Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Harvey Weinstein

13468916

Comments

  • .

    be interesting to know (we never will) how many actresses and wannabes who have now totally turned against him, did at at one time, agree to his crude advances in order to get a role, however minor, or to further their career, or to just make some money ..
    how many careers were made 'on their backs' and now that the ladies are 'on their feet', they are clawing, stamping and gunning for Harvey, the one time magic movie mogul and star maker

    Why would that be interesting especially?

    Circumstances change and a young woman, just starting out in her chosen career, is not in the same position to be listened to or be taken seriously as they may be as an older, established actress speaking out now. From the evidence presented so far he massively abused his position in the relationship he had with these women and it should not be a surprise to anyone that they didn't report it at the time but focussed on putting it behind them and getting on with their career.

    Your post reeks of victim blaming.
    it's not victim blaming in my scenario though is it ? .. I am suggesting the possibility/probability that some women might have succumbed to Weinstein's advances willingly to get ahead and make a career in the sex driven town/industry that is Hollywood .. if they agreed, then they are NOT 'victims' they have made a career choice, albeit one that is unsavoury in your opinion ..
    the fact that he abused his 'power' in many cases is without question .. on the other hand the ladies concerned could either have gone to the authorities at the time, got a job as (e.g.) a waitress, or in the words of actor's wife Nancy Regan 'just said NO'
    Depends what sort of person you are. If what you're saying is correct and he took advantage of willing people, offering whatever to further their career, he's still in the wrong and has probably been expecting it to come back to haunt him for a while.

    It's a bit like accepting cash backhanders during the course of your career, although most people would probably except one (I probably would), they still know it's wrong and that they're going to get in trouble if found out.
  • cabbles said:

    cabbles said:

    His missus is best friend's with my mate's missus. 100% true story - they were at school together. Mate went to their wedding in the States, met loads of celebs there. Think my mate thought he was a bit of a wanker anyway, so guess he's not surprised. Wonder how his marriage will be affected.

    Pass on a message to your missus that cabbles, a 35 year old moderator on a football forum who has 84 of the 92 league grounds under his belt, slightly receeding barnet and torn meniscus in right knee would be up for a date if she's interested. Don't mention anything about the misappropriations of my username though and general lack of respect I have on here

    Cheers Leroy
    Also put good with area telephone codes due to my job in sales. 01908 Milton Keynes, 02476 Coventry, 01344 Derby

    Guaranteed decent seat on the dj coach to any away game of her choice, grab bag of walkers crisps at Newport Pagnell services

    If you do this for me I'll abuse my power and give you a promote
    She's on the rebound and in her emotionally fragile state she'd only be after sexual validation. I'd give it a swerve cabbles.
  • cabbles said:

    cabbles said:

    His missus is best friend's with my mate's missus. 100% true story - they were at school together. Mate went to their wedding in the States, met loads of celebs there. Think my mate thought he was a bit of a wanker anyway, so guess he's not surprised. Wonder how his marriage will be affected.

    Pass on a message to your missus that cabbles, a 35 year old moderator on a football forum who has 84 of the 92 league grounds under his belt, slightly receeding barnet and torn meniscus in right knee would be up for a date if she's interested. Don't mention anything about the misappropriations of my username though and general lack of respect I have on here

    Cheers Leroy
    Also put good with area telephone codes due to my job in sales. 01908 Milton Keynes, 02476 Coventry, 01344 Derby

    Guaranteed decent seat on the dj coach to any away game of her choice, grab bag of walkers crisps at Newport Pagnell services

    If you do this for me I'll abuse my power and give you a promote
    She's on the rebound and in her emotionally fragile state she'd only be after sexual validation. I'd give it a swerve cabbles.
    Don't listen @cabes , sounds like Santas got designs on her an all.
  • .

    be interesting to know (we never will) how many actresses and wannabes who have now totally turned against him, did at at one time, agree to his crude advances in order to get a role, however minor, or to further their career, or to just make some money ..
    how many careers were made 'on their backs' and now that the ladies are 'on their feet', they are clawing, stamping and gunning for Harvey, the one time magic movie mogul and star maker

    Why would that be interesting especially?

    Circumstances change and a young woman, just starting out in her chosen career, is not in the same position to be listened to or be taken seriously as they may be as an older, established actress speaking out now. From the evidence presented so far he massively abused his position in the relationship he had with these women and it should not be a surprise to anyone that they didn't report it at the time but focussed on putting it behind them and getting on with their career.

    Your post reeks of victim blaming.
    it's not victim blaming in my scenario though is it ? .. I am suggesting the possibility/probability that some women might have succumbed to Weinstein's advances willingly to get ahead and make a career in the sex driven town/industry that is Hollywood .. if they agreed, then they are NOT 'victims' they have made a career choice, albeit one that is unsavoury in your opinion ..
    the fact that he abused his 'power' in many cases is without question .. on the other hand the ladies concerned could either have gone to the authorities at the time, got a job as (e.g.) a waitress, or in the words of actor's wife Nancy Regan 'just said NO'
    Depends what sort of person you are. If what you're saying is correct and he took advantage of willing people, offering whatever to further their career, he's still in the wrong and has probably been expecting it to come back to haunt him for a while.

    It's a bit like accepting cash backhanders during the course of your career, although most people would probably except one (I probably would), they still know it's wrong and that they're going to get in trouble if found out.
    you are reinforcing my point .. READ what I wrote, the highlighted bit .. those who (possibly) accepted his advances are not innocent little lambs, they made a Faustian pact to 'get ahead' .. I repeat, they could have said 'no thanks' ..

    Weinstein was wrong in his actions (allegedly) and so were those who accepted his offer(s) (if anyone did lol) .. Hollywood/the entertainment biz is that kind of environment, envy and avarice rule .. the luvvies and darlings really hate one another in a professional sense, they would metaphorically kill one another and climb over the body to get that plum role or to be the guy/girl in shot for a few seconds in a TV soap commercial .. Weinstein's downfall is a symptom of the system he helped to maintain
  • edited October 2017
    I would never criticise a victim - they are victims whenever they come forward. If we criticise them, it hardly encourages other victims to do so. I would prefer to applaud their bravery and show empathy for their horrible experience at the hands of a disgusting human being.
  • DA9 said:

    Weinstein is clearly a wrongun in every sense, and I hope they gather enough evidence to put him away for a long long time, but, equally, I would hold anyone in disdain who sat on their hands and did nothing, so to protect their own careers and build their multi million pound lifestyles, whilst other women were allegedly being put through this treatment for years.
    The biggest & worst kept secret in Hollywood apparently, heard an oscars award clip from a few years ago today, when the host said "all you ladies who won, now no longer have to pretend to find Harvey Weinstein attractive"

    Those women who did nothing are as culpable IMO

    You're about four pages late to this discussion. You don't blame the victims for being abused.
    I'm not, my point is, these actresses now coming forward clearly went through disgusting and distressing acts at his hands. However, many more allegedly have gone through the same over the years because they did not go to the authorities earlier.
    Ask yourself the question why?
    To protect their careers and their multi million pound bank balances.
    I would imagine some of these same actresses were very quick to criticise Trump over his sexist comments and actions as it did not affect them directly, they were happy to do so, once it affects their career they keep schtum, wrong, maybe culpable is too strong a claim, I hope they ALL get justice, but some of them should have acted earlier on what they had experienced and what they knew, too prevent his clear decades of offending and harassment of other women.
  • DA9 said:

    DA9 said:

    Weinstein is clearly a wrongun in every sense, and I hope they gather enough evidence to put him away for a long long time, but, equally, I would hold anyone in disdain who sat on their hands and did nothing, so to protect their own careers and build their multi million pound lifestyles, whilst other women were allegedly being put through this treatment for years.
    The biggest & worst kept secret in Hollywood apparently, heard an oscars award clip from a few years ago today, when the host said "all you ladies who won, now no longer have to pretend to find Harvey Weinstein attractive"

    Those women who did nothing are as culpable IMO

    You're about four pages late to this discussion. You don't blame the victims for being abused.
    I'm not, my point is, these actresses now coming forward clearly went through disgusting and distressing acts at his hands. However, many more allegedly have gone through the same over the years because they did not go to the authorities earlier.
    Ask yourself the question why?
    To protect their careers and their multi million pound bank balances.
    I would imagine some of these same actresses were very quick to criticise Trump over his sexist comments and actions as it did not affect them directly, they were happy to do so, once it affects their career they keep schtum, wrong, maybe culpable is too strong a claim, I hope they ALL get justice, but some of them should have acted earlier on what they had experienced and what they knew, too prevent his clear decades of offending and harassment of other women.
    Yes, it would have been better if they had but the reaction here and eslewhere where the victims are blamed and/or not believed is one reason they didn't.
  • DA9 said:

    DA9 said:

    Weinstein is clearly a wrongun in every sense, and I hope they gather enough evidence to put him away for a long long time, but, equally, I would hold anyone in disdain who sat on their hands and did nothing, so to protect their own careers and build their multi million pound lifestyles, whilst other women were allegedly being put through this treatment for years.
    The biggest & worst kept secret in Hollywood apparently, heard an oscars award clip from a few years ago today, when the host said "all you ladies who won, now no longer have to pretend to find Harvey Weinstein attractive"

    Those women who did nothing are as culpable IMO

    You're about four pages late to this discussion. You don't blame the victims for being abused.
    I'm not, my point is, these actresses now coming forward clearly went through disgusting and distressing acts at his hands. However, many more allegedly have gone through the same over the years because they did not go to the authorities earlier.
    Ask yourself the question why?
    To protect their careers and their multi million pound bank balances.
    I would imagine some of these same actresses were very quick to criticise Trump over his sexist comments and actions as it did not affect them directly, they were happy to do so, once it affects their career they keep schtum, wrong, maybe culpable is too strong a claim, I hope they ALL get justice, but some of them should have acted earlier on what they had experienced and what they knew, too prevent his clear decades of offending and harassment of other women.
    Your view is very simplistic - there are numerous reasons for not coming forward. Bullies such as Weinstein exploit their position and know that their victim has much to lose by coming forward.

    If you report abuse in a work environment It's often the end of your career and you're often not believed. Abusers are frequently protected if they're powerful and this has happened throughout history.

    Saying you've been abused or bullied isn't a simple thing and people often bury the incident.

    I think we should focus on Weinstein and do more to stop bullying and sexual abuse.
  • edited October 2017

    .

    be interesting to know (we never will) how many actresses and wannabes who have now totally turned against him, did at at one time, agree to his crude advances in order to get a role, however minor, or to further their career, or to just make some money ..
    how many careers were made 'on their backs' and now that the ladies are 'on their feet', they are clawing, stamping and gunning for Harvey, the one time magic movie mogul and star maker

    Why would that be interesting especially?

    Circumstances change and a young woman, just starting out in her chosen career, is not in the same position to be listened to or be taken seriously as they may be as an older, established actress speaking out now. From the evidence presented so far he massively abused his position in the relationship he had with these women and it should not be a surprise to anyone that they didn't report it at the time but focussed on putting it behind them and getting on with their career.

    Your post reeks of victim blaming.
    it's not victim blaming in my scenario though is it ? .. I am suggesting the possibility/probability that some women might have succumbed to Weinstein's advances willingly to get ahead and make a career in the sex driven town/industry that is Hollywood .. if they agreed, then they are NOT 'victims' they have made a career choice, albeit one that is unsavoury in your opinion ..
    the fact that he abused his 'power' in many cases is without question .. on the other hand the ladies concerned could either have gone to the authorities at the time, got a job as (e.g.) a waitress, or in the words of actor's wife Nancy Regan 'just said NO'
    Depends what sort of person you are. If what you're saying is correct and he took advantage of willing people, offering whatever to further their career, he's still in the wrong and has probably been expecting it to come back to haunt him for a while.

    It's a bit like accepting cash backhanders during the course of your career, although most people would probably except one (I probably would), they still know it's wrong and that they're going to get in trouble if found out.
    you are reinforcing my point .. READ what I wrote, the highlighted bit .. those who (possibly) accepted his advances are not innocent little lambs, they made a Faustian pact to 'get ahead' .. I repeat, they could have said 'no thanks' ..

    Weinstein was wrong in his actions (allegedly) and so were those who accepted his offer(s) (if anyone did lol) .. Hollywood/the entertainment biz is that kind of environment, envy and avarice rule .. the luvvies and darlings really hate one another in a professional sense, they would metaphorically kill one another and climb over the body to get that plum role or to be the guy/girl in shot for a few seconds in a TV soap commercial .. Weinstein's downfall is a symptom of the system he helped to maintain
    Im not debating with anyong whether the women offered themselves to him mate. I'm just of the opinion that even if they did (which Im not saying they did, just to be clear to the usual CL twisters) he should've said no. The moment he done anything with a willing party or otherwise, he turned into sexcase. He's abusing his privilege.

    It would be the same in any industry, whether a boss in the City of London, or a Grimsby crabstick factory.

    That said, it truely does amaze me why noone spoke out at the time. If it was something as serious as sex abuse, I would have, hand on my heart, no matter what personal cost was
  • .

    be interesting to know (we never will) how many actresses and wannabes who have now totally turned against him, did at at one time, agree to his crude advances in order to get a role, however minor, or to further their career, or to just make some money ..
    how many careers were made 'on their backs' and now that the ladies are 'on their feet', they are clawing, stamping and gunning for Harvey, the one time magic movie mogul and star maker

    Why would that be interesting especially?

    Circumstances change and a young woman, just starting out in her chosen career, is not in the same position to be listened to or be taken seriously as they may be as an older, established actress speaking out now. From the evidence presented so far he massively abused his position in the relationship he had with these women and it should not be a surprise to anyone that they didn't report it at the time but focussed on putting it behind them and getting on with their career.

    Your post reeks of victim blaming.
    it's not victim blaming in my scenario though is it ? .. I am suggesting the possibility/probability that some women might have succumbed to Weinstein's advances willingly to get ahead and make a career in the sex driven town/industry that is Hollywood .. if they agreed, then they are NOT 'victims' they have made a career choice, albeit one that is unsavoury in your opinion ..
    the fact that he abused his 'power' in many cases is without question .. on the other hand the ladies concerned could either have gone to the authorities at the time, got a job as (e.g.) a waitress, or in the words of actor's wife Nancy Regan 'just said NO'
    Depends what sort of person you are. If what you're saying is correct and he took advantage of willing people, offering whatever to further their career, he's still in the wrong and has probably been expecting it to come back to haunt him for a while.

    It's a bit like accepting cash backhanders during the course of your career, although most people would probably except one (I probably would), they still know it's wrong and that they're going to get in trouble if found out.
    you are reinforcing my point .. READ what I wrote, the highlighted bit .. those who (possibly) accepted his advances are not innocent little lambs, they made a Faustian pact to 'get ahead' .. I repeat, they could have said 'no thanks' ..

    Weinstein was wrong in his actions (allegedly) and so were those who accepted his offer(s) (if anyone did lol) .. Hollywood/the entertainment biz is that kind of environment, envy and avarice rule .. the luvvies and darlings really hate one another in a professional sense, they would metaphorically kill one another and climb over the body to get that plum role or to be the guy/girl in shot for a few seconds in a TV soap commercial .. Weinstein's downfall is a symptom of the system he helped to maintain
    Im not debating with anyong whether the women offered themselves to him mate. I'm just of the opinion that even if they did (which Im not saying they did, just to be clear to the usual CL twisters) he should've said no. The moment he done anything with a willing party or otherwise, he turned into sexcase. He's abusing his privilege.

    It would be the same in any industry, whether a boss in the City of London, or a Grimsby crabstick factory.

    That said, it truely does amaze me why noone spoke out at the time. If it was something as serious as sex abuse, I would have, hand on my heart, no matter what personal cost was
    I agree with you except the last paragraph. Victims of abuse face perhaps the hardest ordeal in getting people to believe and accept what they say. There are few strong enough to go public. Which is what abusers know and get confidence from.
  • Sponsored links:


  • abusers all use --positions of power ,trust, weakness. Or combinations of all three. They dont stop unless confronted or caught.

    When i was a kid i remember some nonce being caught on Dartford Heath and my Mum and Aunts talking about it. It was an urban legend then that the "all powerful" were all at it and Plod new but could never do anything.

    Ted Heath--Tory
    Lord Jenner--Labour
    Cyril Smith--Lib Dem
    Cant get much higher or powerful.

    Saville -- Trust,fame,power known about for years and an institution but did nothing
    Glitter---Fame again known about for years.
    Wilfred Brambale--known about for years
    Frankie Howard--chased young male actors around his dressing room before "jumping" them. Treated as a joke by the "profession".

    Rotherham,Rochdale---known about and covered up for a decade. Used weakness of political correctness to carry out 10,000 rapes.

    Hollywood--- please FFS known about since silent films that abusers were at the very top of the profession. Book upon book has been written about it.

    A nonce is a nonce they dont stop. You have to salute the BRAVERY of all of the poor souls abused and are speaking out.

    There are top actors/actresses who outed Trump in nano seconds a year ago but stayed silent until this week shame on them all. They only came forward when the spot light they crave fell on them but this spot light shows they didnt give a shit about the victims of real abuse.


    So people have only come forward to get in the spotlight? Does it really matter someone's background if they have been abused or does it depend on their politics for you.

    Abuse and bullying happens across all sectors of society - you could perhaps try reading up on why people don't speak up. If it was that simple abusers would never get away with it would they?

    Bullies know exactly how to play the system.
  • edited October 2017

    abusers all use --positions of power ,trust, weakness. Or combinations of all three. They dont stop unless confronted or caught.

    When i was a kid i remember some nonce being caught on Dartford Heath and my Mum and Aunts talking about it. It was an urban legend then that the "all powerful" were all at it and Plod new but could never do anything.


    I've read a lot of Simon Kernick crime (supposedly) "fiction" novels over the years. He credits his success in that genre in part to the sources he's had in the Met.

    What you suggest is a recurring theme throughout the novels amongst judges, politicians and senior old bill etc.

    Also James O'Brien on LBC has championed bringing these allegations to the forefront of the media on his shows numerous times over recent years in conjunction with any independent media company (can't recall their name) whose sole focus is trying to get this stuff looked at.

    Not a conspiracy theorist but post Saville and Hillsborough and whilst loathe to adopt the no smoke without fire position I do think there is a huge agenda to cover all this stuff up by those who are in power and the establishment who have influence on those who control the media.

    It seems stuff is almost kept out until the alleged perpetrators are dead.

    Of course it is wrong to go on witch hunts but surely not all of the accusers are cranks with a dishonest agenda.
  • abusers all use --positions of power ,trust, weakness. Or combinations of all three. They dont stop unless confronted or caught.

    When i was a kid i remember some nonce being caught on Dartford Heath and my Mum and Aunts talking about it. It was an urban legend then that the "all powerful" were all at it and Plod new but could never do anything.


    I've read a lot of Simon Kernick crime (supposedly) "fiction" novels over the years. He credits his success in that genre in part to the sources he's had in the Met.

    What you suggest is a recurring theme throughout the novels amongst judges, politicians and senior old bill etc.

    Also James O'Brien on LBC has championed bringing these allegations to the forefront of the media on his showside numerous times over recent years in conjunction with any independent media company (can't recall their name) whose sole focus is trying to get this stuff looked at.

    Not a conspiracy theorist but post Saville and Hillsborough and whilst loathe to adopt the no smoke without fire position I do think there is a huge agenda to cover all this stuff up by those who are in power and the establishment who have influence on those who control the media.

    It seems stuff us almost kept out until the alleged perpetrators are dead.

    Of course it is wrong to go on witch hunts but surely not all of the accusers are cranks with a dishonest agenda.
    Institutions cover up abuse to protect their position hence why it takes so long for things to come out. The Catholic Church covered up abuse for decades to protect its reputation and businesses, government etc are usually no different.

    If abusers are in a position of power they will invariably get more support than the abused. Speaking out against a powerful institution or individual takes a lot of guts and can take a huge toll on someone's health.

    The reputation of an institution or powerful individual is invariably seen as more important than any abuse allegations.
  • .

    be interesting to know (we never will) how many actresses and wannabes who have now totally turned against him, did at at one time, agree to his crude advances in order to get a role, however minor, or to further their career, or to just make some money ..
    how many careers were made 'on their backs' and now that the ladies are 'on their feet', they are clawing, stamping and gunning for Harvey, the one time magic movie mogul and star maker

    Why would that be interesting especially?

    Circumstances change and a young woman, just starting out in her chosen career, is not in the same position to be listened to or be taken seriously as they may be as an older, established actress speaking out now. From the evidence presented so far he massively abused his position in the relationship he had with these women and it should not be a surprise to anyone that they didn't report it at the time but focussed on putting it behind them and getting on with their career.

    Your post reeks of victim blaming.
    it's not victim blaming in my scenario though is it ? .. I am suggesting the possibility/probability that some women might have succumbed to Weinstein's advances willingly to get ahead and make a career in the sex driven town/industry that is Hollywood .. if they agreed, then they are NOT 'victims' they have made a career choice, albeit one that is unsavoury in your opinion ..
    the fact that he abused his 'power' in many cases is without question .. on the other hand the ladies concerned could either have gone to the authorities at the time, got a job as (e.g.) a waitress, or in the words of actor's wife Nancy Regan 'just said NO'
    Depends what sort of person you are. If what you're saying is correct and he took advantage of willing people, offering whatever to further their career, he's still in the wrong and has probably been expecting it to come back to haunt him for a while.

    It's a bit like accepting cash backhanders during the course of your career, although most people would probably except one (I probably would), they still know it's wrong and that they're going to get in trouble if found out.
    you are reinforcing my point .. READ what I wrote, the highlighted bit .. those who (possibly) accepted his advances are not innocent little lambs, they made a Faustian pact to 'get ahead' .. I repeat, they could have said 'no thanks' ..

    Weinstein was wrong in his actions (allegedly) and so were those who accepted his offer(s) (if anyone did lol) .. Hollywood/the entertainment biz is that kind of environment, envy and avarice rule .. the luvvies and darlings really hate one another in a professional sense, they would metaphorically kill one another and climb over the body to get that plum role or to be the guy/girl in shot for a few seconds in a TV soap commercial .. Weinstein's downfall is a symptom of the system he helped to maintain
    Im not debating with anyong whether the women offered themselves to him mate. I'm just of the opinion that even if they did (which Im not saying they did, just to be clear to the usual CL twisters) he should've said no. The moment he done anything with a willing party or otherwise, he turned into sexcase. He's abusing his privilege.

    It would be the same in any industry, whether a boss in the City of London, or a Grimsby crabstick factory.

    That said, it truely does amaze me why noone spoke out at the time. If it was something as serious as sex abuse, I would have, hand on my heart, no matter what personal cost was
    they did that's why the company he ran paid 8 people in out of court settlements.

    The people speaking up should have been the other directors of the company (ie the people with power not the victims) saying "Hang on Harvey, this isn't right"
  • where did i say "people came forward to get into the spot light" i said they only came forward when the spot light they crave fell on them re the fact that they were staying silent.

    just a thought Hoof It My Your arse look up condescending seems to have your name all over it
  • clb74 said:

    I'm amazed how different it is for some people.
    How much and how many different people did Michael Jackson pay off.
    If he hadn't of died a few days before coming to England he would of received a heroes welcome by some.

    Its amazing the amount of people who are still not convinced about Jackson, he allegedly paid out as much as 23 million dollars to his victims, in fact last year, according to reports, another fella came forward and a case maybe pending for compensation from Jacksons estate, and one of the original kid who was paid off may be called to give his testimony.
    If a 45 year old man shares his bed with a 12 year old kid its wrong on every level, I dont think anyone would argue that, but if its Michael Jackson its glossed over and ignored by the public. Saville got away with it for years because the victims thought that the authorities would not believe them, The same with Weinstein.
    It doesn't matter if they are a pop star, teacher, MP, Hollywood producer or bin man, a nonce is a nonce.
  • .

    be interesting to know (we never will) how many actresses and wannabes who have now totally turned against him, did at at one time, agree to his crude advances in order to get a role, however minor, or to further their career, or to just make some money ..
    how many careers were made 'on their backs' and now that the ladies are 'on their feet', they are clawing, stamping and gunning for Harvey, the one time magic movie mogul and star maker

    Why would that be interesting especially?

    Circumstances change and a young woman, just starting out in her chosen career, is not in the same position to be listened to or be taken seriously as they may be as an older, established actress speaking out now. From the evidence presented so far he massively abused his position in the relationship he had with these women and it should not be a surprise to anyone that they didn't report it at the time but focussed on putting it behind them and getting on with their career.

    Your post reeks of victim blaming.
    it's not victim blaming in my scenario though is it ? .. I am suggesting the possibility/probability that some women might have succumbed to Weinstein's advances willingly to get ahead and make a career in the sex driven town/industry that is Hollywood .. if they agreed, then they are NOT 'victims' they have made a career choice, albeit one that is unsavoury in your opinion ..
    the fact that he abused his 'power' in many cases is without question .. on the other hand the ladies concerned could either have gone to the authorities at the time, got a job as (e.g.) a waitress, or in the words of actor's wife Nancy Regan 'just said NO'
    Depends what sort of person you are. If what you're saying is correct and he took advantage of willing people, offering whatever to further their career, he's still in the wrong and has probably been expecting it to come back to haunt him for a while.

    It's a bit like accepting cash backhanders during the course of your career, although most people would probably except one (I probably would), they still know it's wrong and that they're going to get in trouble if found out.
    you are reinforcing my point .. READ what I wrote, the highlighted bit .. those who (possibly) accepted his advances are not innocent little lambs, they made a Faustian pact to 'get ahead' .. I repeat, they could have said 'no thanks' ..

    Weinstein was wrong in his actions (allegedly) and so were those who accepted his offer(s) (if anyone did lol) .. Hollywood/the entertainment biz is that kind of environment, envy and avarice rule .. the luvvies and darlings really hate one another in a professional sense, they would metaphorically kill one another and climb over the body to get that plum role or to be the guy/girl in shot for a few seconds in a TV soap commercial .. Weinstein's downfall is a symptom of the system he helped to maintain
    Im not debating with anyong whether the women offered themselves to him mate. I'm just of the opinion that even if they did (which Im not saying they did, just to be clear to the usual CL twisters) he should've said no. The moment he done anything with a willing party or otherwise, he turned into sexcase. He's abusing his privilege.

    It would be the same in any industry, whether a boss in the City of London, or a Grimsby crabstick factory.

    That said, it truely does amaze me why noone spoke out at the time. If it was something as serious as sex abuse, I would have, hand on my heart, no matter what personal cost was
    they did that's why the company he ran paid 8 people in out of court settlements.

    The people speaking up should have been the other directors of the company (ie the people with power not the victims) saying "Hang on Harvey, this isn't right"
    They may have had the same mindset as him by the sound of it - a lot of powerful people fail to recognise abuse.
  • Sponsored links:


  • edited October 2017
    Greenie said:

    clb74 said:

    I'm amazed how different it is for some people.
    How much and how many different people did Michael Jackson pay off.
    If he hadn't of died a few days before coming to England he would of received a heroes welcome by some.

    Its amazing the amount of people who are still not convinced about Jackson, he allegedly paid out as much as 23 million dollars to his victims, in fact last year, according to reports, another fella came forward and a case maybe pending for compensation from Jacksons estate, and one of the original kid who was paid off may be called to give his testimony.
    If a 45 year old man shares his bed with a 12 year old kid its wrong on every level, I dont think anyone would argue that, but if its Michael Jackson its glossed over and ignored by the public. Saville got away with it for years because the victims thought that the authorities would not believe them, The same with Weinstein.
    It doesn't matter if they are a pop star, teacher, MP, Hollywood producer or bin man, a nonce is a nonce.
    I know we are not supposed to converse, but the Jackson thing... well it's worth reading this.

    Like everybody else, I assumed Jacko was a maniac to some degree. But now I am pretty much convinced he was just odd. There's such little evidence of him doing anything, and the evidence that does 'exist' came from extremely suspect places - namely, the testimony of people who were more interested in making money than finding justice of any kind.

    Edit:

    "the original kid who was paid off may be called to give his testimony."

    Direct quote, from a recording, of that boy (Evan Chandler)'s father:

    “And if I go through with this, I win big-time. There’s no way I lose. I’ve checked that inside out. I will get everything I want, and they will be destroyed forever. June will lose [custody of the son]…and Michael’s career will be over.”

    This man killed himself five months after Jackson died.
  • JiMMy 85 said:

    Greenie said:

    clb74 said:

    I'm amazed how different it is for some people.
    How much and how many different people did Michael Jackson pay off.
    If he hadn't of died a few days before coming to England he would of received a heroes welcome by some.

    Its amazing the amount of people who are still not convinced about Jackson, he allegedly paid out as much as 23 million dollars to his victims, in fact last year, according to reports, another fella came forward and a case maybe pending for compensation from Jacksons estate, and one of the original kid who was paid off may be called to give his testimony.
    If a 45 year old man shares his bed with a 12 year old kid its wrong on every level, I dont think anyone would argue that, but if its Michael Jackson its glossed over and ignored by the public. Saville got away with it for years because the victims thought that the authorities would not believe them, The same with Weinstein.
    It doesn't matter if they are a pop star, teacher, MP, Hollywood producer or bin man, a nonce is a nonce.
    I know we are not supposed to converse, but the Jackson thing... well it's worth reading this.

    Like everybody else, I assumed Jacko was a maniac to some degree. But now I am pretty much convinced he was just odd. There's such little evidence of him doing anything, and the evidence that does 'exist' came from extremely suspect places - namely, the testimony of people who were more interested in making money than finding justice of any kind.

    Edit:

    "the original kid who was paid off may be called to give his testimony."

    Direct quote, from a recording, of that boy (Evan Chandler)'s father:

    “And if I go through with this, I win big-time. There’s no way I lose. I’ve checked that inside out. I will get everything I want, and they will be destroyed forever. June will lose [custody of the son]…and Michael’s career will be over.”

    This man killed himself five months after Jackson died.
    Interesting reading, but from the other end of the spectrum (yes I knew its the Sun) see link.

    "Lawyers have written to the MJ estate asking they should make any confidentiality agreements public.
    From the 1980s Jackson struck business and personal deals with kids and the FBI are said to hold papers which detail how the Grammy-winner paid out as much as £23million."

    As I said in my earlier post a 45 year old man does not share his bed with kids, there cannot be anything innocent in that, and if that 45 year old man is just a little 'odd', where does 'odd' become 'nonce', its just an 'innocent' touch away.
    I think most parents would be mortified if they found out that their child was in a grain mans bedroom.
    And why did Jackson not have his day in court to prove your innocence, instead of paying the kids off, just maybe he was guilty???

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/1457111/michael-jacksons-first-sex-abuse-accuser-could-speak-publicly-for-first-time-about-relationship-with-popstar/
  • edited October 2017
    @DA9 in response to your comment about why these women did not report it earlier because it would hurt their career. They were probably worried that nothing would happen if they reported him as was the case when one woman reported him to the NY police in 2015 and they decided not to persue it because there was a lack of evidence.
  • edited October 2017
    cabbles said:

    In all seriousness, unless any of us have ever been victims of sexual abuse, I struggle to see how we can question any of the women coming forward or their reasons for doing so now

    I feel very sorry for his daughters and wife

    Spot on. I bet there are a lot of us that look back on something in our lives and regret not doing something different. Especially in the work place. As the saying goes hindsight is a wonderful thing.
  • 1StevieG said:

    @DA9 in response to your comment about why these women did not report it earlier because it would hurt their career. They were probably worried that nothing would happen if they reported him as was the case when one woman reported him to the NY police in 2015 and they decided not to persue it because there was a lack of evidence.

    Then why were most of Hollywood (including men) so quick to jump on the Trump sexism/abuse train last year? No fan of Trump myself, but nobody on twitter or on pussy hat marches seemed to care about lack of evidence coming out when accusing Trump.
    Self interest, it's like they accepted it as how Weinstein behaves, earnt their fame & fortune, then drew up the drawbridge.
  • DA9 said:

    1StevieG said:

    @DA9 in response to your comment about why these women did not report it earlier because it would hurt their career. They were probably worried that nothing would happen if they reported him as was the case when one woman reported him to the NY police in 2015 and they decided not to persue it because there was a lack of evidence.

    Then why were most of Hollywood (including men) so quick to jump on the Trump sexism/abuse train last year? No fan of Trump myself, but nobody on twitter or on pussy hat marches seemed to care about lack of evidence coming out when accusing Trump.
    Self interest, it's like they accepted it as how Weinstein behaves, earnt their fame & fortune, then drew up the drawbridge.
    Because that wasn't so personal. It might even be that if you can't report what happened to you that you can vicariously condemn someone else as a way of trying to lessen the effects on yourself.
  • DA9 said:

    1StevieG said:

    @DA9 in response to your comment about why these women did not report it earlier because it would hurt their career. They were probably worried that nothing would happen if they reported him as was the case when one woman reported him to the NY police in 2015 and they decided not to persue it because there was a lack of evidence.

    Then why were most of Hollywood (including men) so quick to jump on the Trump sexism/abuse train last year? No fan of Trump myself, but nobody on twitter or on pussy hat marches seemed to care about lack of evidence coming out when accusing Trump.
    Self interest, it's like they accepted it as how Weinstein behaves, earnt their fame & fortune, then drew up the drawbridge.
    I don't think there is any doubt Trump is sexist - routinely talks about women in a disparaging manner. The reason why it was discussed so much was because he was becoming President of the USA - didn't really get that much attention beforehand.

    Being President of the USA is a little more significant than being a film producer.

    You seem unwilling to accept that women could be victims of Weinstein? You don't really seem to understand abuse and seem more concerned with Donald Trump.
  • DA9 said:

    1StevieG said:

    @DA9 in response to your comment about why these women did not report it earlier because it would hurt their career. They were probably worried that nothing would happen if they reported him as was the case when one woman reported him to the NY police in 2015 and they decided not to persue it because there was a lack of evidence.

    Then why were most of Hollywood (including men) so quick to jump on the Trump sexism/abuse train last year? No fan of Trump myself, but nobody on twitter or on pussy hat marches seemed to care about lack of evidence coming out when accusing Trump.
    Self interest, it's like they accepted it as how Weinstein behaves, earnt their fame & fortune, then drew up the drawbridge.
    I don't think there is any doubt Trump is sexist - routinely talks about women in a disparaging manner. The reason why it was discussed so much was because he was becoming President of the USA - didn't really get that much attention beforehand.

    Being President of the USA is a little more significant than being a film producer.

    You seem unwilling to accept that women could be victims of Weinstein? You don't really seem to understand abuse and seem more concerned with Donald Trump.
    Not concerned with Trump, not a fan of Trump, using him as an example of some of Hollywoods double standards.
    Read my first post, said they had all suffered and hope they all get justice, just questioning the timing of some people's statements, and why they had not raised it until after their careers took off under his umbrella.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!