Entertainment
Sponsored by

The Biggest Crock in The History Of Hollywood

17,774 Views | 195 Replies | Last: 6 yr ago by Liquid Wrench
PDWT_12
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aTmAg said:


But if I tell you, I will not give you this $1M job unless you wash my car, should that be against the law? I think the answer would clearly be no.
Right, and I think this is where you're getting confused, because while I'm sure there are instances of that with Harvey (casting couch type situations), that's likely not what is going to be discussed in the trial. If anything, the prosecution may use examples of what I said earlier "Do this to me or you're fired/I'll make sure you never get work again." That falls more in line with the baseball bat no? I don't know how/where the line gets drawn on that kind of stuff, but I don't think it takes much common sense to figure it out, and I'm not going to lose a lot of sleep over it.

aTmAg said:


Regarding the 2006 and 2013, do you know what they plan on testifying about?
2006 is Mimi Haleyi, a PA who claims to have rejected sexual advances and offers to go to Paris, etc. with Weinstein multiple times, but tried to keep a working relationship with him because she felt it was important. Her claim is that in 2006 he forced her to give him oral sex while she was on her period at his home.

2013 I don't know anything about, I'm not sure if the victim has even been named. All I know is that it is an accusation of rape in hotel in Manhattan.

Actress Annabella Sciorra will also testify about a rape accusation from the 90s. The other 3(?) witnesses are unnamed at this time I believe.

Now, his defense team may try to say "Didn't you receive this after agreeing to do whatever it is you did with Weisntein?" to some of these witnesses. I don't know. We won't until the trial really gets going. All I'm saying is I think maybe there is a disconnect between what you think Weinstein is actually on trial for and what is really happening. Hope that helps.
SACR
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Sorta like the Larry Nassar gymnastics thing. When the gymnasts were young they didn't understand that what was going on (the parents and other adults should have had a freaking clue sooner, however). But as they grew up, they started speaking out because they understood better. I applaud them for that.
I am honestly astounded that an allegedly intelligent human being believes this.

Do you even understand what Nassar did to these girls? Nassar is a pedophile and sexual predator. He used his position as as doctor to give himself access to huge pool of victims, specifically young victims who were ignorant about their own bodies. The absolutely evil part of what he did is he told his victims (and their parents) that what he was doing is a legitimate medical procedure. He was dealing with young girls as young as 6(!). He molested his victims while their mothers were in the examination room with him. He told the parents and the girls that he was doing 'upper pelvic floor strengthening' as cover for his molestation, and they believed him, because he's a doctor. He's an authority, so why question him?

When he was at Michigan State and various student-athletes reported him to others in the athletic department, they were gaslighted, they were told what he was doing was a legitimate procedure. As long as he termed his molestation as 'treatment', his victims were always wrong because they just didn't 'understand', and this allowed him to continue to operate and victimize in plain sight.

They didn't suddenly arrive at an age and decide, "Oh, wait, this is rape." Many of these girls had to have it explained to them that what he did was NOT a medical procedure, that what he did is molestation. Why do you think it took so long for so many to come forward? Because they had to come to terms with the fact that what had happened to them on what they thought was a routine medical exam was sexual assault, and they had to redefine themselves personally as a victim of sexual assault. People have a difficult time admitting to anyone they've been duped or scammed or even tricked when it involves a small amount of money, imagine the mental hurdle of admitting you allowed someone to trick you into letting them violate you? That you're now a sexual assault victim.

Nassar would try to visit his victims late at night in hotels for more 'treatment'. And because he was a doctor and told coaches he was just trying to help them recover from meets, their complaints were ignored.

You keep trying to use your wife's victim status as cover, like this makes you an authority. Wrong. This makes your wife a survivor of rape, but it doesn't make you or her an expert on the subject. (It's also disgusting that you're using what happened to your wife as cover for your beliefs here, but that's a discussion for another time).

You (and her) seem to be among the group that believe the only real rape is violent rape, and that's crap.

If you have to coerce someone into sex or sexual acts without their consent, that's sexual assault. Full stop. It's just sad that you're an allegedly intelligent grown adult, and you need this explained to you. Even sadder that your wife is a survivor, and she doesn't understand this, that she actively gatekeeps sexual assault.

As for Weinstein, I think you're ignoring the conditioning that goes on with young actresses. If they're told, "This is what happens in Hollywood, this is how you get parts", they may go ahead and do it because they think this is how things are supposed to happen. Such quid pro quo doesn't make this okay, or not sexual assault. Just because he didn't hold a victim down and violently rape her doesn't make him using his power to coerce women any less a form of sexual assault.

You and your wife seem to view what happened as a form of prostitution, that these women sold their bodies one time in return for fame and celebrity. I guess this viewpoint allows you to feel morally superior to these women, while also absolving Weinstein from any blame. Such victim-blaming from women is not uncommon. I would argue that the biggest opponent female sexual assault victims have is other women, it's just sad when it is another victim of sexual assault like your wife.

BTW, I'm someone who is skeptical of 95% of sexual assault claims I hear today until I hear all of the facts, so if I'm telling you you're full of sh it and wrong, you're FOS and wrong.
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PDWT_12 said:

aTmAg said:


But if I tell you, I will not give you this $1M job unless you wash my car, should that be against the law? I think the answer would clearly be no.
Right, and I think this is where you're getting confused, because while I'm sure there are instances of that with Harvey (casting couch type situations), that's likely not what is going to be discussed in the trial. If anything, the prosecution may use examples of what I said earlier "Do this to me or you're fired/I'll make sure you never get work again." That falls more in line with the baseball bat no? I don't know how/where the line gets drawn on that kind of stuff, but I don't think it takes much common sense to figure it out, and I'm not going to lose a lot of sleep over it.SO
The reason I don't think it falls in line with the baseball bat is because we don't have the right for any given job, nor the right to work in Hollywood in general. We do have the right to not have our face beat in with a bat.

There are tons of "do this or you will never work in here again" examples. For example, if you work at Ford, and you bash Ford on social media you will get fired. They flat out tell you to not do that ahead of time. Try to sue your employer for a better parking space or something, and you'll get fired too.
Quote:

2006 is Mimi Haleyi, a PA who claims to have rejected sexual advances and offers to go to Paris, etc. with Weinstein multiple times, but tried to keep a working relationship with him because she felt it was important. Her claim is that in 2006 he forced her to give him oral sex while she was on her period at his home.
If he forced her by saying, "do it or you are going to get fired", then I don't think that is criminal (unless the law in California is stupid). If he psychically grabbed her, pulled out a knife, etc. then that would certainly be criminal.
Quote:

2013 I don't know anything about, I'm not sure if the victim has even been named. All I know is that it is an accusation of rape in hotel in Manhattan.

Actress Annabella Sciorra will also testify about a rape accusation from the 90s. The other 3(?) witnesses are unnamed at this time I believe.
If they reported it at the time, then I'd think they would have something. Even if the police/DA dropped the case or decided to not pursue. If they have said nothing until now, then I'd hope they would throw that evidence out. Otherwise, an ex-girlfriend can come out and accuse you or me of rape 5 years from and get us thrown in jail. That would be a bunch of BS.
Quote:

Now, his defense team may try to say "Didn't you receive this after agreeing to do whatever it is you did with Weisntein?" to some of these witnesses. I don't know. We won't until the trial really gets going. All I'm saying is I think maybe there is a disconnect between what you think Weinstein is actually on trial for and what is really happening. Hope that helps.
Thanks for the info. This was stuff I was unaware of.
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Post removed:
by user
PDWT_12
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I think you and I can agree there is a huge difference between saying "Don't talk trash about our product or we'll fire you." and "If you don't blow me I will fire you." Right? Like that doesn't seem equivocal at all.

Sure. There is potential that things will overcorrect due to this #MeToo movement. In some instances, we might have already seen some of that occurring. But again, it's not something I lose sleep over, and I think as long as I teach my son to respect women and boundaries, he'll be fine too.
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
You misunderstand something I said. I wasn't saying that just because victims turn 18 that they suddenly realize what rape is. My point is that as people get older, they learn more and are taught things like sex education and what is rape. I did watch the documentary on Nassar and am aware of the stuff in your long ass post. I'm not sure why you felt the need to write all of that. (And those parents were DUMBASSES)



And if you think for a second that an adult Hollywood actress in Harvey Weinsten's office are naive as a 10 year old gymnast under Nassar "medical" care, then you are more naive than both.
agracer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
SACR said:

Quote:

Sorta like the Larry Nassar gymnastics thing. When the gymnasts were young they didn't understand that what was going on (the parents and other adults should have had a freaking clue sooner, however). But as they grew up, they started speaking out because they understood better. I applaud them for that.

Do you even understand what Nassar did to these girls? Nassar is a pedophile and sexual predator. He used his position as as doctor to give himself access to huge pool of victims, specifically young victims who were ignorant about their own bodies. The absolutely evil part of what he did is he told his victims (and their parents) that what he was doing is a legitimate medical procedure. He was dealing with young girls as young as 6(!). He molested his victims while their mothers were in the examination room with him. He told the parents and the girls that he was doing 'upper pelvic floor strengthening' as cover for his molestation, and they believed him, because he's a doctor. He's an authority, so why question him?
I must be misunderstanding but it seems you're saying the exact same thing ATM is stating?

He states "they understood better when they got older" and you're saying "the victims were young and ignorant".

No?
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PDWT_12 said:

I think you and I can agree there is a huge difference between saying "Don't talk trash about our product or we'll fire you." and "If you don't blow me I will fire you." Right? Like that doesn't seem equivocal at all.

Sure. There is potential that things will overcorrect due to this #MeToo movement. In some instances, we might have already seen some of that occurring. But again, it's not something I lose sleep over, and I think as long as I teach my son to respect women and boundaries, he'll be fine too.
I'm talking about legally. Obviously if my daughter got fired for trashing her employer, I'd tell her, "don't talk bad about your employer, moron" but if she was fired for not blowing somebody then I might go after the guy with a bat of my own.

Here is the problem legally. What is keeping a person, who was fired for cause (like not acting well enough) from claiming that they got fired for not blowing someone? Unless they got recorded audio or something, there is no way to know for sure. And we can't throw people in jail based solely on the victims testimony. That would be rife for abuse.
jc1402
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That's why the judicial system exists? So that if someone makes a claim of sexual misconduct and the alleged abuser is indicted, a jury can decide if they are guilty... That's how this works.....
jc1402
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Also, if you want to see a system that is "rife with abuse," you should look up how male hollywood execs were treating actresses over the years.....

aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
jc1402 said:

That's why the judicial system exists? So that if someone makes a claim of sexual misconduct and the alleged abuser is indicted, a jury can decide if they are guilty... That's how this works.....
My concern is that someday, if this becomes the norm, that our sons or grandsons may face jail time merely because a pissed of ex and a few of her friends decide to claim that he raped her. The fact that Weinstein has been indicted at all on such weak evidence is a problem, IMO.

I couldn't care less about Weinstein. The dude could rot in hell for all I'm concerned.

aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
jc1402 said:

Also, if you want to see a system that is "rife with abuse," you should look up how male hollywood execs were treating actresses over the years.....
I'm not a defender of Hollywood. I think it's full of jackasses like this.
SACR
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

You still don't get it.

You have a misguided definition of sexual assault in your head. To you, sexual assault only happens when a perpetrator holds the victims down and violently rapes the victim. They have to physically force the victim to bend to their will. And if the victim doesn't scream 'no' and violently fight back, they probably wanted it on some level. This redefining of sexual assault is one of the first steps of victim-blaming, and is one of the most nefarious.

Are you familiar with Richard Strauss, aka Dr. Jelly Paws? He was treating football players and wrestlers at Ohio State University from 1979-1998. For 20 years, he was sexually assaulting adult male student athletes. He would grope them, he would fondle them, he would lube up his fingers and rectally exam them (hence the nickname). He called it 'hazing', and it was an open secret at Ohio State. It was sexual assault.

Now according to you, this isn't sexual assault. These are adult men, athletes, stronger than the average male, in the prime of their lives, they could easily fight off a doctor. So it can't be assault, right?

But it is. He violated their boundaries for his own sexual gratification. And they allowed it because he was a doctor and they were told this was part of the treatment, or being part of the team ('hazing').

Many of these athletes only came forward after the Nassar situation became public, and they realized what had happened to them was also assault. These are men in their 40s now. Do you honestly think they didn't know about sex when they were in college? That they didn't know what rape is?

What they didn't know is that a doctor, even a trusted team doctor, could assault you. Strauss abused his position and their trust just like Nassar abused his position. The most successful predators are the ones able to hide in plain sight, especially if they're seen as pillars of the community. Their status gives them camouflage and protects them when accusations come out. They're 'good' people, they're not like those violent predators who rape when at knife point or using a gun. Their greatest con is that they can fool people like you into thinking what they're doing is normal and not assault at all.
Ghost91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'll admit that I don't know much about the Weinstein case, but having just skimmed this thread, it seems that - at MOST - he engaged in quid pro quo, right? "Do this for me and I'll give you a role in the movie"....."Don't do this for me and I'll make sure you never work again". But no physically restraining a female, hitting, etc.

Do I have that right? If so, then how is this any different from the CEO who does the same thing to his secretary? Seems that - at best - they might have him on sexual harassment, but where are we getting rape?
jc1402
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
For all the posters saying they haven't read much about it and then defending Harvey Weinstein's actions. Here you go. You can stop looking like jackasses.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/25/nyregion/weinstein-case-legal-explainer.html

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/celebrity/harvey-weinstein-indicted-on-new-sex-crimes-charges-in-la/ar-BBYFLm7

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/may/25/harvey-weinstein-arrest-what-charges-happens-next-explained
SACR
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

You are misunderstanding.

It wasn't just that the victims were young, all victims of pedophiles are young, they go after children, it's what makes them pedophiles.

Nassar claimed what he was doing was a medical treatment. So when mothers were sitting in the exam room, they thought he was doing a medical treatment when he was molesting their daughters. When athletes complained to others, Nassar dismissed those concerns by telling those other people, "I was doing a medical treatment", and they bought it.

This wasn't a case of "he did this to these girls, and then they grew up and started reading and realized this was wrong", this was a case where he had the victims, their parents, his colleagues at USA Gymnastics, medical review boards, the athletic department at Michigan State, and hundreds of other people completely fooled to his crimes. And people like aTmAg will still claim it wasn't sexual assault, because he wasn't violently raping these girls or these student-athletes.
Brian Earl Spilner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
SACR is absolutely destroying atm and it's fantastic.
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
SACR said:


You still don't get it.

You have a misguided definition of sexual assault in your head. To you, sexual assault only happens when a perpetrator holds the victims down and violently rapes the victim. They have to physically force the victim to bend to their will. And if the victim doesn't scream 'no' and violently fight back, they probably wanted it on some level. This redefining of sexual assault is one of the first steps of victim-blaming, and is one of the most nefarious.
This is not what I am saying at all. I am saying that people who are subjected to rape AND other forms of sexual assault should be duty bound to report it to the police immediately. Because if they wait for months or years there is ZERO chance of the person being convicted, and that person will be free to abuse others. While a victim bears NO blame at all for the assault, the mere fact that they are a victim does not immunize them from blame for every future deed. Especially if the victim is taking money from the assailant to keep quiet.

Furthermore, we wouldn't want the law changed so that a person can claim rape/assault years after the fact, without any further evidence, and then put the guy in jail. Because then people can put their enemies in jail by merely claiming rape later on.

Quote:

Are you familiar with Richard Strauss, aka Dr. Jelly Paws? He was treating football players and wrestlers at Ohio State University from 1979-1998. For 20 years, he was sexually assaulting adult male student athletes. He would grope them, he would fondle them, he would lube up his fingers and rectally exam them (hence the nickname). He called it 'hazing', and it was an open secret at Ohio State. It was sexual assault.

Now according to you, this isn't sexual assault. These are adult men, athletes, stronger than the average male, in the prime of their lives, they could easily fight off a doctor. So it can't be assault, right?

But it is. He violated their boundaries for his own sexual gratification. And they allowed it because he was a doctor and they were told this was part of the treatment, or being part of the team ('hazing').

Many of these athletes only came forward after the Nassar situation became public, and they realized what had happened to them was also assault. These are men in their 40s now. Do you honestly think they didn't know about sex when they were in college? That they didn't know what rape is?
There is a difference in what is and is not assault, and what it takes to be convicted for assault. The definition of assault (noun) is: "a physical attack". If you and I get into a contest where we punch each other in the shoulder until one of us says "uncle" then we, by definition are assaulting each other. But if I then try to turn you in and get you convicted, the police would laugh at me. Likewise, I was mildly hazed in the corps (axe handles and stuff like that). Officially it was assault, but I willingly endured it because I took it as a challenge. So if I tried to turn somebody in now they would laugh at me too. If I turned them in at the time, the police would have taken me seriously because that means it was important enough for me to risk the benefits of the corps to report it.

Likewise, the guys you mentioned above were indeed assaulted by definition. But if nobody ever turned in Strauss then he wouldn't and shouldn't be convicted of assault now (if he's still alive) unless they have more substantial proof.

Quote:

What they didn't know is that a doctor, even a trusted team doctor, could assault you. Strauss abused his position and their trust just like Nassar abused his position. The most successful predators are the ones able to hide in plain sight, especially if they're seen as pillars of the community. Their status gives them camouflage and protects them when accusations come out. They're 'good' people, they're not like those violent predators who rape when at knife point or using a gun. Their greatest con is that they can fool people like you into thinking what they're doing is normal and not assault at all.
Fool people like me? I'm not the guy making excuses for those who refuse to turn these guys in and get them thrown in jail. People like you are why it happens way more than it should.

I saw a video online of a guy trying to kidnap a girl. The people around grabbed the guy and kicked his ass, but from what I could tell they never called the police. That is total BS. Now that guy will be free to kidnap yet another kid in the future. They deserve blame for their stupidity on that.
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
SACR said:


You are misunderstanding.

It wasn't just that the victims were young, all victims of pedophiles are young, they go after children, it's what makes them pedophiles.

Nassar claimed what he was doing was a medical treatment. So when mothers were sitting in the exam room, they thought he was doing a medical treatment when he was molesting their daughters. When athletes complained to others, Nassar dismissed those concerns by telling those other people, "I was doing a medical treatment", and they bought it.

This wasn't a case of "he did this to these girls, and then they grew up and started reading and realized this was wrong", this was a case where he had the victims, their parents, his colleagues at USA Gymnastics, medical review boards, the athletic department at Michigan State, and hundreds of other people completely fooled to his crimes. And people like aTmAg will still claim it wasn't sexual assault, because he wasn't violently raping these girls or these student-athletes.
Bull crap. According to the documentary victims DID grow up and realized it was wrong. And I stated that it WAS sexual assault. He absolutely deserves to be in jail. You are a liar.

Brian Earl Spilner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

People like you are why it happens way more than it should.


Lol. Oh so now it's the guy on Texags' fault, who had verbally destroyed you multiple times.

Priceless.
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Brian Earl Spilner said:

Quote:

People like you are why it happens way more than it should.


Lol. Oh so now it's the guy on Texags' fault, who had verbally destroyed you multiple times.

Priceless.
Since you apparently need things to be explained to you with crayons, let me take it one step at a time:

Do you agree that when victims keep quiet, more people get victimized?


(And nothing on texags is verbal, genius)
Brian Earl Spilner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Hey, you said crayons. Where are the crayons?
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Brian Earl Spilner said:

Hey, you said crayons. Where are the crayons?
You going to answer, or are you going avoid the question?
Brian Earl Spilner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

So avoid it is?

I'll wait until somebody intelligent responds then.
jc1402
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Your arguments are proving why victims of sexual assault sometimes don't report the crimes immediately. You say that you're worried your sons will fall victims of to false allegations of sexual assault. One of the most common reasons sexual assault victims don't report the incidents is that they fear no one will believe them. That is one reason among many valid reasons victims don't feel comfortable reporting these crimes right away.

If you think they should be punished for that you are a sick individual.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-compassion-chronicles/201711/why-dont-victims-sexual-harassment-come-forward-sooner
Brian Earl Spilner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Post removed:
by user
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
jc1402 said:

Your arguments are proving why victims of sexual assault sometimes don't report the crimes immediately. You say that you're worried your sons will fall victims of to false allegations of sexual assault. One of the most common reasons sexual assault victims don't report the incidents is that they fear no one will believe them. That is one reason among many valid reasons victims don't feel comfortable reporting these crimes right away.
It's better to not be believed than do nothing and know others will be victimized. If 2 or 3 separate people come forward the same accusation, people will start to believe. If everybody stays quiet, then the assailant will assault LOTS more people. If it involves rape, and you are willing to get a rape kit then people will believe you.
Quote:

If you think they should be punished for that you are a sick individual.
I never said they should be punished. They should be taught from a young age that you always report it immediately. And people like you shouldn't say, "ahh.. no big deal.. maybe some future victim or 20 will say something."



In this case, if they want to believed then they should stop interacting with the assailant over and over, stop praising the assailant on national TV, and refrain from taking hush money for decades.
jc1402
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
If you've read up on this case and don't believe these women, then you're ****ed in the head. But you've pretty much proven that with every post you've made on this thread.
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
jc1402 said:

If you've read up on this case and don't believe these women, then you're ****ed in the head. But you've pretty much proven that with every post you've made on this thread.
I've said that I haven't kept up with the case and asked if there was any better evidence than the audio recording I heard a year or so ago? Nobody has provided anything.

I'll say again, that if you have better evidence than I'm all ears.
jc1402
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I provided 3 links that describe what's going on in this case and what his charges are. You can also do about 5 minutes of googling.

Come on, man at least try.
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
jc1402 said:

I provided 3 links that describe what's going on in this case and what his charges are. You can also do about 5 minutes of googling.

Come on, man at least try.
I didn't notice that post since it wasn't a response to me. So many people are responding to me, that I only look for those with the blue thing on the right. I'll check those links when I get home.
Brian Earl Spilner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aTm gets a lot of responses. He gets the most responses. You would not believe how many responses he gets. It would make your head spin, believe me.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.