The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

"Moral Rot and Hypocrisy Exposed" Options
Hope123
Posted: Saturday, October 28, 2017 12:27:37 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 7,686
Neurons: 44,394
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
"Moral rot and hypocrisy of Liberal Left Hollywood is being exposed." I saw this phrase in a recent thread.

This exposure of "moral rot and hypocrisy" has been great news for women and children these days. And I hope for any men who are being exploited as well.

The Weinstein Effect - photos of ten powerful men who lost jobs

But it is not just Hollywood. Many Business Boardrooms, Media such as the Politically Extreme Right Fox News' list, Halperin of Liberal media, politicians belonging to all parties in any country (even Geo H W Bush apologized for patting women's rears) the church, sports, medicine, the military - gee, I guess to keep the list as short as possible I should just say it is just about anywhere when powerful men feel entitled to intimidate, harass, even rape women, children, and less powerful men under their power. And it IS about power - not sex.

Moral Outrage

The following link has photos of the women that Sarah Huckabee said today must be liars because Trump, nicknamed Teflon Don because, although he admitted it to Billy Bush, even the Weinstein Effect did not stick to him, said so, and we know he always tells the truth. Well, he did say himself in his book that he is a salesman who tells the “truth with hyperbole". At least he was not hypocritical - he gave candid interviews about how he views women over the years (a good piece of ass, or similar phrase) and now just tweets it out there and is either applauded or excused. He promised to sue these women - I have heard no news of this happening.

Photos of women who accused Trump

Make no mistake - locker room talk is not okay in today's world. Billy Bush lost his job over it, while Trump became president. Hit and Run Men targeting female reporters who are broadcasting publicly have lost their jobs when identified.

Make no mistake - today the atmosphere is that women are no longer going to accept harassment in the workplace or anywhere else. The times they are a-changing and they are going forward, not back to the good old days that never were that good, for women anyhow. The church is finally being held accountable for the harm they did to children. Predators are being exposed.

And I'm glad it is finally happening. My generation often accepted having their "rears patted", by "dirty old men". Young women are saying that is no longer acceptable. Our culture is adopting other values. Go young women!


Comments?



A man must be excessively stupid, as well as uncharitable, who believes there is no virtue but on his own side. Addison
Andrew Schultz
Posted: Saturday, October 28, 2017 1:57:01 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/7/2015
Posts: 413
Neurons: 1,731,566
Location: Chicago, Illinois, United States
People are getting better, but not good enough. And yes, it's not just about Hollywood. But Hollywood is most convenient to kick around. People can be jealous of Hollywood's power and then turn around and say, well, I deserve a little for myself.

I know as a teen I heard a lot of people a year or two ahead of me do this sort of thing in locker room or during "guy talk" (dirty jokes, cajoling women) and they said, well, it was all about getting ahead and taking risks and showing initiative.

And of course it wasn't. It was about establishing power. And I suspect many people saw something wrong and coulnd't put their finger on it, or they were outnumbered, and they didn't come out and say it. Part of this may just be 16 year olds being jerks, but all the same, we can see our way to not being huge jerks, or at least cutting down on the really bad stuff.

I remember seeing a sexual harassment video for training at work. And maybe we laughed about how cheesy it was. But the alternatives are worse.

I suppose I'm fortunate. All I've had to do is email someone who, after leading a 30 minute conversation near my cubicle, started breaking into the colorful jokes, and I asked if he should stop sooner rather than later. It's worse for a lot of women.

And I suppose for a lot of men, we have that choice between saying "well I'll be moderate and I won't be as bad as the guys with the REALLY dirty jokes" or doing the right thing and saying, enough. Or the choice between saying, I'd like to be a better person than I was vs., well, nobody's said anything YET, and it's not illegal...

I'm only speaking as a male. I remember when a "controversial" teacher would pat me on the shoulder (not a very private part) and tell me not to screw up--I think he was upset I didn't join his SuperQuest science project team, when I thought he only asked me to to be polite, and he'd rather have someone else.

It was scary when he was taller than me, but since I was in high school and growing, I got taller than him, and it was still intimidating. Or a teacher from 8th grade would call me some saccharine name I didn't enjoy, and I asked if she could stop, and she said "oh come on..."

None of this is life shattering. But it did offer me a choice: I could pass along the name calling or back slapping to someone else, or I could sympathize with people who've had much worse and maybe be able to say "enough" if I saw it happening. I've been able to do that a few times in public situations (like on a bus,) and it usually makes people back off. Other times I've thought something seemed really wrong but hesitated to speak up because I'd look stupid if I were wrong. Or I thought of the right thing to say a moment late (e.g. "You must know each other really well to be able to say that. I wouldn't say that to a woman. I don't know if I'd like someone telling me that if I were a woman.")

There are a lot of issues here. I think norms need to change. Maybe even the sexual harassment videos can change--to say, well, it means something if another guy says cool down, that you're not impressing anyone. And I think simple phrases like "come on, enough, it's bugging me, it's probably bugging others even more" can be effective.

Anyway, those are my thoughts, looking back on teachers who were merely obnoxious, remembering people saying "Oh deal with it, it wasn't that bad," and realizing that being given the opportunity to write a post like this helps me deal with it.

I suppose also there are people who say this has potential for abuse, that women can be unfair back, and two wrongs don't make a right. And thus we need to be careful here. And they are right. And the argument can be seductive to a lot of guys. But I think we have safe and sensible ways to stop the worst of the nastiness, and if these first steps cause someone who tells a risque joke to lash out, maybe they've shown how nasty they really can be. Or--the guy who worries two wrongs don't make a right suddenly goes all "yeah, but..." in the next flame war he gets into.

I can't help but think back to the example of Milo Yiannopoulos getting his Twitter account revoked for organizing the harassment of Leslie Jones, here, in the name of free speech. (Free speech is allowed. But you can't escape the consequences.) I hope this isn't veering towards politics too much, but I learned a lot from seeing people refute the arguments he and his followers made, which seemed reasonable until they started self-contradicting grossly.

I know people can reform. I don't know if you've heard of Neil Strauss, who wrote the horrible pick-up artist manifesto The Game, but he wrote another book which at least partially redeemed himself. It didn't actually make me like him. But it requires a lot of introspection to change, without basic guidelines and norms, and I'm not sure if we have enough yet.

100th person on TFD to 1 million neurons.
thar
Posted: Saturday, October 28, 2017 5:43:51 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/8/2010
Posts: 17,007
Neurons: 68,660
First, can I say I agree with you -any abuse of power from the patronising to the sexually aggressive is wrong, and it is good for people to expose it and keep fighting. I think many have got complacent in that 'women have got rights now, so what are they complaining about'.

But, to play devil's advocate on one particular point - the Weinstein/Hollywood part of it.

A corrupt system only works if everyone colludes in the corruption. These actresses were not powerless. They were not trafficked women. They were not street hookers with no choice but to put up with what was done to them. They kept quiet because the system worked for them just as much as the abusers. There were choices - tell the casting couch gropers to fuck off. Say they will go work in a shop rather than suffer abuse for a part or a place at the table. If enough people had done that, Weinstein and his ilk would never have been in a position to get anything done. For a single episode of abuse, I can believe shock and shame keep you silent. But for institutional abuse, it requires other people to make the decision that it is worth it for their own purposes.

Now of course I am not letting the abusers off the hook or blaming the victims for the abuse - but I do think that it is a bit much for people to come forward now and say 'this happened to me'. Where were you when it was happening to other people? Not telling everyone about it - no, happily taking the part and trying to put it behind you.

I am aware this may be an unpopular viewpoint but I feel strongly that everyone had a part to play here. These things only stop if people act to stop them. Some people are powerless. Others are not. They say 'I had no choice, I just had to accept that is the way things were done'. I say that is not an excuse, either. There were things you could have done, and you made a decision not to. The awful crime is abuse of power. But the lesser one is not standing up to it when you have the power to do so, if not for yourself, then for others.
Ravindra
Posted: Saturday, October 28, 2017 7:14:10 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2009
Posts: 684
Neurons: 47,136
Location: Bangalore, Karnataka, India
I strongly subscribe to Thar's contentions.

It takes two to tango.



Ravindra
almo 1
Posted: Saturday, October 28, 2017 10:35:27 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/16/2016
Posts: 1,253
Neurons: 5,715
Location: Fussa, Tokyo, Japan




The police on Friday sent to prosecutors the case of a former lawmaker who made headlines earlier this year for verbal abuse, on suspicion of assaulting and injuring her former secretary.

Former House of Representatives member Mayuko Toyota, 43, left the ruling Liberal Democratic Party in the wake of the abuse scandal and lost her Diet seat in Sunday’s general election after running as an independent.

She drew attention after the weekly magazine Shukan Shincho claimed that Toyota, who was sitting in the back seat of a car driven by her then secretary, a man in his 50s, yelled at and struck him several times on the head and face last May.

Shukan Shincho uploaded an audio file of the incident, claimed to have been recorded by the secretary, in which a woman can be heard hurling insults such as “baldy” and “You should die.”

At a news conference in September, Toyota apologized for verbally abusing the secretary but denied assaulting him, saying, “I have never inflicted serious injury on him by being violent.”

*********

A partial transcript of the audio file, purportedly a conversation between House of Representatives member Mayuko Toyota and a former secretary.

Toyota: You baldy!
Secretary: I am sorry. It was about contacting XX (a person's name).
Toyota: It's wrong!
[thud]
Secretary: I am sorry.
Toyota: It's wrong!
[thud]
Secretary: I am sorry, but I'm driving.
Toyota: It's wrong!

(omitting conversation in between)

Secretary: I am sorry, but please don't hit me. I am sorry.
Toyota: How hard have you been hitting my heart?
Secretary: Well ...
Toyota: How hard have you been hitting my heart?
Secretary: Yes, that pain, I know.
Toyota: No you don't understand!
Secretary: Please don't hit me. I'm sorry.
Toyota: How hard have you been hitting my heart?
Secretary: Yes.
Toyota: Don't do anything to bring my reputation down any further.
Secretary: Yes.


https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/10/27/national/crime-legal/ex-lawmaker-toyotas-secretary-assault-case-handed-prosecutors

thar
Posted: Saturday, October 28, 2017 10:42:31 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/8/2010
Posts: 17,007
Neurons: 68,660
Ravindra wrote:
I strongly subscribe to Thar's contentions.

It takes two to tango.



Well, I wouldn't put it that way. More along the lines of

'All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good people do nothing.'

(with deliberate change from 'men' to 'people', given the overarching topic. ) And it was and is people, a whole group of them, 'doing nothing' to stop it.
Hope123
Posted: Saturday, October 28, 2017 12:39:06 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 7,686
Neurons: 44,394
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Thanks, Almo for the example. Yes, it happens to and by both genders and is not acceptable in any case.

Andrew, you made many excellent points and observations about those little incidents that happen and ten minutes later you wish you'd acted differently or said something better but didn't in the moment and then it's too late. All we can do, I guess, is to be more wary and prepared, but still you'll wish you'd handled it differently. But this is how things change, by these little recognitions and efforts to do better every next time. I know I have lost acquaintances because I told them to stop sending me anti-Muslim, racial, and even blonde jokes emails. No loss.






A man must be excessively stupid, as well as uncharitable, who believes there is no virtue but on his own side. Addison
Hope123
Posted: Saturday, October 28, 2017 1:05:52 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 7,686
Neurons: 44,394
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Thar, if these women - actually some girls in their teens - slept with him to advance their careers, then I agree they had a choice. I don't know if that was the case with Weinstein. It did happen in many industries and those girls/women made a choice. I didn't read all the Weinstein stories on this link. But here are some of their stories of how they were tricked, even just opened their door to find him there and fought him off, as huge as he was.

Situations of Accusers

I agree whole-heartedly with your second point about not stopping it was wrong, that it was institutional abuse and that is why those men and women with some power who knew but did nothing, not even warn the girls, have to know they can no longer do that.

But there are several factors to consider.

A lot of these were young girls. And they WERE powerless against his power in the industry. Since it happens in every industry changing your goals won't help. Go wait on tables instead of becoming an actress? And get your bum patted there as you walk away with a tray? Be a nurse - even more abuse and outright assault.

We have to take the times into consideration. I have mentioned before that I know when my uncle patted our teenaged bums, my cousins and I just learned to never expose them to him - always walk away backwards. We laughed and called him a dirty old man but we loved him for all his other good qualities. It was acceptable for trash talk and patting bums then, but no longer. I have no idea how I would have reacted other than to try to get away from Weinstein. I know now how I would react afterwards but not what as a young girl I'd have done. Probably what they did. I know that nowadays I would make a big scene in the restaurant when a man touched my thigh and then smirked as we sat at a barstool. And all I did then was jump off the stool, tell my husband, and move to the other side of our two year-old son. We didn't want to make a scene in front of him.

Going on your own can cause you to be blackballed in any industry. It takes a crowd to stand up to this. McGowan says she was slut shamed.

Secondly, the attitude then was - this is how it is done. And that is hard to change and really is an excuse as I pointed out in my personal examples. The attitude now because of some brave women willing to stick out their necks is changing. As one gets more mature, one is able to see things and act differently. I see nothing wrong with them coming forward now.

The LA Times Editorial, after listing many men recently publicly accused in many industries, says we've only begun to recognize the scope of the problem - "The message is being sent: that women should feel comfortable reporting unacceptable behaviour and there will be consequences for the perpetrators...think hard about what is and isn't sexual harassment, re-examine the rules that govern it - and then make sure that they are enforced."

Let's not let this outrage stop so that 20 years from now it is still happening.
Paraphrased from Times editorial. I won't be around in 20 years, but to help those who will is why I started this thread to do one little bit.

A man must be excessively stupid, as well as uncharitable, who believes there is no virtue but on his own side. Addison
Hope123
Posted: Saturday, October 28, 2017 1:18:09 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 7,686
Neurons: 44,394
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
McGowan says what happens is not just loss of work but destruction of your character if you come forward. She claims she was raped by Weinstein. He denies. She says sexual harassment is not isolated to Hollywood.

80 plus percent of those in power in Hollywood are male. We need more women in power everywhere.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/27/entertainment/rose-mcgowan-womens-convention/index.html

A man must be excessively stupid, as well as uncharitable, who believes there is no virtue but on his own side. Addison
Hope123
Posted: Saturday, October 28, 2017 7:50:00 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 7,686
Neurons: 44,394
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Here's a positive take on Hollywood and making changes so more women can become directors. It is not about sexual misconduct, but more about sexism. I read the transcript as it takes less time than a video. This TED Talk was in my email today.

TED Talk

She says this is why movies are important, and why who directs them and is in them is important too.

"Well, let me put it to you this way: the year "Jaws" came out, Americans suddenly started listing "sharks" among their top 10 major fears.

In 1995, BMW paid the James Bond franchise three million dollars to have James Bond switch from driving an Aston Martin to a BMW Z3. That one move caused so many people to go out and buy that car, that BMW made 240 million dollars in pre-sales alone.

The year that "Brave" and "Hunger Games" came out, female participation in archery went up 105 percent.

In fact, studies show that the movies you watch don't just affect your hobbies, they affect your career choices, your emotions, your sense of identity, your relationships, your mental health -- even your marital status.

So now, consider this: if you have watched mostly American movies in your lifetime, 95 percent of all the films you have ever seen were directed by men. Somewhere between 80 and 90 percent of all of the leading characters that you have ever seen were men. And even if we just talk about the last five years, 55 percent of the time that you have seen a woman in a movie, she was naked or scantily clad. That affects you. That affects all of us. We actually can't even imagine how much it affects us, because this is all we've ever had. Stories -- and movies are just modern stories -- are not frivolous. They're actually the mechanism through which we process our experience of being alive. They're the way that we understand the world and our place in it."


A man must be excessively stupid, as well as uncharitable, who believes there is no virtue but on his own side. Addison
almo 1
Posted: Saturday, October 28, 2017 8:36:10 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/16/2016
Posts: 1,253
Neurons: 5,715
Location: Fussa, Tokyo, Japan





The casting couch, casting-couch syndrome, or casting-couch mentality is the demanding of sexual favors by an employer or person in a position of power and authority, from an apprentice employee, or subordinate to a superior in return for entry into an occupation, or for other career advancement within an organization. The term casting couch originated in the motion picture industry, with specific reference to couches in offices that could be used for sexual activity between casting directors or film producers and aspiring actors.[1]


It is not to be confused with the adult entertainment industry where such actions may be a prerequisite, although many pornographic films and pornographic websites play on the casting couch theme and allude to similarities one may find in casting couch scenarios in the film industry.


The legend of the Hollywood casting couch coincided with the rise of the studio system in the 1910s. Many moguls were rumoured to have been enthusiastic practitioners and it has been claimed that many actresses attempted, with varying degrees of success, to attain stardom via this route.[2][3][4]

In her memoir Past Imperfect: An Autobiography (1978), actress Joan Collins described her experience of the casting-couch behaviour of two 20th Century Fox execs Buddy Adler and Spyros Skouras in the 1950s.

Since 1988, Theresa Russell has alleged in multiple interviews that she was propositioned by legendary producer Sam Spiegel during her first casting session for The Last Tycoon.[5][6] According to his biographer, Spiegel had previously made liberal use of the casting couch during the making of The Chase (1966).[7]

In her memoir Child Star (1988), actress Shirley Temple claimed that producer Arthur Freed exposed himself to her in 1940 when she was 12.

In a 1996 interview, actor Woody Harrelson declared "every [acting] business I ever entered into in New York seemed to have a casting couch ... I've seen so many people sleep with people they loathe in order to further their ambition."[9]

In her 2005 autobiography, actress Goldie Hawn stated that cartoonist Al Capp sexually propositioned her on a casting couch and exposed himself to her when she was nineteen years old. When she refused his advances, Capp became angry and told her that she was "never gonna make anything in your life" and that she should "go and marry a Jewish dentist. You'll never get anywhere in this business."[14][15]

At a 2005 class reunion, producer Chris Hanley told his former classmates that "almost every leading actress in all of [his] 24 films has slept with a director or producer or a leading actor to get the part that launched her career".[16]

In her autobiography Ich habe ja gewusst, dass ich fliegen kann (2006), Austrian actress Senta Berger claimed that in a New York hotel suite in 1965 producer Darryl F. Zanuck exposed himself to her beneath his silk dressing gown and offered to forgive her for the atrocities of the Nazis if she slept with him.

David Stenn's documentary Girl 27 (2007) explored the political power of movie studios in 1930s Hollywood, as well as public attitudes toward sexual assault that discouraged victims from coming forward.

In a 2009 interview, actor Mickey Rourke declared: "There's definitely something called a casting couch... if you take a girl from the Midwest with a pretty face and instead of inviting them in for an audition in the morning, the directors invite them for dinner at night? ... I can recall with certain women, we'd go out, I'd park the car on Sunset and by the time I'd got to the curb there'd be three or four producers handing them cards. ... There's ways you get a job and ways you get a job."[23]

In April 2010, actor Ryan Phillippe admitted on the Howard Stern Show that he had had to flee a "creepy" casting-couch session when he was 18 or 19.[24]

In a 2010 interview with Access Hollywood, actress Lisa Rinna said a producer had asked her for "a quickie" when she was a 24-year-old candidate for a role on a prominent television series.[25] At the same interview, Rinna's husband Harry Hamlin claimed that a female casting director attempted to seduce him in the late 1970s when he was 27.[26][27]

In the November 2012 issue of Elle, Susan Sarandon spoke of a "really disgusting" casting-couch experience in New York City in the late 1960s or early 1970s. "I just went into a room and a guy practically threw me on the desk. It was my early days in New York and it was really disgusting. It wasn't like I gave it a second thought. It was so badly done."[31][32]

Also in October 2016, Rose McGowan tweeted that she had been raped by a studio head who then bought the distribution rights to one of her films. She was then shamed while her rapist was adulated despite the rape being an open secret in Hollywood.[37] A year later, the studio head McGowan accused was revealed to have been Harvey Weinstein.

On 1 November 2016, defence lawyers for Bill Cosby, who has been accused of sexual assault by over 60 women, wrote that, "Even if proven (and it could not be), the age-old 'casting couch' is not unique to Mr. Cosby, and thus not a 'signature' nor a basis for the admissibility of these witnesses' stories, let alone a conviction."[38]

In March 2017, actress Jane Fonda claimed: “I’ve been fired because I wouldn’t sleep with my boss.”[39]



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casting_couch




Romany
Posted: Monday, October 30, 2017 8:33:38 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/14/2009
Posts: 13,989
Neurons: 43,045
Location: Brighton, England, United Kingdom

Thar wrote " ... but I do think that it is a bit much for people to come forward now and say 'this happened to me'. Where were you when it was happening to other people?"

Thankfully (for it shows you're a good man ) you don't fully understand what "institutionalised" sexual harassment means. We once all worked in Companies, organisations, institutions, which were uniformly owned, run, and controlled by men - and in America men still hold the reigns of power - now leading all the way up to the President. Who would one notify? The perpetrator's Boss? The General Manager? What if he IS the General Manager? The more fuss you make and the higher up you go, the more power is ranged against you.

And it doesn't stop with not just getting a part in a movie. If one perseveres for justice the Boys Club moves in and does whatever it can to get rid of you - blacken your name, your reputation, your sexuality, your work, your character. In a world where money is the only value most people adhere to, there is no recourse.

I fully understand your viewpoint: but I understand fully why those particular women didn't come forward. It's because its a given; its known; its a fact of life; - if you're a woman then to some men you will never be valued any higher than that famous "piece of meat" so often mentioned. In some men's eyes you're just a walking vagina, devoid of thought, feeling, humanity. We live our lives, from childhood, absorbing this fact. And, tragically some grow up feeling they have no worth beyond their genitals.

Americas gender wars are where the rest of the West was 40years ago. "Locker room talk" is still a thing. "Dirty jokes" - memes about transgressive women, still do the rounds. The leader of the country itself thinks his assaults on women are 'normal'.

I'm not, for one second, trying to maintain that no other Western country houses misogynists. But its no longer institutionalised. Men no longer wear two faces: one which they only show to men and the other they only show to women. Schools are including women's history in their lessons. Females in politics, education, science, research, medicine are no less respected than their male counterparts. Dumb blond jokes are dead. And men themselves have stepped up to the plate.

But Hollywood? It goes on pushing out movies of violence, gender stereotypes, ever-after happiness with the 'right' person; while the other, dark, USA film industry produces 55% of the entire worlds pornography.

THATS why they didn't come forward.
Hope123
Posted: Monday, October 30, 2017 10:17:36 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 7,686
Neurons: 44,394
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
So what are the 94% of men who do not act like the 6% who are sociopaths, and are horrified by those actions, supposed to do?

This is an interesting blog with a discussion from one of the 94% about the "metoo" movement.

And would the 94% of men in Hollywood (or any workplace) who tried to speak up about Weinstein have been in the same boat as the women when the top brass wanted him there because he was making money hand over fist for them? I think they would be.

http://www.evanmarckatz.com/blog/understanding-men/why-men-arent-speaking-up-about-the-metoo-movement/


"This isn’t an easy conversation, but if you want men to actively fight sexual harassment, try not to attack the ones who are openly wrestling with our role in the problem. Rest assured we are equally horrified but don’t know how to express our support and create positive change.


12 MILLION women have already said #MeToo. Please share your thoughts on how men can best participate in the #MeToo movement."

Edited to add - maybe men don't have to speak out publicly. Maybe just refuse to laugh at dirty jokes that denigrate women or turn away from locker room talk. And continue to teach their sons to respect women - really to respect all people. Teach their girls how to deal with schoolyard bullies, telling them they are strong. I suspect this is how most men already react nowadays. And many already did it before. I have many examples in my own life of such men.

Thoughts?

A man must be excessively stupid, as well as uncharitable, who believes there is no virtue but on his own side. Addison
Romany
Posted: Monday, October 30, 2017 9:57:18 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/14/2009
Posts: 13,989
Neurons: 43,045
Location: Brighton, England, United Kingdom

Hope, yeah.

I think it's a generational thing to a large extent, too. While many of the elder generation still hold fast to learned prejudices; we're two generations in to a different world now. Men taking Paternity Leave; men and women speaking more openly about all subjects so that none is "hidden" or assumed by the other; schools no longer pit The Girls against The Boys; the parents of today lay great emphasis on equalities,and equal opportunities: they've certainly done better in that department than many of us could. Not from ineptitude but because the whole of society had different values then.

I find modern young men much more likeable on the whole than those in my teen years and early twenties. And some of their fathers were worse than they were!

Though, come to think of it, it's probably that same, shrinking cadre of guys who were the utter pigs of bygone days who are now the Trumps and the Weinsteins (sp?).
almo 1
Posted: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 12:24:48 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/16/2016
Posts: 1,253
Neurons: 5,715
Location: Fussa, Tokyo, Japan
Romany wrote:

Hope, yeah.
...
...

(sp?).








Just because you think that way,

it does not justify saying wanker against POTUS in a public place

even if you wear nose rings.



Drag0nspeaker
Posted: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 1:05:06 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/12/2011
Posts: 28,849
Neurons: 165,025
Location: Livingston, Scotland, United Kingdom
Just in case anyone decides to take Almo's inferences rather than read through the spurious links.

There is nowhere in any of those threads where anyone calls Donald Trump - or any earlier president - a wanker.
This is simply part of Almo's obsession with Romany's fashion ideas.


Wyrd bið ful aræd - bull!
Hope123
Posted: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 11:31:17 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 7,686
Neurons: 44,394
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Thanks, Drago. As explained, the term is used to mean different things in different countries. To some it means jerk. To others it is still a term for onanism and context is key. I can think of more derogatory words to describe POTUS. We may even be able to add a few in the future - time will tell.


And yes, Almo. "Yeah" is a perfectly spelled word for someone whose first language is English.

Your post does not even add to the topic of the thread.



Your posts are often a good example of the topic of this Weinstein thread.



A man must be excessively stupid, as well as uncharitable, who believes there is no virtue but on his own side. Addison
Hope123
Posted: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 11:40:32 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 7,686
Neurons: 44,394
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Kevin Spacey's show was cancelled after his story in the news. A young man says he will release names of those in the business who targeted young boys and men, and a decent man wrote an article in our paper today where he came clean and apologized about how he used to think that women said, "No" as part of the flirting game.

Seems to be a cascade has started to expose sexual harassment in all walks of life for all genders. 😀 This is good news for my grandchildren and their children - if we don't let the topic get rolled under the rug again.

A man must be excessively stupid, as well as uncharitable, who believes there is no virtue but on his own side. Addison
almo 1
Posted: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 12:15:33 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/16/2016
Posts: 1,253
Neurons: 5,715
Location: Fussa, Tokyo, Japan
Hope123 wrote:

And yes, Almo. "Yeah" is a perfectly spelled word for someone whose first language is English.








??

"(sp?)" is written by Romany.










almo 1
Posted: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 12:56:38 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/16/2016
Posts: 1,253
Neurons: 5,715
Location: Fussa, Tokyo, Japan
Hope123 wrote:

Your post does not even add to the topic of the thread.










Just dave argo said at the bottom of this thread,

it is for information and further thought.




Hope123
Posted: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 1:44:26 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 7,686
Neurons: 44,394
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
almo 1 wrote:
Hope123 wrote:

And yes, Almo. "Yeah" is a perfectly spelled word for someone whose first language is English.



??

"(sp?)" is written by Romany.





I know. But you questioned it.

A man must be excessively stupid, as well as uncharitable, who believes there is no virtue but on his own side. Addison
almo 1
Posted: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 2:11:52 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/16/2016
Posts: 1,253
Neurons: 5,715
Location: Fussa, Tokyo, Japan
Hope123 wrote:
almo 1 wrote:
Hope123 wrote:

And yes, Almo. "Yeah" is a perfectly spelled word for someone whose first language is English.



??

"(sp?)" is written by Romany.





I know. But you questioned it.












Huh?

I just stated:

""Just because you think that way,

it does not justify saying wanker against POTUS in a public place

even if you wear nose rings.""



Hope123
Posted: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 5:41:30 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 7,686
Neurons: 44,394
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
You are right, Almo. I did not look again at the original, just at the way you copied and spaced. I apologize.


::::

Not good news from France re this topic:


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/31/trolls-force-shutdown-of-french-anti-harassment-hotline



A man must be excessively stupid, as well as uncharitable, who believes there is no virtue but on his own side. Addison
Andrew Schultz
Posted: Sunday, November 5, 2017 6:07:39 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/7/2015
Posts: 413
Neurons: 1,731,566
Location: Chicago, Illinois, United States
Wow! There are good comments here despite, err, potential derailment. And I think that's instructive. Because a lot of time, when people speak up, there isn't just the character assassination but amplifying marginally relevant parts of the person's argument. In other words, people argue just to win or exhaust the other person.

This is something people who'd like to stand up for others "should" be able to deal with, but we're people and not machines, and we wear down. It's tough to know how, or how much, to address snarky comments.

This is a common tactic: amplify someone else's mistakes, minimize your own or say "WELL I'M NOT PERFECT." And the thing is, it works on people who actually want to do and be better.

Re: trolling and anti-harrassment. One thing I noticed about these sorts of trolls--they'll make some sort of joke to get their foot in the door, and then they'll say "but you laughed at the first joke!" I remember this sort of thing from Boy Scouts, from people younger than me telling the jokes actually. That can make it harder to tell someone "enough" later, and trolls know this. It's tough to turn the conversation around on them and say, you crossed a line.

For instance, there was a poll of which country Justin Bieber should have a concert in. 4chan flooded it with votes for North Korea. Which is sort of funny, in isolation. Because, of course, Bieber would not go to North Korea. But then they use the same logic to excuse sexist jokes or even "Watch it, I doxxed you, I know where you live." They can say, hey, relax, we aren't going to do anything criminal, because OBVIOUSLY!

The story is here, and while the headline may seem like a very clever practical joke, 4chan's acts go beyond just silly poll rigging: http://www.bbc.com/news/10506482

This is having your online cake and eating it too, and it can effectively paralyze people.

100th person on TFD to 1 million neurons.
Lotje1000
Posted: Monday, November 6, 2017 2:36:20 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 11/3/2014
Posts: 929
Neurons: 438,640
Location: Gent, Flanders, Belgium
Interesting addition, Andrew. It reminds me of the concept of consent. People often think that consent, once given, is final, but forget that people can also withdraw consent. So even if, for instance, your date gives consent for you two to sleep together, they might later change their minds and that's fine. This concept is strangely difficult for people to get into their heads. "You consented before, so what I'm doing isn't wrong!" It's the same for having laughed at someone's bad joke. That doesn't mean that you now have to laugh at their next sexist/racist joke. But it often does feel like you should.
Lotje1000
Posted: Thursday, November 9, 2017 4:22:52 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 11/3/2014
Posts: 929
Neurons: 438,640
Location: Gent, Flanders, Belgium
thar wrote:
A corrupt system only works if everyone colludes in the corruption. These actresses were not powerless. They were not trafficked women. They were not street hookers with no choice but to put up with what was done to them. They kept quiet because the system worked for them just as much as the abusers. There were choices - tell the casting couch gropers to fuck off. Say they will go work in a shop rather than suffer abuse for a part or a place at the table. If enough people had done that, Weinstein and his ilk would never have been in a position to get anything done. For a single episode of abuse, I can believe shock and shame keep you silent. But for institutional abuse, it requires other people to make the decision that it is worth it for their own purposes.

Now of course I am not letting the abusers off the hook or blaming the victims for the abuse - but I do think that it is a bit much for people to come forward now and say 'this happened to me'. Where were you when it was happening to other people? Not telling everyone about it - no, happily taking the part and trying to put it behind you.


I've been mulling over what you said here for a while, trying to find out why it bothers me so much. I think it is because it's easy to view this in hindsight, and difficult to view it from the position of the assaulted women in question.

For instance, you say "for institutional abuse, it requires other people to make the decision" and later "I do think that it is a bit much for people to come forward now". You assume the victims knew this was institutional. They come forward now because there is strength in numbers, because they feel supported and because, possibly, they realise it wasn't just them. In a situation where you're looking back on it and finding out how many people are involved, it's easy to piece things together. You've got the support of society and its moral outrage. That is not the case for the women when they were in these situations. There was no society backing them up with moral outrage. There was a guy with power and even, at times, an assistant who backed him up.

When you are alone in a room with a man who makes an unsavoury suggestion, your first reaction is shock. (Why would he do that? Maybe I didn't hear him right because this sounds completely absurd.) We try to reason our way through a scenario like this, to place it so we can let go. Maybe we yell back and storm out, maybe not.

When you're standing in a room with who has a reputation (= social backing), lots of money and even an assistant with him who supports him(!) when he says the things he does, the instinct is strong to question yourself in the face of such bald-faced suggestions (why would they say it with such certainty if it wasn't true or normal in this industry? Could it be that I'm wrong to think this is morally wrong? Am I a prude? Is this just how it's done?).

Add to that that he rarely outright made the "you get the role if you sleep with me" offer. Instead, he kept talking to soothe people and taking baby steps. "Have dinner with me." then "Come upstairs to talk to me.", then "Do you mind if I go take a shower before we talk?". He slowly starts to push common boundaries until he starts pushing moral boundaries. That's how abusers get people in the first place. That is why people have as a first reaction "But you talked to him." or "But you were smiling at him." Because those small steps will be used against you. You can bet the first question is going to be "But why did you go upstairs to his room?". As if that one moment of consent implies the women gave consent to be approached with lecherous propositions?

There is more to being powerless than being a trafficked woman or a street hooker. It's about people pushing your boundaries until you can't say no or you'd be to blame. He doesn't have to resort to threats (though I just read in the news he had a small army of people investigating these women and trying to make sure they never spoke to the press). Abusers know that they can't watch their victims 24/7. It's about getting victims in such a mindset that they feel they can't do anything, because they question themselves or because they know society will question them. Now that Weinstein has been exposed, he's taken down a peg and he's not quite as powerful and untouchable as he seemed in that hotel room.

It's easy to say now "well, how 'bout you just said "fuck him", given up your job and livelihood". I'm sure some did. And I can bet you that some of those women would end up questioning whether they did the right thing and living with the knowledge that this guy believed he could use them as their personal plaything. And, by the way, that he'll remain untouchable because who's going to believe them now? They lost their job so they're obviously just trying to get back at him for it.

That is why so few people talk about this openly and most only start when someone else has stepped forward first. This is basic human nature. This is about creating bonds of trust. Knowing you can talk to people and expect them to behave by moral and societal rules, that they'll listen to you, that they'll take you seriously.

I agree with you, however, that for corruption to continue, everyone has to play along. But the people who can make a difference are the people in power, like Weinstein himself, like his assistants, like his friends. These victims alone couldn't have solved it until now when they banded together and forced people to look at them. And even when they do that, so many people still go "ah well you just want your name in the papers, don't you?". Just look at how TheParser responds to these women to see what they're battling on a daily basis until they've internalized this way of thinking and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS
Forum Terms and Guidelines. Copyright © 2008-2018 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.