lost.

they are reacting because a media org published a story on it.
Sorry, i still laugh when people bring up that tape. It is so typical, yet, people want to get outraged about it LOL

It is NOT that typical. Grow up, TN.

It is NOT that typical.

Frankly, I don't give a damn whether it's typical, but let's say it is typical or traditional or other banal label one cares to append to it. Is that a legit basis for discounting the behavior? Hell, f*cking no!!! Does that make it any less wrong? Hell, no!!! It does not!!! What it needs to be, now being none too soon, is not typical any longer. Period!

 

[TNHarley]

The Weinstein affair is just the latest manifestation of the litany of social ills that beset the U.S. We've got racial injustice which we hear about daily from all over the country. Weinstein's behavior is yet another example of sexual injustice which, though of late it's been rearing its head from within the media and entertainment industry, I suspect is no less abundant in other sectors. Both are ridiculously pervasive, and neither should be.

From the New Yorker article. "From Aggressive Overtures to Sexual Assault: Harvey Weinstein’s Accusers Tell Their Stories":

Asia Argento, an Italian film actress and director, told me that she did not speak out until now—Weinstein, she told me, forcibly performed oral sex on her—because she feared that Weinstein would “crush” her. “I know he has crushed a lot of people before,” Argento said. “That’s why this story—in my case, it’s twenty years old; some of them are older—has never come out.”

Wow. So Ms. Argento determined that her not being "crushed" was more important than other women not having to endure that man's unwanted advances and prurient overtures. So much for doing the right thing. And yet, now, finally, some woman said "f*ck the BS, I'm not going to sit idly by and in silence let this keep happening."

employees described what was, in essence, a culture of complicity at Weinstein’s places of business, with numerous people throughout the companies fully aware of his behavior but either abetting it or looking the other way. Some employees said that they were enlisted in subterfuge to make the victims feel safe. A female executive with the company described how Weinstein assistants and others served as a “honeypot”—they would initially join a meeting, but then Weinstein would dismiss them, leaving him alone with the woman.

Argento was obviously not alone in here compliance, but that doesn't excuse her, or any other individuals -- men or women -- from looking askance at that crap and letting it persist for two damn decades or more. Everyone damn one of them knew better.


Human civilization is supposed to have evolved beyond the troglodyte state, yet were one to judge by what we hear of abuse and harassment visited upon aspiring women by men, one is hard pressed to confirm that we have. It's not just the Weinstein matter, it's O'Reilly, Trump, Cosby, and others, and there's no sense to their doing so. Those men and others like them are wealthy enough and powerful enough that nary a one of them had to force themselves on a woman; there were surely plenty of women who would have "put out" willingly.

Plenty of men who are nowhere near as rich and influential as those guys know that to be so. Rich and powerful dudes aren't the only ones who have extramarital affairs and recreational dalliances with consenting women who are only barely known to them. It takes two to "tango," and women -- women of every color, creed, and nationality and all around the world -- like to "dance" just as much as men do.


Quite simply, these sorts of social ills, abuse and wrongdoing are not going to stop until people unfailingly refuse to tolerate it. Does that mean each of us may be called to risk personal financial gain as a result of decrying injustices? Yes, it might; however, yours, my and no other individual's net worth is not a greater end than is the ethical solvency of our society.

And let me be clear. I'm not talking about behaviors and mindset of which one normatively may disapprove. I'm talking about talking about malfeasant action(s) taken against one or more other individuals. One can think whatever one wants about women, men, minorities, gays, whites, adherents to a faith-based belief system, children, etc., but in the U.S. one does not have the imprimatur to abuse, assault, neglect, physically impose oneself on, harass or intimidate them.

You know, I was SOOOO bummed out about people's reaction to the Access Hollywood tape. It obviously didn't matter to them.
But it occurred to me with this Weinstein thing--people ARE beginning to react and show they care about it. The two guys from Fox. Now this guy. And they are BIG important men losing their jobs, not just tokens. Maybe it restores my faith in humankind a bit. Perhaps all is not lost.

they are reacting because a media org published a story on it.
Sorry, i still laugh when people bring up that tape. It is so typical, yet, people want to get outraged about it LOL

It is NOT that typical. Grow up, TN.

It is NOT that typical.

Frankly, I don't give a damn whether it's typical, but let's say it is typical or traditional or other banal label one cares to append to it. Is that a legit basis for discounting the behavior? Hell, f*cking no!!! Does that make it any less wrong? Hell, no!!! It does not!!! What it needs to be, now being none too soon, is not typical any longer. Period!

Nice feminist imasculating drivel.
80 percent of boys and men talk like that. Hem I bet half if not more of women talk like that. Most people aren't prudes. We also like to brag, talk about accomplishments, want attention and high fives.
Both of you need to grow up

 

[impuretrash]

The Weinstein affair is just the latest manifestation of the litany of social ills that beset the U.S. We've got racial injustice which we hear about daily from all over the country. Weinstein's behavior is yet another example of sexual injustice which, though of late it's been rearing its head from within the media and entertainment industry, I suspect is no less abundant in other sectors. Both are ridiculously pervasive, and neither should be.

From the New Yorker article. "From Aggressive Overtures to Sexual Assault: Harvey Weinstein’s Accusers Tell Their Stories":

Asia Argento, an Italian film actress and director, told me that she did not speak out until now—Weinstein, she told me, forcibly performed oral sex on her—because she feared that Weinstein would “crush” her. “I know he has crushed a lot of people before,” Argento said. “That’s why this story—in my case, it’s twenty years old; some of them are older—has never come out.”

Wow. So Ms. Argento determined that her not being "crushed" was more important than other women not having to endure that man's unwanted advances and prurient overtures. So much for doing the right thing. And yet, now, finally, some woman said "f*ck the BS, I'm not going to sit idly by and in silence let this keep happening."

employees described what was, in essence, a culture of complicity at Weinstein’s places of business, with numerous people throughout the companies fully aware of his behavior but either abetting it or looking the other way. Some employees said that they were enlisted in subterfuge to make the victims feel safe. A female executive with the company described how Weinstein assistants and others served as a “honeypot”—they would initially join a meeting, but then Weinstein would dismiss them, leaving him alone with the woman.

Argento was obviously not alone in here compliance, but that doesn't excuse her, or any other individuals -- men or women -- from looking askance at that crap and letting it persist for two damn decades or more. Everyone damn one of them knew better.


Human civilization is supposed to have evolved beyond the troglodyte state, yet were one to judge by what we hear of abuse and harassment visited upon aspiring women by men, one is hard pressed to confirm that we have. It's not just the Weinstein matter, it's O'Reilly, Trump, Cosby, and others, and there's no sense to their doing so. Those men and others like them are wealthy enough and powerful enough that nary a one of them had to force themselves on a woman; there were surely plenty of women who would have "put out" willingly.

Plenty of men who are nowhere near as rich and influential as those guys know that to be so. Rich and powerful dudes aren't the only ones who have extramarital affairs and recreational dalliances with consenting women who are only barely known to them. It takes two to "tango," and women -- women of every color, creed, and nationality and all around the world -- like to "dance" just as much as men do.


Quite simply, these sorts of social ills, abuse and wrongdoing are not going to stop until people unfailingly refuse to tolerate it. Does that mean each of us may be called to risk personal financial gain as a result of decrying injustices? Yes, it might; however, yours, my and no other individual's net worth is not a greater end than is the ethical solvency of our society.

And let me be clear. I'm not talking about behaviors and mindset of which one normatively may disapprove. I'm talking about talking about malfeasant action(s) taken against one or more other individuals. One can think whatever one wants about women, men, minorities, gays, whites, adherents to a faith-based belief system, children, etc., but in the U.S. one does not have the imprimatur to abuse, assault, neglect, physically impose oneself on, harass or intimidate them.

You know, I was SOOOO bummed out about people's reaction to the Access Hollywood tape. It obviously didn't matter to them.
But it occurred to me with this Weinstein thing--people ARE beginning to react and show they care about it. The two guys from Fox. Now this guy. And they are BIG important men losing their jobs, not just tokens. Maybe it restores my faith in humankind a bit. Perhaps all is not lost.

Are you aware that every single day in hollywood, young women looking to make it big are paid to let men basically rape them on camera to provide casual masturbation material to the internet? Just days ago you people were heralding Hugh Hefner as a champion for the sexual liberation movement. It's only bad when it's done in secret? The left are degenerate hypocrites and they wonder why we hate them.

 

[usmbguest5318]

The Weinstein affair is just the latest manifestation of the litany of social ills that beset the U.S. We've got racial injustice which we hear about daily from all over the country. Weinstein's behavior is yet another example of sexual injustice which, though of late it's been rearing its head from within the media and entertainment industry, I suspect is no less abundant in other sectors. Both are ridiculously pervasive, and neither should be.

From the New Yorker article. "From Aggressive Overtures to Sexual Assault: Harvey Weinstein’s Accusers Tell Their Stories":

Asia Argento, an Italian film actress and director, told me that she did not speak out until now—Weinstein, she told me, forcibly performed oral sex on her—because she feared that Weinstein would “crush” her. “I know he has crushed a lot of people before,” Argento said. “That’s why this story—in my case, it’s twenty years old; some of them are older—has never come out.”

Wow. So Ms. Argento determined that her not being "crushed" was more important than other women not having to endure that man's unwanted advances and prurient overtures. So much for doing the right thing. And yet, now, finally, some woman said "f*ck the BS, I'm not going to sit idly by and in silence let this keep happening."

employees described what was, in essence, a culture of complicity at Weinstein’s places of business, with numerous people throughout the companies fully aware of his behavior but either abetting it or looking the other way. Some employees said that they were enlisted in subterfuge to make the victims feel safe. A female executive with the company described how Weinstein assistants and others served as a “honeypot”—they would initially join a meeting, but then Weinstein would dismiss them, leaving him alone with the woman.

Argento was obviously not alone in here compliance, but that doesn't excuse her, or any other individuals -- men or women -- from looking askance at that crap and letting it persist for two damn decades or more. Everyone damn one of them knew better.


Human civilization is supposed to have evolved beyond the troglodyte state, yet were one to judge by what we hear of abuse and harassment visited upon aspiring women by men, one is hard pressed to confirm that we have. It's not just the Weinstein matter, it's O'Reilly, Trump, Cosby, and others, and there's no sense to their doing so. Those men and others like them are wealthy enough and powerful enough that nary a one of them had to force themselves on a woman; there were surely plenty of women who would have "put out" willingly.

Plenty of men who are nowhere near as rich and influential as those guys know that to be so. Rich and powerful dudes aren't the only ones who have extramarital affairs and recreational dalliances with consenting women who are only barely known to them. It takes two to "tango," and women -- women of every color, creed, and nationality and all around the world -- like to "dance" just as much as men do.


Quite simply, these sorts of social ills, abuse and wrongdoing are not going to stop until people unfailingly refuse to tolerate it. Does that mean each of us may be called to risk personal financial gain as a result of decrying injustices? Yes, it might; however, yours, my and no other individual's net worth is not a greater end than is the ethical solvency of our society.

And let me be clear. I'm not talking about behaviors and mindset of which one normatively may disapprove. I'm talking about talking about malfeasant action(s) taken against one or more other individuals. One can think whatever one wants about women, men, minorities, gays, whites, adherents to a faith-based belief system, children, etc., but in the U.S. one does not have the imprimatur to abuse, assault, neglect, physically impose oneself on, harass or intimidate them.

You know, I was SOOOO bummed out about people's reaction to the Access Hollywood tape. It obviously didn't matter to them.
But it occurred to me with this Weinstein thing--people ARE beginning to react and show they care about it. The two guys from Fox. Now this guy. And they are BIG important men losing their jobs, not just tokens. Maybe it restores my faith in humankind a bit. Perhaps all is not lost.

Are you aware that every single day in hollywood, young women looking to make it big are paid to let men basically rape them on camera to provide casual masturbation material to the internet? Just days ago you people were heralding Hugh Hefner as a champion for the sexual liberation movement. It's only bad when it's done in secret? The left are degenerate hypocrites and they wonder why we hate them.

Are you aware that every single day in hollywood, young women looking to make it big are paid to let men basically rape them on camera to provide casual masturbation material to the internet?

First of all, you can frame that as you have, for I can't stop you from doing so. You can also pretend that I and others are too stupid to not see through that sophistic BS you just typed.

• Why you needed to be cagey about it is anybody's guess, but I won't hazard one. What you are alluding to is pornographic video. And what makes that different is that those actors -- men and women -- are engaging in acts they want to engage in. They may like it; they may not, but as goes their "on screen" performances, they are not the objects of undesired advances.
• Rape is a sex crime, not merely the act of having sex or some aspect of it. It has a very specific definition, every aspect (as applicable to the victim and offender) of which must apply for the sex act to be construed as rape. The definition of rape is, "The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim." (There's more exhaustive discussion/definition here: Legal Dictionary - Law.com) So you can think and belive whatever the hell you want, but I can assure that the behavior you described above is not in any way "basically rape" because "basically rape" is rape, and acting for pay in porn video is not at all or in any way, shape or form rape.

Now, I don't whether you wrote what you did to be coy, or argumentative, or to entertain yourself, or what. What I know is that the tone and tenor of what you wrote, if we are to believe you meant what you wrote as you wrote it, is a clear manifestation of the relativistically insouciant degeneracy that is part of why we find our society blighted by derelict men holding positions of power.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

I'm glad that sexual predators like Weinstein, Cosby, Weiner etc are being outed and prosecuted. I do not agree that this is a new phenomenon reflecting the alleged sick state of America. Hollywood producers as far back as the 30s and 40s routinely had sex with their would-be starlets paying their "entry fee" into the business. That is where the term "casting couch" comes from. And yes two of the most notorious Presidents who had no problem using their position of power to take advantage of women were Bill Clinton and JFK.

Do you honestly feel that JFK took advantage of Marilyn Monroe? There is a difference between taking advantage and having an affair.

JFK was rich, handsome and utterly charming. It is hightly unlikely that he took advantage of anyone.

 

[impuretrash]

First of all, you can frame that as you have, for I can't stop you from doing so. You can also pretend that I and others are too stupid to not see through that sophistic BS you just typed.

• Why you needed to be cagey about it is anybody's guess, but I won't hazard one. What you are alluding to is pornographic video. And what makes that different is that those actors -- men and women -- are engaging in acts they want to engage in. They may like it; they may not, but as goes their "on screen" performances, they are not the objects of undesired advances.
• Rape is a sex crime, not merely the act of having sex or some aspect of it. It has a very specific definition, every aspect (as applicable to the victim and offender) of which must apply for the sex act to be construed as rape. The definition of rape is, "The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim." (There's more exhaustive discussion/definition here: Legal Dictionary - Law.com) So you can think and belive whatever the hell you want, but I can assure that the behavior you described above is not in any way "basically rape" because "basically rape" is rape, and acting for pay in porn video is not at all or in any way, shape or form rape.

Now, I don't whether you wrote what you did to be coy, or argumentative, or to entertain yourself, or what. What I know is that the tone and tenor of what you wrote, if we are to believe you meant what you wrote as you wrote it, is a clear manifestation of the relativistically insouciant degeneracy that is part of why we find our society blighted by derelict men holding positions of power.

LOL what? Get off your high horse and stop being so pretentious. Degenerate expressions of sexuality in left-controlled pop culture and entertainment is one of the main things that turned me and so many other young men to the right. We learned early in life that literally nothing is taboo in western society. Nothing except conservative social values, no sex before marriage, intact families etc...stuff like that. Because I am repulsed by the casual and often self imposed degradation of women makes me the degenerate one? Is that what you're trying to imply?

 

[SeaGal]

If the issue of powerful, influential or wealthy men 'charming' women into submission and silence then the list must be extended to include JFK and Clinton. Personally with JFK? - No problem, I'd have been there. Elvis, too. But Clinton is a creep.

JFK and Bill Clinton's affairs were with consenting women, I believe....

Not necessarily for Bill. A little reading, perhaps. Hillary's reaction to Bill's accusers is also interesting.

Paula Jones, Juanita Broderick...

A guide to the allegations of Bill Clinton’s womanizing
(not a source unfriendly to Clinton, more defensive of him than accusatory but the basics are there)

What, you might ask, difference does it make? Credibility - shown by a concern for the situation, and condemnation of the acts of powerful people, no matter the politics of those involved...or whether one is liked or disliked.

Sooo...if we want to address this in an open manner, partisanship by omission has no place in it.

ps - there were whispers about JFK - but we all loved him so.