You’re probably right. We’re a magnet for every manner of loon under the Sun.
I’ve always thought of the casting couch as being more of a blatant quid pro quo proposition resulting in actual, you know, intercourse. For a guy as powerful and career making as Weinstein to be asking women to watch him shower or stripping down and asking for massages seems a little…lame. He seems to be more of an exhibitionist than anything else.
Note that word " allegations" .
No proof. Allegations.
You’re absolutely right. Totally lame. Everyone is completely over reacting.
It’s not like he raped them in the locker room.
What?..
Simmer down. The comment about lameness had nothing to do with how people should react. It was on Weinstein’s part. One would think that if he was gonna use his position and influence to misbehave sexually that he would have used it to go all the way, rather than employing the half-way measures he’s alleged to have engaged in. More like a casting massage table than a casting couch.
On a side note, I notice that all the outraged Hollywood indignates who were so incensed about Donald Trump’s pussy grabbing have been curiously quiet. What they don’t realize is that their hypocrisy on issues like this only serves to bolster the conservative observation that the severity of, and harm done, by an offense depends mainly upon the political leanings of the person who commits it.
I suppose it could be seen as a function of asserting power - “I can put you in an awkward, compromising position, and what are you gonna do about it?” And also a way for the person to convince himself what he’s doing is not THAT bad.
I suppose there are still folks around who do the full-service casting couch schtick and get away with it. Y’know, traditionalists…
I’ve seen plenty of criticism from “Hollywood indignates”. I haven’t gone and checked the response of every last liberal in Hollywood (that would take weeks!), but I’ve seen many open criticisms of this type of behavior, especially from women in entertainment.
I wonder what Troy Duffy would say about this…
I’ve seen almost exclusively criticism.
…but whatever helps his narrative…
I don’t see anyone here – or anywhere else – being “curiously quiet” about this. No one here is defending Weinstein’s behavior. It’s certainly true and understandable that this would have been even bigger news if instead of being a movie producer in private life Weinstein had been running for some public office of some significance, like, I dunno, mayor of Kalamazoo, or President of the United States or something. But he’s not.
As for severity and harm done by such offenses, that has to include the moral tone that it sets. So the offender’s public stature matters a lot, like the difference between being, say, a movie producer in private life and being something like, I dunno, President of the United States or something.
Oh, you mean like Bill Clinton?
I don’t see it as the same. No one expected kids to be molested by priests and that if something like that did happen that the church itself would cover it up and play a shell game. A huge betrayal of trust on top of the crimes themselves.
To act surprised that young hopefuls in Hollywood were being sexually used/abused by the system is naive. Figure a good percentage of stage mothers knew what the risks were and put their kids at risk in pursuit of stardom and/or the huge payday.
Clinton wasn’t a sexual predator, and that was never the issue. Trump was, and that was the central issue. Clinton didn’t get elected despite such allegations, because there weren’t any. Trump got elected despite video proof of them. If you’re trying to make some point about how the two sides judge their politicians, I can’t help you if you can’t see this blatant difference.
My point in any case is that Harvey Weinstein is far less important to the national psyche than the current occupant of the most important leadership position in the nation. And his actions are being condemned, as they should be.
…and he’s been fired.
…and there’s a kerfuffle about how comedy news shows, including SNL, have not included this on their joke agenda. Fodder for conservative media to point out the show’s’ biases.
It’s probably worse in terms of who casual the society is towards child abuse. It’s true that there’s no trust there though, and there shouldn’t be. Woody Allen and Roman Polanski are still respected figures in that town. If you let your kid work there you know what you are subjecting them to. You can count on your fingers the number of child actors who don’t end up heavy drug users.
Might have been a little late (and/or insufficiently corroborated as at writing time - even SNL lawyers have standards) for SNL this past Saturday. I’m wondering if John Oliver will mention it though.
He did:
Clinton has been accused of rape, exposing himself, and forcing himself on women. If you believe the accusations then he definitely is a sexual predator.
Not to mention the ‘power imbalance’ re Monica Lewinsky that everyone around here would be on about were Clinton a Pubbie/conservative.
Once again the idea is created that the offense and its alleged harm isn’t really the problem; rather, it’s the political leanings of the offendee. Drug and rape 13-year-old girls (Polanski) or cheat on your wife and stick cigars up a star-struck intern (Clinton), and Hollywood is quiet or outright supportive. Claim that you can grab women over their clothes while they allow you get away with it, and the din from Hollywood is deafening.
Politics. It’s nothing but politics.