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

[usmbguest5318]

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?

Get off your high horse and stop being so pretentious.

High horse! Pretension! There's nothing pretentious about about knowing what I'm talking about when it comes what is and is not rape and where lies the line between it and consensual sex. There's no "high horse" from which to assert that abuse and sexual harassment of women is wrong and not to be tolerated.

Your ID states that you're pure trash. I'm inclined by your remarks in this thread to take your word for it. I didn't call you that. You chose that moniker for yourself; it's your own attestation.

LOL what?

Read the post. I was quite clear. Read it and you won't need to ask "what."

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.

Why you or anyone else "turned to the right" is not relevant to the thread topic. It's not because you and those other people and you're reasons aren't the topic of the thread.

 

[usmbguest5318]

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.

f 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.

I really don't care at whom specifically we can point a finger, most especially if we already know of what they've done. I care that as a society, no man or woman is willing to forebear the behavior. There are surely plenty of people who are perpetrators of the heinous acts themselves, and plenty who are complicit or acquiescent in the acts. Individuals in neither group deserve society's forbearance.

If you want to point fingers then point them at people who have not been called out and who have victimized you, or your child, or your friend, or whomever. But if you just want to point fingers for the sake of making political hay, as it were, don't. If you have some ideas about how people can commence to bring the behavior to a halt, ideally an abrupt one, by all means, be it your own solution or an extension of one someone else has offered, let's see your ideas.

 

[SeaGal]

If you want to point fingers then point them at people who have not been called out and who have victimized you, or your child, or your friend, or whomever. But if you just want to point fingers for the sake of making political hay, as it were, don't. If you have some ideas about how people can commence to bring the behavior to a halt, ideally an abrupt one, by all means, be it your own solution or an extension of one someone else has offered, let's see your ideas.

What I will point out twas you who saw fit to selectively mention a few folks, make political hay as you call it, which tarnishes the image of a concerned citizen seeking open discussion and a solution. Let's not perpetrate this abuse by hiding the uncomfortable parts.

I will also point out, in the spirit of this venue, that I have shared my ideas regarding what can or can not be done. What are your solutions other than handwringing and haymaking?

 

[usmbguest5318]

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.

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.

On the question of whether we, the public who don't have the details, can rightly condemn Weinstein, O'Reilly, and others who have not admitted to the allegations or attested freely to having committed acts of the sort being here discussed, well, no, we really can't in fairness do that. What we might do, however, is:

• Demand that the appropriate people tasked with enforcing our laws take the allegations seriously and determine whether they hold water.
• Insist that each investigative team include at least one woman on in a decision making role about whether the findings of an investigation are probative enough to merit bringing them to trail.
• Insist that the full details of any such investigation, along with a written opinion from each decision maker for the point above, be made public.
• Establish a public website where women/people can anonymously (from a viewing public's standpoint, but not from an investigator's standpoint) report incidents of abuse, harassment, or worse, and include strong penalties for submitting clearly spurious accusations. The second part because this is no joking matter regardless of in which position -- accused or actual abuser or abused -- one finds oneself. Women must be trusted and listened to when they make their claims, but they can't be allowed to ruin people's lives over "just any damn imagined slight."

 

[usmbguest5318]

If you want to point fingers then point them at people who have not been called out and who have victimized you, or your child, or your friend, or whomever. But if you just want to point fingers for the sake of making political hay, as it were, don't. If you have some ideas about how people can commence to bring the behavior to a halt, ideally an abrupt one, by all means, be it your own solution or an extension of one someone else has offered, let's see your ideas.

What I will point out twas you who saw fit to selectively mention a few folks, make political hay as you call it, which tarnishes the image of a concerned citizen seeking open discussion and a solution. Let's not perpetrate this abuse by hiding the uncomfortable parts.

I will also point out, in the spirit of this venue, that I have shared my ideas regarding what can or can not be done. What are your solutions other than handwringing and haymaking?

What I will point out twas you who saw fit to selectively mention a few folks, make political hay as you call it

But I didn't. Look at the bulk of the OP. None of it is finger pointing and haymaking. Of the men I mention, two are liberal and two are conservative. For two of them there's no question about what they've done, and for two of them there is no conclusion on whether they indeed went too far, as it were. My OP very clearly first and foremost castigates a behavior and tolerance of it and is clearly not about any of the men whom I mentioned.

There's a huge difference between finger pointing and merely citing someone as an example because they are a current example of the behavior and phenomenon under discussion. Surely you didn't expect me to mention every philanderer and cad known to history? The men I mentioned are but foils to the discussion rubric.

What are your solutions other than handwringing and haymaking?

See posts 9 and 24.

 

[xotoxi]

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.

One thing I wonder is: why is everyone believing the women alleging sexual harassment by Weinstein, but not believing the women alleging sexual harassment by Trump?

 

[SeaGal]

Well said, Xelor.

On #1 - I agree, though can't say that we aren't already doing that.

On #2 - I don't see that as necessary, but not harmful either.

On #3 - That is fine - but not until after the case has been decided, and only if found guilty. If it goes to trial the testimony will be public anyway unless a minor is involved.

On #4 - There are hotlines both online and phone line where abuse can be reported, In some circumstances health care providers are compelled to report instances of abuse. For minors, teachers are compelled to report suspected abuse. If you're suggesting a public venue outside official avenues, a board of shame so to speak, beyond what we already have in Facebook, ie - that makes me a bit uneasy - a spurious accusation may be clear to you but not to me. And I certainly agree that no one should be allowed to ruin someone's life over 'just any damn imagined slight'.

 

[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.

One thing I wonder is: why is everyone believing the women alleging sexual harassment by Weinstein, but not believing the women alleging sexual harassment by Trump?

I'm not one to ask. I believe the women who've levied allegations against Trump.

 

[xotoxi]

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.

One thing I wonder is: why is everyone believing the women alleging sexual harassment by Weinstein, but not believing the women alleging sexual harassment by Trump?

I'm not one to ask. I believe the women who've levied allegations against Trump.

Same here. But there are gobs of people who say that the accusers are liars, yet they condemn Weinstein, and anyone that he has ever taken a picture with.

I guess that is what is called BLIND PARTISANSHIP.

 

[Toronado3800]

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.

In your opinion is a woman smart enough to be able to decide by her own free will to take money in exchange for sex on tape or off?

If you think women are un-evolved monkeys with no brain just step up and say so don't waste my time with 10101 dodging responses.

 

[impuretrash]

In your opinion is a woman smart enough to be able to decide by her own free will to take money in exchange for sex on tape or off?

If you think women are un-evolved monkeys with no brain just step up and say so don't waste my time with 10101 dodging responses.

I think most women in porn went to hollywood to make it big, and would rather be doing something else. Would they be better off at home in the kitchen where they belong?

Definitely.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Fact of the matter is a certain amount of women are ok with and will do anything for the gig if it means fame and fortune.....on the other side are those who refused or were forced......wondering which group is larger

 

[Toronado3800]

In your opinion is a woman smart enough to be able to decide by her own free will to take money in exchange for sex on tape or off?

If you think women are un-evolved monkeys with no brain just step up and say so don't waste my time with 10101 dodging responses.

I think most women in porn went to hollywood to make it big, and would rather be doing something else. Would they be better off at home in the kitchen where they belong?

Definitely.

Thank you for being honest.

My contention is since I like small government porn should be legal.

Since we have separation of church and state I could care less what people do with their bodies until it infringes on others.

In the case of rape, go string up the guilty. I don't support Roman Polanski and that applause fest one of them awards shows gave him a year or two back was disgusting. It really seems Weinstein is guilty so lets find him a cell in the general population.

In the case of porn, I hope them gals (and guys even) are making decent money. It is not rape if you hire a hooker. It is not rape if I offer Aria Giovanni to star in my web movie and she accepts on her own free will. Calling it rape IMO weakens the word and we need words to mean particular things.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Actually as far as sexual harassment (real) goes and sexual assault (real) goes, I believe there is a LOT less than there use to be.
In the workplace women are 100 times less harassed than they used to be. At least in my experience. In the 1980's you would see daily remarks, laying on hands, flirting...innuendos every single day. I honestly do not know how woman took it back then. Today it is so much less pervasive.
Same with schools, when I was in school - girls were practically tormented. Bra flipping, but pinching, cat calling on and on...schools have cracked down on that big time since then.

All in all...much less than before.

 

[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.

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.

Hugh Hefner continued the objectification of women as sex objects; he just did it with their clothes off instead of in a poodle skirt and tight cashmere sweater. I and the people I know weren't "heralding" him as a champion of anything.

 

[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

I have a very different view of what that tape showed, particularly about the electorate. It wasn't just locker room talk. There was truth behind the brags and the attitude itself is just plain ugly. You'll not normalize that with me by laughing and saying everyone you know acts the same way. Just tells me I wouldn't want to hang with the people you know.
I hope to Christ you aren't teaching that kind of disrespect of women to your boys.

 

[OldLady]

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.

I wasn't thinking about the fact that JFK and Clinton were Democrats. I think others may have done that, though.

 

[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.

One thing I wonder is: why is everyone believing the women alleging sexual harassment by Weinstein, but not believing the women alleging sexual harassment by Trump?

Good question.

 

[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

I have a very different view of what that tape showed, particularly about the electorate. It wasn't just locker room talk. There was truth behind the brags and the attitude itself is just plain ugly. You'll not normalize that with me by laughing and saying everyone you know acts the same way. Just tells me I wouldn't want to hang with the people you know.
I hope to Christ you aren't teaching that kind of disrespect of women to your boys.

It's not a learned behavior..

 

[SeaGal]

I wasn't thinking about the fact that JFK and Clinton were Democrats. I think others may have done that, though.

Understood.