Sign in to follow this  
papyrusbeetle

did we just wake up in Nazi Germany? KEVIN SPACEY blacklisted!!!!!

109 posts in this topic

1 hour ago, Hibi said:

As far as boycotting goes, I'll watch a Woody Allen film on TCM, but I wont pay to see one in a theater because he profits from that. I can separate the work from the artist, but I dont want the artist to profit from my paying to see the work..................

It's probably not quite as straightforward as that, Hibi - depends on the distribution agreements for his movies, but I'd imagine that he gets a residual from both his films shown in a cinema and those broadcast on TV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, limey said:

It's probably not quite as straightforward as that, Hibi - depends on the distribution agreements for his movies, but I'd imagine that he gets a residual from both his films shown in a cinema and those broadcast on TV.

 

Maybe, but at least I'm not paying for them directly....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Hibi said:

 

Maybe, but at least I'm not paying for them directly....

I understand your 'approach' to such a boycott;   limiting any financial gain to the artist, especially direct financial gain.  

Therefore  I understand someone NOT going out and purchasing a DVD but to me it is total nonsense to throw out DVDs one has already purchased or to continue such a boycott after the person has died.

 (instead I recommend a dart board with their picture on it!).

    

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would never throw something out I'd already purchased. If I felt strongly enough, I might sell it on e-bay. (LOL).

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Ok,  maybe we are not that far apart in our thinking here;    I acknowledge the crimes (or even the creepy actions as in the case of Woody Allen or Michael Jackson).     I know about them and they are always 'in my mind',   but I just don't let this knowledge impact my viewing of their work.    I separate the viewing of their work from this acknowledge of their crimes.       This is the point DB has been trying to make;  that the work doesn't change with this knowledge.    The work is the work.    

So of course I would watch a Polanski movie since 'the work is the work' and he directed many fine films.    

On further reflection, I will say this.  Let's take Chinatown (1974) as an example.  And it's an especially good one as he's in it.  Though he directed it, it also has contributions by a lot of other talented people, the actors, the cinematographer, and the screenwriter, Robert Towne.  That could make me reconsider my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, papyrusbeetle said:

As to "Nazi Germany" (if that offends people!), what I am referring to is how QUICK this has happened.

..................Let's start looking around at what is REALLY going on. 
Hollywood films have (for the past decades) humiliated and trashed women of every age and type.

Disgusting scenes appear in TV series, as well. I have, as a woman, gritted my teeth and tried to get used to this, to simply enjoy MUCH of the entertainment value of films and television shows.

But the women "protesting" are not talking about film and television content.

Shouldn't someone start looking at this issue? Until they do, it's hard to feel sympathetic (or, certainly, angry enough to boycott films or destroy artists' careers) because of "incidents" in hotel rooms.

Why should these "victims" get all the attention, when the viewing public has been victimized for years, having to view media insulting women from every possible angle.?

For example, the interesting, but horrifying "breakthrough" film ANATOMY OF A MURDER. (1959). (Shown this A.M. on the Movies Channel)

Every aspect of the "woman" is accused, humiliated, threatened, and made a joke of, climaxing in George C. Scott nearly spitting his accusations into the face of rape-victim Lee Remick on the witness stand. Gee, the fun of trashing women without messy old nudity getting the censors upset. How much fun this is!

Of course, George C. Scott,  IRL, was a known woman-beater, often leaving his lover Ava Gardner black and blue.

 

MV5BNjQ3MDQzNzctZTUyZi00OThhLWE1MzItNWMzOWMxMjJiMTE2XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNzM5ODEzMDY@__V1_.thumb.jpg.7167a664c6e03d05a03bd564f4fbc119.jpgSo no one really is upset over all this, for the last 60 years.

But they want to CONTROL what we see all of a sudden, by replacing an excellent actor with a lousy one.

The OTHER thing about NAZI GERMANY is that people simply did not look around at reality. They said, wow, I don't have to THINK any more!

 

 

You seem to be equating the treatment of women onscreen with the r_ape of minors.  If I'm wrong, I apologize, but if I'm right, I'm afraid there is hardly any comparison.  I agree the depiction of women by Hollywood (and others) has been and continues to be deplorable.  And to the extent it contributes to social conditions that lead to monstrous violations, it can be rightly condemned.  But in raising your objections to women's treatment on screen you seem to minimize the crimes committed against the vulnerable and powerless and even blame the victims (by the use of quotes).  In doing so, you are perpetuating the very cultural norms you object to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, papyrusbeetle said:

As to "Nazi Germany" (if that offends people!), what I am referring to is how QUICK this has happened.

..................Let's start looking around at what is REALLY going on. 
Hollywood films have (for the past decades) humiliated and trashed women of every age and type.

Disgusting scenes appear in TV series, as well. I have, as a woman, gritted my teeth and tried to get used to this, to simply enjoy MUCH of the entertainment value of films and television shows.

But the women "protesting" are not talking about film and television content.

Shouldn't someone start looking at this issue? Until they do, it's hard to feel sympathetic (or, certainly, angry enough to boycott films or destroy artists' careers) because of "incidents" in hotel rooms.

Why should these "victims" get all the attention, when the viewing public has been victimized for years, having to view media insulting women from every possible angle.?

For example, the interesting, but horrifying "breakthrough" film ANATOMY OF A MURDER. (1959). (Shown this A.M. on the Movies Channel)

Every aspect of the "woman" is accused, humiliated, threatened, and made a joke of, climaxing in George C. Scott nearly spitting his accusations into the face of rape-victim Lee Remick on the witness stand. Gee, the fun of trashing women without messy old nudity getting the censors upset. How much fun this is!

Of course, George C. Scott,  IRL, was a known woman-beater, often leaving his lover Ava Gardner black and blue.

 

MV5BNjQ3MDQzNzctZTUyZi00OThhLWE1MzItNWMzOWMxMjJiMTE2XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNzM5ODEzMDY@__V1_.thumb.jpg.7167a664c6e03d05a03bd564f4fbc119.jpgSo no one really is upset over all this, for the last 60 years.

But they want to CONTROL what we see all of a sudden, by replacing an excellent actor with a lousy one.

The OTHER thing about NAZI GERMANY is that people simply did not look around at reality. They said, wow, I don't have to THINK any more!

 

 

What's even your point? This is nothing like the Nazis. Spacey is accused of having touched underage boys off screen and the studio execs don't want him anymore because they suspect less people will want to watch it. There's a messy scandal and they don't want controversy. As for your other concern about Anatomy of a Murder, just because a character says something on screen doesn't mean the movie and director are supporting it. The character does bad actions because that's how they're written. Is Mel Brooks a neo-nazi because Franz Liebkind was a character in his movies? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anything productive comes out of this, it will be the victims going to the police, their physicians and a lawyer right away, not waiting for many years and then going to the news services or just letting it go which (with the silence of the Hollywood establishment) allowed these abusers to flourish. This is not just a Hollywood problem. The business world, politics, the medical field, the military, pro sports and other sectors of society all have this sickness that needs to finally be exposed and erased. As far as the Hollywood treatment of women as victims, what's always been hypocritical is how violence against women is seen as entertainment (pick any TV show, Criminal Minds, for example) but bare a breast and American society spews a tirade of condemnation.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, jameselliot said:

If anything productive comes out of this, it will be the victims going to the police, their physicians and a lawyer right away, not waiting for many years and then going to the news services or just letting it go which (with the silence of the Hollywood establishment) allowed these abusers to flourish. This is not just a Hollywood problem. The business world, politics, the medical field, the military, pro sports and other sectors of society all have this sickness that needs to finally be exposed and erased. As far as the Hollywood treatment of women as victims, what's always been hypocritical is how violence against women is seen as entertainment (pick any TV show, Criminal Minds, for example) but bare a breast and American society spews a tirade of condemnation.

Yes,  encouraging real-time disclosure is the best way to reduce sexual assault \ harassment.   Note that CA, due to the Cosby case,  recently passed legislation were there is NO statue of limitation for certain sexual assault crimes.  This 'feel good' measure actually makes it less likely a perp will be exposed, as well as making it much more difficult to convict them (so even though the DA can bring a case,  DAs have said the odds of winning are much lower and therefore they likely would NOT file charges).

Note that one idea is to not allow for non-disclosure 'payoff' agreements.    I wonder how organizations like NOW feel about such an idea.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I can say is that if I'm on jury duty and a woman says she was raped 30 years ago but didn't report it until now, there's no way I'm having anything to do with sending the man to prison.

For me, no evidence (not even a police report) = no conviction. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem of course human nature, there are going to be people of the female persuasion out there devious enough to game it either for vindictive reasons or for gain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, cigarjoe said:

The problem of course human nature, there are going to be people of the female persuasion out there devious enough to game it either for vindictive reasons or for gain

That People's Court case is something Gloria Allred needs to watch as well as every victims rights lawyer that says something as stupid as 'every women must be believed'. 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/19/2017 at 7:09 AM, cigarjoe said:

The problem of course human nature, there are going to be people of the female persuasion out there devious enough to game it either for vindictive reasons or for gain

 

Yes, that's what I'm afraid of. Now some woman is accusing Al Franken of putting his hand on her rear end having their picture taken years ago. Who can prove something like that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Charlie Rose, a man whom I have long respected as a very insightful and objective interviewer, has now been accused of "sexual misconduct."
I don't know the details but evidently some former female staffers have come forward. I read his apology and he said that at the time he felt and thought that the feelings were mutual.
I want to believe him, but at the same time I am angry at him because I will really miss his insightful interviews.

This whole backlash gives me a very uneasy, queasy feeling.
I have long been aware of historical inequities and abuses in this country (and other countries), and am a firm believer in equal rights for all.
But now when I watch a movie, old or recent, I find myself thinking that what was once considered "normal" "ordinary" male (and female) behavior, today is tantamount to sexual harassment or abuse. 
I was a latchkey kid, and many of those old male stars were my "father" figures and "role" models.

When I grew up it was normal for boys to try to "pick-up" girls, openly check them out, whistle at them if we thought they were hot. Today all that behavior is now verboten.

I confess that I was not personally offended by Trump's caught on tape "grab em by the **** " blurt.
I agree with those that have labeled it as "locker room" braggadocio. Granted it was of the teenage variety, but I am familiar with groupies and to what lengths they will allow themselves to go with a perceived celebrity.
But Trump was not running for president at that time, and his actions, so long as those involved did not object to them, did not personally affect me. However, being a man of 70 and still retaining those adolescent attitudes is something that I did not openly want in a president.


When I was in the army, in the later years with more females uniform, it was still "normal" for a bunch of guys to horse around. If we were on a long transport, and some of us fell asleep, they were sure to be subject to some horseplay.
I.e., I was with a medical training unit one time and we were using anatomically correct mannequins that could be dismembered and used to simulate assorted casualties. At the end of the exercise some of these mannequins were missing their male parts. During a long commute, where many of us nodded off at various times, we were awoken to digital images of ourselves with a realistic (albeit flaccid) **** next to our face. 
It wasn't funny at the time for the person who was pranked, but one had to take it good naturedly because everyone else was laughing, all the while knowing that payback was in order for the prankster who in turn fell asleep. These were all adult professional males (and females) acting like juveniles for the moment. Granted those images could have caused a problem if any of them ever made it to the net, but none of the action was meant to be a malicious act!
I think of that when I look at the Al Franken photos.
How a little bit of foolishness from a decade before can derail this guys entire political career...  And I considered Franken to be one of the "good" guys.

I am not insensitive to anyone who is or has been sexually abused. I know it happens, I know persons whom it has happened to, and I know how bad it can be for those subject to it.
However, I am also quite aware of the commonality of misperceptions and misconceptions, especially when it comes to male and female communication/miscommunication.
It is flirting if both parties are attracted to each other, but it is now harassment, stalking, or sexual misconduct if one party is not!
If two persons have a consensual relationship it is acceptable, however, if one person has a change of attitude afterward, or the relationship ends on a sour note, then "memories" can become vindictive.

I knew a young soldier in my unit, barely twenty years old at that time. I spent some time working with him and thought that he was a good kid. Sincere and with a future ahead of him. After duty one day he went to a party. He drank alcohol and began flirting with a young girl there. It turned out that although she didn't look it that she was underage.
They were "caught" by both civilians and fellow soldiers, one of whom happened to be the cousin of the girl.
She said that "he went to far," he said he thought she was of age and that it was consensual.
He was arrested and despite no prior history of misconduct he was convicted and sent to prison. I wasn't present at the "party" and my character witness for him evidently didn't make a difference. He was booted out of the army and ruined. A felon for life now.

I know of many far less damning "miscommunications" that ended in article 15's. It usually occurred when male and female soldiers were "partying" and alcohol was involved. 

During my own military career I have occasionally served under and with female officers who also exercised some perceived "right of privilege" beyond that authorized by rank. 

On the civilian side I've seen coworkers (and on occasion fellow professionals) ramrodded with accusations of showing "special preference" for a particular employee.

Such labels (civilian and military, justified or not) can become part of that persons personnel file, forever.

I am all for justice and retribution for those whom have been and are victims criminal acts, esp. heinous acts against those unable to defend themselves (weak or infirm individuals, minors, elderly, women, and animals). But I can't help but feel this current wave of accusations almost has a McCarthyistic tone to it, with the very real potential of sweeping up both guilty and innocent.

After centuries of being considered no more than human chattel, I understand why there could be such a backlash, especially once the floodgates have been opened... But not everyone is guilty (or innocent) by mere association, or by virtue of their gender. And even with multiple accusations, each case must be tried individually, and actual guilt by degree and level must be determined. The victim has a right to justice, and the accused has a right to address their accuser in a court of law.
In this land All persons (no matter how socially unattractive) should have a right to a "fair" trial, and should be considered innocent until they are proven guilty.

Let us hope that justice can be truly blind when it comes to the influence of money and power, and impartial to politics when adjudicating these ever more numerous cases before it.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your interesting reply.

It's disturbing this month (IMHO) because I know this can't last. The persecution will move on to some other subject soon.

It's "trendy". Perhaps, because there is nothing we can do to expunge the idea of our President's locker room boasts to Billy Bush on a live microphone. So---let's ease the tension by attacking anyone in media that we can.

As a woman, I have some issues with the many ladies who have come forward.

The woman that Al Franken embarrassed had posed for PLAYBOY.

One teen who was attacked by Judge Roy Moore accepted a ride in his car.

Another teen went to the movies with him.

Maybe we shouldn't blame these girls, but blame whatever mother-figure was in their home.

If you do these things, this is what may happen!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm concerned some people's reputations will be ruined in all this blaming/finger pointing. Where do you draw the line and how do you know someone doesnt have an agenda? I certainly look askance at trolling teenagers, but as this continues to grow, I'm not sure who/what to believe with all these past allegations.......

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Hibi said:

I'm concerned some people's reputations will be ruined in all this blaming/finger pointing. Where do you draw the line and how do you know someone doesnt have an agenda? I certainly look askance at trolling teenagers, but as this continues to grow, I'm not sure who/what to believe with all these past allegations.......

It is difficult for any of us not directly involved (or sitting on the jury) to make any kind of valid determination.
The media too often fans these flames for increased viewership ratings. Objective reporting is too often a bygone practice these days. 
As uncomfortable as it may be for some of us, we must "trust" our judicial system.
In a court of law, with "evidence" presented, hopefully a jury will be able to determine innocence or degree of guilt in these (as they should in all cases).
No one and no system is infallible, but it is presently the best system we have.

It is very difficult for persons to be unbiased. We all have our preconceived notions, and "favorites."

Our justice system wants the "bad" guy to be found guilty and punished, but in that zeal we have not been immune to incarcerating (or worse) innocent persons along the way.

However, even if those accused are found to be innocent, too often irreparable damage has already been done.
In the "court" of public opinion persons are often judged Guilty by accusation alone... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Stephan55 said:

It is difficult for any of us not directly involved (or sitting on the jury) to make any kind of valid determination.
The media too often fans these flames for increased viewership ratings. Objective reporting is too often a bygone practice these days. 
As uncomfortable as it may be for some of us, we must "trust" our judicial system.
In a court of law, with "evidence" presented, hopefully a jury will be able to determine innocence or degree of guilt in these (as they should in all cases).
No one and no system is infallible, but it is presently the best system we have.

It is very difficult for persons to be unbiased. We all have our preconceived notions, and "favorites."

Our justice system wants the "bad" guy to be found guilty and punished, but in that zeal we have not been immune to incarcerating (or worse) innocent persons along the way.

However, even if those accused are found to be innocent, too often irreparable damage has already been done.
In the "court" of public opinion persons are often judged Guilty by accusation alone... 

Very reasonable post as it relates to the legal system but note that the vast majority of these recent cases are NOT legal cases (I.e. it isn't the police that are investigating or the DA that is determining if a crime has been committed).    Instead the cases are employer \ employee conduct cases.     The standard for "guilt" related to firing someone for conduct isn't the same as finding them guilty in a court of law.    In addition there is NO standard as it relates to NOT hiring someone.    The best a person can do is file a civil lawsuit (like Kaepernick is doing),  and those are very difficult to win.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Very reasonable post as it relates to the legal system but note that the vast majority of these recent cases are NOT legal cases (I.e. it isn't the police that are investigating or the DA that is determining if a crime has been committed).    Instead the cases are employer \ employee conduct cases.     The standard for "guilt" related to firing someone for conduct isn't the same as finding them guilty in a court of law.    In addition there is NO standard as it relates to NOT hiring someone.    The best a person can do is file a civil lawsuit (like Kaepernick is doing),  and those are very difficult to win.

 

I thought about that after making my post.
You are right. Many, perhaps most of these "cases" will never reach a court room.

They will be either settled out of court, or the accusers will have to be satisfied that those they have accused have had their careers destroyed by the accusations.

This is unfortunate, in that if the persons accused of such conduct are in fact "guilty" and such conduct is against the law and therefore a criminal act (in some cases), then they should be tried in a court of law, before a judge, with a jury.
That is sadly the only "level" playing field for "justice" in such cases. And the only way for whatever "truth" that lies between the accused and the accusers to hopefully be revealed.

If one has truly been slandered and libeled by "false" accusations then it is their just right to sue in a court of law, where the validity or falsity of the claims can be adjudicated.

But settling out of court, or allowing the "court" of public opinion to be the "judge" in such cases does no one good.
Not the true victims, Not the innocent accused, Not the companies which are now trying to distance themselves as quickly as they can from any hint of complicity with those which have been accused, Nor the public that has been sucked into this vortex and are then left to "judge" for themselves without the benefit of due process having occurred.

As I said, No one, and No system of "justice" on this planet is infallible. But ours is currently the best we have.
When due process is denied, whatever "truth" that exists remains hidden, and "justice" is denied for all of us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My daughter is an intelligent, logical minded, independent thinking person. 
She is also a strong willed woman and the best connection that I have with anyone of that sex.
We often get involved in long rambling discourses that can take off in a variety of related tangents.
When we converse we really try to listen to what each of us is saying and offer relevant input. 
We have had long talks ever since she was a small child, and I remember times back then when she would astound me with her clear and simple, uncluttered observations, which showed insight far beyond her years.
Knowing me perhaps better than anyone else, she is good at pointing out things from a different perspective that I might have not considered, or overlooked. We don't always agree, but we do have an ability to often see where each of us is coming from, and respect each others opinions.
She is my best friend, and I really like her.

I share this here because we have had some conversations relevant to this topic at hand.
I shared with her about my feeling very uneasy with the way these things are transpiring, and as usual she offered me a perspective that I admit, is difficult for me to fully comprehend.

I have reflected on all that she has told me, and am wondering if my uncomfortableness with all this is because I am a product of my times. Though I have often tried to see the "other side" of things, and empathize, it may be impossible for me to truly put myself in another persons shoes, especially when it comes to the mysteries of the female sex.

Since what is taking place appears to be so radically revolutionary, perhaps what I am feeling has been shared by others in other times.
Perhaps those who grew up in the antebellum south felt a similar uneasiness when Lincoln was elected. 
Their way of life, their total experience threatened by a "new" way of thinking. That "persons" long considered mere "property" were actually persons that, god-forbid, would have to be treated as "equals".

I know that is a rather extreme sounding analogy, but that is one of the thoughts that entered into my mind.

I don't know if such thoughts will make it any easier for me to fully "adapt" to what appears to be another "Brave New World" unfolding?
But such is the ability of my daughter to stimulate my thinking... 

So I thought I might share with you here, the context of an email that she recently sent me...

Based on some of what we've discussed the other night, thought you might find this an interesting read. 
As a white male who grew up with this being the norm, try not to be offended by it, but just read with an open mind.
A quote from the article that sort of illustrates my point about the pushing back harder to get on even ground analogy:

"This is not a political or ideological revolution. This is a complete undoing of all that is sick in this world, coming not from our minds but from deep within our cells. A voice has finally been given to the heritage of pain which has been passed from mother to daughter from generation to generation as we taught one another how to survive in a world of sexual slavery since the dawn of civilization. It will not be pretty when it first comes out. It will not be sexy. It will not dance for male sexuality as it has been trained to do like a good little girl. It will roar, and it will destroy."

-----------------------------------------------------

"I was 19 years old the first time I was raped. The last time, I was 39. I am not unusual. I’ve been involved in a private ongoing discussion with some dear friends since last year in which we all share our rape stories with one another, and despite a deep awareness of rape culture’s ubiquitousness even I was surprised at how universal these experiences are among the women I know.

All women. Rape culture impacts all women. Severely. The only reason this is treated as less of an epidemic than it is is because there are longstanding mechanisms built into our society (shame, religion, power dynamics, a cultural taboo against shaming men for irresponsible use of their sexuality, etc.) to keep us from speaking out about them.

These mechanisms are now falling apart.

Human civilization is made of rape. For millennia, all over the world, women have been commodified and kept as property for the purpose of receiving male reproductive fluids and raising their progeny, regardless of our will. During this time we were kept at home while men invented religion, money, economics, war, government, hierarchy, class, culture, rules, laws and traditions, including the laws of the marital bed. Civilization has been arranged so that each man receives a woman to own, with whom he may have sex whenever he wishes, between building, fighting, destroying and conquering in accordance with the will of whatever ruler happened to be running the show at the time.

This is only just now beginning to change. A woman’s will for her own sexuality is only just now becoming culturally relevant, a blink of an eye from a historical perspective.

Spousal rape was not considered a crime in all 50 states until 1993, and there are still seven states where there is a marital exception to certain sex crimes. The full anatomy of the **** wasn’t recognized by western science until 1998. The G-spot was given its name in the 1980s after a male gynecologist, Ernst Gräfenberg, who spent time in the 1940s studying the stimulation of the urethra. Birth control pills kill sexual desire. A third of women reported pain in their last sexual experience. There is a little-known, virtually unresearched and untreatable condition called vulvodynia that causes such intense nerve pain that some women consider suicide, and it is more common than breast cancer.

Just sit with that. A third of women reported pain in their last sexual experience. They didn’t just not enjoy it, they gritted their teeth through it.
Why? Because for a myriad of reasons, we don’t feel like we have a choice.
That’s rape culture.

Given that interest in a woman’s will for her own sexuality is just barely beginning to enter social consciousness on a large scale, it shouldn’t surprise anyone that it is only just now in 2017 that sharing our experiences with rape culture is beginning to go mainstream.

Rape dynamics are woven into the fabric of society far more pervasively than anyone realizes, and by pulling this thread, the whole mad tapestry will necessarily unravel. This can only be a good thing.

Our species is at a crossroads. It’s become self-evident that we’re about to either collectively experience some kind of enormous transformation, or go the way of the dinosaur. Parallel to our unprecedented ability to network and share information and ideas with our fellow humans all around the globe is a death march toward either ecosystemic disaster or nuclear holocaust which so far shows no signs of slowing down, and one of these two factors will necessarily win out at some point in the near future. Thus far our attempts to shift trajectories have failed spectacularly. If something is going to save us, it’s going to come from way out of left field.

Women everywhere feel the significance of the #MeToo phenomenon. A lot of us are scared to say anything about it for fear of hurting the feelings of the men we love, fear of retribution, and fear of being eaten alive by the intimidating, debate-culture defenders of patriarchy, but there’s a widespread sense that this thing is much bigger than it seems. Some leaders of conventional feminist thought have been speculating about some kind of progressive political upheaval, but in my opinion this is infinitely more revolutionary than that. We are about to experience a plunge into completely unknown and uncharted territory.

I can’t even keep track of all the men who are facing sexual misconduct accusations anymore as women gain more and more confidence to call it out, but the hyper-politicized nature of the circles I move in tells me it’s entirely bipartisan. Liberal men rape and conservative men rape, all the way up the power structure. Democrats and Republicans are both accusing one another of hypocrisy today for focusing on one faction’s sex crimes and not the other’s, while ignoring the elephant in the room that rape is happening all over the place.
What will happen when they can’t ignore it anymore?

What will happen when women begin really reclaiming their sexuality? What will happen when women everywhere flick on every light in the house, and all the perversions of men no longer have any darkness left to hide in?

It is unimaginable. Power structures will be disrupted from the basic family unit all the way up to the highest echelons of influence. Movement will happen.
Cracks will appear. The will of women, which spent all those millennia forbidden from influencing the development of the civilization in which we now find ourselves, will finally have some space to get a word in edgewise."

Uma Thurman's response when asked about the flood of sexual misconduct allegations....wow.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just going to add to the growing MIGTOW numbers. It may be better to acquiesce to the past and the way things were and let women fend for themselves.

Then we can sell our precious bodily fluids to the multitudes of women who'll want it. 

:blink:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Stephan55 said:

When due process is denied, whatever "truth" that exists remains hidden, and "justice" is denied for all of us.

Except for those with faith.

"for there is nothing concealed that will not be uncovered, or hidden that will not be made known" - Jesus of Nazareth (Matthew 10:26)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Stephan55 said:

Since what is taking place appears to be so radically revolutionary, perhaps what I am feeling has been shared by others in other times.
Perhaps those who grew up in the antebellum south felt a similar uneasiness when Lincoln was elected. 
Their way of life, their total experience threatened by a "new" way of thinking. That "persons" long considered mere "property" were actually persons that, god-forbid, would have to be treated as "equals".

I know that is a rather extreme sounding analogy, but that is one of the thoughts that entered into my mind.

I don't think it is so extreme an analogy.  What has been overlooked in the discussion so far has been an element that links the two, the question of power.  Slavery is the most direct, brutal expression of power over another individual, which often included rape.  You will notice the character of sexual harassment and abuse takes the form of a person in a position of power, or authority using it to exploit someone else.  And as for the culture of keeping it quiet, you have the threat: "Don't report it, no one will believe you."

Slavery was always wrong, a vile offense, even though it was sanctioned by society at large.  The same holds true for sexual harassment, abuse, and rape.  It is always wrong to treat people in a demeaning, exploitative manner, no matter what cultural norms approve.  A vast dark universe of injury I hope is being revealed.  Perhaps, like the sea change that happened with slavery, we will see a similar change with sexual brutality.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us