The Harvey Weinstein Mess: I'm amazed that, once again, the victims of sexual harassment are being blamed. This letter to the NYT hits the nail on the head about placing the blame...

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I'm amazed that, once again, the victims of sexual harassment are being blamed. This letter to the NYT hits the nail on the head about placing the blame where it doesn't belong.

http://mashable.com/2017/10/11/harvey-weinstein-women-sexual-harassment-new-york-times/?utm_cid=a-rr-culture#xEMtI_WjYmqX

foathog Loc: Greensboro, NC

Whether it be Weinstein or Trump. A scumbag is a scumbag. not to mention Cosby.

lamontcranston

Could we keep our personal politics out of this thread. The thread is about Weinstein.

digit-up Loc: Flushing, Michigan

lamontcranston wrote:

Could we keep our personal politics out of this thread. The thread is about Weinstein.

lighten up. The hogg is PERSONAL politics, that's what's so great about it. Enjoy your days.

Marionsho Loc: Kansas

lamontcranston wrote:

Could we keep our personal politics out of this thread. The thread is about Weinstein.

I learned a long time ago that if you (I) don't like what a Hog says, I quickly quit reading it, and skip to the next reply. Try it, you might like it.

lamontcranston

digit-up wrote:

lighten up. The hogg is PERSONAL politics...

You're right. As long as we're talking about scumbags and sexual predators, let's not forget to include Bill Clinton in that group.

d3200prime

lamontcranston wrote:

You're right. As long as we're talking about scumbags and sexual predators, let's not forget to include Bill Clinton in that group.

And John F. Kennedy with Marilyn Monroe (and she is the only one we know about). That is really going to ruffle some feathers. I could go on and on way back to other President's and well know folks but, really, what is the point?

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

Weinstein did things that he must have known were wrong. Appearing naked and asking the ladies watch him ???. Unbelievable.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

d3200prime wrote:

And John F. Kennedy with Marilyn Monroe (and she is the only one we know about). That is really going to ruffle some feathers. I could go on and on way back to other President's and well know folks but, really, what is the point?

There's a difference between harassment and consent.

Frank T Loc: New York, NY

d3200prime wrote:

And John F. Kennedy with Marilyn Monroe (and she is the only one we know about). That is really going to ruffle some feathers. I could go on and on way back to other President's and well know folks but, really, what is the point?

Don't forget Eisenhower and his cute little Lieutenant. Not to mention Jefferson and his slaves.

Twardlow Loc: Arkansas

Frank T wrote:

Don't forget Eisenhower and his cute little Lieutenant. Not to mention Jefferson and his slaves.

The only exception I feel fairly certain of was Truman.

d3200prime

jerryc41 wrote:

There's a difference between harassment and consent.

Of course there is a difference but one thing is undeniable; adultery is adultery. I am surprised by your answer Jerry.

Twardlow Loc: Arkansas

d3200prime wrote:

Of course there is a difference but one thing is undeniable; adultery is adultery. I am surprised by your answer Jerry.

No, adulatory isn’t just adultery’; that’s too simple.

Adultery by consent is not the same as unwilling sex by harassment, or blackmail, or threat of losing income or career.

Emotionally, they are much, much different things.

Many definitions go something like this:

“voluntary sexual intercourse between a married man and someone other than his wife or between a married woman and someone other than her husband; also :an act of adultery”

hondo812 Loc: Massachusetts

Frank T wrote:

Don't forget Eisenhower and his cute little Lieutenant. Not to mention Jefferson and his slaves.

Really? Are you knuckleheads suggesting that Weinstein is "presidential". He's a scumbag, plain and simple. There will be a pile of people that claim they "weren't aware/didn't know" ala Ben Afleck and Matt Damon.

http://deadline.com/2017/10/seth-macfarlane-harvey-weinstein-oscar-joke-explained-1202186425/

In January 2013, MacFarlane, who hosted the Oscars that year, was joined by actress Emma Stone to unveil the nominees. After reading the five actresses in the Supporting Actress category, MacFarlane said: “Congratulations, you five ladies no longer have to pretend to be attracted to Harvey Weinstein.”

Five years ago. Seems to me Hollyweird knew he was a scumbag.

d3200prime

Twardlow wrote:

No, adulatory isn’t just adultery’; that’s too simple.

Adultery by consent is not the same as unwilling sex by harassment, or blackmail, or threat of losing income or career.

Emotionally, they are much, much different things.

Many definitions go something like this:

“voluntary sexual intercourse between a married man and someone other than his wife or between a married woman and someone other than her husband; also :an act of adultery”

You are correct. Where you are in error is assuming all the women Weinstein was involved with were unwilling participants. So, out of all of them, I will assume, based on human nature, some of them were more than willing to further their acting careers by wilful action on their part. This is part and parcel of Hollywood and has been for many decades. So, adultery is adultery. However, I will give you some of the women were coerced and that needs to be addressed by law as they were not strong enough to stand against Weinstein and he definitely needs to be prosecuted in those cases. Guess I should have explained better in my first post.