The Disgrace that is Harvey Weinstein -- and Other Sexual Predators

[Sterngard Friegen]

Sexual predator Harvey Weinstein needs his own topic. He is turning out to be little more than a Jewish Bill Cosby. While the directors of his company have known since at least 2015 of allegations such as those the New York Times has recently reported, it was only after the Grey Lady ran its stories that they finally decided to act. Better late than never? Sexual predators of women continue to harm women until they are exposed and stopped.

Hidden Content

This board requires you to be registered and logged-in to view hidden content.

[Title changed 11-29-17.]

[Addie]

Thank you, Sternie

[DejaMoo]

From all accounts, this is how business is conducted in H-Wood, and it's always been that way. If you want to get a job, you had better be willing to provide sexual favors, because it is so often made a condition for even considering a person (male or female) for a job, most usually in front of the cameras but sometimes behind, too.

Joss Whedon was recently roundly denounced after it came out that he, the supposed feminist writer/producer, routinely provided actresses with roles and/or beefed up their storylines in exchange for sex. All the while gaslighting his wife that he wasn't cheating on her.

The worst part is that the abusers are always, always protected by their peers, while it's the victims and those who speak out about the abuse that suffer the retaliation.

[maydijo]

I read today that Matt Damon covered up for Weinstein and killed this story when another reporter tried to write about it in 2004. That makes two sex scandals Damon has tried to bury now, and two sexual predators he's actively protected (the other, of course, is Casey Affleck.) I would love to see this destroy his career, or at least seriously damage his name to the extend that he has to do a shit-ton of grovelling to get back on track.

I am leaving this up for the purposes of transparency and honesty, but upon reviewing the story, it isn't quite as bad as I made it sound. What can I say, I was still half asleep when I read it this morning. The link can be found here: http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/ce ... 2b06534d1f
In short, a reporter who was doing a story on this was interested in an Italian Miramax employee whose job it was to "take care of Weinstein's women needs", and Damon and Russel Crowe called the reporter to vouch for the Italian, which was partially responsible for the wider story, about Weinstein's abuses, being axed.

[Flatpointhigh]

Sexual predator Harvey Weinstein needs his own topic. He is turning out to be little more than a Jewish Bill Cosby. While the directors of his company have known since at least 2015 of allegations such as those the New York Times has recently reported, it was only after the Grey Lady ran its stories that they finally decided to act. Better late than never? Sexual predators of women continue to harm women until they are exposed and stopped.

Hidden Content

This board requires you to be registered and logged-in to view hidden content.

why was it necessary of you to bring in his religion?

[Foggy]

Sterngard mentioned his ethnicity, not his religion (do we know if he practices Judaism?) because Sterngard is Jewish and he resents people who give Jews a bad name. He despises Orly for being a bad lawyer and for being a bad Jew. Hard to tell which is more offensive to him. Without being Jewish myself, I know that for many, many Jews, part of being a good Jew means being a good person. Sterngard isn't particularly religious, but he does believe that Jews should strive to be good people.

Being agnostic, I think ALL people have an ethical duty to be good people. What he said about Weinstein being Jewish is what I feel about Stephen Paddock - he gives 64 yr. old white goyim guys a bad name, so fuck that guy.

I hope I explained that right.

[TexasFilly]

I read today that Matt Damon covered up for Weinstein and killed this story when another reporter tried to write about it in 2004. That makes two sex scandals Damon has tried to bury now, and two sexual predators he's actively protected (the other, of course, is Casey Affleck.) I would love to see this destroy his career, or at least seriously damage his name to the extend that he has to do a shit-ton of grovelling to get back on track.

[JohnPCapitalist]

I read today that Matt Damon covered up for Weinstein and killed this story when another reporter tried to write about it in 2004. That makes two sex scandals Damon has tried to bury now, and two sexual predators he's actively protected (the other, of course, is Casey Affleck.) I would love to see this destroy his career, or at least seriously damage his name to the extend that he has to do a shit-ton of grovelling to get back on track.

http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/10/09/m ... weinstein/

And if you're one of the people that likes to spell words like "rationalise," here's one for you. Yeah, I know it's the Daily Fail, but it's in print: http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/10/09/m ... weinstein/

[maydijo]

I read today that Matt Damon covered up for Weinstein and killed this story when another reporter tried to write about it in 2004. That makes two sex scandals Damon has tried to bury now, and two sexual predators he's actively protected (the other, of course, is Casey Affleck.) I would love to see this destroy his career, or at least seriously damage his name to the extend that he has to do a shit-ton of grovelling to get back on track.

Please see my updated post above. I was maybe too harsh on Damon.

[Sterngard Friegen]

Sterngard mentioned his ethnicity, not his religion (do we know if he practices Judaism?) because Sterngard is Jewish and he resents people who give Jews a bad name. He despises Orly for being a bad lawyer and for being a bad Jew. Hard to tell which is more offensive to him. Without being Jewish myself, I know that for many, many Jews, part of being a good Jew means being a good person. Sterngard isn't particularly religious, but he does believe that Jews should strive to be good people.

Being agnostic, I think ALL people have an ethical duty to be good people. What he said about Weinstein being Jewish is what I feel about Stephen Paddock - he gives 64 yr. old white goyim guys a bad name, so fuck that guy.

I hope I explained that right.

You did, eggsactly. Go to Jew or Not Jew and you will see him excoriated there for being the pustule on society that he has been his whole life. (The JONJ review is from 2012. Verdict: "Sadly, a Jew.")

[Addie]

A real charmer, this guy.

People

Nathan Lane Says Harvey Weinstein Threw Him Against a Wall at Hillary Clinton's Birthday Party

Amid the allegations of sexual harassment against Harvey Weinstein, Broadway funnyman Nathan Lane recounted an incident where the producer attacked him at Hillary Clinton‘s birthday party in 2000.

“The Birdcage” star was the emcee at the event thrown by the 65-year-old mogul, a longtime supporter of the Clintons, and Weinstein blew up at the actor for telling a comb-over joke about Rudy Giuliani, reports Page Six.

“This is my f–king show, we don’t need you,” Weinstein reportedly said to Lane, tossing the actor against a wall.

During an interview at the New Yorker Festival on Saturday night, Lane recalled firing back, “You can’t hurt me, I don’t have a film career.”

[DejaMoo]

Janice Min (Hollywood Reporter) posted on Twitter the text of an email Weinstein sent to other H-wood bigshots, saying his board was moving to fire him and begging for their support. Instead of losing his position, he wanted to be allowed to go away and get therapy and counseling.

Once again, evil people pretending they're not evil, they're sick. And that all they need is a bit of therapy or to find god, and then it'll be back to business as usual.

[RVInit]

They don't ever seem to have epiphanies when they are victimizing other people, it's only when their behavior starts affecting them. All the sudden the lights come on that something is wrong.

[Sam the Centipede]

I read a comment somewhere (sorry, can't recall exactly where, so no link) pointing out that the chat shows that were quick to excoriate Trump for his pussy-grabbing crap have been reticent about using their monologues, etc. to comment on and satirize Weinstein's evildoings. As the writer pointed out, Hollywood is less keen on washing its own dirty laundry in public than it is about pointing out the stains and blemishes on others.

[RVInit]

This is interesting. George Clooney talks about Weinstein and the kinds of things he heard about him.

The final paragragh

“A lot of people are doing the ‘you had to know’ thing right now, and yes, if you’re asking if I knew that someone who was very powerful had a tendency to hit on young, beautiful women, sure,” Clooney continued. “But I had no idea that it had gone to the level of having to pay off eight women for their silence, and that these women were threatened and victimized. I’ve been talking with a lot of people about this and I don’t know many people who knew of that.”

http://dailycaller.com/2017/10/10/georg ... paign=push

[Mikedunford]

I read a comment somewhere (sorry, can't recall exactly where, so no link) pointing out that the chat shows that were quick to excoriate Trump for his pussy-grabbing crap have been reticent about using their monologues, etc. to comment on and satirize Weinstein's evildoings. As the writer pointed out, Hollywood is less keen on washing its own dirty laundry in public than it is about pointing out the stains and blemishes on others.

Weinstein wasn't running for President, and I doubt nearly as many Americans are so plugged into Hollywood as to make him the kind of immediately recognizable figure Trump is. So I'm not sure why the chat shows would be expected to approach the two walking disgraces in exactly the same way.

[MN-Skeptic]

I read a comment somewhere (sorry, can't recall exactly where, so no link) pointing out that the chat shows that were quick to excoriate Trump for his pussy-grabbing crap have been reticent about using their monologues, etc. to comment on and satirize Weinstein's evildoings. As the writer pointed out, Hollywood is less keen on washing its own dirty laundry in public than it is about pointing out the stains and blemishes on others.

Weinstein wasn't running for President, and I doubt nearly as many Americans are so plugged into Hollywood as to make him the kind of immediately recognizable figure Trump is. So I'm not sure why the chat shows would be expected to approach the two walking disgraces in exactly the same way.

That’s exactly what I’ve been thinking!

[Addie]

I think that's right. I knew the name as someone who was a major party donor, sure. I barely knew he had something to do with Hollywood.

Weinstein wasn't running for President, and I doubt nearly as many Americans are so plugged into Hollywood as to make him the kind of immediately recognizable figure Trump is. So I'm not sure why the chat shows would be expected to approach the two walking disgraces in exactly the same way.

[wavey davey]

I never heard of him before now.

[DejaMoo]

This is interesting. George Clooney talks about Weinstein and the kinds of things he heard about him.

The final paragragh

“A lot of people are doing the ‘you had to know’ thing right now, and yes, if you’re asking if I knew that someone who was very powerful had a tendency to hit on young, beautiful women, sure,” Clooney continued. “But I had no idea that it had gone to the level of having to pay off eight women for their silence, and that these women were threatened and victimized. I’ve been talking with a lot of people about this and I don’t know many people who knew of that.”

http://dailycaller.com/2017/10/10/georg ... paign=push

Oh, come on, George. For years - decades, now - the story has made the rounds that Weinstein required Gwyneth Paltrow to give him a blow job in exchange for securing the lead in Shakespeare in Love. You had to have heard it, too - most probably, straight from Gwyneth. Because this is one of the usual ways that deals are made in your industry.

[DejaMoo]

People always ask why victims of sexual assault/harassment don't come forward sooner. They should actually be asking why witnesses to sexual assault/harassment don't speak out. Worse, why so many of them help cover it up:

[ObjectiveDoubter]

Sexual predator Harvey Weinstein needs his own topic. He is turning out to be little more than a Jewish Bill Cosby. While the directors of his company have known since at least 2015 of allegations such as those the New York Times has recently reported, it was only after the Grey Lady ran its stories that they finally decided to act. Better late than never? Sexual predators of women continue to harm women until they are exposed and stopped.

Hidden Content

This board requires you to be registered and logged-in to view hidden content.

why was it necessary of you to bring in his religion?

Just to add my thoughts, as it's a legitimate question you ask. As a Jew, I do consider Judaism my religion by default, but I am not religious. I ascribe to the belief that for a Jew, doing good makes you a good Jew, especially if you do it without reward or recognition (i.e., selflessly), and that part of being a Jew is seeking social justice. A good Jew does not have to attend shul, and attending shul does not make you a good Jew. A douche-bag like Weinstein, for all the social justice he's fought for, is nonetheless a shitty Jew, for all the evil he's perpetrated on women. That's our history, a part of our ethnicity, as well as part of our religion. That's how I see it.

I also paused for a nano-second when I saw Stern's reference. But personally, I think it adds to the comment, since as I've said, I believe we're called on to do good, as Jews, whether religious or not. And Weinstein didn't. So it matters to me.

[AndyinPA]

My jaw dropped when I saw what Donna Karan had to say about Harvey Weinstein, or more accurately, the women he assaulted.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/10/entertain ... index.html

"To see it here in our own country is very difficult, but I also think how do we display ourselves? How do we present ourselves as women," Karan said to the Daily Mail. "What are we asking? Are we asking for it by presenting all the sensuality and all the sexuality?"

She apologized for it later and said it was taken out of context, but if you watch the entire (short) interview, that's not true.

[Sterngard Friegen]

My jaw dropped when I saw what Donna Karan had to say about Harvey Weinstein, or more accurately, the women he assaulted.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/10/entertain ... index.html

"To see it here in our own country is very difficult, but I also think how do we display ourselves? How do we present ourselves as women," Karan said to the Daily Mail. "What are we asking? Are we asking for it by presenting all the sensuality and all the sexuality?"

She apologized for it later and said it was taken out of context, but if you watch the entire (short) interview, that's not true.

Of course, Karan creates clothing and scents and other "accouterments" of "beauty" and "fashion" that do exactly what she seems to imply means women are asking for it. She needs to be shunned. Another hypocrite.

[AndyinPA]

That's part of the reason my jaw dropped, the business she's in. What about that didn't she get?