Web of Sex Scandals

Greg
Tenured
Posts: 2714
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 1:12 pm
Location: Greg
Contact:

Re: Web of Sex Scandals

Postby Greg » Fri Dec 08, 2017 1:19 pm

Sonic Youth wrote:Fortunately, we have civil rights laws that frown against this sort of thing, and I think being on the side of civil rights is generally a good thing. I'd re-emphasize if I were you, warning bosses to not deny women employment, rather than caution women not to get too "uppity" lest it backfire.


Although, it is impossible to enforce laws regarding discrimination in hiring. That is because employers are allowed to conduct interviews before they hire applicants. This allows employers to turn down applicants for any reason they wish, and, if any questions are asked, they can always say, "The applicant performed poorly in the interview."
The fact that #ScotusPick Kavanuaugh believes that a President cannot be indicted is an automatic disqualification from Supreme Court consideration.
Plain and simple. --

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

User avatar
Sonic Youth
Laureate
Posts: 7436
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:35 pm
Location: USA

Re: Web of Sex Scandals

Postby Sonic Youth » Fri Dec 08, 2017 8:51 am

Big Magilla wrote:
Sonic Youth wrote:
Big Magilla wrote:As for backfiring on Democrats, I wouldn't worry about it. Women make up about 50% of the electorate, more or less. They'll be fine.


And women all of a sudden are going to band together and vote as a bloc? That will never happen.

No woman should have voted for Trump, yet enough either stayed home or voted for him anyway, and not just women in Alabama. A lot of women are harder on other women than they are on men.

While I know a lot of smart, enlightened women who keep up with the issues, I also know a lot who, like thier male coutnerparts, are either too busy working to pay attention to what's going on in the world outside of the headlines, all of which they get filtered thorugh Fox News, while others stay at home and watch Sean Hannity and his ilk all day.

Reforms have to be made to treat women with greater dignity in the workplace, and they will be, but the vote is another matter entirely. No woman or man is going to vote against their Congressman or Senator because he or she belongs to the party of Trump and Moore. They will vote against him or her if they feel he or she hasn't or won't do anything for them. As Oscar Hammerstein put it in "What's the Use of Wond'rin" in Carousel, all the rest is talk.


That cuts both ways, you know. If everything you said above was true, then it also belies your original statement that this will backfire on the Democrats.
"What the hell?"
Win Butler

User avatar
Precious Doll
Tenured
Posts: 3375
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 2:20 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Web of Sex Scandals

Postby Precious Doll » Fri Dec 08, 2017 4:11 am

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/d ... ill-happen

The Academy could consider a low-key untelevised ceremony but I suspect they make a lot of money from having it televised in the first place.
"I have no interest in all of that. I find that all tabloid stupidity" Woody Allen, The Guardian, 2014, in response to his adopted daughter's allegations.

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15660
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Web of Sex Scandals

Postby Big Magilla » Fri Dec 08, 2017 3:06 am

Sonic Youth wrote:
Big Magilla wrote:As for backfiring on Democrats, I wouldn't worry about it. Women make up about 50% of the electorate, more or less. They'll be fine.


And women all of a sudden are going to band together and vote as a bloc? That will never happen.

No woman should have voted for Trump, yet enough either stayed home or voted for him anyway, and not just women in Alabama. A lot of women are harder on other women than they are on men.

While I know a lot of smart, enlightened women who keep up with the issues, I also know a lot who, like thier male coutnerparts, are either too busy working to pay attention to what's going on in the world outside of the headlines, all of which they get filtered thorugh Fox News, while others stay at home and watch Sean Hannity and his ilk all day.

Reforms have to be made to treat women with greater dignity in the workplace, and they will be, but the vote is another matter entirely. No woman or man is going to vote against their Congressman or Senator because he or she belongs to the party of Trump and Moore. They will vote against him or her if they feel he or she hasn't or won't do anything for them. As Oscar Hammerstein put it in "What's the Use of Wond'rin" in Carousel, all the rest is talk.
“‎Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.” - Voltaire

User avatar
Precious Doll
Tenured
Posts: 3375
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 2:20 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Web of Sex Scandals

Postby Precious Doll » Fri Dec 08, 2017 1:10 am

Geoffrey Rush to sue Murdoch rag:

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/d ... our-report

These are links to an earlier scandal in Australia relating to actress Maggie Kirkpatrick. The first from The Wrap reports of the guilty verdict dished out by the courts. The second is from The Guardian of her conviction being overturned on appeal. This case illustrates what a slippery slide a single allegation can be:

https://www.thewrap.com/prisoner-actres ... lestation/

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-n ... overturned
"I have no interest in all of that. I find that all tabloid stupidity" Woody Allen, The Guardian, 2014, in response to his adopted daughter's allegations.

User avatar
Sonic Youth
Laureate
Posts: 7436
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:35 pm
Location: USA

Re: Web of Sex Scandals

Postby Sonic Youth » Fri Dec 08, 2017 12:45 am

Big Magilla wrote:
This whole thing could backfire, not only on the Democrats, but women in the workplace as well. We're already beginning to hear stories about male executives being afraid to hire women for fear that the slightest thing, a raised voice, a cuss word in a lady's presence, or something else that wasn't tolerated a hundred years ago, will result in a complaint of sexual harassment against them.


Now who's applying "purity tests"?

Do you realize what Methuselahs some of you sound like right now? You could say "This whole thing could backfire on ______ in the workplace as well", and substitute "women" with "negroes" or "queers" (and I could have used worse words) and placed the sentence into 1961 or 1981 respectively, and what would that have sounded like? Fortunately, we have civil rights laws that frown against this sort of thing, and I think being on the side of civil rights is generally a good thing. I'd re-emphasize if I were you, warning bosses to not deny women employment, rather than caution women not to get too "uppity" lest it backfire.

Yes, there's going to be false accusations, mistaken accusations, and exaggerated accusations. All of this, unfortunately, also happened with every civil rights movement in history. It shouldn't happen. But it does. Historically, it's one of the inevitable consequences whenever there's a liberation movement going on. There will always be victims of an injustice as the oppressed or mistreated group in question assert themselves. We're fooling ourselves if we're expecting a nice, clean, victim-less paradigm shift. There's no such thing. That doesn't mean it's lost legitimacy.

ETA: As for backfiring on Democrats, I wouldn't worry about it. Women make up about 50% of the electorate, more or less. They'll be fine.
"What the hell?"

Win Butler

Okri
Tenured
Posts: 2594
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB

Re: Web of Sex Scandals

Postby Okri » Fri Dec 08, 2017 12:37 am

What Sonic and BJ said.

The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4184
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: Web of Sex Scandals

Postby The Original BJ » Fri Dec 08, 2017 12:26 am

I'm sort of amazed this shoe didn't drop sooner, but I imagine this is the beginning of a Weinstein-level avalanche of allegations against Bryan Singer. I've never crossed paths with him personally, but as a young man starting out in Hollywood a decade ago, I was warned plenty by people to stay away from this guy, and the stories swirling around him are pretty disgusting.

http://deadline.com/2017/12/bryan-singer-sued-sexual-assault-underage-boy-yacht-2003-1202222501/

User avatar
Sonic Youth
Laureate
Posts: 7436
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:35 pm
Location: USA

Re: Web of Sex Scandals

Postby Sonic Youth » Fri Dec 08, 2017 12:06 am

Mister Tee wrote:
I'm thinking in very short order -- maybe a few months, maybe a year or two -- Franken will be in the books like a blacklist victim: as a shameful example of someone unfairly destroyed by the hysteria of the times.


There's another possibility. Perhaps you will see this differently with the passage of time, and wonder with amazement how you could have been so out of step with your thinking back then. I'm not saying that will happen. I'm just saying, maybe we shouldn't be so presumptuous while we're still on the-day-of. Everybody thinks they are right - about anything - and we believe that in time the rest of the country will come around to our way of thinking and we'll be vindicated. This will only be true for some of us. Who knows? Nobody does, and I certainly don't know. But I do know that we are in a really turbulent point in our history, and while we're deep in the middle of it we're not exactly going to have an objective, panoramic outlook on everything that's happening now.

Bog wrote:All in a matter of 5 days we're going to add a Moore and subtract a Franken


But we're not going to subtract a Democrat! If you're upset for the sake of Al Franken himself, I can understand that. If you really liked him (which I did), or if you think he's personally being railroaded, that's one issue. But if we're only talking about the political ramifications, then I really don't see the drawback (about Franken, I mean. Moore is a very different story.)

Mister Tee wrote:Unless it turns out there are verified stories to which we're not privy but other Senators are,


This really is the subordinate clause that everything hinges on, isn't it? I'm a little amazed how people are waving this off as a weak conditional, when it seems self-evident to me that this is exactly the case. How can there NOT be stories that these senators are privy to? Have we forgotten the Hollywood scandals already? Just about everyone who was accused of being a predator/rapist/whatever was known within the industry to be just that. It was an open secret that you had to be careful when you were around Harvey, Kevin Spacey, James Toback, Charlie Rose or Matt Lauer. Maybe not everyone in Hollywood knew it, maybe not everyone knew any specific details, but enough people - a substantial number - knew it, and some participated in helping to cover it up. In fact, when celebrities like Meryl Streep declared how outraged they were at these revelations and that they knew nothing about it beforehand, many of us reacted derisively. I assume the senate is even more clubby than Hollywood, and the idea that they may know more stories about him is more than a little theoretical. And I would suggest that maybe we should consider that's the basis for the senate not supporting him... at least, not until there were eight separate accusations.

Do I have proof of this? Nope, at least no more proof than anyone else has that this is one big, coordinated falsehood. But let's not forget that first there was one accusation. Then there were two accusations. Then there were three accusations. Then there were four accusations. Then there were five accusations. Then there were six accusations. Then there were seven accusations. Then there were eight accusations. And in less than a month. Are any of these accusations, taken singly, heinous enough for a man to lose his job? Not in my mind. But do you seriously believe the number was going to stop at eight? As I said before, if there were two accusations, it's possible there could be eight accusations. Now that there are eight, there could be fifteen. And if there are fifteen, there could be thirty. What, exactly, is the senate supposed to do? Wait until it gets to Cosby numbers? Weinstein numbers? Toback numbers? Or were they supposed to defend him from every accusation? Sure, the Democrats could do the honorable thing and defend him until their poll numbers flatline. But how would they make a convincing case of it when they CLEARLY were not convinced themselves? Shitty as it may be, this was bleeding that had to be stanched. Call it "spineless" if it makes you all feel better. But think of the long game. I think the word is more likely "practicable".
"What the hell?"

Win Butler

Sabin
Laureate
Posts: 7364
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Web of Sex Scandals

Postby Sabin » Fri Dec 08, 2017 12:04 am

So...I just watched Al Franken's resignation...

If he did it, he didn't admit it. If he didn't do it, he's not fighting. It's probably a mixture of the two, but I'm starting to think he's resigning more for the latter than the former.
"If you are marching with white nationalists, you are by definition not a very nice person. If Malala Yousafzai had taken part in that rally, you'd have to say 'Okay, I guess Malala sucks now.'" ~ John Oliver

Sabin
Laureate
Posts: 7364
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Web of Sex Scandals

Postby Sabin » Thu Dec 07, 2017 8:42 pm

Mister Tee wrote
Could you find that quote for me? Because i don't recall him saying ANYTHING like that.

Nope. I’ve just spent some time searching but I thought for sure he said something like “There might be others...” but apparently I’m mistaken or just can’t find it.

Mister Tee wrote
I'm a little confused about your antecedent here. What "did that" does this refer to? Till I know that for sure, I can't tell if I agree or disagree with you.

I was referring to the incident I had just described. The Leean Tweeden account of him forcibly kissing her and taking a photo of her pretending to grab her breasts.
"If you are marching with white nationalists, you are by definition not a very nice person. If Malala Yousafzai had taken part in that rally, you'd have to say 'Okay, I guess Malala sucks now.'" ~ John Oliver

Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 6427
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Web of Sex Scandals

Postby Mister Tee » Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:45 pm

Sabin wrote:I have a lot of thoughts about the Al Franken, but it's hard to fight for someone who, when these accusations first began, said something along the lines of "There have been others."


Could you find that quote for me? Because i don't recall him saying ANYTHING like that.

Sabin wrote:Let's put aside comparisons to Roy Moore and President Trump for a second. If someone did that to your sister or girlfriend or wife or friend...you'd kick the shit out of them, right? It's bad.


I'm a little confused about your antecedent here. What "did that" does this refer to? Till I know that for sure, I can't tell if I agree or disagree with you.

Bog
Assistant
Posts: 815
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:39 am
Location: United States

Re: Web of Sex Scandals

Postby Bog » Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:30 pm

All in a matter of 5 days we're going to add a Moore and subtract a Franken...and the most sickening part from a political standpoint...when/if Murkowski or Ernst or Collins or Fischer or Capito get loud and make her Gillibrand-esque demands...the response from Moore will be 'thanks, but no thanks'...and McConnell will simply say we allowed the voters to ultimately make the decision and they have...our hands are tied.

Sabin
Laureate
Posts: 7364
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Web of Sex Scandals

Postby Sabin » Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:19 pm

I have a lot of thoughts about the Al Franken, but it's hard to fight for someone who, when these accusations first began, said something along the lines of "There have been others." That's sort of on you for being a creep. However, this is Tina Dupuy's story...

This was my first inauguration. I’d never been in the proverbial room where it happens. My experience with government at that point was being a ward of the court in foster care. Noting that I had an interest in politics and in grandstanding—at 14, I ran a scorched-earth campaign to make the entire group home I lived in recycle—my foster dad set up an internship for me at the district office of Representative George Miller. The summer before my senior year of high school, as an intern, I answered calls, thumbed through the congressional record and misalphabetized his constituent files. It was a great experience and, at the time, the closest I’d been to power.

D.C. was decked out and packed in for the inauguration of a young and popular new president. The town was buzzing with optimism, and one of the many events on our list was a swanky Media Matters party with Democratic notables everywhere. Then I saw Al Franken. I only bug celebrities for pictures when it’ll make my foster mom happy. She loves Franken, so I asked to get a picture with him. We posed for the shot. He immediately put his hand on my waist, grabbing a handful of flesh. I froze. Then he squeezed. At least twice.

I’d been married for two years at the time; I don’t let my husband touch me like that in public because I believe it diminishes me as a professional woman. Al Franken’s familiarity was inappropriate and unwanted. It was also quick; he knew exactly what he was doing.


Now, nothing like this has ever happened to me and I'm not denying that it's inappropriate, overly familiar conduct. But it's not in the same league as his first offense, where he forcibly kissed that woman on stage during a rehearsal and posed for a photo where he pretended to grope her breasts. Let's put aside comparisons to Roy Moore and President Trump for a second. If someone did that to your sister or girlfriend or wife or friend...you'd kick the shit out of them, right? It's bad.

But this story strikes me as...well, not a big deal. It's clear that the reason why Franken is stepping down is the stories keep adding up. To me, this one's not really a story.
Last edited by Sabin on Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"If you are marching with white nationalists, you are by definition not a very nice person. If Malala Yousafzai had taken part in that rally, you'd have to say 'Okay, I guess Malala sucks now.'" ~ John Oliver

Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 6427
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Web of Sex Scandals

Postby Mister Tee » Thu Dec 07, 2017 1:32 pm

Unless it turns out there are verified stories to which we're not privy but other Senators are, I'm with Magilla on this: I think this is Dems caving to a Twitter mob much like they did when they fired Shirley Sherrod (how many even remember her?).

The accusations against Franken are sketchy in the extreme, and even if every one is true, to conflate them with what predators like Moore and Weinstein have done -- or even less-overt, run-of-the-mill harassers like your manager at work who keeps commenting on the size of your butt -- is to lose all perspective and turn this into sexual McCarthyism.

Maybe it's just the people I know, but my Facebook feed (way dominated by liberal Dems) is furious that Franken has been railroaded like this. Women actually seem to be the MOST opposed -- with some who have been seriously harassed or assaulted saying it trivializes their experiences to have what they went through lumped in with something like what Franken's been accused of (and, now, been denied the right to confront/rebut).

There's always been a dilemma with sexual offenses like this, in that they're often unwitnessed and thus inherently he said-she said. Yes, it's disgraceful that for centuries women have taken the brunt of not being believed, but to expect to remedy that by taking every accusation as truth is excruciatingly naive. It used to be liberals who wrote cautionary tales like The Crucible and The Children's Hour; now too many are on the side of "kill 'em all and let god sort 'em out".

Especially given the mendacity we've seen from the Republican right over the past quarter-century, how could anyone fail to see how they'd weaponize this "all women must be believed without investigation" to attack opponents?

NOTE: I'm not saying any of this in defense of John Conyers. He has multiple identified accusers, accusers with no political axe to grind, and a track record of making cash payments to them. He's had a level of due process that Franken was denied.

I'm thinking in very short order -- maybe a few months, maybe a year or two -- Franken will be in the books like a blacklist victim: as a shameful example of someone unfairly destroyed by the hysteria of the times.


Return to “Current Events”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest