Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone fame.
Also…what’s the latest on George Takei? I don’t see anything since the original accusations weeks ago.
Murdoch was interviewed about harrassment at FoxNews and said the incidents were “isolated … largely political because we’re conservative (although liberals are going down the drain) … amounted to a bit of flirting.”
Tamara Holder, herself a lawyer as well as ex-Foxie, felt that Murdoch’s disparaging lies released her from a gag order. She still doesn’t tell all, but one detail is revealing:
Her original complaint was not that a FoxNews executive whistled at her, or commented on how pretty she looked. Instead the (unnamed) executive unzipped his *****, exposing his **** and forced her head down to make contact with said ****.
Back in the day, I was too shy to flirt. Apparently I just didn’t know how! :eek:
That was from 12/17/17 right?
Since the political nature of the allegations were brought up I’d like to make an observation that I’ve wanted to for a while.
Seems to me that the vast majority of post-Weinstein allegations have involved those on the left. Do I need to name names?
Post-Weinstein is important because investigations into Trump and even Moore predate Weinstein. Once he and his “open secret” was finally outed even the politically like minded who were subjects of harassment decided to come forward…and the politically like-minded who were responsible for overseeing the harassers couldn’t keep from doing something about it.
Getting back to conservatives…yeah there are plenty of harassers on that side but I think they’ve known to be more careful because their political enemies have barrels of ink and lots of band-width.
Doesn’t fleeing the jurisdiction stop the clock on the statute?
It can, but only upon proof that the person fled to avoid arrest or prosecution on the charge in question.
Abe has a one-night stand with Barbara prior to his taking a new job in Brazil. He lives in Brazil for ten years. Barbara wakes up the next morning aghast at how much she drank and believes she was in no shape to consent to sex. She reports the event as a rape.
Upon his return, Abe is probably safe from prosecution: he did leave the jurisdiction, to be sure, but not in an effort to avoid arrest or prosecution for his night with Barbara, which in his mind was tipsy but consensual.
In the case at hand, Polanski fled the United States in 1978 to avoid sentencing on a separate crime; he was never told of the 1975 accusation until October 2017. In my view, he has a strong argument that his absence did not toll the statute of limitations: he did not flee to avoid arrest or prosecution of that crime, and, indeed, no one was trying to arrest or prosecute him for it.
I think we get a different result if the woman reports the crime in 1975, and he leaves after becoming aware of the charges.
Neil Degrasse Tyson accused of raping a grad student.
Nothing between 1/15/18 and Schneiderman?
…well, except the ongoing Stormy Trump Storm.
Well there’s always Christina Garcia. California state legislator, celebrated #MeToo activist, and accused of sexual harassment by 6 different men.
Unfortunately, advocacy like that can be more to cover up your own crimes. See also being strong against corruption because you are corrupt, big into “family values” because you are an adulterer, or being highly homophobic because you have gay sex.
Though there is the added problem of people treating #metoo as gendered, when it most certainly is not.
…as the examples of Terry Crews and Brendan Fraser also show.
I don’t think it’s about covering up. Certainly in the last example, it’s thought that people who are highly homophobic because they have gay sex are self-loathing people who are in denial, trying to smother their inclinations by drowning them in homophobia.
But even in the other examples, I don’t think it’s covering up. (How would advocacy help someone cover up?)
Depends what you mean by “gendered”. There’s very little doubt that the vast majority of #metoo-type harassment is directed by men against women. There are exceptions to everything, of course. But as a practical matter, this is a much much bigger concern for women than it is for men.
Yes. I think of these cases as overcompensation rather than covering up: taking a public stance in contradiction to one’s private self in order to deflect suspicion.
I don’t see how that might work out in practice.
Suppose you take some politician having an affair. Are you saying people who might otherwise suspect that he’s doing so are going to think “well I can see him slinking around with this woman but no way he could possibly be having an affair because look, he’s a big ‘family values’ guy”? People who are close enough to the guy to suspect what he’s up to are going to suspect, and people who aren’t close to him aren’t going to be suspicious in any event.
Ditto for corruption.
I’m describing people’s motivations, not how well this tactic works for them. But in reality, the image that people project does help deflect suspicion. Look how long it took for people to grasp the magnitude of sexual abuse in the Catholic church.
He may not be, but I definitely am. Because that is exactly what happens. People were reluctant to believe that Bill Cosby could actually have done what he did because he was the big family values guy. When that one PBS guy who is pro-feminist came in, there were tons of people defending him, saying it couldn’t be true, until more evidence came. People defended Franken.
This may be outside your circles, but a YouTuber named Justin Carmical was a big anti-rape guy, pro-feminist, the works. But there were always these rumors that he had sexually harassed several of his fans. But because everyone thought he was such a good guy, no one believed it. (Then the guy committed suicide, which made it even harder for anyone to talk bad about him.) Only since #metoo and the attitude that we should “listen to women” did people finally listen to those he attacked.
It’s a tried and true tactic. You can quibble about my word choice, but I do think it is a tactic used specifically to make people doubt that they would actually do anything that bad. It’s only since #metoo that this tactic has finally started to fail.
Sure, it’s also overcompensation. But that overcompensation serves the purpose not only of convincing the offender that they aren’t all that bad, but also to convince the public that anything bad they hear can’t be true.
Actor-producer categorically denies allegations from all 20 women
Bafta suspends outstanding contribution award and actor’s membership
Alleged misconduct including claims he secretly filmed naked audition
Doctor Who and Kidulthood star allegedly showed colleagues sexually explicit photos and videos of women
He also sent one female a “dick pic”
I’m surprised ITV is willing to lose millions of dollars as a result of this.
More allegations against Clarke (at least, I don’t think these accusers were part of the initial Guardian exposé). Doesn’t look good. Also, Barrowman apparently really likes getting his cock out…
I can actually confirm that- a guy I know was a ‘guest expert’ on a show Barrowman was hosting in around 2007. I honestly can’t remember the name of the show- I only watched the bit my mate was in and I don’t think I ever came across the programme again. Said friend is was also known for getting his tackle out at any half-reasonable opportunity*, and happily told everyone that the filming ended with both of them getting their cocks out backstage.
In that instance at least it was mutually consenting penis, but it didn’t occur to me to wonder if it was actually in private or if there were crew around…
* In situations where nudity could be reasonably expected, and he does appear to have grown out of it now.