Jump to content

Harvey Weinstein and other Hollywood predators


Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, SeanR said:

like the mum who offered her child to Ian Watkins?

 

I don't really know the answer to that as I don't know much about that case.  I did say "most" though.

 

And it's a bit of a strange example to discuss when discussing Woody Allen.  Ian Watkins is a paedophile, some people here are trying to claim that it's impossible for Woody Allen to be a paedophile.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Stevie said:

 

I'm reading it as his way of trying to show that hes also a human being, and more than just someone having abusing his powers. We know that childhood experiences can greatly impact our lives, some more than others. For example, we know that poverty and crime is related. If you're a child growing up without a father in the slums of Baltimore, chances are you will break the law more often than someone living in suburbia. As for me personally, the violence I lived with as a child and early teenage years definitively affected me and my personal development. Just to be clear, I've never assaulted anyone, but I did freak out when I reached puberty, and my entire life has been one cul-de-sac after the other. It took years and years of hard work to move on, to be able to break free. So when someone like Spurlock writes about his childhood, I kind of understand what hes saying. It doesn't excuse bad behavior in any way, but its a reminder than hes more than just someone having abused his powers.

 

 

I really want to read it that way but I'm a bit cautious after Kevin Spacey's "I chose to live my life as a gay man" and Don Burke's "I'm an undiagnosed sufferer of Asperger's."

 

And he really needs to be careful about how he frames his past abuse experience because if it's seen as a get out of jail free card it's also seen as "all men who were abused are bound to be abusers" which is a narrative that can stop men from reaching out for help and for sufferers of hypervigillance it might amp their anxiety up tenfold.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, NickC said:

 

I don't really know the answer to that as I don't know much about that case.  I did say "most" though.

 

And it's a bit of a strange example to discuss when discussing Woody Allen.  Ian Watkins is a paedophile, some people here are trying to claim that it's impossible for Woody Allen to be a paedophile.

 

did you read your post that I quoted?

 

as an example of mothers of children being manipulated, I thought it was pertinent.

 

but carry on!

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SeanR said:

 

did you read your post that I quoted?

 

as an example of mothers of children being manipulated, I thought it was pertinent.

 

but carry on!

 

Oh, OK.  I don't know much about that case.  Makes sense now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, NickC said:

Exactly, that's the sort of stuff I don't understand.  Child abuse is littered with sad examples of mums who are in fear of abusive dads

 

Absolutely true. Only, you couldn't possibly say that about Mia Farrow. That's the difference.

 

10 hours ago, NickC said:

 

You never really explained this one. I don't understand your thinking.

How does someone signing off on a person's lifetime achievement award mean that it's impossible that that person is also a paedophile?

 

It doesn't mean that it's impossible, it's just 'one more thing' in an increasingly long list that points to a far more simple explanation. 

 

9 hours ago, geekette said:

Indeed, but I'm not going to go back round the loop about the details. The fact is that any lay person cherry picking from the evidence leaked to the media 25 years ago is not going to form a clearer picture than the judge who made findings on the case (findings, I note, that have never been successfully challenged despite all Allen's wealth and influence).

 

You mean the same judge (page 10 of his report, if you care) who observed that Mia's first claims of child molestation were actually against Woody's affair with 21 year old Soon Yi, and that it was - and this is coincidence of the century, I'm sure - only a matter of weeks later when she decided to change it to being about Dylan. That's the linear narrative that you're wholeheartedly accepting? I maintain you have to either be really quite thick to believe that, or that you want to believe it. 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Benny said:

It's quite simple: futureshock hates women, so he'd rather defend to the hilt an alleged paedophile than agree with one.

 

Jesus. Could you be any more of a walking cliché? I'll tell you what, seeing as you're happy to spout slanderous shite like this, you'll have no problem if I address you as Benny the Paedophile from now on, right? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, futureshock said:

 

 

You mean the same judge (page 10 of his report, if you care) who observed that Mia's first claims of child molestation was actually against Woody's affair with 21 year old Soon Yi, and that it was - and this is coincidence of the century, I'm sure - only a matter of weeks later when she decided to change it to being about Dylan. That's the linear narrative that you're wholeheartedly accepting? I maintain you have to either be really quite thick to believe that, or that you want to believe it. 

 

 

 

Or it’s possible that once he became romantically involved with her adopted daughter she re-evaluated his relationships with her children and suddenly paid more attention to Dylan’s claims.

 

Asking seriously, how should a victim of alleged child abuse get adults to believe them? @futureshock I totally get not wanting to believe Dylan. To do listen to her and other survivors of abuse is to accept that more men than we are comfortable with are either predators or enablers. Far more comforting to paint the survivor as a liar or a dupe.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup.

 

Part of the reason why there is such a low conviction rate of abusers and rapists is that defence lawyers always pull together a number of inconsistencies and argue that it's much simpler and more compelling to believe their client is innocent. The problem is that paedophiles in reality are not comic book villains, they act like normal people most of the time. They hold down jobs, they probably (contradictorally) also care for their families... they are in many ways regular people. They're not monsters all the time, that's not the way these things work.

 

Of course all of this makes it very difficult to get to the bottom of whether abuse has taken place. But it doesn't mean we should dismiss out of hand the claims of women and children who have witnessed abuse.  Abuse by it's very nature is hidden, doesn't take place all the time, and is conducted by incredibly manipulative people.  I'm not sure the Male Internet Detective is particularly well placed to claim that a woman who says abuse has happened is a liar.  Especially as that woman knows full well that their life will be worse off for telling people about it.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Unofficial Who said:

 

Or it’s possible that once he became romantically involved with her adopted daughter she re-evaluated his relationships with her children and suddenly paid more attention to Dylan’s claims.

 

There were no Dylan claims until a couple of months after the Soon Yi affair exploded. Mia hated him for it (who wouldn't?), the children all knew about it over the summer,  and the stage was set for the claim of child molestation a short while after. The context of when and how it all happened is just 'one more thing' in that long list.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, futureshock said:

 

There were no Dylan claims until a couple of months after the Soon Yi affair exploded. Mia hated him for it (who wouldn't?), the children all knew about it over the summer,  and the stage was set for the claim of child molestation a short while after. The context of when and how it all happened is just 'one more thing' in that long list.

 

 

I don't get how you can look at Woody Allen's ouvre and not conclude that he's creepy as fuck. I mean, just look at Manhattan. He flew to Mariel Hemingway's parents house when she was 17 and tried to whisk her away to Paris! A man in his 40s!

 

He's a creepy motherfucker.

 

To go so far as to put this much effort into defending him?

 

Really odd.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/12/2017 at 21:19, Benny said:

 futureshock hates women

 

Citation needed, otherwise stop it.

 

17 hours ago, futureshock said:

 

Jesus. Could you be any more of a walking cliché? I'll tell you what, seeing as you're happy to spout slanderous shite like this, you'll have no problem if I address you as Benny the Paedophile from now on, right? 

 

And this isn't an appropriate response to something that was already a bit shit. 

 

Cut it out please, both of you.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Isaac said:

Woody Allen's ouvre

 

Did you mean oeuvre? I'm not sure this is the thread for analysing his library of work. Some of the people in here thought Ghostbusters 3 was good.

 

Quote

To go so far as to put this much effort into defending him? 

 

I'm defending the facts of the matter after the same old Vanity Fair article was regurgitated. And besides, it's an interesting story on the whole - for example, Mia Farrow was 18 or 19 when she lost her virginity to Frank Sinatra, who was nearly 50.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Don Rosco said:

So both Frank Sinatra and Woody Allen are creepy as shit? Good point.

 

Well, to be accurate, Woody asked if she wanted to go to Paris and got politely turned down, while Frank actually stuck his dick in it. I'm not sure saying they're both (equal) creeps properly describes the situation, but sure, knock yourself out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the problem is less with the use of the word "dick" and more that your phrasing is referring to Mia Farrow as "it". You might want to try avoiding that in future if you wish to avoid giving a bad impression.

 

Going back to Allen, Sinatra and Farrow, you can be a creepy fucker without having to actually sleep with anyone. Pestering a girl young enough to be your granddaughter to accompany you to Paris is creepy as fuck, and trying to lessen that by comparing Allen with Sinatra is like that guy who tried to distinguish between sexual assault and "serious sexual assault" for no good reason that anyone could see. 

  • Upvote 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, futureshock said:

I'm talking about body parts. That's what "it" is for. The clue is the word "dick"

 

No, no, no, I'm not being sexist, I wasn't calling a woman it

 

By saying it I was simply referring to Mia Farrow’s vagina.

 

:hmm:

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, K said:

Hmm. I wonder - I wonder - if the guy who defended Ched Evans, hates feminists, argued at great length that Woody Allen is not a pervert, and had tears running down both cheeks at the prospect of the porn / naked woman review thread being deleted, used the phrase "he stuck his dick in it" in a non-misogynistic way. What could he have meant? It's a mystery worthy of Sir Arthur CL Smooth's Mysterious World.

 

Tears running down both cheeks? Is this like your interpretation of the Alien 3 thread between me and Gorf, where you insisted it was a bad tempered argument when it actually was just two guys laughing about which was the better of two bad sci-fi movies? You need to up your reading skills, K. I never said Woody wasn't a pervert. I never said I hated feminists.

Keep trying, though. You'll get that zinger one day! Come on, tell us what you do when somebody refers to a vagina as "it" - do you scream?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, futureshock said:

 

Tears running down both cheeks? Is this like your interpretation of the Alien 3 thread between me and Gorf, where you insisted it was a bad tempered argument when it actually was just two guys laughing about which was the better of two bad sci-fi movies? You need to up your reading skills, K. I never said Woody wasn't a pervert. I never said I hated feminists.

Keep trying, though. You'll get that zinger one day! Come on, tell us what you do when somebody refers to a vagina as "it" - do you scream?

 

Why not stop this pathetic line of defence and just own up to it and/or apologise? You’re claiming it’s a perfectly normal turn of phrase when it clearly is not.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't Futureshock one of the alt-right infesting this board as a supposed lefty? I mean, he'll probably post some 'waaaah' defence that his hate against sexually harassed victims and women in general has been taken out of context, but I'm surprised to see a mod defend him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.