Jump to content

Menu

Hollywood and men in politics.


Moxie
 Share

Recommended Posts

No.  I doubt that's true.

 

I think you actually see this in other parts of society too, and it's a kind of cultural thing.  When I was in the army, for example, there was a lot of sexual stuff that happened, consensually - it was part of the accepted behaviour.  There was also inappropriate stuff, and I think the two were actually pretty closely related for the most part.  The same with the club scene.  And in both of those, BTW, women contributed to that culture as much as men.

 

In Hollywood, I think that is one part of it - it's got that creative/artistic/bohemian element, where there is this sense of free sexual expression.  But that can allow a lot of darker things to come out as well, or hide.  And the a lot of money, and fame, and a lot of competition for those things are in the mix, which makes it much worse and creates a lot more capacity for exploitation.

Edited by Bluegoat
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of lecherous men predators in Hollywood seem to have had female agents setting up "meetings" with the victims (many of them say that they were unsuspecting victims). Those women should also be named and shamed and put in prison if possible. 

Edited by mathnerd
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hollywood and the fashion industry are in the business of selling s*x and there is a willingness on the part of many young actresses and models to sleep their way to success. That emboldens men in power to think that they can demand it from *ALL* actresses/models. For every one of Weinstein's victims, there were likely DOZENS of women who were willing, even eager to visit his hotel room in an attempt to secure a role through whatever means necessary.

 

The whole "casting couch" culture in Hollywood needs to end and it isn't just the men who need to reform their behavior.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just scanning my news sites. So, at this point, we should just assume all men in Hollywood and/or politics are guilty of some sort of lecherous behavior, right?? Ugh. Why are they so damn gross??

Basically, yes. Power corrupts. What's more powerful in this world than a powerful, rich, white male? At this stage, the good guys are the outliers! You know, the ones who don't cheat/beat their partners or assault/harass whoever they want...

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hollywood and the fashion industry are in the business of selling s*x and there is a willingness on the part of many young actresses and models to sleep their way to success. That emboldens men in power to think that they can demand it from *ALL* actresses/models. For every one of Weinstein's victims, there were likely DOZENS of women who were willing, even eager to visit his hotel room in an attempt to secure a role through whatever means necessary.

 

The whole "casting couch" culture in Hollywood needs to end and it isn't just the men who need to reform their behavior.

That is the definition of sexual assault. https://www.rainn.org/articles/sexual-assault

If you have to have sex with a man you donĂ¢â‚¬â„¢t want to have sex with to get a job, you are not Ă¢â‚¬Å“willingĂ¢â‚¬.

Edited by Moxie
  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

CEOs and others in power as well often have scandals.

 

Uber whistleblower Susan Fowler has a movie and a book deal about sexual harassment while working at Uber.

http://www.businessinsider.com/susan-fowler-has-her-movie-deal-and-shes-working-on-a-book-2017-10

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory/uber-whistleblower-susan-fowler-book-deal-51037224

 

Ă¢â‚¬Å“(CNN)Former Olympic gymnast McKayla Maroney alleged Wednesday that former USA Gymnastics doctor Larry Nassar repeatedly molested her, starting when she was 13 years old.Ă¢â‚¬ http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/18/us/mckayla-maroney-me-too-abuse/index.html

 

There is also the Oakland Police sex scandal which resulted in a police officer committing suicide.

Ă¢â‚¬Å“Now 19, Jasmine was just 17 when she began having sex, she claims, with more than a dozen police officers, including from Oakland, Richmond, Livermore and Alameda and Contra Costa County sheriffs.Ă¢â‚¬ http://abc7news.com/news/woman-at-center-of-east-bay-police-sex-scandal-speaks-after-settlement-approved/2058525/

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Born and raised in L.A. and with some meetings (Gun Club Snack Bar, etc.),  when I was a young boy, with some very famous movie stars. I think it has always been known (or assumed) that actresses were being taken advantage of. It seemed to be well known. Not all actresses and singers, but obviously, from the recent news stories, many of them.  Sad...

 

I doubt the same is true with Politicians, although there are bad Apples in every large group.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Born and raised in L.A. and with some meetings (Gun Club Snack Bar, etc.), when I was a young boy, with some very famous movie stars. I think it has always been known (or assumed) that actresses were being taken advantage of. It seemed to be well known. Not all actresses and singers, but obviously, from the recent news stories, many of them. Sad...

 

I doubt the same is true with Politicians, although there are bad Apples in every large group.

And not just women, but young vulnerable men get taken advantage of by men wielding power. I just read an article that Cory Haim was sexually assaulted by Charlie Sheen when he was a teen starting out on the set of "Lucas". This is not a new occurrence either and leads to a great deal of mental health issues in young stars once they have grown up.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just scanning my news sites. So, at this point, we should just assume all men in Hollywood and/or politics are guilty of some sort of lecherous behavior, right?? Ugh. Why are they so damn gross??

 

Yes, and we should assume all unemployed black people are dealing drugs.

 

 

Although to be honest I don't disagree with you about Hollywood especially - it's been known for a long time that there is a lot of abuse of child actors, and the adults don't exactly seem to be paragons of sexual virtue (whether male or female).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is the definition of sexual assault. https://www.rainn.org/articles/sexual-assault

If you have to have sex with a man you donĂ¢â‚¬â„¢t want to have sex with to get a job, you are not Ă¢â‚¬Å“willingĂ¢â‚¬.

 

You are willing to have sex to get the job.  The job is not a matter of survival.

 

If your husband came home from a job interview and said, "Honey, I got the job!  The lady in charge of HR wanted me to have sex with her, though, so I did," you'd probably think he'd been the victim of a power imbalance and had suffered a sexual assault, sure - but you also would be pissed at him for sleeping with someone just to get a particular job.  

 

Now if that happened again and again, and he said, well, it's just part of the culture of this industry, these women are so abusive!  they keep insisting I have sex with them to get a promotion - you'd be rightfully mad at the women and the culture, but I doubt you'd think your husband was completely innocent and a victim.  

 

 

That is not to say that all women (and men) who are victims of sexual assault in Hollywood and politics and etc. are morally complicit; some are children and some are unwilling participants (or non-participants, in the Louis CK stuff).

 

but to equate a woman who sleeps willingly with a series of producers in order to get roles with a child who is actually unwillingly assaulted, or a woman who is drugged and assaulted, or whatever, is disingenuous.  

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Furthermore, here is a controversial idea but one I have thought about some recently (after seeing the beginning of a completely implausible post-apocalypse movie):

 

The most basic exchange men and women make for a social compact is the regulation of sexuality.  Men commit not to rape women (that is, their aggressive sexuality is regulated - they agree not to take sex from someone society hasn't deemed theirs) and women commit not to be promiscuous (that is, their passive sexuality is regulated - they agree not to give sexual access to someone society hasn't deemed theirs).  Why do they make this exchange?  For women, an unregulated society - like in times of true social breakdown, without even tribal chiefs, etc. - means rape by the strongest man who can catch her, serially.  Because women are not as strong as men, or as aggressive, they're also vulnerable to violence.  For men, an unregulated society means no reproductive security - there is no reason to trade your labor for a woman whose pregnancy and children may or may not be yours (because her sexuality is unregulated, and the only guarantee men have, on a societal and individual scale, relies on the regulation or their own strength, which of course is fallible).  

 

So we make this trade, and societies prosper - men are willing to use their labor and brains for women and children they can be certain are their biological heirs, and women have the security of a social apparatus that limits their sexual vulnerability to one man, not a series of them, and thus also reduces their physical vulnerability as their assigned men are likely to provide and protect (from starvation and the violence of other men, etc.)  Who does the assigning varies across culture and even across castes within a single culture, of course - everything from parents to the state to individuals themselves (who nonetheless enter a contract, explicit or implicit).

 

 

Rape, thus, is obviously a violation of that social compact - the male violation.  Promiscuity is also a violation - perhaps not as personally aggressive, but socially just as much a violation and destabilization, socially speaking, as rape. 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For every one of Weinstein's victims, there were likely DOZENS of women who were willing, even eager to visit his hotel room in an attempt to secure a role through whatever means necessary.

 

You are wrong. A boss, requesting sex from a job applicant, where the boss has the power to decide how the job interview goes is considered as sexual harassment - this holds true even if the applicant willingly or eagerly visited the hotel room to perform sexual favors. They would not have to do that if Mr. Powerful-Producer told them upfront that he is not interested in having sex with them and simply wanted a regular audition. They then would have had to do their best acting and leave the scene and get in touch with their agent for updates, wouldn't they?

 

If a person does something sexual to get ahead professionally, it is because of the imbalance of power. There is no genuine willingness involved - as in "Weinstein is looking so hot that I cannot wait to get into a hotel bedroom and give him a massage" or "Weinstein has such a great intellect" or "Weinstein is the greatest guy I have ever met".

 

Some of his accusers say that they willingly slept with him because they were afraid that refusing would make them jobless in Hollywood. That is also considered abuse.

Edited by mathnerd
  • Like 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the women didn't do anything about it either, did they?  Not to protect other women, not to protect children in the industry, not for any reason, because their own job security and advancement and fame were more important to them.

 

I don't just mean the women who were assaulted or had sex with a producer but those who had heard about it or knew what was going on, even if they themselves hadn't been propositioned.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, wait, it's other women's fault that women in Hollywood continued to be exploited?

 

You're ignoring the fact that many women DID speak out and no one gave a sh1t until it was dozens of women who were tenacious about speaking up!

 

Exploitation happens because of the power imbalance. What happened to the women who said no? What happened to the women who tried to speak out? *hint - powerful guy used his powers to shut her up! https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/harvey-weinsteins-army-of-spies

  • Like 13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are willing to have sex to get the job. The job is not a matter of survival.

 

If your husband came home from a job interview and said, "Honey, I got the job! The lady in charge of HR wanted me to have sex with her, though, so I did," you'd probably think he'd been the victim of a power imbalance and had suffered a sexual assault, sure - but you also would be pissed at him for sleeping with someone just to get a particular job.

 

Now if that happened again and again, and he said, well, it's just part of the culture of this industry, these women are so abusive! they keep insisting I have sex with them to get a promotion - you'd be rightfully mad at the women and the culture, but I doubt you'd think your husband was completely innocent and a victim.

 

 

That is not to say that all women (and men) who are victims of sexual assault in Hollywood and politics and etc. are morally complicit; some are children and some are unwilling participants (or non-participants, in the Louis CK stuff).

 

but to equate a woman who sleeps willingly with a series of producers in order to get roles with a child who is actually unwillingly assaulted, or a woman who is drugged and assaulted, or whatever, is disingenuous.

On what planet is having a job not a matter of survival?!?

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the US, having this job (getting a particular role as an actress) is not a matter of survival.  Pretending that it is is not fair to the millions of women who do have to take certain jobs to get by, and are abused by their bosses in those jobs.

 

If your husband has a job in IT, say, and does the above, do you really think he should just keep having sex with his bosses in order to get promotions or continue in his job?  Does he not have a personal responsibility to say, hey, the pay is great here and the hours are good and all but jeez, I can't just cheat on my wife all the time (or allow myself to be coerced into having sex with the promise of more money or continued fame, etc.) in order to get ahead in this profession.  The system is @#$ up and evil, but I can't be a willing part of it when I could instead get a job as a janitor while my wife goes back to work as a teacher, or become a truck driver, or work on a farm, or a zillion other things.  

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether the woman accommodates or not, soliciting sexual favors as a trade for getting or keeping a job is sexual harassment.  The person doing so is guilty of harassment regardless of the response.  Of course women should walk away for their own self-respect and integrity.  But it is not on them to stop the behavior. 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do wonder though, once the purge is complete and Hollywood can claim that it is clean, (which I doubt will ever actually happen) how will things change? What could be put in place to prevent it from happening again? 

 

Ultimately only a cultural change in which it is no longer considered acceptable, by either women or men.  We're no where near that in my opinion.

 

Editing, "tolerable" is a better word than acceptable.  

Edited by goldberry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  For men, an unregulated society means no reproductive security - there is no reason to trade your labor for a woman whose pregnancy and children may or may not be yours (because her sexuality is unregulated, and the only guarantee men have, on a societal and individual scale, relies on the regulation or their own strength, which of course is fallible).  

 

There are some societies where the child belongs to the social, not biological, father. I'm not sure that isn't a better system in many ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And who speak up and out at the time, not, you know, when it's good for their PR.

 

All those men who 'heard the rumors'...what the heck did they do about it ? Nada.

They protected their 'property' - see Brad Pitt. Only some women deserve to work free of harassment, the other dumb ****s asked for it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read an interesting story about Maureen O'Hara who had to deal with this years and years ago--in the 40s.  She stuck to her guns, but didn't publish details and somehow made a career.  I don't know what that statement has to do with anything, but I have always liked her as an actress and thought it was interesting that it's (duh) going on forEVer in places where people have too much power over other people's lives.

 

Although it happened then, I think that there was a lot more societal support for viewing it as wrong than the 'whatever you can get away with' or 'all the puppies love to pile up' ethoses that we have now.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Furthermore, here is a controversial idea but one I have thought about some recently (after seeing the beginning of a completely implausible post-apocalypse movie):

 

The most basic exchange men and women make for a social compact is the regulation of sexuality. Men commit not to rape women (that is, their aggressive sexuality is regulated - they agree not to take sex from someone society hasn't deemed theirs) and women commit not to be promiscuous (that is, their passive sexuality is regulated - they agree not to give sexual access to someone society hasn't deemed theirs). Why do they make this exchange? For women, an unregulated society - like in times of true social breakdown, without even tribal chiefs, etc. - means rape by the strongest man who can catch her, serially. Because women are not as strong as men, or as aggressive, they're also vulnerable to violence. For men, an unregulated society means no reproductive security - there is no reason to trade your labor for a woman whose pregnancy and children may or may not be yours (because her sexuality is unregulated, and the only guarantee men have, on a societal and individual scale, relies on the regulation or their own strength, which of course is fallible).

 

So we make this trade, and societies prosper - men are willing to use their labor and brains for women and children they can be certain are their biological heirs, and women have the security of a social apparatus that limits their sexual vulnerability to one man, not a series of them, and thus also reduces their physical vulnerability as their assigned men are likely to provide and protect (from starvation and the violence of other men, etc.) Who does the assigning varies across culture and even across castes within a single culture, of course - everything from parents to the state to individuals themselves (who nonetheless enter a contract, explicit or implicit).

 

 

Rape, thus, is obviously a violation of that social compact - the male violation. Promiscuity is also a violation - perhaps not as personally aggressive, but socially just as much a violation and destabilization, socially speaking, as rape.

My bold - they have? When was this? Apparently a lot of them didn't get the message...

 

Also, wow. I really disagree with your theory. Women didn't commit to not being promiscuous - they were severely punished for it! They learned very explicitly that good girls don't and bad girls get what they deserve. It's not an equal 'exchange' or 'agreement' - at all.

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just scanning my news sites. So, at this point, we should just assume all men in Hollywood and/or politics are guilty of some sort of lecherous behavior, right?? Ugh. Why are they so damn gross??

 

don't confine it to men.  there are women who abuse (female teachers having s3x with male students has become cliche.  Can't imagine why hollywood would romanticize it  (lot's of sarcasm there.)   I saw this coming 15 years about with mary k letourneau.).

 

then there are the writers and comedians telling the victims to "suck it up".  (re: gay talese,)

 

and the women who support them..   for example:

Lisa bloom - lawyer, defending HW

donna karan, defedning HW  by slut shaming

both have had backlash

meryl streep .   Her 'HW is a gawd", and leading a standing ovation for convicted pedophile roman polanski shows what she really thinks.

or whoopi - and her complaints that people were being so hard on RP. . . it's not like it was "r@pe, r@pe".   

I could go on.

 

there are men who object.

I sadly don't recall the actor's name - his on screen wife was assaulted by HW.  she told him later. He was livid. when he announced best supporting actresses at the AAs - he also said "now you don't have to be alone in a room with HW".

Jodi Foster shared her experience when she was 14.   Her agent went and punched the director in the face.

 

There are also many male victims.   Anthony Edwards is one of the latest to share his experience at the abuse he experienced by Gary Goddard (writer/producer) starting when he was 14.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gardenmom, while I agree with your point that any abusers are evil and glamorising female perpetrators/undermining their male victims is awful, the statistics are still highly skewed towards men doing the vast majority of assaulting - of women and girls and boys and some other men.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it does any good to say that when women are complicit in sexual exchange that they are not also responsible for creating a larger, exploitative situation for all kinds of other people.

 

Saying that doesn't somehow mean the others are not being exploited, or finding themselves in a sick system that ask them to make unfair choices or exchanges.

 

Women can be exploitative of other women, directly or indirectly.  In the same way men can exploit other men.  And people in the side of a relation that is looking for a benefit can exploit the situation and screw the others - we see that in the way other contracts are awarded all the time.   

 

But I think one issue with Hollywood in particular is that people are already being asked, in their jobs, to access their intimate self.  And especially for women that is often sexually, not just emotionally.  Maybe for men increasingly as well.

 

When you become used to doing that in one situation, or seeing it as something others do, it is not so different to do, or expect to see it, it in another.  Is it so different for the individual to be sexually available and vulnerable on a screen, as it is in a personal interaction?  I suspect the ways you protect yourself psychologically would work well in both. situations

 

And really, if we know that in  lot of cases it isn't really even art - it is taking off your clothes, etc, for money.  So, if that is what you are doing, it doesn't seem so far out that it would transfer into the offscreen parts of the job.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gardenmom, while I agree with your point that any abusers are evil and glamorising female perpetrators/undermining their male victims is awful, the statistics are still highly skewed towards men doing the vast majority of assaulting - of women and girls and boys and some other men.

 

I've been a victim.  I was molested by a neighbor at four.  I was s3xually harassed by male AND female students in jr. high.  I was s3xualy assaulted (as a young wife/mother) by a stranger IN MY OWN HOME.

 

I'm stick of the ignoring of 'certain classes' of victims because they fail to meet some standard.  in this case - being male.

 

eta:(I forgot to include harassed/groomed on multiple occasions by one of my brothers druggie friends. I was forced to stay in my bedroom whenever he was in my house. 

 

Edited by gardenmom5
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just scanning my news sites. So, at this point, we should just assume all men in Hollywood and/or politics are guilty of some sort of lecherous behavior, right?? Ugh. Why are they so damn gross??

 

Gardenmom, while I agree with your point that any abusers are evil and glamorising female perpetrators/undermining their male victims is awful, the statistics are still highly skewed towards men doing the vast majority of assaulting - of women and girls and boys and some other men.

 

 

LMD wasn't ignoring any class of victim. She included boys and men in her list of those who suffer from the entitled criminality of other men.

 

I was responding to the first quoted post - that was confining it to men.

LMD - responded to me, and said :men doing the vast majority of assaulting

 

I'm also realizing just how much all of this crap in the news is affecting me because it is bringing stuff up that I thought I had dealt with.   And through it all - is my hatred for, and recognition of, my abusive  grandmother (A WOMAN) being the source of so much of it- because she *groomed us* to be abuse victims, is coming out, and  is way way way above all of it in terms of damage. and the damage that b!tch caused!

 

so I am DAMN sick and tired of women abusers being given a freaking pass because they're a woman!

Edited by gardenmom5
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the US, having this job (getting a particular role as an actress) is not a matter of survival.  Pretending that it is is not fair to the millions of women who do have to take certain jobs to get by, and are abused by their bosses in those jobs.

 

If your husband has a job in IT, say, and does the above, do you really think he should just keep having sex with his bosses in order to get promotions or continue in his job?  Does he not have a personal responsibility to say, hey, the pay is great here and the hours are good and all but jeez, I can't just cheat on my wife all the time (or allow myself to be coerced into having sex with the promise of more money or continued fame, etc.) in order to get ahead in this profession.  The system is @#$ up and evil, but I can't be a willing part of it when I could instead get a job as a janitor while my wife goes back to work as a teacher, or become a truck driver, or work on a farm, or a zillion other things.  

 

Well, my husband's job is not in IT, but the scenario could destroy us.  Even in his non-celebrity industry, his boss(es) could potentially make him unemployable within it and related industries if he couldn't prove his case.  Or maybe even if he could prove his case.

 

So I'll sit here and predict that he would quit and we'd both go out and get $10/hr. jobs (if we're lucky), declare bankruptcy, lose our health insurance, lose our house, lose our cars, and lose just about all our time with our kids while we work weird shifts and they go to school, but I'm not going to pretend that I don't understand a different decision.

 

It's very similar to taking the naive stance that "battered women should just leave". There's no "just" about such situations.  Victims are victims no matter how they choose to cope with their abuse and/or harassment.

  • Like 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

whoa, who's giving female abusers a pass?

 

yes, women can be evil monsters too. I'm very sorry for what you have been through, gardenmom.

 

But we are discussing the culture that encourages and enables the kind of behaviour recently in the news.

 

Statistics show that between 90-99% of perpetrators of sexual assault are men. What we know about female perpetrators indicates that their reasons for offending are often different from men's (power vs loss of control and invasive thoughts).

 

If we want to find solutions, we have to accurately name the problem. Part of the problem is the gender hierarchy.

 

It's like, if in every single conversation about strategies to deal with dyslexia, someone has to say "other people struggle with math too!"

Well, okay, that's a good conversation to have and there may even be a little overlap, but it doesn't actually further the discussion towards solutions.

Edited by LMD
  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are willing to have sex to get the job.  The job is not a matter of survival.

 

 

This assumes a simplistic meaning of the word "survival." If by "survive" you mean "get some kind of job that provides food and shelter," yes, the job is not a matter of survival. But if your career goal is acting, and some or many of the people who control that career are predators, then the situation is much more complex.

 

Same can be true in politics or business. Women should not have to feel that their career choices are limited based on their willingness to have sex with the right people. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Furthermore, here is a controversial idea but one I have thought about some recently (after seeing the beginning of a completely implausible post-apocalypse movie):

 

The most basic exchange men and women make for a social compact is the regulation of sexuality. Men commit not to rape women (that is, their aggressive sexuality is regulated - they agree not to take sex from someone society hasn't deemed theirs) and women commit not to be promiscuous (that is, their passive sexuality is regulated - they agree not to give sexual access to someone society hasn't deemed theirs). Why do they make this exchange? For women, an unregulated society - like in times of true social breakdown, without even tribal chiefs, etc. - means rape by the strongest man who can catch her, serially. Because women are not as strong as men, or as aggressive, they're also vulnerable to violence. For men, an unregulated society means no reproductive security - there is no reason to trade your labor for a woman whose pregnancy and children may or may not be yours (because her sexuality is unregulated, and the only guarantee men have, on a societal and individual scale, relies on the regulation or their own strength, which of course is fallible).

 

So we make this trade, and societies prosper - men are willing to use their labor and brains for women and children they can be certain are their biological heirs, and women have the security of a social apparatus that limits their sexual vulnerability to one man, not a series of them, and thus also reduces their physical vulnerability as their assigned men are likely to provide and protect (from starvation and the violence of other men, etc.) Who does the assigning varies across culture and even across castes within a single culture, of course - everything from parents to the state to individuals themselves (who nonetheless enter a contract, explicit or implicit).

 

 

Rape, thus, is obviously a violation of that social compact - the male violation. Promiscuity is also a violation - perhaps not as personally aggressive, but socially just as much a violation and destabilization, socially speaking, as rape.

 

I was thinking for awhile about this and my main thought is that you have an...interesting...and reductive idea about the history of men and women across time and cultures. I honestly cannot think of a place or era where your theory was the norm or even more than a theoretical construct.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think all people in Hollywood did the harassment/sexual assault.   I think some of the posters were onto something when they talked about the culture that surrounded some of these men and their accusations.  I read a depressing enough news articles this morning to catch up on the ones I missed while not paying that much attention to the news this last week.  Yes, I got the Sen candidate news and the first Kevin Spacey accusation etc but not the giant list that is starting to appear.  About culture and this sort of harassment, I think it is interesting how much derision VP Pence received when he said he doesn't meet with a woman alone.    The same sort of derision when a Muslim man who came to a class at my church faced from one particular person because he wouldn't go into a house of a married woman even though there were other (male) guests there already until her husband came home.  (A dinner by the commander's wife for a group of underling soldiers and this was long ago so males). 

 

One PP said why didn't the men do anything if they knew rumors.  Probably because you can't do anything.  When I worked in immigration at one of the major airports, I had one of the supervisors come to me leeringly asking me to go out or some such proposal- that I can't remember exactly what he said initially but I replied, I am married in stony manner.  His response was "How married are you?''  I replied, "Very married" again in a stony manner and henceforth tried to avoid him as much as possible.  We had many lanes open usually and several supervisors on the floor and they weren't necessarily our actual supervisor who would rate us.  I heard rumors that one female inspector got a promotion by sleeping with someone.  A) She was good inspector so I certainly didn't have any reason to think she had to do that B) I had no idea if it was my leering supervisor or who--- the rules about such behavior weren't really emphasized and he actually had no power over me since I was already at the higher level of inspector due to my education and could not go up until after I went to Immigration academy.   There were lots of rumors about numerous misbehaviors but I didn't have proof of anything.  Even my leering supervisor wasn't clearly doing sexual harassment since he didn't come back again. 

 

Finally, about women harassers and abusers.  I think there are a lot more female harrassers than abusers.  My dd, in her last job, was dealing with female sexual harassment, I believe.  They were doing such things as suddenly shoving a phone in front of her with a sexual photo of a male partner of one of them, continual talking about their various sexual escapades in great detail even though she would tell them to please not- not just because it bugged her but also because it was inappropriate in a medical front office, etc, etc.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are some societies where the child belongs to the social, not biological, father. I'm not sure that isn't a better system in many ways.

 

And others where the child's main male adult role models are the mother's brothers and mother's mother's brothers - the father is more like an uncle in our culture.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

whoa, who's giving female abusers a pass?

 

yes, women can be evil monsters too. I'm very sorry for what you have been through, gardenmom.

 

But we are discussing the culture that encourages and enables the kind of behaviour recently in the news.

 

Statistics show that between 90-99% of perpetrators of sexual assault are men. What we know about female perpetrators indicates that their reasons for offending are often different from men's (power vs loss of control and invasive thoughts).

 

If we want to find solutions, we have to accurately name the problem. Part of the problem is the gender hierarchy.

 

It's like, if in every single conversation about strategies to deal with dyslexia, someone has to say "other people struggle with math too!"

Well, okay, that's a good conversation to have and there may even be a little overlap, but it doesn't actually further the discussion towards solutions.

 

I don't think statistics on who are perpetrators are really what people feel is unbalanced, or important to note.  (And actually, I think they are pretty unreliable at a basic level, but that's a different issue.)

 

It's more that fundamentally, this culture that exists in certain industries isn't just a problem of men taking advantage of power over women, and if it's understood as such it's going to be a significant misunderstanding.  The misuse of sexuality in general is   a major component of the problem, and that is something that isn't about one sex dominating the other - women seem equally likely to want to uses in that way, their own or that of other women.  

 

In a way, the actual exchange of jobs or other considerations for sex is a bit like a bribe.  The person who accept the bribe is guilty of an offence, but it also can be the case that people offer bribes of their own accord to get what they want.  Both of those people are guilty of corruption.  And when it becomes endemic that creates a momentum of its own, in terms of pressuring everyone to offer the same, and creating a sense of that being normal.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is the definition of sexual assault. https://www.rainn.org/articles/sexual-assault

If you have to have sex with a man you donĂ¢â‚¬â„¢t want to have sex with to get a job, you are not Ă¢â‚¬Å“willingĂ¢â‚¬.

 

People have s*x for all sorts of reasons, and just because it isn't for pleasure or love, does NOT mean it's being forced upon the person. Having s*x for personal gain =/= assault.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't take long for a thread about men abusing women to turn into a thread about how women should change their behavior. Only a few posts in. Impressive. 

 

The actresses who are willing to sleep their way to fame shouldn't get a free pass because their behavior IS part of the problem. The Weinsteins of the industry need to be held responsible for their behavior, absolutely. But he wouldn't have been inviting actress after actress for DECADES to his hotel room if he got refused 100% of the time.

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was an article on FoxNews.com this morning, about some Actor (or Director?) and what he asked a young Actress to do, for one hour. Truly disgusting.  I can't find it now or I would post the link here.  She didn't do what he wanted her to do and she was out of there, 2 weeks later.  Had she been willing to sleep with him, she would have gotten a much bigger role in the film. 

 

My late Mother worked some years for Attorneys and  Accountants (in Hollywood) who specialized in Music business clients (singers/groups, some of which you know the names of).  My guess is that the majority of the people in Hollywood (film industry or music) use illegal drugs and are not the most decent people on the planet. Probably somewhere between 50 and 80% of them.  I don't know the percentage, but it is high.    There are some very decent people there, but most, I wouldn't want to be around.  

Edited by Lanny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think statistics on who are perpetrators are really what people feel is unbalanced, or important to note. (And actually, I think they are pretty unreliable at a basic level, but that's a different issue.)

 

It's more that fundamentally, this culture that exists in certain industries isn't just a problem of men taking advantage of power over women, and if it's understood as such it's going to be a significant misunderstanding. The misuse of sexuality in general is a major component of the problem, and that is something that isn't about one sex dominating the other - women seem equally likely to want to uses in that way, their own or that of other women.

 

In a way, the actual exchange of jobs or other considerations for sex is a bit like a bribe. The person who accept the bribe is guilty of an offence, but it also can be the case that people offer bribes of their own accord to get what they want. Both of those people are guilty of corruption. And when it becomes endemic that creates a momentum of its own, in terms of pressuring everyone to offer the same, and creating a sense of that being normal.

Thanks for your reply Bluegoat. I disagree Ă°Å¸Ëœâ€°

The cultural context of the gender hierarchy means that women as a class have been socialised to understand that our only power in this society is sexual - be pretty, play the wh*re/madonna perfectly etc.

Using sexuality is something that is required from females, remember the big brouhaha when Mo'nique didn't shave her legs for the Oscars? Can you think of ONE relatively powerful woman who doesn't wear make up or heels? Why is that?

 

And I believe that men like Weinstein are smart enough to realise that just because some girls say yes it is not an excuse for raping, assaulting, stalking, harassing and blacklisting the ones who say no. It's not that confusing.

 

Using your bribe example - if a CEO says to a brand new, teenage employee, that they must work 20+ hours a week of unpaid overtime if they want to get a promotion one day. Who has the power? Who's taking advantage of whom? The employee could be pleased with an option to advance themself, they come from a culture that defers to authority figures and was going to work a little extra to be noticed anyway - does that mean the CEO wasn't using his position to unethically coerce? Was the employee's decision freely made?

What if there had previously been another employee who worked equally hard and was equally qualified, this employee had worked at this company longer but refused the CEO's offer and is subsequently fired, the CEO calls around other CEOs in his network to stop them getting hired anywhere and hires private detectives to make sure they stay quiet. This story gets around, but it's all just hushed talk. Having heard this story, how free was our first employee's choice?

 

It's about naming the problem - the employee isn't the problem because the massive power imbalance means that their 'choice' to go along is heavily coerced. It's a gorilla vs a butterfly - not a fair fight.

Edited by LMD
  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

By blaming the women who "allowed" the assaults to happen and saying they shouldn't have gone along with it, we're allowing these sexual predators to be the gate keepers of women's dreams. Want to be an actress? You have to sleep with this man. You want to be an Olympic gymnast? You have to let this doctor fondle you. You want to make it to the top of the business world? You have to suck off a few guys.

 

If the women don't go along with it, achieving their dreams (and reaching positions of power themselves) becomes SO much harder, and the men just keep on holding the power. If we instead LISTENED to these women, and punished THE PEOPLE WHO INSISTED ON SEX IN EXCHANGE FOR A PERSON BEING ALLOWED TO ACHIEVE THEIR DREAM we'd get a lot further at changing things for the better.

  • Like 20
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ITT we learn that women who are sexually assaulted can still be blamed by other women.

 

I am NOT blaming the victims, but rather their peers who put the victims at risk by willingly trading sexual favors for roles so often that Weinstein and the like thought that *ALL* actresses would be willing to do the same.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rape, thus, is obviously a violation of that social compact - the male violation.  Promiscuity is also a violation - perhaps not as personally aggressive, but socially just as much a violation and destabilization, socially speaking, as rape. 

 

How are you defining promiscuity as part of this alleged social contract?

 

I also don't think anything you suggest actually makes sense or applies to previous eras.  Women did not agree to not be promiscuous to avoid rape.

1.)  Women have never avoided rape.

2,) In most cultures women did not control their own sexuality.  They were generally treated as property and their sexuality was treated as a resource/property.

 

 

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

Ă—
Ă—
  • Create New...