Harvey Weinstein scandal

[DrZoidberg]

If a person invites somebody to their room, that's about as a clear an indicator that the other person is ever going to get.

It's definitely possible you were misconstrued here. Even if you've invited someone into your room, even if it's a bedroom, they can still harass you (and worse), obviously.

Yes, I agree. I hope I'm not coming across as defending that? My point is that we all up the game bit by bit. We make moves and the other's respond and thereby signal what is appropriate. Inviting somebody to your room is one such thing. Touching somebody on the back or arm comes before touching the face and neck, which follows by touching the naughty bits. Or a withdrawal of consent, in which it stops. Both parties need to be super attentive and sensitive to where it's going. Because this can all be extremely subtle.

Here's an example I'm sure we've all experienced (or I hope you have). We're sitting talking. Then we stop talking. Look into each others eyes way too long and then we kiss. At no point does anybody ask "can I kiss you?". I think that is extremely rare. Instead the consent has to be implied. That's what's normal. And unless we're* discussing how normal people have sex, we're not really having a discussion.

*I'm not talking about your in particular. I mean...we as in everybody discussing in this thread.

 

[ruby sparks]

I myself don't really know where the line is between harassment and non-harassment, but in practical terms I'd say one reasonable place is at the point someone says the actions are unwelcome, if they do. There might of course be reasons they don't, so it could still be deemed harassment, I suppose.

I suspect that in the large majority of sexual harassments, the victim never vocalises their lack of consent or discomfort. Indeed, many of the instances coming to light recently have been situations where the victim felt they could not vocalise this for fear of unwelcome consequences to career or even wellbeing.

This is why it is essential to gain active consent, and even more essential to not engage in sexual activities with anyone who may have a reason to not vocalise the withholding of consent (for example, an employee or subordinate or anyone over whom you have power).

I broadly agree, while allowing that gaining active consent is where it gets tricky, in some contexts. I must admit, in all of my admittedly non world-class seductions, I've relied mostly on passive consent, or at least not necessarily verbal consent. In short, I've had to do some intuitive guesswork.

 

[Jon Osterman]

Agreed. But how is this in any way relevant to what I said? Please, can you stop virtue signalling?

I was supporting your mentioning of long term relationships, as a counter to Ruby's objection, by saying that sexual harassment is also relevant to long term relationships. Paranoid much?

You seem desperate to position yourself as a good guy by saying all the obvious stuff. You don't need to. I'm sure you're a great guy. As most people are. But the obvious stuff is obvious to everyone. So let's not discuss that? How about if we talk about the stuff around the edges? You know.... where things go bad? Good guys ending up doing bad stuff is a more interesting discussion than talking about evil people doing evil. Don't you agree? I have zero interest in discussing exactly how much like Hitler Weinstein is.

When did I mention Hitler?

I am new here, so was trying to be nice. But I thought that my underlying tone was clear. Let me try again...

I think your pathetic apologies on behalf of perverts who abuse their positions of power to harass women makes you (almost) as much scum as they are.

Is that better?

 

[TSwizzle]

I think it is the same topic. It's relevant because actual healthy human sexuality is relevant in a discussion about sexuality gone wrong. I seem to be alone in this thread with acknowledging that it's not always obvious. And there's plenty of room for people to make mistakes. Pretending like it's always obvious when there's consent is being disingenuous.

You should start a separate thread because you are determined not to stay on topic.

But people here don't seem to care. They just seem to want to be on the witch hunt. I thought that a free thought and rationalist forum could do better than this and just be honest? But perhaps I'm wrong and this isn't the forum for me?

It's because you want to discuss something else, fine, start another thread. Stop spamming this one.

Not to mention that those who have argued against me in this thread have mostly been really dishonest and haven't made an effort to meet my arguments. They mischaracterise what I'm saying and pretend that I'm defending cases that I'm not.

Boo hoo, cry me a river. You want to discuss a broader topic, fine, start another thread.

It's interesting to explore the border between acceptable behavior and perhaps acceptable behavior. It's relevant to this topic. I also seem to be the only one acknowledging that there's a grey area between what's clearly acceptable and what isn't. Why is it so scary even talking about it honestly? I honestly don't get it? Why not have a civil conversation about this?

Well now you know. Start another thread.

 

[Underseer]

Sorry, but I don't see how this "Me too" phenomenon is affecting Hollywood any more than any other segment of society, and I definitely don't see how Hollywood is somehow more sanctimonious than any Christian, Muslim, Republican, politician, etc.

To the degree that the rich and famous (be that "Hollywood" or people like Trump) have gotten away with this type of shit more so than the average Joe, I think we are seeing a bit of a "take down" of the power people - which is great, imo.

But the reality is that this sort of sexual harassment happens in every segment of society, from the construction worker cat calls to the jackass customer who pulled a Trump on me when I was in my 20's. It isn't even a matter of hypocrisy, imo... this behavior was just so ubiquitous that even the victims and the majority of people who have never engaged in it tended to keep quiet about it - never reporting it or speaking up about it.

It is my hope that with the publicity of the "rich and famous" now suffering consequences for their casual sexual harassment, there will be a paradigm shift all the way through our society.

I'm no lover of Hollywood. I think they're pretty fucking racist and perpetuate a lot of subconscious racism in the West, but I still don't see how the rich and powerful in Hollywood are necessarily any worse than rich and powerful people in any other sphere.

Although I do confess that I'm getting a bit of schadenfreude from this over the fact that they are more in the public sphere. ("What? That guy I don't know but think I know turned out to be a major creep? Well screw that guy!")

 

[DrZoidberg]

You should start a separate thread because you are determined not to stay on topic.

I think it is the topic. I don't think they can be meaningfully separated. The topic is partly why it happens. I think sexual predators exploit social allowances we give because of how normal sexual flirting works. So its worth exploring.

Look, we're supposed to be rationalists and free thinkers here. Most things said here have been towing the party line, virtue signalling and repeating worn feminist slogans as if they're universally applicable. I think we can do better than that?

Pretending a hard problem is easy, doesn't make it easy. That's a great way to guarantee this behaviour never goes away

 

[Toni]

Is it uncomfortable when somebody spells out what you are doing to you? If you want to have a civil discussion, then just stop being a dick? It's not hard.

And yet, here you are.

It's interesting how you're so quick to strongly condemn the faults of others. But when you're the one who has committed the transgression you refuse to take responsibility.

I think you have things flipped around.

 

[TSwizzle]

You should start a separate thread because you are determined not to stay on topic.

I think it is the topic.

And every single person has told you they are not and still you persist. Stop spamming and start another thread.

 

[Toni]

Sorry, but I don't see how this "Me too" phenomenon is affecting Hollywood any more than any other segment of society, and I definitely don't see how Hollywood is somehow more sanctimonious than any Christian, Muslim, Republican, politician, etc.

To the degree that the rich and famous (be that "Hollywood" or people like Trump) have gotten away with this type of shit more so than the average Joe, I think we are seeing a bit of a "take down" of the power people - which is great, imo.

But the reality is that this sort of sexual harassment happens in every segment of society, from the construction worker cat calls to the jackass customer who pulled a Trump on me when I was in my 20's. It isn't even a matter of hypocrisy, imo... this behavior was just so ubiquitous that even the victims and the majority of people who have never engaged in it tended to keep quiet about it - never reporting it or speaking up about it.

It is my hope that with the publicity of the "rich and famous" now suffering consequences for their casual sexual harassment, there will be a paradigm shift all the way through our society.

I'm no lover of Hollywood. I think they're pretty fucking racist and perpetuate a lot of subconscious racism in the West, but I still don't see how the rich and powerful in Hollywood are necessarily any worse than rich and powerful people in any other sphere.

Although I do confess that I'm getting a bit of schadenfreude from this over the fact that they are more in the public sphere. ("What? That guy I don't know but think I know turned out to be a major creep? Well screw that guy!")

The thing is, we only hear about them because they are rich and/or famous. Shit like this goes on ALL THE TIME. AT all levels.

Shit, I think I was 11 or 12 when boys started snapping girls' bra straps at school. With zero reaction from the teacher who was standing right there and saw it all.

Things got markedly worse from there.

My experiences are not at all unusual.

 

[Toni]

Who knew Dustin Hoffman was such a dirtbag?

And who knew he was so bald?

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/new-dustin-hoffman-accuser-claims-harassment-physical-violation-broadway-guest-column-1062349

View attachment 13514

One night in Chicago, I felt his hand up under my slip on the inside of my thighs. I was completely surprised and tried to bat him away while watching the stage for my cues. After the show he was busy with the producer and director so I had no access to him to address it. It then happened almost every show. Six to eight shows a week. I couldn’t speak to him in the moment because I was on a live mic. He kept it up and got more and more aggressive. One night he actually started to stick his fingers inside me. Night after night I went home and cried. I withdrew and got depressed and did not have any good interpersonal relationships with the cast. How could the same man who fought to get me the job, who complimented my work, who essentially launched my career, who gave me the benefit of his wisdom as an actor, how could he also be this sexual power abuser? Was I doing something? Was it my fault?

There's a part of me that just wants to see Hollywood taken down. Its always been a bit tiresome and annoying to me to see these sanctimonious hypocritical pricks and cunts getting up on their soapboxes on Oscar night preaching about their pet human rights causes (immigrants, women's rights, LGBT rights, etc). Now many have been busted committing some pretty awful stuff themselves. People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones, and all that stuff.

Explain to me how this could go on week after week without her telling him it isnt ok?

I have a hard time with this as well. Obviously there are other people present: at least the photographer and likely a lot more. I am certain that it was passed off as a joke. Probably intended as a joke. Maybe also a come on but certainly as a joke. I'm not minimizing that it was wrong or bad or horrifying. I'm just trying to explain why no one--not the photographer, not the actress--no one said: Whoa. Or threw an elbow to the ribs. Joking, just joking, right? Hoffman is the bigger name and would have been kept over her. Her protests would have been minimized as would his offense. She would have been shuffled off to the sidelines, with no more career.

It's not like this wouldn't happen in other job situations. It would. It does.

Me, I would have thrown an elbow. Maybe in his nose. Laughed at my 'joke' or apologized if I had hurt him. More like 'apologize.' Put some steel into my eyes and smile and spine--and elbow.

But then, on the fight/flight scale, I am much more likely to fight than to flee. Not everyone is like that, though. I was talking with one of my long time friends about harassment, etc. when the stories first began to break. We were exchanging tales of experiences and I realized that this extremely talented, brilliant, beautiful woman that I've known since we were 8 years old reacts very differently to threats and stress than I do. She freezes. She placates. She avoids. She described some pretty awful work scenarios that occurred well into her career. They were especially bad because she was expected to go along on trips with a boss who was...pretty disgusting but the travel was part of her job and she wasn't able to avoid all of trips or him all of the time. Her line of work involved working as a consultant with a defense contractor. She never turned him in. It wouldn't have mattered. It took years of multiple women complaining before he quietly retired. She did manage to get herself reassigned so she didn't have to travel with him any more.

The first time or 10 that it happened to me, I tended to freeze and withdraw, to avoid any possible situation that might result in another grabbed boob or crotch. Unfortunately not able to anticipate them all. Eventually, something clicked. Same asshole tried to hurt a dear friend of mine, right in front of me. I stopped him; a few minutes later he managed to corner me alone and make another grab, another filthy suggestion. And it clicked for me: I realized then that I was doing nothing at all to provoke him, that he did what he did because he was ANGRY with me for stopping him from breaking my friend's arm or with the world or whoever. That moment of realization changed everything for me. No more avoid avoid avoid and escape at the earliest moment if I wasn't able to avoid completely. This was fairly quickly followed by my discovery of the right combination of inflicting pain plus creating plausible fear of discovery that I shut his behavior with me down completely and to avoid any scenarios where repeat attempts would occur. I was 15 at this time. Which is how I excuse myself for not realizing that his behavior was not limited to just me and would not stop because I shut him down. There would be others. There were others. Years later--many years later, I learned he continued to be violent and abusive towards the woman he married and their kids and almost certainly his second wife and her children. If I had been older, if times had been different, I might have been able to do more. I would have known I needed to do more. But I did not. Because I was 15.

 

[DrZoidberg]

You should start a separate thread because you are determined not to stay on topic.

I think it is the topic.

And every single person has told you they are not and still you persist. Stop spamming and start another thread.

That doesn't make it true. Then I'll be the one guy who doesn't agree. I'm ok with being a special and unique little flower here.

 

[ruby sparks]

If a person invites somebody to their room, that's about as a clear an indicator that the other person is ever going to get.

It's definitely possible you were misconstrued here. Even if you've invited someone into your room, even if it's a bedroom, they can still harass you (and worse), obviously.

Yes, I agree. I hope I'm not coming across as defending that? My point is that we all up the game bit by bit. We make moves and the other's respond and thereby signal what is appropriate. Inviting somebody to your room is one such thing. Touching somebody on the back or arm comes before touching the face and neck, which follows by touching the naughty bits. Or a withdrawal of consent, in which it stops. Both parties need to be super attentive and sensitive to where it's going. Because this can all be extremely subtle.

Here's an example I'm sure we've all experienced (or I hope you have). We're sitting talking. Then we stop talking. Look into each others eyes way too long and then we kiss. At no point does anybody ask "can I kiss you?". I think that is extremely rare. Instead the consent has to be implied. That's what's normal. And unless we're* discussing how normal people have sex, we're not really having a discussion.

*I'm not talking about your in particular. I mean...we as in everybody discussing in this thread.

You are interested in the fuzzy boundary between harassment and non-harassment. You are not really talking about what we might call 'clear cut' examples of either. I do think that's an interesting place to go and it is of course relevant to the topic.

Yes, you are right, I have 'guessed consent' on many occasions and luckily I've been right almost all the time. I'm not saying I'm a saint. I've probably offended people lots of times without realising it, but hopefully not too often when it comes to sexual matters, because I generally keep my hands to myself and...whatever. I know other guys who are more forward. I know a guy whose strategy for getting laid on a night out was to be upfront about that being what he was looking for, take a lot of refusals, as many as it took, and waited for the one. I guess that that could be construed as harassment. Dunno.

But anyhows, where I'm from, the guy generally has to make the running and make the moves, so there's always a risk.

I don't think this applies to Dustin Hoffman, Harvey Weinstein much.

 

[ruby sparks]

I posted this talk earlier in this thread. It's by the social psychologist Carol Tavris. It's an excellent talk on exactly this. All her books and videos are fantastic btw, on a variety of topics. She's a genius. And funny. Anyhoo... she spells it out way better than I could.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGMi0UtvTIc

Great video. Very egalitarian, fair-minded, empathetic, rational and as you say witty. It would be hard to imagine the exact same talk being given by a man and being seen as acceptable (and if delivered by a man using the same wit, there might even have been accusations of not taking a very serious matter seriously), so, all in all, great that the talk was delivered by a feminist woman.

 

[blastula]

Celebrity chef Mario Batali out as 'The Chew' co-host amid allegations of sexual misconduct | abc13.com

Another day, another harasser outed, but this story is notable for Batali's statement. He gave the fullest, most unqualified apology so far.

"I apologize to the people I have mistreated and hurt. Although the identities of most of the individuals mentioned in these stories have not been revealed to me, much of the behavior described does, in fact, match up with ways I have acted. That behavior was wrong and there are no excuses. I take full responsibility and am deeply sorry for any pain, humiliation or discomfort I have caused to my peers, employees, customers, friends and family.

I have work to do to try to regain the trust of those I have hurt and disappointed. For this reason, I am going to step away from day-to-day operations of my businesses. We built these restaurants so that our guests could have fun and indulge, but I took that too far in my own behavior. I won't make that mistake again. I want any place I am associated with to feel comfortable and safe for the people who work or dine there.

I know my actions have disappointed many people. The successes I have enjoyed are owned by everyone on my team. The failures are mine alone. To the people who have been at my side during this time - my family, my partners, my employees, my friends, my fans - I am grateful for your support and hopeful that I can regain your respect and trust. I will spend the next period of time trying to do that."

 

[RavenSky]

And every single person has told you they are not and still you persist. Stop spamming and start another thread.

That doesn't make it true. Then I'll be the one guy who doesn't agree. I'm ok with being a special and unique little flower here.

What are you? 2-years old? Grow the fuck up and discuss issues like an adult. Your passive-aggressive whining & neg rep is juvenile What's the matter... couldn't stand it that I said I was going to ignore your tantrums in the thread so you had to take it behind the scenes too?

You really are "a special and unique little flower" - and I don't mean that in a good way

 

[RavenSky]

Dude, you have not yet actually presented any sort of an argument.

You have only presented your own opinion over and over using an incorrect definition of sexual harassment. I have presented you with a factual sourced definition/explanation of "sexual harassment" which you have rejected with the false claim that it "only" applied to the workplace. You have failed to present any sort of factual sourced counter-definition/explanation of "sexual harassment" (your uninformed opinion doesn't count).

In the meantime, several of us have stated why we disagree with your overall opinion on the topic, and all you have done is repeated the same opinion without expanding on it, while personally attacking us and whinging like a two-year-old.

When you decide to post like an adult, I will decide then whether I feel like responding. In the meantime, enjoy your wallow.

I'm not interested in discussing a fantasy of human sexuality and flirting. I'm only interested in discussing how people actually do it. It doesn't matter how much you insist, it's false. I worked in clubs and bars in over ten years l. That makes me an expert in how it's actually done.

As did I - plus I've lived in the real world one hell of a lot longer than you have - so by your measure, I'm twice the expert you are.

That official definition isn't good enough.

I don't give a fuck what your OPINION is. You have added nothing valid to the conversation or the definition of sexual harassment.

Anyway I tried. You can stay in fantasy land. I somehow don't think that's an adult discussion on this topic. Which is doubly worrying since #metoo is partly a witch hunt. It matters what regular people think. Since we're the mob.

And you still owe an apology. I won't forget it.

Don't hold your breath, because I owe you nothing

I tried keeping a civil tone. You didn't.

He claims after he hurls a few more bullshit insults

You've handled yourself very badly in this thread IMHO

Quit describing yourself. We all already know you blew it here.

Now run along and neg rep me again because you are incapable of admitting you might be wrong on this topic and you are incapable of discussing anything like an adult.

 

[RavenSky]

Well, one can certainly have sexual harassment and/or rape in a long terms relationship, including marriage. It is also important to obtain consent there too. No-one should have to tolerate unwelcome sexual touching or flirting, irrespective of their relationship status.

very true... and it wasn't so long ago that marital rape was not even recognized as a crime.

I think popular fiction, movies and TV share a lot of the blame in generating a culture where consent is assumed. We are conditioned to find sexual advances normal even when explicit consent has not been obtained. James Bond just assumes the girl is interested in him.

VERY true.

Popular fiction also reinforces the idea that women need to play 'hard to get' and/or that if the guy just keeps stalking her she will eventually give in and he will get great sex.

 

[RavenSky]

I myself don't really know where the line is between harassment and non-harassment, but in practical terms I'd say one reasonable place is at the point someone says the actions are unwelcome, if they do. There might of course be reasons they don't, so it could still be deemed harassment, I suppose.

I suspect that in the large majority of sexual harassments, the victim never vocalises their lack of consent or discomfort. Indeed, many of the instances coming to light recently have been situations where the victim felt they could not vocalise this for fear of unwelcome consequences to career or even wellbeing.

This is why it is essential to gain active consent, and even more essential to not engage in sexual activities with anyone who may have a reason to not vocalise the withholding of consent (for example, an employee or subordinate or anyone over whom you have power).

Or the victim is not even given a chance to voice an objection, or so shocked by what is happening that they are unsure how to respond (or how would be safe to respond).

A year or so ago there were several contentious discussions about the creepy dud in the elevator... the point was repeatedly made that in those types of situations a woman will very often pretend to laugh off the sexual harassment to avoid angering the guy.

Louis CK is a perfect example of this type of harasser. Several of his accusers said they assumed he was joking and tried to laugh it off... which he took as consent (it wasn't). The women expressed concern about his possible reaction if they did anything other than allow him to finish and then get out of there as quickly and calmly as possible.

This is not to say that Louis CK WOULD have violently assaulted anyone... just that his victims has no way to know how he would react if they directly and bluntly objected to what he was doing. I suspect that the majority of women (and likely a large number of men) have experienced a situation wherein they have turned down an offer of a date, only to have the person get extremely nasty and insulting. It is all different degrees of the same phenomenon, and why a lot of women tread very very very carefully in these situations.

It is also why men who are real men seek unambiguous affirmative consent in their relationships.

 

[RavenSky]

Sorry, but I don't see how this "Me too" phenomenon is affecting Hollywood any more than any other segment of society, and I definitely don't see how Hollywood is somehow more sanctimonious than any Christian, Muslim, Republican, politician, etc.

To the degree that the rich and famous (be that "Hollywood" or people like Trump) have gotten away with this type of shit more so than the average Joe, I think we are seeing a bit of a "take down" of the power people - which is great, imo.

But the reality is that this sort of sexual harassment happens in every segment of society, from the construction worker cat calls to the jackass customer who pulled a Trump on me when I was in my 20's. It isn't even a matter of hypocrisy, imo... this behavior was just so ubiquitous that even the victims and the majority of people who have never engaged in it tended to keep quiet about it - never reporting it or speaking up about it.

It is my hope that with the publicity of the "rich and famous" now suffering consequences for their casual sexual harassment, there will be a paradigm shift all the way through our society.

I'm no lover of Hollywood. I think they're pretty fucking racist and perpetuate a lot of subconscious racism in the West, but I still don't see how the rich and powerful in Hollywood are necessarily any worse than rich and powerful people in any other sphere.

I don't think they are any worse at all... just more public

 

[RavenSky]

You are interested in the fuzzy boundary between harassment and non-harassment. You are not really talking about what we might call 'clear cut' examples of either. I do think that's an interesting place to go and it is of course relevant to the topic.

Yes, you are right, I have 'guessed consent' on many occasions and luckily I've been right almost all the time. I'm not saying I'm a saint. I've probably offended people lots of times without realising it, but hopefully not too often when it comes to sexual matters, because I generally keep my hands to myself and...whatever.

You say that you generally keep your hands to yourself. So where you think you have "offended people lots of times without realising it" and how does that - in your opinion - constitute sexual harassment?

I know other guys who are more forward. I know a guy whose strategy for getting laid on a night out was to be upfront about that being what he was looking for, take a lot of refusals, as many as it took, and waited for the one. I guess that that could be construed as harassment. Dunno.

How do you think it might constitute sexual harassment? You say that he is upfront about his hopes when on dates (i.e. - not when he is at work or to random women he hasn't met before). You also say he would "take a lot of refusals, as many as it took, and waited for the one" - do you mean that he would repeatedly ask the same woman, or that he would be upfront each time he dated a different woman until he found a woman that shared his pov/preferences?