Moderators: Bakhtosh, EvilHomer3k
See? what did I say back on page 4 of this thread. Everyone is going to go down. So be it.tjg_marantz wrote: Thu Dec 14, 2017 9:06 am Morgan Spurlock of Super Size Me fame.
At least he self outed?
One thinks that agents throughout Hollywood are talking with their meal tickets and advising them to come clean. Careers taken down by accusations and firing aren't going to rebound. If you come clean preemptively, you might be salvaged. Self preservation. Ego will stop a lot of that, though. Men who thought what they were doing was fine will go down swinging.A nonny mouse wrote: Thu Dec 14, 2017 9:42 amAnd I think the Morgan Spurlock thing, while seemingly "noble," is actually a typical attention ploy. Probably has a new show in the works. Although I don't know why you would want that sort of attention.
Then maybe your assumption of an "attention ploy" is wrongA nonny mouse wrote: Thu Dec 14, 2017 9:42 amSee? what did I say back on page 4 of this thread. Everyone is going to go down. So be it.tjg_marantz wrote: Thu Dec 14, 2017 9:06 am Morgan Spurlock of Super Size Me fame.
At least he self outed?
And I think the Morgan Spurlock thing, while seemingly "noble," is actually a typical attention ploy. Probably has a new show in the works. Although I don't know why you would want that sort of attention.
Saying the memory is tainted in no way minimizes or denigrates what she accomplished. I would agree with everything you say but the taint is still and always will be there as she herself has stated so eloquently.Moliere wrote: Wed Dec 13, 2017 10:29 pm PBS suspends host Tavis Smiley amid sexual misconduct allegations
I have the utmost respect for women and celebrate the courage of those who have come forth to tell their truth. To be clear, I have never groped, coerced, or exposed myself inappropriately to any workplace colleague in my entire broadcast career, covering 6 networks over 30 years.
Never. Ever. Never.
PBS launched a so-called investigation of me without ever informing me. I learned of the investigation when former staffers started contacting me to share the uncomfortable experience of receiving a phone call from a stranger asking whether, I had ever done anything to make them uncomfortable, and if they could provide other names of persons to call. After 14 seasons, that’s how I learned of this inquiry, from the streets.
Only after being threatened with a lawsuit, did PBS investigators reluctantly agree to interview me for three hours.
If having a consensual relationship with a colleague years ago is the stuff that leads to this kind of public humiliation and personal destruction, heaven help us. The PBS investigators refused to review any of my personal documentation, refused to provide me the names of any accusers, refused to speak to my current staff, and refused to provide me any semblance of due process to defend myself against allegations from unknown sources. Their mind was made up. Almost immediately following the meeting, this story broke in Varietyas an “exclusive.” Indeed, I learned more about these allegations reading the Variety story than the PBS investigator shared with me, the accused, in our 3 hour face to face meeting.
Really? I live in the area and everyone here seems surprised.
Moliere wrote: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:44 pm Tavis Smiley responds to suspension by PBS following sexual misconduct investigation
I have the utmost respect for women and celebrate the courage of those who have come forth to tell their truth. To be clear, I have never groped, coerced, or exposed myself inappropriately to any workplace colleague in my entire broadcast career, covering 6 networks over 30 years.
Never. Ever. Never.
PBS launched a so-called investigation of me without ever informing me. I learned of the investigation when former staffers started contacting me to share the uncomfortable experience of receiving a phone call from a stranger asking whether, I had ever done anything to make them uncomfortable, and if they could provide other names of persons to call. After 14 seasons, that’s how I learned of this inquiry, from the streets.
Only after being threatened with a lawsuit, did PBS investigators reluctantly agree to interview me for three hours.
If having a consensual relationship with a colleague years ago is the stuff that leads to this kind of public humiliation and personal destruction, heaven help us. The PBS investigators refused to review any of my personal documentation, refused to provide me the names of any accusers, refused to speak to my current staff, and refused to provide me any semblance of due process to defend myself against allegations from unknown sources. Their mind was made up. Almost immediately following the meeting, this story broke in Varietyas an “exclusive.” Indeed, I learned more about these allegations reading the Variety story than the PBS investigator shared with me, the accused, in our 3 hour face to face meeting.
Matrix wrote:And for guys who are weinsten level, they will just put it into paper work in the future. Want connections,? Put out. Transactional, but now stated in contract.
No no, it all bothered me but there was too much stupidity to address it all.Isgrimnur wrote:That’s the part that bothered you and not...
Matrix wrote:And for guys who are weinsten level, they will just put it into paper work in the future. Want connections,? Put out. Transactional, but now stated in contract.
Alex Kozinski, the powerful judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit who was facing a judicial investigation over allegations that he subjected 15 women to inappropriate sexual behavior, announced Monday that he would retire effective immediately.
In a statement provided by his lawyer, Kozinski apologized, saying that he “had a broad sense of humor and a candid way of speaking to both male and female law clerks alike,” and that “in doing so, I may not have been mindful enough of the special challenges and pressures that women face in the workplace.”
“It grieves me to learn that I caused any of my clerks to feel uncomfortable; this was never my intent,” he said.
Kozinski, 67, said although family and friends had urged him to stay on, “at least long enough to defend myself,” he “cannot be an effective judge and simultaneously fight this battle.”
“Nor would such a battle be good for my beloved federal judiciary. And so I am making the decision to retire, effective immediately,” he said.
I doubt it will affect the fetish niches we all think you enjoy.em2nought wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 1:40 am I'm hoping what we get out of this is a higher level of porn, especially now that we'll have to pay more for it over the net.
You might be correct as this already had pretty good acting.
'Matrix wrote: Sun Dec 17, 2017 11:31 pm And for guys who are weinsten level, they will just put it into paper work in the future. Want connections,? Put out. Transactional, but now stated in contract.
witch-huntHolman wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 10:52 pm I keep seeing anti-feminists calling this a "witch hunt."
Don't they know that that metaphor depends on witchcraft not being real?
He paid 203 million for it in 1993. He will sell it for over 2 billion. Lesson learned!Grifman wrote: Sun Dec 17, 2017 9:07 pm Well, that was quick, guess the handwriting was on the wall:
http://m.panthers.com/news/article-2/Je ... 2005729697
I'm assuming it was this?Moat_Man wrote: Tue Dec 19, 2017 11:29 pmMatt Damon needs to shut his mouth. This isn't about you and what you think of things.
He also actually said (close paraphrase) "Why aren't we talking about the men in Hollywood who *aren't* predators?"
But asking men to acknowledge that there's a gendered problem isn't the same as accusing them of assault.Paingod wrote: Wed Dec 20, 2017 9:39 amHe may be feeling the same way. Feeling like you're being tossed into a grouping with predators and fiends when you're not one isn't fun.
MacGowan already came forward claiming both Damon and Affleck are complicit in Harvey's behaviour because they knew about it and didn't do enough to get him to stop.Moliere wrote: Wed Dec 20, 2017 10:14 am The problem is that Matt is friends with Harvey and owes his career to that scumbag. He needs to shut up or explain how he somehow didn't know that shit was going on with his buddy.
Everyone in Hollywood is complicit. Entire theater halls filled with Hollywood people chuckled nervously as they mocked him sexually harassing people. Everyone in America that tuned in was in on 'the joke' at some level. It seems excessive to point randomly at someone in that crowd and scream "He knew! HE KNEW!"GreenGoo wrote: Wed Dec 20, 2017 3:32 pmMacGowan already came forward claiming both Damon and Affleck are complicit in Harvey's behaviour because they knew about it and didn't do enough to get him to stop.
Uh...Paingod wrote: Wed Dec 20, 2017 4:04 pmEveryone in Hollywood is complicit. Entire theater halls filled with Hollywood people chuckled nervously as they mocked him sexually harassing people. Everyone in America that tuned in was in on 'the joke' at some level. It seems excessive to point randomly at someone in that crowd and scream "He knew! HE KNEW!"GreenGoo wrote: Wed Dec 20, 2017 3:32 pmMacGowan already came forward claiming both Damon and Affleck are complicit in Harvey's behaviour because they knew about it and didn't do enough to get him to stop.
Or She knew!Paingod wrote: Wed Dec 20, 2017 4:04 pmEveryone in Hollywood is complicit. Entire theater halls filled with Hollywood people chuckled nervously as they mocked him sexually harassing people. Everyone in America that tuned in was in on 'the joke' at some level. It seems excessive to point randomly at someone in that crowd and scream "He knew! HE KNEW!"GreenGoo wrote: Wed Dec 20, 2017 3:32 pmMacGowan already came forward claiming both Damon and Affleck are complicit in Harvey's behaviour because they knew about it and didn't do enough to get him to stop.
It hurt to be attacked by Rose McGowan in banner headlines this weekend, but I want to let her know I did not know about Weinstein’s crimes, not in the 90s when he attacked her, or through subsequent decades when he proceeded to attack others.
I wasn’t deliberately silent. I didn’t know. I don’t tacitly approve of rape. I didn’t know. I don’t like young women being assaulted. I didn’t know this was happening.
I don’t know where Harvey lives, nor has he ever been to my home.
I have never in my life been invited to his hotel room.
I have been to his office once, for a meeting with Wes Craven for "Music of the Heart" in 1998.
HW distributed movies I made with other people.
HW was not a filmmaker; he was often a producer, primarily a marketer of films made by other people- some of them great, some not great. But not every actor, actress, and director who made films that HW distributed knew he abused women, or that he raped Rose in the 90s, other women before and others after, until they told us. We did not know that women’s silence was purchased by him and his enablers.
HW needed us not to know this, because our association with him bought him credibility, an ability to lure young, aspiring women into circumstances where they would be hurt.
He needed me much more than I needed him and he made sure I didn’t know. Apparently he hired ex Mossad operators to protect this information from becoming public. Rose and the scores of other victims of these powerful, moneyed, ruthless men face an adversary for whom Winning, at any and all costs, is the only acceptable outcome. That’s why a legal defense fund for victims is currently being assembled to which hundreds of good hearted people in our business will contribute, to bring down the bastards, and help victims fight this scourge within.
Rose assumed and broadcast something untrue about me, and I wanted to let her know the truth. Through friends who know her, I got my home phone number to her the minute I read the headlines. I sat by that phone all day yesterday and this morning, hoping to express both my deep respect for her and others’ bravery in exposing the monsters among us, and my sympathy for the untold, ongoing pain she suffers. No one can bring back what entitled bosses like Bill O’Reilly, Roger Ailes, and HW took from the women who endured attacks on their bodies and their ability to make a living. And I hoped that she would give me a hearing. She did not, but I hope she reads this.
I am truly sorry she sees me as an adversary, because we are both, together with all the women in our business, standing in defiance of the same implacable foe: a status quo that wants so badly to return to the bad old days, the old ways where women were used, abused and refused entry into the decision-making, top levels of the industry. That’s where the cover-ups convene. Those rooms must be disinfected, and integrated, before anything even begins to change.
You should shut your mouth too defending a Weinstein co conspirator! Sigh.RunningMn9 wrote:I saw a lot of outrage directed at Damon, and then saw the interview. I didn’t find the interview nearly as objectionable as the outragists led me to believe it was. Tone deaf? In parts, but hardly worth the outrage that I’ve seen in various reaction pieces.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro