HorrorMovieFans.com

zombie wrote:you keep saying others follow their lead, when i see liberals accusing liberals. you keep trying to make this right vs. left and it really isn't at this point. that may have been where it started, but the majority of accusations against liberals come from other liberals. *shrug*

That is what I am saying. Liberals burned their own house down by overreacting to allegations against conservatives. Their little sanctimonious shit show has backfired

#MeToo

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:you keep saying others follow their lead, when i see liberals accusing liberals. you keep trying to make this right vs. left and it really isn't at this point. that may have been where it started, but the majority of accusations against liberals come from other liberals. *shrug*

That is what I am saying. Liberals burned their own house down by overreacting to allegations against conservatives. Their little sanctimonious shit show has backfired

#MeToo

Maybe the problem here is considering believing sexual assault victims should be listened to and not dismissed as being "overreacting"... You absolute bell end.

showa58taro wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:you keep saying others follow their lead, when i see liberals accusing liberals. you keep trying to make this right vs. left and it really isn't at this point. that may have been where it started, but the majority of accusations against liberals come from other liberals. *shrug*

That is what I am saying. Liberals burned their own house down by overreacting to allegations against conservatives. Their little sanctimonious shit show has backfired

#MeToo

Maybe the problem here is considering believing sexual assault victims should be listened to and not dismissed as being "overreacting"... You absolute bell end.

I absolutely believe in listening. I also believe that overreacting hurts real victims in the long run. There is an obvious effort to blur this into one broad category, which is awful.

Some things I want to make clear:

- violent rape and statutory rape are not the same thing
- child molestation and statutory rape are not the same thing
- violent rape and being in an awkward sexual situation is not the same thing
- you give up being a victim when you are prostituting yourself for career advancement
- leaving your job because of harassment is a choice
- you have every right to tell your story
- other people have every right to question the facts

Foo wrote:
- you give up being a victim when you are prostituting yourself for career advancement
s

this point stands out from the rest as pure garbage. even being an actual prostitute (and not just an actor / actress) does not take away your rights as a human being. if someone rapes you, you're a victim, regardless of whatever your profession, and whatever cultural stigma associated with that profession.

if someone claims they were raped, molested, or even sexually harassed, it should be taken seriously and looked into. preferably that should be handled internally within the hr dept but if they sweep it under the rug or ignore it or try to just blame the accuser for being a bother or whatever, then it needs to be handled in some other way.

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:you keep saying others follow their lead, when i see liberals accusing liberals. you keep trying to make this right vs. left and it really isn't at this point. that may have been where it started, but the majority of accusations against liberals come from other liberals. *shrug*

That is what I am saying. Liberals burned their own house down by overreacting to allegations against conservatives. Their little sanctimonious shit show has backfired

#MeToo

unless you know what the intended goal was, you can't say that it backfired. if the goal was to hold people responsible for their actions, or at least investigate whether they are guilty for said actions, then it didn't backfire. if it was all designed to make their political opponents all look bad, so that they could gloat, then i'm glad it backfired. but neither you, nor i, know what the intent was.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:
- you give up being a victim when you are prostituting yourself for career advancement
s

this point stands out from the rest as pure garbage. even being an actual prostitute (and not just an actor / actress) does not take away your rights as a human being. if someone rapes you, you're a victim, regardless of whatever your profession, and whatever cultural stigma associated with that profession.

if someone claims they were raped, molested, or even sexually harassed, it should be taken seriously and looked into. preferably that should be handled internally within the hr dept but if they sweep it under the rug or ignore it or try to just blame the accuser for being a bother or whatever, then it needs to be handled in some other way.

You know how I feel about prostitution. It is a form of rape. When you walk on that line, I certainly have a lot less sympathy. When actresses are furthering their careers by flirting and sleeping around, selling their nude and sexual images, etc., it rings hollow compared to the person who is violently raped.

Would like to hear some commentary on this:

At the time, Argento was twenty-one and had twice won the Italian equivalent of the Oscar. Argento said that, in 1997, one of Weinstein’s producers invited her to what she understood to be a party thrown by Miramax at the Hôtel du Cap-Eden-Roc, on the French Riviera. Argento felt professionally obliged to attend. When the producer led her upstairs that evening, she said, there was no party, only a hotel room, empty but for Weinstein: “I’m, like, ‘Where is the fucking party?’ ” She recalled the producer telling her, “Oh, we got here too early,” before he left her alone with Weinstein. (The producer denies bringing Argento to the room that night.) At first, Weinstein was solicitous, praising her work. Then he left the room. When he returned, he was wearing a bathrobe and holding a bottle of lotion. “He asks me to give a massage. I was, like, ‘Look, man, I am no fucking fool,’ ” Argento told me. “But, looking back, I am a fucking fool. And I am still trying to come to grips with what happened.”

Argento said that, after she reluctantly agreed to give Weinstein a massage, he pulled her skirt up, forced her legs apart, and performed oral sex on her as she repeatedly told him to stop. Weinstein “terrified me, and he was so big,” she said. “It wouldn’t stop. It was a nightmare.”

At some point, she stopped saying no and feigned enjoyment, because she thought it was the only way the assault would end. “I was not willing,” she told me. “I said, ‘No, no, no.’ . . . It’s twisted. A big fat man wanting to eat you. It’s a scary fairy tale.” Argento, who insisted that she wanted to tell her story in all its complexity, said that she didn’t physically fight him off, something that has prompted years of guilt.

“The thing with being a victim is I felt responsible,” she said. “Because, if I were a strong woman, I would have kicked him in the balls and run away. But I didn’t. And so I felt responsible.” She described the incident as a “horrible trauma.” Decades later, she said, oral sex is still ruined for her. “I’ve been damaged,” she told me. “Just talking to you about it, my whole body is shaking.”

Argento recalled sitting on the bed after the incident, her clothes “in shambles,” her makeup smeared. She said that she told Weinstein, “I am not a whore,” and that he began laughing. He said he would put the phrase on a T-shirt. Afterward, Argento said, “He kept contacting me.” For a few months, Weinstein seemed obsessed, offering her expensive gifts.

What complicates the story, Argento readily allowed, is that she eventually yielded to Weinstein’s further advances and even grew close to him. Weinstein dined with her, and introduced her to his mother. Argento told me, “He made it sound like he was my friend and he really appreciated me.” She said that she had consensual sexual relations with him multiple times over the course of the next five years, though she described the encounters as one-sided and “onanistic.” The first occasion, several months after the alleged assault, came before the release of “B. Monkey.” “I felt I had to,” she said. “Because I had the movie coming out and I didn’t want to anger him.” She believed that Weinstein would ruin her career if she didn’t comply. Years later, when she was a single mother dealing with childcare, Weinstein offered to pay for a nanny. She said that she felt “obliged” to submit to his sexual advances.

How about this:

Matt Lauer, the disgraced former anchor of NBC's "Today" show who was fired Wednesday for “inappropriate sexual behavior,” once summoned a married female employee to his office, locked the door and sexually assaulted her until she passed out, the New York Times reported after interviewing the accuser.

The alleged incident occurred in 2001. The woman, who was not named in the report, told the Times that she was in her 40s at the time.

According to the report, Lauer was behind his desk and she took a seat in the office. She said he locked the door from a button at his desk and he asked her to unbutton her blouse. She said she complied and claims he got up from his desk, approached her from behind, bent her over his desk and had sex.

She claims that she passed out during intercourse and woke up later on the floor in his office. She said Lauer had his assistant take her to a nurse. She told the Times that Lauer never mentioned the encounter with her again and she said she left the network about a year later.

Foo wrote:Would like to hear some commentary on this:

At the time, Argento was twenty-one and had twice won the Italian equivalent of the Oscar. Argento said that, in 1997, one of Weinstein’s producers invited her to what she understood to be a party thrown by Miramax at the Hôtel du Cap-Eden-Roc, on the French Riviera. Argento felt professionally obliged to attend. When the producer led her upstairs that evening, she said, there was no party, only a hotel room, empty but for Weinstein: “I’m, like, ‘Where is the fucking party?’ ” She recalled the producer telling her, “Oh, we got here too early,” before he left her alone with Weinstein. (The producer denies bringing Argento to the room that night.) At first, Weinstein was solicitous, praising her work. Then he left the room. When he returned, he was wearing a bathrobe and holding a bottle of lotion. “He asks me to give a massage. I was, like, ‘Look, man, I am no fucking fool,’ ” Argento told me. “But, looking back, I am a fucking fool. And I am still trying to come to grips with what happened.”

Argento said that, after she reluctantly agreed to give Weinstein a massage, he pulled her skirt up, forced her legs apart, and performed oral sex on her as she repeatedly told him to stop. Weinstein “terrified me, and he was so big,” she said. “It wouldn’t stop. It was a nightmare.”

At some point, she stopped saying no and feigned enjoyment, because she thought it was the only way the assault would end. “I was not willing,” she told me. “I said, ‘No, no, no.’ . . . It’s twisted. A big fat man wanting to eat you. It’s a scary fairy tale.” Argento, who insisted that she wanted to tell her story in all its complexity, said that she didn’t physically fight him off, something that has prompted years of guilt.

“The thing with being a victim is I felt responsible,” she said. “Because, if I were a strong woman, I would have kicked him in the balls and run away. But I didn’t. And so I felt responsible.” She described the incident as a “horrible trauma.” Decades later, she said, oral sex is still ruined for her. “I’ve been damaged,” she told me. “Just talking to you about it, my whole body is shaking.”

Argento recalled sitting on the bed after the incident, her clothes “in shambles,” her makeup smeared. She said that she told Weinstein, “I am not a whore,” and that he began laughing. He said he would put the phrase on a T-shirt. Afterward, Argento said, “He kept contacting me.” For a few months, Weinstein seemed obsessed, offering her expensive gifts.

What complicates the story, Argento readily allowed, is that she eventually yielded to Weinstein’s further advances and even grew close to him. Weinstein dined with her, and introduced her to his mother. Argento told me, “He made it sound like he was my friend and he really appreciated me.” She said that she had consensual sexual relations with him multiple times over the course of the next five years, though she described the encounters as one-sided and “onanistic.” The first occasion, several months after the alleged assault, came before the release of “B. Monkey.” “I felt I had to,” she said. “Because I had the movie coming out and I didn’t want to anger him.” She believed that Weinstein would ruin her career if she didn’t comply. Years later, when she was a single mother dealing with childcare, Weinstein offered to pay for a nanny. She said that she felt “obliged” to submit to his sexual advances.

That's just one example and it doesn't change the fact he was a piece of shit.

Foo wrote:
You know how I feel about prostitution. It is a form of rape. When you walk on that line, I certainly have a lot less sympathy. When actresses are furthering their careers by flirting and sleeping around, selling their nude and sexual images, etc., it rings hollow compared to the person who is violently raped.

this is also the argument, more or less, used by paparazzi to take pictures of celebs at their private homes and such. do you think that's justified? do you think that what they do as their job means that that can be done to them outside of their job, without their consent? i don't.

Tiggnutz wrote:

Foo wrote:Would like to hear some commentary on this:

At the time, Argento was twenty-one and had twice won the Italian equivalent of the Oscar. Argento said that, in 1997, one of Weinstein’s producers invited her to what she understood to be a party thrown by Miramax at the Hôtel du Cap-Eden-Roc, on the French Riviera. Argento felt professionally obliged to attend. When the producer led her upstairs that evening, she said, there was no party, only a hotel room, empty but for Weinstein: “I’m, like, ‘Where is the fucking party?’ ” She recalled the producer telling her, “Oh, we got here too early,” before he left her alone with Weinstein. (The producer denies bringing Argento to the room that night.) At first, Weinstein was solicitous, praising her work. Then he left the room. When he returned, he was wearing a bathrobe and holding a bottle of lotion. “He asks me to give a massage. I was, like, ‘Look, man, I am no fucking fool,’ ” Argento told me. “But, looking back, I am a fucking fool. And I am still trying to come to grips with what happened.”

Argento said that, after she reluctantly agreed to give Weinstein a massage, he pulled her skirt up, forced her legs apart, and performed oral sex on her as she repeatedly told him to stop. Weinstein “terrified me, and he was so big,” she said. “It wouldn’t stop. It was a nightmare.”

At some point, she stopped saying no and feigned enjoyment, because she thought it was the only way the assault would end. “I was not willing,” she told me. “I said, ‘No, no, no.’ . . . It’s twisted. A big fat man wanting to eat you. It’s a scary fairy tale.” Argento, who insisted that she wanted to tell her story in all its complexity, said that she didn’t physically fight him off, something that has prompted years of guilt.

“The thing with being a victim is I felt responsible,” she said. “Because, if I were a strong woman, I would have kicked him in the balls and run away. But I didn’t. And so I felt responsible.” She described the incident as a “horrible trauma.” Decades later, she said, oral sex is still ruined for her. “I’ve been damaged,” she told me. “Just talking to you about it, my whole body is shaking.”

Argento recalled sitting on the bed after the incident, her clothes “in shambles,” her makeup smeared. She said that she told Weinstein, “I am not a whore,” and that he began laughing. He said he would put the phrase on a T-shirt. Afterward, Argento said, “He kept contacting me.” For a few months, Weinstein seemed obsessed, offering her expensive gifts.

What complicates the story, Argento readily allowed, is that she eventually yielded to Weinstein’s further advances and even grew close to him. Weinstein dined with her, and introduced her to his mother. Argento told me, “He made it sound like he was my friend and he really appreciated me.” She said that she had consensual sexual relations with him multiple times over the course of the next five years, though she described the encounters as one-sided and “onanistic.” The first occasion, several months after the alleged assault, came before the release of “B. Monkey.” “I felt I had to,” she said. “Because I had the movie coming out and I didn’t want to anger him.” She believed that Weinstein would ruin her career if she didn’t comply. Years later, when she was a single mother dealing with childcare, Weinstein offered to pay for a nanny. She said that she felt “obliged” to submit to his sexual advances.

That's just one example and it doesn't change the fact he was a piece of shit.

Not saying he is not a piece of shit. I am saying even in her version, there are many mixed signals. Imagine his version. A neutral version.

We are at a place right now where challenging her story is wrong. To me, that is ridiculous. I think her story is true. I think he has no place in the business world and should be fired. To call that a sexual assault and say she is a rape victim, or that he raped her, I think we NEED to be asking more questions about the so called victim.

Foo wrote:

Tiggnutz wrote:

Foo wrote:Would like to hear some commentary on this:

At the time, Argento was twenty-one and had twice won the Italian equivalent of the Oscar. Argento said that, in 1997, one of Weinstein’s producers invited her to what she understood to be a party thrown by Miramax at the Hôtel du Cap-Eden-Roc, on the French Riviera. Argento felt professionally obliged to attend. When the producer led her upstairs that evening, she said, there was no party, only a hotel room, empty but for Weinstein: “I’m, like, ‘Where is the fucking party?’ ” She recalled the producer telling her, “Oh, we got here too early,” before he left her alone with Weinstein. (The producer denies bringing Argento to the room that night.) At first, Weinstein was solicitous, praising her work. Then he left the room. When he returned, he was wearing a bathrobe and holding a bottle of lotion. “He asks me to give a massage. I was, like, ‘Look, man, I am no fucking fool,’ ” Argento told me. “But, looking back, I am a fucking fool. And I am still trying to come to grips with what happened.”

Argento said that, after she reluctantly agreed to give Weinstein a massage, he pulled her skirt up, forced her legs apart, and performed oral sex on her as she repeatedly told him to stop. Weinstein “terrified me, and he was so big,” she said. “It wouldn’t stop. It was a nightmare.”

At some point, she stopped saying no and feigned enjoyment, because she thought it was the only way the assault would end. “I was not willing,” she told me. “I said, ‘No, no, no.’ . . . It’s twisted. A big fat man wanting to eat you. It’s a scary fairy tale.” Argento, who insisted that she wanted to tell her story in all its complexity, said that she didn’t physically fight him off, something that has prompted years of guilt.

“The thing with being a victim is I felt responsible,” she said. “Because, if I were a strong woman, I would have kicked him in the balls and run away. But I didn’t. And so I felt responsible.” She described the incident as a “horrible trauma.” Decades later, she said, oral sex is still ruined for her. “I’ve been damaged,” she told me. “Just talking to you about it, my whole body is shaking.”

Argento recalled sitting on the bed after the incident, her clothes “in shambles,” her makeup smeared. She said that she told Weinstein, “I am not a whore,” and that he began laughing. He said he would put the phrase on a T-shirt. Afterward, Argento said, “He kept contacting me.” For a few months, Weinstein seemed obsessed, offering her expensive gifts.

What complicates the story, Argento readily allowed, is that she eventually yielded to Weinstein’s further advances and even grew close to him. Weinstein dined with her, and introduced her to his mother. Argento told me, “He made it sound like he was my friend and he really appreciated me.” She said that she had consensual sexual relations with him multiple times over the course of the next five years, though she described the encounters as one-sided and “onanistic.” The first occasion, several months after the alleged assault, came before the release of “B. Monkey.” “I felt I had to,” she said. “Because I had the movie coming out and I didn’t want to anger him.” She believed that Weinstein would ruin her career if she didn’t comply. Years later, when she was a single mother dealing with childcare, Weinstein offered to pay for a nanny. She said that she felt “obliged” to submit to his sexual advances.

That's just one example and it doesn't change the fact he was a piece of shit.

Not saying he is not a piece of shit. I am saying even in her version, there are many mixed signals. Imagine his version. A neutral version.

We are at a place right now where challenging her story is wrong. To me, that is ridiculous. I think her story is true. I think he has no place in the business world and should be fired. To call that a sexual assault and say she is a rape victim, or that he raped her, I think we NEED to be asking more questions about the so called victim.

there are different kinds of victims. there are different levels of victimization. if he did those things against her will, she's a victim. whether it's rape or not. but i agree, more questions should be asked. but it should be asked from the position of wanting to understand the situation, rather than wanting to dismiss or find a way to put the blame on to her at the start.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:
You know how I feel about prostitution. It is a form of rape. When you walk on that line, I certainly have a lot less sympathy. When actresses are furthering their careers by flirting and sleeping around, selling their nude and sexual images, etc., it rings hollow compared to the person who is violently raped.

this is also the argument, more or less, used by paparazzi to take pictures of celebs at their private homes and such. do you think that's justified? do you think that what they do as their job means that that can be done to them outside of their job, without their consent? i don't.

In their homes? No. In public, yes. When you make yourself a public figure and sell access to your life, it is more complicated than flipping a switch.

Consider the amount of money and freebies celebs make as "brand ambassadors" and "influencers". This often involves blurring the lines into their lives on social media. Half naked in their bedroom, complete with product placement. Putting out almost a fictionalized version of theirselves for profit.

Celebrity cuts both ways.

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:
You know how I feel about prostitution. It is a form of rape. When you walk on that line, I certainly have a lot less sympathy. When actresses are furthering their careers by flirting and sleeping around, selling their nude and sexual images, etc., it rings hollow compared to the person who is violently raped.

this is also the argument, more or less, used by paparazzi to take pictures of celebs at their private homes and such. do you think that's justified? do you think that what they do as their job means that that can be done to them outside of their job, without their consent? i don't.

In their homes? No. In public, yes. When you make yourself a public figure and sell access to your life, it is more complicated than flipping a switch.

Consider the amount of money and freebies celebs make as "brand ambassadors" and "influencers". This often involves blurring the lines into their lives on social media. Half naked in their bedroom, complete with product placement. Putting out almost a fictionalized version of theirselves for profit.

Celebrity cuts both ways.

"in their homes" was about paparazzi using the justification. they find the celeb's house and stalk them and such. it is comparable to the argument you're using.

consent is important. and it shouldn't be taken away from you, because you happen to make a living on your image or your body. that's how i feel.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

Tiggnutz wrote:

Foo wrote:Would like to hear some commentary on this:

At the time, Argento was twenty-one and had twice won the Italian equivalent of the Oscar. Argento said that, in 1997, one of Weinstein’s producers invited her to what she understood to be a party thrown by Miramax at the Hôtel du Cap-Eden-Roc, on the French Riviera. Argento felt professionally obliged to attend. When the producer led her upstairs that evening, she said, there was no party, only a hotel room, empty but for Weinstein: “I’m, like, ‘Where is the fucking party?’ ” She recalled the producer telling her, “Oh, we got here too early,” before he left her alone with Weinstein. (The producer denies bringing Argento to the room that night.) At first, Weinstein was solicitous, praising her work. Then he left the room. When he returned, he was wearing a bathrobe and holding a bottle of lotion. “He asks me to give a massage. I was, like, ‘Look, man, I am no fucking fool,’ ” Argento told me. “But, looking back, I am a fucking fool. And I am still trying to come to grips with what happened.”

Argento said that, after she reluctantly agreed to give Weinstein a massage, he pulled her skirt up, forced her legs apart, and performed oral sex on her as she repeatedly told him to stop. Weinstein “terrified me, and he was so big,” she said. “It wouldn’t stop. It was a nightmare.”

At some point, she stopped saying no and feigned enjoyment, because she thought it was the only way the assault would end. “I was not willing,” she told me. “I said, ‘No, no, no.’ . . . It’s twisted. A big fat man wanting to eat you. It’s a scary fairy tale.” Argento, who insisted that she wanted to tell her story in all its complexity, said that she didn’t physically fight him off, something that has prompted years of guilt.

“The thing with being a victim is I felt responsible,” she said. “Because, if I were a strong woman, I would have kicked him in the balls and run away. But I didn’t. And so I felt responsible.” She described the incident as a “horrible trauma.” Decades later, she said, oral sex is still ruined for her. “I’ve been damaged,” she told me. “Just talking to you about it, my whole body is shaking.”

Argento recalled sitting on the bed after the incident, her clothes “in shambles,” her makeup smeared. She said that she told Weinstein, “I am not a whore,” and that he began laughing. He said he would put the phrase on a T-shirt. Afterward, Argento said, “He kept contacting me.” For a few months, Weinstein seemed obsessed, offering her expensive gifts.

What complicates the story, Argento readily allowed, is that she eventually yielded to Weinstein’s further advances and even grew close to him. Weinstein dined with her, and introduced her to his mother. Argento told me, “He made it sound like he was my friend and he really appreciated me.” She said that she had consensual sexual relations with him multiple times over the course of the next five years, though she described the encounters as one-sided and “onanistic.” The first occasion, several months after the alleged assault, came before the release of “B. Monkey.” “I felt I had to,” she said. “Because I had the movie coming out and I didn’t want to anger him.” She believed that Weinstein would ruin her career if she didn’t comply. Years later, when she was a single mother dealing with childcare, Weinstein offered to pay for a nanny. She said that she felt “obliged” to submit to his sexual advances.

That's just one example and it doesn't change the fact he was a piece of shit.

Not saying he is not a piece of shit. I am saying even in her version, there are many mixed signals. Imagine his version. A neutral version.

We are at a place right now where challenging her story is wrong. To me, that is ridiculous. I think her story is true. I think he has no place in the business world and should be fired. To call that a sexual assault and say she is a rape victim, or that he raped her, I think we NEED to be asking more questions about the so called victim.

there are different kinds of victims. there are different levels of victimization. if he did those things against her will, she's a victim. whether it's rape or not. but i agree, more questions should be asked. but it should be asked from the position of wanting to understand the situation, rather than wanting to dismiss or find a way to put the blame on to her at the start.

Well, you keep trying to understand. I understand it just fine. A person with power and influence hit on her. She sent mixed signals and reluctantly had sex with him at first. They became friends and their sexual relationship continued, she was accepting gifts and favors during this relationship. The relationship ended and she decided to claim rape years later, after others mad allegations. Some in the past have made money making these allegations, and others are working towards that end.

What am is missing?

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:
You know how I feel about prostitution. It is a form of rape. When you walk on that line, I certainly have a lot less sympathy. When actresses are furthering their careers by flirting and sleeping around, selling their nude and sexual images, etc., it rings hollow compared to the person who is violently raped.

this is also the argument, more or less, used by paparazzi to take pictures of celebs at their private homes and such. do you think that's justified? do you think that what they do as their job means that that can be done to them outside of their job, without their consent? i don't.

In their homes? No. In public, yes. When you make yourself a public figure and sell access to your life, it is more complicated than flipping a switch.

Consider the amount of money and freebies celebs make as "brand ambassadors" and "influencers". This often involves blurring the lines into their lives on social media. Half naked in their bedroom, complete with product placement. Putting out almost a fictionalized version of theirselves for profit.

Celebrity cuts both ways.

"in their homes" was about paparazzi using the justification. they find the celeb's house and stalk them and such. it is comparable to the argument you're using.

consent is important. and it shouldn't be taken away from you, because you happen to make a living on your image or your body. that's how i feel.

Have you ever knowingly viewed images or video taken without a celebrity's consent?

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:
You know how I feel about prostitution. It is a form of rape. When you walk on that line, I certainly have a lot less sympathy. When actresses are furthering their careers by flirting and sleeping around, selling their nude and sexual images, etc., it rings hollow compared to the person who is violently raped.

this is also the argument, more or less, used by paparazzi to take pictures of celebs at their private homes and such. do you think that's justified? do you think that what they do as their job means that that can be done to them outside of their job, without their consent? i don't.

In their homes? No. In public, yes. When you make yourself a public figure and sell access to your life, it is more complicated than flipping a switch.

Consider the amount of money and freebies celebs make as "brand ambassadors" and "influencers". This often involves blurring the lines into their lives on social media. Half naked in their bedroom, complete with product placement. Putting out almost a fictionalized version of theirselves for profit.

Celebrity cuts both ways.

"in their homes" was about paparazzi using the justification. they find the celeb's house and stalk them and such. it is comparable to the argument you're using.

consent is important. and it shouldn't be taken away from you, because you happen to make a living on your image or your body. that's how i feel.

Have you ever knowingly viewed images or video taken without a celebrity's consent?

i probably have, in magazines and such, but not knowingly. if i saw a celeb at a restaurant, i would not think it's okay to start taking pictures and bothering him / her.

Foo wrote:
Well, you keep trying to understand. I understand it just fine. A person with power and influence hit on her. She sent mixed signals and reluctantly had sex with him at first. They became friends and their sexual relationship continued, she was accepting gifts and favors during this relationship. The relationship ended and she decided to claim rape years later, after others mad allegations. Some in the past have made money making these allegations, and others are working towards that end.

What am is missing?

i think you want to side against the women, and are looking for justification for that position, rather than actually taking weinstein's actions into account as well. (and i mean, as a whole, not just this specific situation) things don't happen in a vacuum. it's dishonest to treat it as if it does, to justify your position.

Foo just hypothetical say when you were young some dude made you suck his cock. Now you are ashamed and terrified other people will know. Now the Dude who did that is a greatly renowned person. Now he than feeds you money and opportunity at your weakest moment. It's easy to say you would act different. Shame changes things.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:
You know how I feel about prostitution. It is a form of rape. When you walk on that line, I certainly have a lot less sympathy. When actresses are furthering their careers by flirting and sleeping around, selling their nude and sexual images, etc., it rings hollow compared to the person who is violently raped.

this is also the argument, more or less, used by paparazzi to take pictures of celebs at their private homes and such. do you think that's justified? do you think that what they do as their job means that that can be done to them outside of their job, without their consent? i don't.

In their homes? No. In public, yes. When you make yourself a public figure and sell access to your life, it is more complicated than flipping a switch.

Consider the amount of money and freebies celebs make as "brand ambassadors" and "influencers". This often involves blurring the lines into their lives on social media. Half naked in their bedroom, complete with product placement. Putting out almost a fictionalized version of theirselves for profit.

Celebrity cuts both ways.

"in their homes" was about paparazzi using the justification. they find the celeb's house and stalk them and such. it is comparable to the argument you're using.

consent is important. and it shouldn't be taken away from you, because you happen to make a living on your image or your body. that's how i feel.

Have you ever knowingly viewed images or video taken without a celebrity's consent?

i probably have, in magazines and such, but not knowingly. if i saw a celeb at a restaurant, i would not think it's okay to start taking pictures and bothering him / her.

You have never viewed paparazzi photos? Never looked at Britney's cooter, etc.?