Shard

Kevin Spacey: his full story is out now. A very sad background leading to his own abusive behaviour.

dave_j

Weinstein and Spacey, the sacrificial lambs who'll prove that Hollywood has rid itself of predators and who no doubt will slowly be reassimilated when the fuss has died down. Methinks they will know too much to be left out in the cold for too long.

But.. what happens when the next accusation's made in the future? Who'll believe their story? Q. Why didn't you come forward when the Weinstein and Spacey stories emerged?

In a strange way, keeping quiet now will make it much more difficult to come forward in the future? Hard on Weinstein and Spacey but others'll be thinking how lucky they've been.

Shard

Your well of cynicism runs deep.

Atlantic Xpat

This (very detailed and well researched) article about Weinstein is rather horrifying... https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-...-army-of-spies

Tangram

Wow, thanks for the link.

Almost Canadian

I would love to know how his former lawyer has not broken privilege by divulging the advice he gave to his former client.

jerryhung

His POS lawyer is defending himself as not having thought it through

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/u...T.nav=top-news

Times:

The newspaper released a stern statement on Monday night about Mr. Boies’s involvement in the effort to undermine its reporting and its reporters.

“We learned today that the law firm of Boies Schiller and Flexner secretly worked to stop our reporting on Harvey Weinstein at the same time as the firm’s lawyers were representing us in other matters,” the statement read. “We consider this intolerable conduct, a grave betrayal of trust, and a breach of the basic professional standards that all lawyers are required to observe. It is inexcusable and we will be pursuing appropriate remedies.”

Hope this new information FURTHER helps certain individuals here to see the women as less "blameworthy"

dbd33

I don't see that it should. The one has nothing to do with the other.

jerryhung

jerryhung

The physical and security threats of Weinstein are irrelevant to the women and how they felt about speaking out, interacting with someone like this?

I once thought you were a decent man, never again.

dbd33

Whether or not someone is "blameworthy", and I don't see how someone could ever be to blame for being assaulted, has nothing to do with legal machinations after the fact.

Jingsamichty

Likewise, I have never once suggested a woman - or indeed a man - is blameworthy for having been assaulted. You've already apologised to me in this thread when I called you out on that before.

dbd33

FWIW, I accept that Weinstein is a monster and that he has, at best we can guess, forced people into sexual acts by weight of personality and of body. I expect he has also coerced people by promise to advance, or threat to ruin, their careers. I think we can reasonably assume that no one had sex with Harvey Weinstein because they looked at him and thought, "phwoar, some of that, that'd be fun".

The only doubt I see here is that there may be people who thought a disgusting half an hour would be time well spent for the potential benefit, held their noses and went ahead. If the expected benefit did not materialize then they'd have an act to grind. Weinstein being bad doesn't make everyone else involved in the story good.

Discovering that Weinstein's lawyers are shits is a Pope/Catholic moment.

Shard

That's the rub. Some individuals are in fact prepared to exchange favours for opportunity. And it's debatable whether that is wrong or not. The problem with Weinstein (and argument against a favours culture) is that he is said to have requested/demanded such favours, and used his considerable power to coerce individuals.

Jingsamichty

That's exactly the point I've been trying to make since post #6 of this thread. Provided the wannabe-stars got their moment of fame in exchange for the sordid half-hour, what's the beef?

I'm not interested in hearing from successful Hollywood stars about who they had to shag to get a role. That means nothing, other than that people with flexible morals will always get ahead of the more principled. It's just tabloid titillation.

Chances are that anyone who shagged HW knew exactly who he was and what he could deliver. It's highly likely, given the amount of sleazebags in the entertainment business, that they probably had to shag a few enablers to even get the opportunity to shag HW.

Yet jerryhung says it's not about the business?