The New Yorker has detailed coverage of Harvey Weinstein’s criminal behavior. And by detailed, I mean fairly explicit, names named, horrifying encounters recounted, and a history of extortion and rape spelled out repellently.
Most awful is how Weinstein used his influence to silence any revelations until there were so many they could no longer be contained. He’s been taking advantage of his power for decades, and yet his lawyer has released a statement saying, “Any allegations of non-consensual sex are unequivocally denied by Mr. Weinstein.” If you read the story, you’ll realize that is a lie. They even have a case where one of his victims wore a wire to get open admissions of his tactics, which was taken by the police, and then…a series of stories were ‘coincidentally’ leaked to the media to portray her as a slut, and the charges evaporated.
But now I’m wondering…who else? Matt Damon, Russell Crowe, and Ben Affleck have been called out as enablers of Weinstein’s behavior — how many cowards covered for abuse by powerful men in the entertainment industry (or any industry, for that matter), and how many powerful men have similar histories? They’re out there. I guarantee you that Weinstein is not a solitary case.
I know from personal experience that calling out the Big Men with reprehensible behavior has high personal costs (I still get accusatory email every day saying I’m a terrible person for exposing Michael Shermer, for instance), but it has to be done. It has to be done now. If anyone is hiding abuse now out of fear of the repercussions to your career, we have to make clear that the repercussions will be even more severe if you wait and wait and wait until the revelations are inescapable.
“Any allegations of non-consensual sex are unequivocally denied by Mr. Weinstein.” If you read the story, you’ll realize that is a lie.
It’s true that he’s denying them.
Lawyers.(spits)
It’s important to remember that Ben Affleck, Matt Damon, and Russel Crowe didn’t just keep silent and look the other way. They actively worked to keep people from finding out what he was doing, so he could keep doing it. They bear responsibility for every woman he harmed after they got the initial story killed. Of course, when various entertainment people are asked, everybody is shocked, SHOCKED, that gambling is going on at Rick’s American. It would be funny, if it wasn’t about people being harmed, hearing all these people who worked with Harvey Weinstein acting as if they had no idea he was doing what was a pretty open secret.
I’d also like to add that Rose McGowan and Ashley Judd had called him out years ago and nobody cared. I think both of them are due big apologies from a lot of people.
I am pretty sure that the bill that his lawyers will submit to him win or lose will be a substantial one.
have some pity for him he just lost his job/company that bars his name
uncle frogy
ZERO PITY.
Yeah, what? Pity? Hoping there was sarcasm I missed.
Part that blew me away was concerning the Italian model. They thought that her history of being sexually assaulted by old, dirty, rich men in Italy somehow reflected poorly on her claim to have been sexually assaulted by an old, dirty, rich man in the US.
That’s a particularly egregious example of victim blaming. Also, an interesting look into internal dynamics within law enforcement agencies: detective on the case was furious the case was squelched.
Power covering for power. Disgusting.
Between this and their defense of Casey Affleck, it’s time for Matt Damon’s and Ben Affleck’s careers to die.
“When you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything…Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything.”
– Not Harvey, but a swine of the same complexion that many found admirable enough to reward. The American culture is a festering cancerous sore.
Pity is for those who face hardship undeserved, as with Weinstein’s long train of victims. Facing non-zero consequences for a lifetime of crime does not itself entitle any, and to demand it is to ignore the reasons for those consequences.
You can imagine horrible things that could happen to him that would still merit some pity, but they have not. Things like losing his ill-gotten money, job, company, and reputation do not come close, for anything obtained through abuse and silencing was not something deserved in the first place.
I fear he’ll be back. Case in point: Roman Polanski.
It seems to me that for some jobs, ‘sexual harassment’ is just expected, and everyone knows that. I guess I just figured it for aspiring actresses.
I mean, if a woman gets a job in a Nevada brothel, and then complains that her employers all just want to touch her and have sex with her – well, is the problem hers? Or the men’s?
At what point do you draw the line?
You draw the line at consent. Like always.
…and yes, that includes brothel employees. This isn’t rocket surgery. If she doesn’t want you to do a thing to her body, and you do it to her body anyway, you are a criminal. If you’re not sure if she wants you to do it to her body, you should ask her, so that you can avoid becoming a criminal. It’s her fucking body, no matter what her job is!
wcorvi
Are you fucking serious? An actor’s job is to play in movies or on stage. Not to sexually satisfy sleazy men. Take your victim blaming and go to Donald Trump.
I knew him in college, and am not surprised. Then again, he’s a major movie producer, so I wouldn’t have been surprised anyway.
What is with the horseshit takes happening on this topic? I’m sort of surprised to see it around here.
Love that Sexual harassment is in scare quotes. Want to explain why?
Goddamn, what nonsense.
Sexual harassment may have been “expected” in Hollywood at one time, but that’s because there were a bunch of men with power over young people and no constraints. It wasn’t acceptable or defensible then, and it’s not acceptable or defensible now.
Related, Data hints at the iceberg of sexual harassment still beneath the surface:
What is “expected” is that nothing will be done, and that no complaints will be made.
The sexual misconduct allegations were removed from Shermer’s page on Rationalwiki.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Michael_Shermer
Any clue of how this happened?
@18 F.O.
Revision as of 13:05, 3 April 2017
Reverend Black Percy
https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Michael_Shermer&diff=1809542&oldid=1797093
Looks to have been done sneakily as “retooling segment”
https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Michael_Shermer&action=history
wcorvi, #10
You have a frightening understanding of consent and sex work.
@deepak shetty #19
Yup. The problem is that it hasn’t been fixed yet. I tried to contact Rationalwiki some time ago, no answer.
Rationalwiki used to be decently trustworthy.
I feel overwhelmed by all this shit.
I can’t stand humanity any more, I’m scared shitless by my own fallibility and impotence.
Can we Mulligan this decade. I’m sick of this shit.
And in other shitty arsecovering news. MI5 warned Thatcher that Cyril Smith was a pedophile, but she gave him a knighthood anyway.
@20 as a former sex worker: thank you saad.
One of the women said that he had masturbated in front of her! She should count her blessings. If I were a woman, I’d prefer for him to masturbate in front of me rather than behind me. It’s easier to dodge projectile-jizz if you can see it coming.
(Ba-DUMP-bump.)
As I pointed out elsewhere, at least part of the problem with Hollywood is you have a bunch of people working there who are in possibly the most precarious “profession” known to humanity. Consider: they’re temporary employees, employed on a project by project basis (since the destruction of the Studio system); each of the projects they’re employed in is extremely short term work (3 – 6 weeks filming time); the basis on which they’re employed is incredibly arbitrary (when you can cast a white person in a black role, a cissexual man in a role as a transsexual woman, an able-bodied actor as a disabled character, all because the casting people thought they were “better for the role” even though they didn’t fit a defining characteristic); the gender gap is ridiculous (women in Hollywood have a working lifetime of approximately 20 years less than the men, not to mention lower pay rates even at the upper-most end of the profession); and their re-employability rests not only on whether they’re considered professional by their co-workers, but also on their ability to put up with crap from the people above them, AND on their ability to impress the viewing public with their acting skills or good looks. Plus, of course, the nepotism and “who you know” factor is so normalised it’s hardly worth commenting on.
So the question is not so much “why didn’t anyone mention this problem” as “who in the entire industry has the necessary security and privilege to be able to mention the problem?” – and the answer to that second question is: it’s the people who are most likely to be the predators.
It’s not surprising predators love Hollywood (and the entertainment industries in general) – the whole thing is basically set up as a buffet for them from go to whoa.
(PS: this “short term, extremely precarious employment” thing is also why Hollywood actors as a group would probably head any league table for “most neurotic people on the planet”, and why they’re liable to latch onto any snake-oil going which will offer them the promise of a steady income).
#25, I’d rather have a Ba-DUMP in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.
#25, Did you imagine there was actual humor in that comment?
@10, wcorvi
How, exactly, does a behavior being expected somehow mean that it should be accepted? Hollywood being abnormally full of creepy assholes sexually harassing women doesn’t somehow mean that these people are no longer a problem, and all treating that as true does is guarantee that the problem will get worse.
No, everyone doesn’t know that. What the hell?!?
What the fuck?!?!
Cleanup on Aisle 25…