Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick
Apparently, News network NBC tried to quash this story....
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b0eb18af059685
I have no issue with freedom of the press to report on anything they choose, but to side step a major story of such allegations, I do have an issue with and again it is all about balance. |
Further stuff here:
http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/nbc-...ed-1202586648/ Lots of recriminations going on.
---------- Post added at 12:43 ---------- Previous post was at 12:39 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuart
That's the problem. And apparently Rosanna Arquette has blamed the fact she rejected his advances for her career faltering. She rejected his advances at around the time Pulp Fiction was released, and that *should* have boosted her career. All of a sudden, the job offers stopped.
As with Jimmy Saville, it was an open secret, but he made a lot of money for a lot of people. Some people are quite happy to forgive or forget most things if the money coming in is enough.
Regarding the actors involved, they had a choice. Risk the shame and emotional distress of abuse, possibly even rape, or risk having the career they have (in some cases) spent most of their lives building up destroyed because they said no.
I am not defending Weinstein, those who actively helped him, or those who were in a position to do something and merely turned a blind eye. In fact, I have nothing but contempt for them. He should have stopped, or have been stopped. It's useless wittering on about sex addiction now he has been caught. That's an excuse. That's so he can say "I'm ill, I'm seeking help" and hoping we forgive him before his career is totally destroyed. If he was ill, he should have sought treatment years ago.
Not that I believe he is a sex addict. If you are inferring to someone that their job hangs on performing certain favors to you, that's not a sexual thing. That is exerting power over them.
Oh, and blaming the victims because they didn't speak up earlier, that's not on.
|
Weinstein is also alleged to have been very litigious so anyone making any public claim would have to be very careful and ready to go to court. Really any one person speaking out would have been risking a lot. It took 10 months of reporting, a great legal department, the testimony of several different people and a organisation ready to take the risk even with all they had to break the story.
You're right that people are being unfair in asking why any specific person didn't come out. Everyone knows part of the story, or just what happened to them, or the rumors they've heard. All of which doesn't amount to lot it isolation if you're going up against one of the most powerful people in your industry who also has lawyers he isn't afraid to use.
Again same with Saville. Everyone 'knew' but very few people actually
knew and then even didn't know the extent. When that story first came out some people were saying the women were lying trying to get rich! You have to be very brave to make such allegations as it is, let alone when the person in question is famous and you can be publically attacked.