The lynching of Harvey Weinstein

[devogue]

A few thoughts...

Over the years online I saw a number of sexual allegations rise against various famous people - Cliff Richard, Leon Britten, Ted Heath and Frank Bruno to name a few. Quiet murmurs by individual, anonymous forum posters claimed they were evil sexual predators - in every case I never once heard from a direct victim of these men. It was always sentences that began with "It's well known that..." or "A friend of mine once heard that..." or "Such and such is a bad egg...". Never once did I read "I was abused by..." online.

Eventually we get to a point where Leon Britten spends his dying days in the middle of a witch hunt that was disproved (too late for his traumatised family), where the completely innocent Cliff Richard's home is searched live on TV, his spotless name built over 60 years sullied and serious questions are being asked about the recent investigation in to Ted Heath.

The police and social services can't win - if they don't investigate they will be hammered, if they do they can be accused of persecution. False accusers (note False) lose nothing - like the old neighbour in 12 Angry Men they may get some much craved attention and importance in to their dull lives and, who knows, there might be some financial goodies at the end of it all too.

I reckon there's a snowball effect in certain cases as well - a crucial tipping point of when there are perhaps four accusers, there is a general feeling of outrage and excited blood lust in the media, and then the floodgates open and a trickle of accusations becomes a torrent that overwhelms an individual.

I think Harvey Weinstein is a bad man ( he has admitted as much), I think he is probably guilty of some of the crimes he has been accused of, but the point is I can only use words like "think" and "probably" until the man is found guilty in a court of law after careful presentation of all the evidence from the prosecution and defence. At the minute we have 100% prosecution, 0% defence and an awful lot of famous and not so famous people who seem to be signing up to a viral "Me Too" social justice campaign with accompanying major media opportunities at Weinstein's expense. I'm sure their agents have cleverly advised them and they will be safe in the numbers of the pack while they claim bravery and attempt to open lucrative career opportunities.

[cronus]

Can't be famous without folks throwing cow dung. In the UK the cow dung contains stones. This is the behaviour of apes. We are apes. Go figure?

[Brian Peacock]

A few thoughts...

...

I think Harvey Weinstein is a bad man ( he has admitted as much), I think he is probably guilty of some of the crimes he has been accused of, but the point is I can only use words like "think" and "probably" until the man is found guilty in a court of law after careful presentation of all the evidence from the prosecution and defence. At the minute we have 100% prosecution, 0% defence and an awful lot of famous and not so famous people who seem to be signing up to a viral "Me Too" social justice campaign with accompanying major media opportunities at Weinstein's expense. I'm sure their agents have cleverly advised them and they will be safe in the numbers of the pack while they claim bravery and attempt to open lucrative career opportunities.

it's easy (and perhaps all too easy) to imagine that a proportion of people signing up to "Me Too" are 'bandwagoning' on the back of the media's prurient interest in an exposed sexual predator whose activities appear to have been an 'open secret' within his industry, but again, that conclusion remains within the realms of "think" and "probably" too, doesn't it? But as seemingly reasonable a conclusion as this might be it's speculation - idle musings which distract from the main, core issues: that someone might be doing a Munchausen doesn't dilute the testimony or experience of any other "Mee-Too-er", and; let's not forget, that abusers act with guile and aforethought to create circumstances in which they can control other and meet their personal needs with impunity - they are the one's who benefit from their abuse, not the abused.

[Hermit]

I think Harvey Weinstein is a bad man ( he has admitted as much), I think he is probably guilty of some of the crimes he has been accused of, but the point is I can only use words like "think" and "probably" until the man is found guilty in a court of law after careful presentation of all the evidence from the prosecution and defence. At the minute we have 100% prosecution, 0% defence

A bad man? Come on, call a spade a spade. Weinstein is a sexual predator who should not be allowed to be in close proximity of women without supervision. And there is no need to to hedge that opinion with "I think" and "probably". Weinstein has said and written enough on that matter himself to remove any doubt.

That said, I do agree that media-driven hysterics based on nothing more than allegations concerning the lack of moral virtue of public figures happen too often and are to be condemned. Starting this thread about it you just picked the wrong man as an example. Even if Weinstein is never formally charged with any offence at all, let alone found guilty of one, public outrage is justified, as is his sacking. He is not a victim of gossip. He is now suffering the consequences of his past deeds.

[laklak]

Here in Africa we just eat our enemies.

I'm going to hook up with Rainbow for a missionary braai while we're here.

[pErvinalia]

[mistermack]

The police must be totally bemused by it all.

When a genuine rape happens, by a nobody against a nobody, it's very difficult for the police to get a conviction.
They need forensics, they need witnesses with a clear memory, they need corroborating evidence like phone and cctv footage, and preferably a medical report from an exam performed within hours.
Even then, it's hard to prove or disprove consent, and the guilty party often walk away free.

But a celebrity gets accused thirty years after the so-called event, and it's a dead certainty that they're guilty, especially when, as if by magic, loads of fortune hunters suddenly recall that they too were abused.

It's fucking pathetic.
Sorry and everything, if you were genuinely abused. But you left it too fucking late.

[Brian Peacock]

That's right. And all those gold-digging fortune-hunters who say a celeb raped them 30 years ago are always women too - that's the real problem right there: women. I mean Christ, you can't even tell a woman she's got nice tits any more without her going up the wall and calling you a paedio.

[mistermack]

all those gold-digging fortune-hunters who say a celeb raped them 30 years ago are always women too

Yeh that's right. And they are always old or middle aged women. Bitter old bitches who ain't gettin none.

[Galaxian]

all those gold-digging fortune-hunters who say a celeb raped them 30 years ago are always women too

Yeh that's right. And they are always old or middle aged women. Bitter old bitches who ain't gettin none.

Well...to a point. "all those gold-digging fortune-hunters who say a celeb raped them 30 years ago are always women too". That confirms what I said several posts ago; that there's a difference between statutory law, and the law as applied in real life: All are supposedly equal before the law. But in practice, women are allowed to bring rape charges, but men are not. Any man trying to do so would only bring ridicule upon his head.

Well, they're heading towards middle age, and digging for a comfortable retirement. Let's say they're over 45. That's by definition, since many years should lapse before an accusation is made (see my above posts). Then here's the tricky bit:
"Bitter old bitches who ain't gettin none.". They ain't getting none because generally they are NOT interested in sex after 50. It is a biological imperative. Women lose sexual drive after the menopause. Men do not lose it till extreme old age, because they're still fertile till then.

However, women would like to 'think' that they are still sexy after 50. That is due to social conditioning. So a conflict is set up in the organism: "Do I want sex? My mind tells me I 'should' do. But my body is not interested." In American society someone is always to blame. Someone must be sued. There's no such thing as natural senescence or natural death. If you die at 90, who caused it? If you stop having sex at 50 your husband must be at fault. Hence HRT (hormone replacement therapy) and viagra.

Come hell or high water, you must be able to party at 60+. Hips hurting? Not to worry, we'll replace them and you can go clubbing by next weekend. I think the photo of the 80 year old lecherour pimp says it all:
https://cache.bzi.ro/cache/1/367/s604x0 ... 560737.jpg


But the prostitutes gawking over him are even more obnoxious; to them money is way more superior to love or family

[Rum]

Male rape prosecutions are not uncommon. Rape by women is also a recognised crime and prosecutions have taken place. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_by_gender

Facts actually matter.

[Scot Dutchy]

I wonder how many men report being raped by a female?

[Brian Peacock]

Tom Hanks has popped up to condemn Weinstein, saying that his name will become a noun and a verb.

Nice to see a man taking charge of the situation, eh boys? Eh?

[Rum]

I 'spect he's a feminist though.

..so did Tom Jones - another feminist?

[Brian Peacock]

We're all feminists these days.

Well, you have to be if you want to get a shag.