homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | Register | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Community discussion   » Purgatory   » Harvey Weinstein and Liberal Hyposcrisy (Page 1)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Harvey Weinstein and Liberal Hyposcrisy
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530

 - Posted      Profile for stonespring     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Harvey Weinstein, the producer (with his brother) behind many of the Oscar-winning movies of the 90's (and a few since then) is the subject of a scathing expose in the New York Times about allegations of decades of sexual harassment allegations from female actresses and models in multiple countries, as well as from female employees of his company. The New Yorker has its own expose which includes multiple allegations of sexual assault. (Not sure if these articles have paywalls for international readers. In the US you get something like 5-10 free articles a week/month from these sites.) The story has been picked up by the BBC and just about everywhere else.

The company named after him has fired him after three board members left and a lawyer advising him quit. His wife has left him. Gwyneth Paltrow and Angelina Jolie have come out with harassment allegations against him. A tape recorded by an Italian model and used by the NY Police in 2015 (although no criminal charges were filed at the time) alleges to show Weinstein pleading with the model to stay and show her claiming he groped her in the past. A NY Times reporter attempted unsuccessfully to publish a story about Weinstein's behavior with women 13 years ago.

It took some time, but Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have issued statements condemning the alleged behavior, albeit in measured terms.

This is what concerns me. In addition to being something that I am sure antisemites will exploit, this scandal is going to be used by the Right for a very long time as an example of the hypocrisy of the US Left. Of course we have the Access Hollywood tapes of Trump and there are the sexual harassment claims that made Roger Ailes and Bill O'Reilly lose their jobs. Of course sexual harassment and sexual assault is all too common among powerful men in business and politics, regardless of their political affiliation. But Weinstein was a major contributor to Obama and the Clintons and frequently donated to causes regarding, and supported documentary and filmmaking associated with, women's rights (including a documentary about university campus sexual assault!). He marched in one of the many nationwide Women's Marches in protest of Trump's inauguration.

As for the hypocrisy of the rest of (overwhelmingly liberal) Hollywood regarding this, Meryl Streep and Matt Damon claim that not everyone in Hollywood knew about Weinstein's actions. This is likely true. However, However, rumors of his behavior were widespread enough to be used as jokes at awards ceremonies years ago. Those who knew for certain about his behavior, including many who worked at Weinstein's Company and knowingly participated in setting up the meetings where the harassment occurred, as well as either helping the careers of or paying off the women afterwards, have not gone public until now. Female stars that were victims of his before attaining fame and influence, although it is true they are victims, have not gone public until now. I understand that Weinstein is/was a powerful man and that Hollywood is notoriously litigious, but when Hollywood figures, so many of whom are active in Democratic politics and in other progressive causes (or at least like to appear to be so), know of this pattern of abuse and remain silent to protect their own careers, their commitment to women's rights seems somewhat suspect. Furthermore, once this story broke, it took days for many stars and studio figures to condemn Weinstein, and many more have remained silent.

The delay of Democratic politicians who benefited from the donations Weinstein made and bundled to condemn his actions, and the language that many have used in their condemnations that is more careful than that used by many non-political public figures, is most sickening of all.

[fixed link]

[ 12. October 2017, 10:05: Message edited by: Eutychus ]

Posts: 1489 | Registered: Mar 2010  |  IP: Logged
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061

 - Posted      Profile for Brenda Clough   Author's homepage   Email Brenda Clough   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
This may be helpful. John Scalzi is one of the clearest thinkers I know.

--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page

Posts: 5457 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530

 - Posted      Profile for stonespring     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Anyone who claims to support more just policies and social reform - in particular anyone who gives lip service to ending the mistreatment of women - has to stop letting powerful men get away with treating women's bodies (and sometimes men's bodies, as in the case of Terry Crews) as property they are entitled to. The hyperpartisanship of modern society makes many of us extremely selective in how much emphasis we put on condemning the sexual misdeeds of those on the other side vs those on our own. Frankly, we get more pleasure out of seeing those on the other side get their comeuppance. Outrage is a commodity nowadays.

Finally, powerful people in the left-of-center need to stop offering any protection to those around them who harass or abuse others sexually. This kind of thing is much more common than we would like to admit.

--On a side note, I shudder when I think that Obama's daughter recently did an internship at The Weinstein Company. Although it is unlikely she was a victim of harassment, I wonder what, if any, rumors she heard while she was there, if she told any of them to her father, and if she told him, how long he knew about them before the current exposes were published. She may very well have been treated with such padded gloves while she was there that she overheard nothing. But I like to think of Malia Obama as someone with a searching mind.

(BTW, if it's not obvious, I like to think of myself as a progressive, although I often wonder about the ways I, too, am a hypocrite.)

Posts: 1489 | Registered: Mar 2010  |  IP: Logged
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530

 - Posted      Profile for stonespring     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Of course, the silence of influential men in the entertainment business about the harassment and abuse that goes on is much more damning than any silence by women, especially those women that are themselves victims, influential though some of them may be. Forgive me for falling into the common trap for focusing on famous women implicated in this when ultimately this is about horrible things done by a man against women.
Posts: 1489 | Registered: Mar 2010  |  IP: Logged
no prophet's flag is set so...

Proceed to see sea
# 15560

 - Posted      Profile for no prophet's flag is set so...   Author's homepage   Email no prophet's flag is set so...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Sexual assault* isn't a liberal thing it's an effed up society thing. It's mostly a man thing. And if you're not part of solving it, you're an accomplice. Some men who knew about this have something to answer for.

*it's all sexual assault. Sexual harassment is just wordplay IMO.

--------------------
Maybe I should stop to consider that I'm not worthy of an epiphany and just take what life has to offer
(formerly was just "no prophet") \_(ツ)_/

Posts: 10911 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
*it's all sexual assault. Sexual harassment is just wordplay IMO.

Disagree. While we must fight all such misbehavior, twisting a term because we are (justly) angry at people isn't helpful and can be counterproductive. If it isn't assault, it isn't assault, and calling it assault is not beneficial.

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62991 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
no prophet's flag is set so...

Proceed to see sea
# 15560

 - Posted      Profile for no prophet's flag is set so...   Author's homepage   Email no prophet's flag is set so...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Should've provided more content. Raising one's hand but not striking is assault if it is a non-sexual physical assault in Canada. Link, see 265-b. I think we should consider 'harassment' as assault the same way, where the person makes the gesture or threat of sexual intrusion, this should be enough.

I'm also not fond of the term "sexual abuse". It tempers the violence of the behaviour.

[ 12. October 2017, 01:22: Message edited by: no prophet's flag is set so... ]

Posts: 10911 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:

Finally, powerful people in the left-of-center need to stop offering any protection to those around them who harass or abuse others sexually. This kind of thing is much more common than we would like to admit.

I don't see any evidence that this happened. Rather, what we see is Weinstein using his considerable power & influence to intimidate and silence his victims. That's what predators do-- regardless of their political leanings. It's horrible, illegal, immoral-- but not political.

The paper that broke the story is one of those that the right likes to dismiss as part of the "liberal media establishment". I've not heard anyone on the left defend or condone his behavior.

I don't doubt the right will play this to their advantage, but I don't find a lot of basis for the claim of liberal hypocrisy here.

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 10956 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349

 - Posted      Profile for Anglican_Brat   Email Anglican_Brat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It is disturbing if anyone wants to use this issue to score cheap political points. There are real victims here, and attention and resources should be directed towards justice for the victims and preventing sexual misconduct from occurring again.

--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.

Posts: 4235 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881

 - Posted      Profile for Soror Magna   Email Soror Magna   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm a bit confused by the title. If liberals are hypocritical about sexual assault and harassment, does that mean non-hypocritical conservatives are in favour of it? Because the same shit went down at Fox just recently ...

--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"

Posts: 5352 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Pangolin Guerre
Shipmate
# 18686

 - Posted      Profile for Pangolin Guerre   Email Pangolin Guerre   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Considering it was (I believe) in the pages of the "elitist", "liberal", and "fake news" New Yorker that the story broke, it was a liberal organ that broke the story - no hypocrisy there. Whether individual "liberals" knew that something very bad/criminal was going on is different from formulating it as "liberal hypocrisy", which does have a ring of conspiracy about it. And those individuals are going to have to answer some uncomfortable questions.

The unhappy fact is that a lot of conservatives are going to use this as an equivalence to pussy-gate. Ignoring the fact that one is a producer, and one the President, we'll all have to get used to it. Enjoy the pig wrestling contest, everyone.

Posts: 651 | From: 30 arpents de neige | Registered: Nov 2016  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm always a bit wary of "everyone knew" in these sorts of contexts. When you're the victim of something it's easy to feel like everyone around you knows and is choosing not to act. Nothing like as serious but that's how I felt when bullied at school, and it was only when I started teaching that I realised that my teachers and peers were largely unaware of what was going on or how I felt about it. Additionally, while everyone may have heard rumours that's not the same as knowing, and if you hear those rumours the natural reaction is to treat them as gossip, keep an eye out but otherwise do nothing. What else should you do if you're not close enough to one of the victims for them to discuss it with you? It's not really a case of "everyone knew" so much as "a lot of people suspected" and that's no basis for action. The measure of someone, or of a group more generally, is what they do in the face of clear and concrete allegations. Those who had links to Weinstein have distanced themselves and he has been removed from positions of power and influence. Meanwhile the right has made Trump POTUS. Compare and contrast.
Posts: 2813 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119

 - Posted      Profile for Kaplan Corday         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hypocrisy on the part of left-wing Hollywood's weirdly misnomered "liberals" is not limited to the sexual sphere, and has been around for decades.

Veneration for some of history's worst mass murderers, such as Stalin and Mao, was followed by the valorisation of their epigones, such as Ho Chi Minh and Castro.

Posts: 3215 | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
I'm a bit confused by the title. If liberals are hypocritical about sexual assault and harassment, does that mean non-hypocritical conservatives are in favour of it? Because the same shit went down at Fox just recently ...

Indeed, the title doesn't seem to reflect the seriousness of the content of the OP. Hollywood is not uniformly Democrat-supporting, for a start.

There are some uncomfortable intersections between Obama, Clinton and Weinstein - however even these could only be said to be hypocrites if they knew about the abuse (or even the rumours) but were so star-struck that they ignored them and allowed their children to work for him.

I find that idea very hard to believe.

Since Savile we have become less naive and we've been rudely awakened to the possibility of monsters operating in public with many people knowing about him and victims scared into silence.

Savile even appeared on national TV and made nudge-nudge allusions to what he'd done and his proclivities and yet nothing was done before he died.

The Weinstein allegations are a whole other thing, of course. But it is a familiar, unpleasant story which cuts across "liberal" or "conservative" boundaries. Nothing to do with him being Jewish (as far as I know none of the media figures who have recently been subject to their own allegations are Jewish - so the idea that they in particular are being got at seems fairly wild to me), everything to do with him being horrible to women.

So the only part of the story which could possibly be described as hypocrisy is the way that "liberal" actors conspired together to keep quiet about accusations within the community whilst at the same time joining together in a witch-hunt of conservatives and in particular.. to not put too fine a point on it.. Trump.

And I'll admit, the silence is perplexing. There do seem to be people who continue to repeatedly do things which are (at very least) deeply inappropriate - to the extent that it becomes a running "joke" in public - and yet they seem so popular and powerful that victims don't speak out together, nobody seems to try to join up the stories into an overarching narrative and other people get drawn into the web without hearing about them.

But it isn't that surprising. And it isn't hypocritical. The floodgates eventually open and all the stories spill out. Sometimes the victims need to know that others are speaking out and that there is strength in numbers before they feel that they have "permission" to talk about it.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 9920 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
Hypocrisy on the part of left-wing Hollywood's weirdly misnomered "liberals" is not limited to the sexual sphere, and has been around for decades.

Veneration for some of history's worst mass murderers, such as Stalin and Mao, was followed by the valorisation of their epigones, such as Ho Chi Minh and Castro.

What a load of crap. And what has this even got to do with anything even if such individuals exist?

--------------------
arse

Posts: 9920 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I knew Savile. Met with him in acute circumstances over two days at Stoke Mandeville hospital. He was superb. For two extended families he could and did no wrong. Far from it. His presence was mesmerizing. His touch deft, genuine and in extremis, truly remarkably pivotal. In hindsight I'm haunted by what he could have done, would have been thinking. By two young nurses who exchanged glances, which stayed with me for nearly 40 years: "'e were a bit of a lad" obviously ...

I fail to see how the private abuse of privilege is liberal. By brilliant, charismatic, powerful, groomer predators. How not jumping high enough on the bandwagon of outrage is an issue justifying such habitual tl;dr verbosity.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 16677 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338

 - Posted      Profile for L'organist   Author's homepage   Email L'organist   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
If (and it is "if") Harvey Weinstein did some of the things which are alleged then he is a creep.

But the spectacle of every actress under the sun leaping gamely onto the "get Harvey" bandwagon is sickening: if Mr Weinstein didn't have young children who must be deeply traumatised by this circus it might even be funny.

So, the child of American "theatre royalty", Gwyneth Paltrow, didn't feel able to speak out? Really??? This from a woman who makes a fortune through rampant narcissism and self-promotion with details about her vagina-steaming (I kid you not) and such rot? Similarly Angelina Jolie: more than happy to pursue the family feud with her father Jon Voight (also a Hollywood insider) and with starring roles from when she was 20, felt unable to say anything? And this morning British actress Cara Delvigne has joined the baying mob, though quite how a granddaughter of Joselyn Stevens can claim she didn't know how to complain or who to is a mystery.

From the days before Hollywood existed the entertainment industry has had a reputation for attracting men hoping to parlay supposed influence into sexual favours from gullible young people. And from the earliest days too there have been plenty of up-coming actresses and actors who have turned around and said fuck off and have gone on to enjoy good, satisfying and highly successful careers. If you don't believe me, look at Katherine Hepburn and Bette Davis: both spoke about the casting couch in the 1940s yet had stellar careers.

The world will always be full of chancers - male and female - who seek to bully (and that is the correct term) people into bed with them. If you stand up to a bully 99 times out of 100 they fold.

I'm mystified that a whole bunch of women who have made a career based on appearing in public wearing little (sometimes) and speaking in front of hundreds as a day-to-day event have found themselves unable to turn around and say "no" when confronted by boorish behaviour.

No, I don't condone abuse - abuse of power, privilege, sexual abuse, whatever - but I also don't like the spectacle of a man being lynched without a hearing by a group of people who seem to have in common a belief in the power of PR and a willingness to expose themselves, their person (sometimes their partners and children) to any amount of publicity and to offer their thought on almost any subject regardless of knowledge or training.

Mr Weinstein deserves a level playing field and a fair hearing - something he isn't getting from anyone from the Obamas down. Shameful.

--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet

Posts: 4623 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012  |  IP: Logged
Tubbs

Miss Congeniality
# 440

 - Posted      Profile for Tubbs   Author's homepage   Email Tubbs   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I don’t see why this is evidence of a “liberal” conspiracy. Weinstein (allegedly) got away with his behaviour for the same reasons Saville did. He was rich, famous, successful and powerful.

For some people this is enough to make them to look the other way.

Others can’t believe that someone they like and admire is capable of such actions. Remember Whoopi Goldberg trying to explain away Roman Polanski’s charge for raping a minor?!.

Others may be believe it’s possible as they know these things happen, but won’t condemn someone without actual evidence. How dare someone assume that you’re innocent until proven guilty?! Damn liberals.

Others know these things happen because they’ve experienced them first hand. But they too frightened to complain as they need the work or they’re told that these things happen in this business and the best thing to do is shrug it off and avoid this person in future.

Weinstein (allegedly) picked his victims well. Actresses in search of their first big role are far less likely to kick up a stink for fear of never working again. Whoever they are or who they’re related too. L’Organist you should be ashamed. You appear to be seriously arguing that Angelina Jolie etc are somehow at fault because they felt unable to complain at the time. That’s a horrible piece of victim blaming!

--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am

Posts: 12628 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715

 - Posted      Profile for ExclamationMark   Email ExclamationMark   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
In some ways the whole episode is bizarre.

- who is this chap? Never heard of him before now
- is there nothing else happening in the world?
- if his activities were that widespread to the point of in jokes why did no one say anything?
- the bandwagon is creaking heavily as everyone is jumping on it with some force

Of course we have the Sainted Jimmy as an example that the power some individuals have will be used for selfish rather than altruistic purposes

Posts: 3705 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
Boogie

Boogie on down!
# 13538

 - Posted      Profile for Boogie     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
In some ways the whole episode is bizarre.

- who is this chap? Never heard of him before now
- is there nothing else happening in the world?
- if his activities were that widespread to the point of in jokes why did no one say anything?
- the bandwagon is creaking heavily as everyone is jumping on it with some force

Of course we have the Sainted Jimmy as an example that the power some individuals have will be used for selfish rather than altruistic purposes

And also that the cover ups continue until a critical mass is reached and a brave whistle blower calls their bluff.

Why is it news? Because this has been happening, worldwide, to women for centuries and it’s time it stopped.

Very few women don’t have a story of inappropriate groping and sexual assault. With me it was in the 80s and a local preacher/headmaster who put his hand up my skirt in the church kitchen. Why did I say nothing? I really don’t know. A combination of shame and fear of being told I was silly/wrong/trying to besmirch his reputation.

I’m glad to say he’s dead now, I didn’t attend his funeral, I couldn’t bear to hear all the accolades.

--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk

Posts: 12592 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
You need to get out more mate. I'm two handshakes from him.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 16677 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748

 - Posted      Profile for Doc Tor     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hmm.

The Scalzi piece linked by Brenda resonates strongly, since we're in the same industry, and I don't just understand his arguments, but also live in them.

He's absolutely right about the whispering. I have been told all manner of things, and I have no way of corroborating any of it. Neither do I know whether people 'above' me have heard of these things.

But he's also absolutely right about the fear - not necessarily realised, but the fear - of being blackballed. Any creative industry, even one which is allegedly competitive - will have very strong links at the very top. If author/actor A gets a reputation for being difficult, for whatever reason (whether they are difficult, or just won't submit to sexual favours), it is absolutely certain that all the other heads will know quickly.

So I take care to curate my reputation, and I'm absolutely certain that anyone else who relies on what is essentially the patronage of others does the same.

Now comes the difficult part. If I was being harassed, or knew of someone being harassed, or of someone harassing, and the person in question was in the position to make career-defining decisions, what would I do? I'd like to think I'd speak out. But in doing so, I'd never work again in my chosen field, would I hesitate? Yes. I probably would. Again, I'd like to think I'd press on.

And to address the OP directly, is Liberal Hypocrisy worse or better than blatantly supporting the guy who boasts of sexually assaulting women?

--------------------
Forward the New Republic

Posts: 8758 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm still not sure what hypocrisy means in this context. Does it mean people who hear rumours about somebody, but keep quiet? Surely, they would be mad to go public with such rumours?

Women who have been harassed and keep quiet - are they hypocrites? I suppose they fear for their careers.

After that, I'm struggling. I suppose politicians who take donations from somebody who has an unsavoury reputation.

Incidentally, the therapy world is often full of rumours about therapist X who is reputed to be over-familiar with certain clients. Again, I'm not sure what one can do about this.

--------------------
no path

Posts: 9559 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I went over to the Daily Mail online which has large headlines about hypocrisy and the 'cowardice of the liberal Establishment', pow! It seems to boil down to the claim that lots of people 'must have known about Weinstein's activities'. That's a very thin claim indeed, for which, there will be presumably very little evidence. Are they suggesting that the Obamas let their daughter work for W., knowing he was a predator?

--------------------
no path

Posts: 9559 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
A few years ago I heard from a very reliable source some scandalous information. They told me that the chief of a Christian international development charity was well known for going abroad to abuse children. I was also told that this was not a unique situation and that there were a number of abusive people in similar situations.

I was not, and am not, in a position to follow up this information but as far as I know that individual has never been investigated or denounced for their behaviour.

Of course, it is possible it is all rumour and made-up nonsense, as I said I have no way to verify or investigate it. But it is scarily plausible that it is accurate and that there are abusers who are in these positions of power.

I don't really understand how "conspiracies of silence" continue in these situations or why it takes so long for the lid to blow.

But I can tell you that people who have spoken to me about it are scared shitless about what might happen to them if they talk about it. It appears that everyone is waiting for someone else to break ranks before they come forward with collaborating experiences.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 9920 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I went over to the Daily Mail online which has large headlines about hypocrisy and the 'cowardice of the liberal Establishment', pow! It seems to boil down to the claim that lots of people 'must have known about Weinstein's activities'. That's a very thin claim indeed, for which, there will be presumably very little evidence. Are they suggesting that the Obamas let their daughter work for W., knowing he was a predator?

I suspect it all plays into the whole Pizzagate narrative and conspiracy. People seem to want to believe that there is a "ring" of abusers around the Clintons and that somehow this is more believable than anything which is said about Trump.

The problem is when there are nods to it in "respectable" places like the Daily Mail then it becomes accepted and acceptable common-knowledge that the "Obamas deliberately sent their children" to do xyz and so on.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 9920 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
And I realise that there might appear to be a myopic difference between the ideas I just expressed in the last two posts.

For reasons I can't really go into here, I can believe that the things I've been told about particular leaders in International Development Agencies are credible, whereas I've never seen anything remotely credible about Pizzagate - which seems to rely on "this must mean that" interpretation of specific words in an email dump.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 9920 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748

 - Posted      Profile for Doc Tor     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
I don't really understand how "conspiracies of silence" continue in these situations or why it takes so long for the lid to blow.

I think how they continue is all-too understandable.

The first person to put their head over the parapet has to be prepared to be crushed, emotionally and financially. Only if they have literally nothing left to lose will they do it.

--------------------
Forward the New Republic

Posts: 8758 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:


The first person to put their head over the parapet has to be prepared to be crushed, emotionally and financially. Only if they have literally nothing left to lose will they do it.

Yes.

It is all too human. It takes an incredible amount of effort to do anything else - it was a bad choice of words on my part.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 9920 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641

 - Posted      Profile for chris stiles   Email chris stiles   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
A few years ago I heard from a very reliable source some scandalous information. They told me that the chief of a Christian international development charity was well known for going abroad to abuse children.

There may well have been other instances, but in at least one instance the allegations were reasonably widely publicised - though the accused had committed suicide.
Posts: 3761 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715

 - Posted      Profile for ExclamationMark   Email ExclamationMark   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
A few years ago I heard from a very reliable source some scandalous information. They told me that the chief of a Christian international development charity was well known for going abroad to abuse children. I was also told that this was not a unique situation and that there were a number of abusive people in similar situations.

I was not, and am not, in a position to follow up this information but as far as I know that individual has never been investigated or denounced for their behaviour.

Of course, it is possible it is all rumour and made-up nonsense, as I said I have no way to verify or investigate it. But it is scarily plausible that it is accurate and that there are abusers who are in these positions of power.

I don't really understand how "conspiracies of silence" continue in these situations or why it takes so long for the lid to blow.

But I can tell you that people who have spoken to me about it are scared shitless about what might happen to them if they talk about it. It appears that everyone is waiting for someone else to break ranks before they come forward with collaborating experiences.

If you have any doubts or concerns whatsoever with anyone or anything, you should raise them.

Best practice in Child Protection and Safeguarding requires this. It is our responsibility to report any concerns and for the professionals to decide whether there is any case to answer: there may be none or our phone call may add significantly to existing evidence of wrongdoing.

Where there is any suspicion it must be raised - indeed you are criminally liable if you fail to report anything that allows significant harm to continue.

Posts: 3705 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338

 - Posted      Profile for L'organist   Author's homepage   Email L'organist   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Tubbs

I'm not victim blaming (as you put it), simply pointing out that with their preparedness to speak out on many subjects, the likes of Jolie, Paltrow, etc, should have/ could have spoken out long before.

In the case of Angelina Jolie, in particular, it is odd that a woman who from 2013 fronted up a campaign against the use of rape as a weapon of war in conflict zones (with William Hague, former UK Foreign Secretary) should still have found herself unable to speak out about sexual harassment in the entertainment industry. That is not victim blaming, it is an observation.

--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet

Posts: 4623 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
If you have any doubts or concerns whatsoever with anyone or anything, you should raise them.

First I was told things in confidence and second I wasn't told enough details to tell anyone else anyway.

quote:
Best practice in Child Protection and Safeguarding requires this. It is our responsibility to report any concerns and for the professionals to decide whether there is any case to answer: there may be none or our phone call may add significantly to existing evidence of wrongdoing.
Unfortunately journalists are told things all the time. In this instance the events were said to have occurred in unnamed places overseas.

quote:
Where there is any suspicion it must be raised - indeed you are criminally liable if you fail to report anything that allows significant harm to continue.
Easy to say that though, isn't it. There are various problems including that of liable, lacking detailed information and informants/sources being afraid to talk.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 9920 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349

 - Posted      Profile for Anglican_Brat   Email Anglican_Brat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The issue is that as long as something like an accusation of sexual abuse/harrassment remains in the realm of rumor with no clear evidence, then any third party who speaks up publicly runs the risk of a libel/slander suit from Weinstein.

--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.

Posts: 4235 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061

 - Posted      Profile for Brenda Clough   Author's homepage   Email Brenda Clough   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Here is a (free) radio interview with a long-time Hollywood reporter who explains the difficulties.

More deeply and broadly, women (especially in the past) were carefully taught to be passive on this. It is *always* the woman's fault when something like this happens; the man is always and forever blameless. Why were you in that neighborhood/out at night/wearing that skirt/showing ankle or leg or boob or forehead? Clearly you were asking for it and deserve what happened to you. Only if some man comes to testify on your behalf will you be believed, and probably not even then; you had better be a virgin, a nun, or a blameless mother of three otherwise the case will never even be opened, you slut you. This has been going on for hundreds of years -- I can quote you from advice manuals published in 1900.

--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page

Posts: 5457 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Yes. It's also universal, isn't it? It happens in all professions and walks of life. I have to laugh at conservative opinion criticizing 'liberals' for not speaking out sooner, or implying that they 'must have known'. Remember the old generals, standing at the back, shouting forwards?

[ 12. October 2017, 14:13: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]

--------------------
no path

Posts: 9559 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
I'm not victim blaming (as you put it), simply pointing out that with their preparedness to speak out on many subjects, the likes of Jolie, Paltrow, etc, should have/ could have spoken out long before.

In the case of Angelina Jolie, in particular, it is odd that a woman who from 2013 fronted up a campaign against the use of rape as a weapon of war in conflict zones (with William Hague, former UK Foreign Secretary) should still have found herself unable to speak out about sexual harassment in the entertainment industry. That is not victim blaming, it is an observation.

Yeah, I have to say that your combination of "OMG, why didn't anyone speak out sooner?" and "OMG, why is everybody rushing to judgment?" seems perfectly calibrated to prevent anyone from saying anything ever. Discussions that focus on the victims and play with various hypothetical coulda/shoulda scenarios seem like they're designed to shift blame. 'Did you see what she was wearing?' 'Why was she even talking to him?' 'She should have been more careful out in public.' All these are kinds of comments are designed to shift focus from the attacker to the victims. The (alleged) problem with Harvey Weinstein wasn't Angelina Jolie or Gwyneth Paltrow. It was Harvey Weinstein.

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10376 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
la vie en rouge
Parisienne
# 10688

 - Posted      Profile for la vie en rouge     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
ISTM that the reasons women don’t publically accuse a Hollywood mogul of abusing and harassing them are much the same as the reasons women the world over don’t accuse anyone in a position of power of abusing and harassing them. Because they feel ashamed and want to forget about it. Because they don’t think anyone will believe them.

It strikes me as very similar to the workplace situation where all the young women know about a particular manager and warn each other not to be alone with him. And nobody, but nobody, thinks it’s worth contacting the HR. The difference is one of scale, not of kind.

--------------------
Rent my holiday home in the South of France

Posts: 3579 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Exactly.

The Weinstein allegations remind me very much of this recent article about sexual abuse in Antarctica

The similarities and differences for me are striking-- a far less glamorous field, far less publicity. In some ways all the more chilling due to the isolation/vulnerability of the victims. And yet the same dynamic of shaming, fear, and intimidation. The first victim to report intentionally waiting until she had tenure before speaking out.

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 10956 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Tubbs

Miss Congeniality
# 440

 - Posted      Profile for Tubbs   Author's homepage   Email Tubbs   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
I'm not victim blaming (as you put it), simply pointing out that with their preparedness to speak out on many subjects, the likes of Jolie, Paltrow, etc, should have/ could have spoken out long before.

In the case of Angelina Jolie, in particular, it is odd that a woman who from 2013 fronted up a campaign against the use of rape as a weapon of war in conflict zones (with William Hague, former UK Foreign Secretary) should still have found herself unable to speak out about sexual harassment in the entertainment industry. That is not victim blaming, it is an observation.

Yeah, I have to say that your combination of "OMG, why didn't anyone speak out sooner?" and "OMG, why is everybody rushing to judgment?" seems perfectly calibrated to prevent anyone from saying anything ever. Discussions that focus on the victims and play with various hypothetical coulda/shoulda scenarios seem like they're designed to shift blame. 'Did you see what she was wearing?' 'Why was she even talking to him?' 'She should have been more careful out in public.' All these are kinds of comments are designed to shift focus from the attacker to the victims. The (alleged) problem with Harvey Weinstein wasn't Angelina Jolie or Gwyneth Paltrow. It was Harvey Weinstein.
What he said. Whether they could or should have spoken out is irrelevant. He shouldn't have been doing something they needed to speak out against in the first place.

Tubbs

--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am

Posts: 12628 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Callan
Shipmate
# 525

 - Posted      Profile for Callan     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Originally posted by L'organist:

quote:
So, the child of American "theatre royalty", Gwyneth Paltrow, didn't feel able to speak out? Really??? This from a woman who makes a fortune through rampant narcissism and self-promotion with details about her vagina-steaming (I kid you not) and such rot? Similarly Angelina Jolie: more than happy to pursue the family feud with her father Jon Voight (also a Hollywood insider) and with starring roles from when she was 20, felt unable to say anything? And this morning British actress Cara Delvigne has joined the baying mob, though quite how a granddaughter of Joselyn Stevens can claim she didn't know how to complain or who to is a mystery.
Good point. Whenever a man is accused of sexual abuse the really important thing to do is to establish that the whole thing is the fault of the women involved.

--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 9686 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
no prophet's flag is set so...

Proceed to see sea
# 15560

 - Posted      Profile for no prophet's flag is set so...   Author's homepage   Email no prophet's flag is set so...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I've been thinking and saying for a while that the most important social issue in the world is the empowerment of women and girls since one of my family was attacked and I found words to say, and have taken to stating this rather frequently. When people ask why, I say it isn't okay for anyone to worry and be preoccupied about others' motives and their own safety, and that as a older adult man, I don't, and that I don't think it is fair that others seem to have to. This has led to many really good conversations with women of all ages; the men don't tend to engage nearly so well.
Posts: 10911 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
Hypocrisy on the part of left-wing Hollywood's weirdly misnomered "liberals" is not limited to the sexual sphere, and has been around for decades.

Veneration for some of history's worst mass murderers, such as Stalin and Mao, was followed by the valorisation of their epigones, such as Ho Chi Minh and Castro.

What a load of crap. And what has this even got to do with anything even if such individuals exist?
The purpose appears to be to attack liberals. And, as mentioned above; if it is hypocrisy for liberals, does it mean that it is de rigueur for conservatives?

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 16726 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
In hindsight I'm haunted by what he could have done, would have been thinking.

Most people are not evil or good, we are evil and good. It is just how far and to which side the slider is set.
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
If (and it is "if") Harvey Weinstein did some of the things which are alleged then he is a creep.

It is not if, but how much. Weinstein has admitted to pushing boundaries, but he has not admitted to rape.
quote:
In a statement to The Times on Thursday afternoon, Mr. Weinstein said: “I appreciate the way I’ve behaved with colleagues in the past has caused a lot of pain, and I sincerely apologize for it. Though I’m trying to do better, I know I have a long way to go.”
So, he is a creep. What isn't proven is if he is a rapist.
Read the link which Brenda provided to understand the power dynamic.
As far as Jolie and Paltrow, they were not always heavy hitters and they are still women. And in a business where a quiet word can kill a career.

BTW, comfort in speaking of one's vagina is in no way linked to comfort in speaking out about sexual assault.

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 16726 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378

 - Posted      Profile for Gramps49   Email Gramps49   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Question: How many family-values Republicans have had to resign their positions because of certain indiscretions?

It is not a liberal problem or, for that matter, a conservative problem. As pointed out above, it is a societal problem.

In other news, NPR reported this morning that the Indian Supreme Court has ruled men in India cannot have sex with their teenage brides. Now, it is a matter of those young women coming forward to make the accusation.

In still other news, it is now being reported that Matt Lauer of the NBC Today Show has been ousted because he went off script and talked about his erectile dysfunction.

Posts: 1941 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011  |  IP: Logged
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378

 - Posted      Profile for Gramps49   Email Gramps49   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The report of Matt Lauer is apparently false. Sorry for the mistake.
Posts: 1941 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011  |  IP: Logged
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530

 - Posted      Profile for stonespring     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I apologize for the thread title and for suggesting that the US left is more hypocritical than the US right, that people working in Hollywood are uniformly left-of-center, that Weinstein's actions were widely known as fact rather than rumor, that US Democratic politicians were fully aware of his actions and somehow complicit in them in accepting his money and fundraising efforts, that there is any liberal "conspiracy" to cover up the sexual misdeeds of prominent liberal politicians and their supporters, that female stars that were Weinstein's victims, by not coming out earlier, should bear part of the blame of the effects of his actions, etc.

What matters most are the harm Weinstein has caused, any crimes he may have committed, and whatever can be done to prevent this kind of abuse.

As for hypocrisy, the hypocrisy that matters most is Weinstein's own - and, to a lesser degree, that of the subset of employees (assuming that at least some of them identified as liberal and/or feminist) that worked for his company and were involved in arranging meetings with aspiring actresses knowing that they would at the last minute be moved to a hotel room and involved in dealing with the women after these meetings. Whatever other prominent activists or donors to issues related to women's rights, in Hollywood or outside of it, that abuse women and/or men in this way deserves to be outed and to face the consequences of their actions.

What also matters to myself, as I suggested above, is my own hypocrisy. I enthusiastically voted for Hillary, volunteered for her campaign, and stood behind her at a rally shouting my head off for her. Although my mother voted for the tangerine candidate (*groan*), I wanted to help Hillary (who is just about the same age as my mom), to win, among many other reasons, to allow women of my mother's generation to see all that they fought for in their lifetimes had made a female president possible. I haven't done what Weinstein is accused of, but for some reason seeing his outing and downfall has made me think of all the dirty, anti-feminist laundry I might have beneath my own liberal sanctimony (and I am quite guilty of being politically sanctimonious).

On another note, I know that so many people write Hollywood off as out of touch, sleazy, and (here's that word again) sanctimonious in its advocacy of causes, but for me, something else really hurts about this scandal. I was never a huge fan of Weinstein, but being a kid growing up in the 90's I loved the movies that he helped produce and stars he helped break out - without knowing who the producers even were, unless the films were Miramax films. Somewhat indirectly and by no means at a Hollywood level, entertainment was the family business (although I have a family member in that business who painfully seems to have, consciously or not, emulated Trump in almost everything except matters of real estate). As a gay kid, the Oscars were a huge deal, and Miramax movies won so very often in those years. Also, although those movies did not hold up to the classics of cinema or even to many of the better films made today, these movies tended to have a somewhat progressive attitude for the time (although I am sure feminists and activists for racial justice today would rightly tear many of them apart). As I got older, I did become more aware of the self-righteousness and self-absorption evident in the Oscars ceremony, but watching it was still one of the highlights of my year. Watching it will be much less enjoyable this year, largely because I am almost certain that however the ceremony chooses to address or not address this scandal will fall flat despite the best intentions. I am not sure it's hypocrisy that will cause this so much as an overemphasis on appearances and on protections form lawsuits that is pervasive in US culture but taken to almost the furthest of extremes in Hollywood. And, of course, the conversation will focus on the mostly white, already famous and wealthy people who will speak out against abuse, and nowhere nearly enough on the struggling men and women, often of color, that are used and abused daily in the entertainment industry just like they are almost everywhere else.

Lastly, I'm a bit upset about all of this because two female members of my immediate family have suffered abuse, one as a child and one as an adult, both times at the hands of a (different) male family member, although the first one blames the latter for her own abuse. I only found out about the latter case of abuse this year and, although I am a man myself, I'm feeling pretty prejudiced against all men at the moment. I apologize if my OP and thread title seemed unfair in any way because of this.

Posts: 1489 | Registered: Mar 2010  |  IP: Logged
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322

 - Posted      Profile for Enoch   Email Enoch   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
... It is not a liberal problem or, for that matter, a conservative problem. As pointed out above, it is a societal problem. ...

No, not a societal problem, a human one. It's people, individual ones with immortal souls for which each is answerable, who do bad things. Blaming it on society is moral evasion.

But how much is there really to discuss here? This man appears to have been revealed not to be the sort of person he presumably would have like to have presented himself, and in a particularly deplorable and exploitative way. If the allegations turn out to be true, there's not really scope for disagreement about that.

[ 12. October 2017, 21:38: Message edited by: Enoch ]

--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson

Posts: 7251 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
No, not a societal problem, a human one.

It is a societal problem and an individual one. It is a fallacy to think society does not influence behaviour, a patently ridiculous fallacy. This does not excuse an individual's actions, for which they are responsible. But the soil affects the taste of the wine, no matter the variety of the grape.

ETA: Calling such a problem purely an individual one is part of the reason the problem is systemic as it is. It evades dealing with the issue. I will not say it is an evasion on your part, but evasion is what it is.

[ 12. October 2017, 22:20: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 16726 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061

 - Posted      Profile for Brenda Clough   Author's homepage   Email Brenda Clough   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
And I'm astonished that conservatives can cry hypocrisy. Liberal politicians returned the sexual predators political donations. The GOP made one President. As Scalzi said (did I post that link here?) if you voted for Liddle Donny you can have nothing to say about this.

--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page

Posts: 5457 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
Check out Reform magazine
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
  ship of fools