|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Oct 17, 2017 15:57:01 GMT
The good news is that what he could do, along with everyone else in the world, is react in everyday situations where harassment or sexism occurs. As we all know, sexual harassment doesn't only happen to Hollywood starlets! Everybody has a chance to say "that wasn't cool" if they witness men behaving badly. This gives all the keyboard warriors demanding to know why the women didn't come forward earlier, or why the bystanders didn't do something, countless opportunities to take action in their own lives. Harassment and sexism will continue until perpetrators are socially embarrassed and corrected at the early stages of "boys will be boys behavior", far before any rapes happen. The same goes for racism (you may not be a policeman in an abuse of power situation, but you do contribute in your own small way to a racist culture, if you ignore objectionable comments, jokes, etc.) I think there is a fine line and it's very dangerous to cross it. We have a racist and sexist culture is true but to exaggerate things and saying a bad joke about rape or a stupid comment cause rape is very dangerous and could end having a negative effect. You don't stop bad behavior silencing people but maybe you will be silenced in the future if you say something that someone else think it's wrong. For example, there is a polemic right now in the awful YA literature scene about a "racist" book that very few people have actually read but still they decided it was racist and succeeded in make a site delating a positive review by someone (a muslim) who actually read it: www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2017/10/16/kirkus_withdraws_starred_review_after_criticism.html I'm sure that mob is trying to end racism but they are just censoring people who in a right or wrong way are trying to say something about how awful racism is and the only think they have achived is in creating an extremist and ignorant scene and ironically feeding racists that claim they aren't racist, that is just that some people are oversensitive (extremists tend to feed each other: "all people who say they aren't racists are actually racist because that guy who is obviously racist and is accused of being racist is also saying he is not racist"). Weisntein is actually an example of someone who publicly did and said the right things: he was a progressive, he donated money to women causes, he was a liberal but still he abused woman. There is also that self-called feminist porn star who was applauded for saying the right things but still abused women or those two non-binary indie rockers who were actually rapists or the feminist guy who wrote in the feminist section of Vice who behind the scenes asked an alt-right leader to harrass a "fat feminist" or that other feminist guy who also wrote in the feminist section of Vice who was recently accused of beating one woman and sexual abuse on Twitter. I think we can't change a sexist culture censoring people who say the wrong things (and saying the wrong things are not the same than doing it. It could be hateful but it doesn't mean they will commit a crime in the future). I'm not saying we have to ignore nasty comments but criticize them in a constructive way without censoring. Abusive people sometimes are intelligent and some of them know what to say to be seen as the good guy. I agreed that perpretrators of actual crimes like harassment should be socially embarrassed but we should be careful of doing the same with people who do objectionable comments or jokes. They should be educated in a constructive way but not socially embarrassed. There should be a space to grow up and to change. That's why it always bothers me when people compare minor offences to actual crimes. I agreed that a few of the people who are arguing ignorance could be involve in some way, tho. EDITED: I just visited Twitter and people are actually talking about a Vice writer who just admitted he harrased a woman. I'm not even sure if it's one of the two guy I mentioned above! Maybe he is a third one which it's crazy! Another progressive woke guy who work for the right outlett and surely knew the right argot but, you know, abused women! His name is Sam Kriss and the Twitter storm is very heat right now if someone is interested. I think right now I would consider a brave sincere person, woman or man, to whom denounce other predator apart than Weinstein. I'm sure there are other out there! |
|
|
|
Post by onebluestocking on Oct 17, 2017 16:29:34 GMT
I can see your point. I'm saying that not many of us will be in a situation of a Hollywood mogul removing his robe in front of a young actress. However in society as a whole, any time that women are belittled, it's a symptom of a misogynistic culture. We can all do something about that by calling it when we see the male manager making inappropriate comments, the coworker telling offensive jokes, the friend too-aggressively coming onto a woman at a bar. (I'm talking about real life events, not Tumblr arguments.) Nobody has to do anything dangerous! Mild social disapproval can work wonders, if everyone does it. That's the kind of thing that this screenwriter could realistically have done, instead of silently condoning by inaction.
I know what you mean, but a million little things add up to the culture that breeds these crimes. Why do bullies feel entitled to push around people with less power in their society? Because nobody or few people, ever stood up to them about the microaggressions over their lifetimes.
Sometimes it's surprising how much a cultural change can do. Speaking of bullies, when I was a kid in the 70's, there was no real anti-bullying policy in schools. When I was pushed down by a boy in 3rd grade, my dad told me to punch him in the face next time. You were supposed to just learn to defend yourself (and the same was true of sexual harassment among older kids; it really wasn't addressed.) Now the schools take very seriously trying to prevent this, by starting early to encourage students to stand up for each other. They take complaints seriously instead of the old "kids will be kids" attitude. It's not perfect, but schools are a lot less bully-friendly than they were in the past. Things can change if the majority stop ignoring offenses committed by the few.
|
|
|
|
Post by coolclearwaters on Oct 17, 2017 17:02:58 GMT
Well, he could have quit, but that would have meant giving up his glamorous lifestyle. He could have told others what he had seen there. He could have not participated. I am glad that he is talking now.
I once worked at a horrible place - a small business that had a cool reputation. It was a nightmare. I had taken what I thought was a temporary pay cut to work there and felt trapped for the first time in my life, because I knew that to leave while making such low pay would look bad on my resume.
One of the owners, in particular, had a monstrous, Harvey-like temper. When he would start screaming in this guttural bellow that could be heard all over the building and out into the street, people would shake and turn pale with horror, fear, and shame. I have never heard anything like it. It was absolutely terrifying. I never saw any actual physical violence, but I heard about it. He’s now a film director, btw.
Both owners were very vindictive. While there wasn’t actual sexual harassment, there was a constant deriding of feminists - even by the women. There was extreme racism by my immediate supervisor - who used the n word constantly in his demeaning, vitriolic comments. Only one black person was employed there, and he was part-time.
Working there taught me a lot about how power works is some environments - people not doing the jobs they were hired for, but flattering the right people to land a cushier job; laughing along with the repulsive jokes; happily isolating employees who were out of favor (I’m thinking of other employees who suffered - not myself); sucking up to power in the most repulsive way and feeling proud about it. I could go on and on.
Fortunately, I clawed my way out of there as soon as I could. I actually had nightmares about it for years.
|
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Oct 17, 2017 17:16:03 GMT
I actually think the concept of micro aggressions and the idea that they are similar to actual aggressions is causing a lot of problems right now and most often than not it's affecting left wing people than actual retrogrades. Did people really think a racist would stop if someone tell him it's a micro aggression to ask someone where he/she is from? (Yes, that question is considered a micro aggression by some).
As someone said micro aggressions deserve micro reactions. I don't think we could change the world policing trivialities. Agreed with calling uncomfortable probably not criminal but bullying actions but always considering the degree of the fault.
|
|
|
|
Post by dreamsincolour on Oct 17, 2017 17:22:14 GMT
I thought that was a good piece by Scott Rosenberg. In truth, his having turned his back on what the Weinsteins were giving him wouldn't have changed anything. And I believe that he wasn't aware of actual rape or of anything that that there was no excuse for not reporting to the police. Apart from anything else, if he (or anyone else) had reported HW even for rape, that couldn't have gone anywhere without the co-operation of a victim.
My only criticism is that he's only hinted at the wider issues re the abuse of the casting couch generally (young hopefuls sleeping with producers/directors et al to try to get themselves an advantage). And the "dreadful" behaviour he's referring to having been aware of is also something that will have been seen by all relative to already skewed perceptions of what is acceptable by understanding of what is standard casting couch practice from top to bottom of the food chain. Sleeping their way to the top is how many are presumed to have become successful, although it obviously doesn't work for all. But sexual favours to effect, however morally repugnant, isn't rape. And the difference with HW (and there will be others) seems to be that he was enacting almost a parody of that behaviour where he thought he had the right to expect sex from anyone he fancied and that he could be that much more aggressive in pursuit of it too. That "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" isn't a great truism for nothing.
Even I've experienced how it works to a minor extent, and I've never even been a professional actress. But I did do some acting when I was at university on the side and went to the Edinburgh festival a couple of times, and on one of those occasions I found the director had assumed that my sleeping with him was a perk of the job. I wasn't assaulted or anything, it was just embarrassing, and I felt both foolish and belittled when someone else told me later that I was only cast because he'd fancied me and that I was supposed to have understood that.
|
|
|
|
Post by onebluestocking on Oct 17, 2017 17:22:59 GMT
No, but if every time (or at least some of the time) a racist made a racist comment or joke, the people around him stared uncomfortably or even commented "not funny", instead of pretending to laugh or just ignoring it, that racist might eventually stop because it becomes clear: everyone isn't in on the joke (or comment) with them.
Same goes for any type of bully.
For example, I doubt that HW was once a perfectly nice, gentle young man who suddenly one day thought "I'll push this woman against a wall and expose myself to her." He probably got away with a million smaller things over the years that led up to that point. Wouldn't it have been nice if, the first second third or even twentieth time, he had encountered some disapproval instead of passive acceptance from those around him? Maybe social disapproval would have changed his behavior, if it hadn't gotten to the point that he had more money and power than anyone could resist. Maybe not, and he would have been a b@stard either way, but standing up for the underdog in little situations before they grow into big situations, is one thing everyone can do. Everyone who is currently saying "someone else should have done something."
|
|
|
|
Post by ellie on Oct 17, 2017 17:26:23 GMT
The thing is I don't think he needed to tell others within the industry because, like he says, they already knew.
I admire his honesty in being upfront and saying that he wanted to hang on to his burgeoning career and lifestyle. That's not admirable but it is credible and not entirely surprising. Also if the victims weren't talking then I guess he and others felt there was no point in them saying anything.
Bottom line is he doesn't come out of this smelling of roses and he doesn't try to. Unlike some of the others making statements.
I can just about accept that the newer arrivals on the Hollywood scene might not have known much about the situation but people like Meryl Streep? No. I don't believe they didn't know and I think less of them for the statements they made pleading ignorance.
|
|
|
|
Post by ellie on Oct 17, 2017 17:43:48 GMT
I also think that instead of all racing to outdo each other in their condemnation of HW, the big, powerful, names would be of more use if they broadened the debate.
Why not put their weight behind a campaign to name the offenders and open up and deal with this can of worms?
Because vile and all though HW is there are those who are worse. I'm talking about the likes of Roman Polanski and others who have abused children and many of whom are still doing it.
So far the only time a list of Hollywood heavyweights have come together with regard to sex abuse is to plead for a man to be exonerated from blame for drugging, raping and sodomizing a 13 year old child because, you know, he made some good films. By that view of the world HW should no doubt be getting an honorary Oscar for his exploits.
Now is the time for Hollywood big shots to make up for that utterly shameful episode by backing their statements with actions that will combat rather than defend sex abusers.
|
|
|
|
Post by onebluestocking on Oct 17, 2017 18:00:33 GMT
I agree!
|
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Oct 17, 2017 18:02:03 GMT
No, but if every time (or at least some of the time) a racist made a racist comment or joke, the people around him stared uncomfortably or even commented "not funny", instead of pretending to laugh or just ignoring it, that racist might eventually stop because it becomes clear: everyone isn't in on the joke (or comment) with them. Same goes for any type of bully. For example, I doubt that HW was once a perfectly nice, gentle young man who suddenly one day thought "I'll push this woman against a wall and expose myself to her." He probably got away with a million smaller things over the years that led up to that point. Wouldn't it have been nice if, the first second third or even twentieth time, he had encountered some disapproval instead of passive acceptance from those around him? Maybe social disapproval would have changed his behavior, if it hadn't gotten to the point that he had more money and power than anyone could resist. Maybe not, and he would have been a b@stard either way, but standing up for the underdog in little situations before they grow into big situations, is one thing everyone can do. Everyone who is currently saying "someone else should have done something." My point is policing language is not working. A lot of the people who are socially embarrassed for saying the wrong thing are people susceptible to feel embarrassed by those around them A Ku Klux Khan member surely would have not problem to find people who agreed with them around them That's why I think the better way to erase bad thought is to rationally show how ridiculous they are. Fighting micro aggressions like major crimes is irrational which it's problematic because racism or sexism are ridiculous ideas that can be exposed with rationality. I think the main clue with Weinstein was power and access to vulnerable women in yes, an environment in which it seems sexism is much more common that what people are willing to accept. Women are seen as commodities in the entertainment world and in a lot professions and that's why people should challenge. Jeffrey Katzenberg is a powerful figure that has a very interesting view of the scandal: he says there is a pack of wolves around Harvey and that he wasn't a lone case. He also said he didn't knew about the abuses (which kind of confused me but I now think he was saying there are other powerful abusive people like him but not necessarily acting with him). He also said that when he was their boss in Disney he thought the problematic was Bob! That he treated people badly and he gave him an ultimatum! EDITED: Here is the Katzenberg video: www.wsj.com/articles/executives-say-weinstein-behavior-is-systemic-1508214150I had a lot of doubts when I read the quotes without context in articles. |
|
