Shard

Any hoot, I think (as Tom Hanks posited in an interview) the name Weinstein is going to become synonymous with sexual predation. Probably best for all such news gossip to be filed under this thread. Pity the poor people who share this surname though.

jerryhung

Sorry I'm late. She said he basically wanted to rape her - put his gun out very prominently etc. hence she managed to get out screaming or whatever

jerryhung

I get you bats. This thread is male dominated.

I reckon BristolUK is ultimately well intentioned though, some are downright chauvinistic.

dbd33

Are you, in fact, hung, jerry?

BristolUK

That wasn't the woman in the article though.

I was contrasting the seriousness of that incident (and those of the same type) with others like a guy talking about himself and how equal prominence is given to both.

Jingsamichty

You make the classic mistake of accusing people who don't agree with you of some form of failing.

jerryhung

Untrue, as much as you wish it to be. I disagreed with BristolUK with no change in perception of him. People who disregard rape and sexual assault with "just doing it for a favor so stop whinging" though are clearly chauvinistic and unsympathetic creatures - pity the woman who come in front of them.

jerryhung

I love how the post got all the usual suspects out in fine form - at least they know who they are.

jerryhung

Oh I see. I didn't read that Guardian article because it seemed lightweight. I only remember hearing Julianne M's version - that was ick enough. Based on what you say of the article in this thread, I suppose the author is talking about Seagal being a bit of a pervert. Perverts can do worse things than perv, some do some don't (or can't).

Jingsamichty

Fair enough, as long as you don't insinuate that I am among those people who consider that victims of rape or sexual assault are just whingers.

dbd33

It's a fair question, you comment that the thread is male dominated. Are you a male?

Shard

And now Charlie Rose...! Would not have guessed that.

BristolUK

Apologies for repeating myself but I was checking something in my posting history in the guardian today and came across the following. It came from the fashion pages but it was on the main page for all to see - as I don't go on the fashion pages.

Note the humorous reference to "of course three of us had to go" and the disappointed three references to him not being in trunks.

I can read this with a smile to myself. But try reading it as if it were a female icon where, of course, all the male correspondents just "had" to attend in the hope of seeing her with the minimal covering of a bathing costume.

How would this be reported if this was, say, an over heard comment among three men about a woman? Or, indeed if it was a similarly nudge, nudge, wink, wink, article in the newspaper.

I think it would make the front pages as an example of what we've been reading. The writer(s) would likely lose their jobs.

I really don't like double standards.

bats

Oh I agree to an extent with this. If a women were launching a range of undies then tame comments at the launch party would be OK. Not of the " phoar phoar I would do that" type though and not if it was a party to launch a new book or movie.

Men's comments on, about, toward women are laden with sexual innuendo and threat. There's a power behind the threat, whether it's about getting or keeping a job, a threat of reputation, a physical threat of assault or rape.

Making simple comparisons doesn't address the whole problem.

BristolUK

Yes. Those videos on youtube when passers by are harassing (being friendly WTF) women have been a real opener.

True enough. Gets it off my chest though.