New Board

For refugees from MyWay and Tek Board II, and for anyone else wishing to participate.


    "Sure wish we coulda kept this swept under the rug!"

    Share
    avatar
    sinister_midget
    Admin

    Posts : 2553
    Join date : 2016-08-26
    Age : 65
    Location : Home

    "Sure wish we coulda kept this swept under the rug!"

    Post  sinister_midget on Sun Jan 07, 2018 10:12 am

    Academy members now regret banning Weinstein so hastily

    When Hollywood’s most prestigious organization, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (AMPAS) — the group of nearly 7,000 actors, directors and other industry types who dole out the Oscars — expelled Harvey Weinstein on Oct. 14, audiences applauded. But by acting so swiftly, a mere nine days after the New York Times first reported allegations of sexual assault against the movie producer, the outfit now finds itself facing a dilemma.

    Put simply: What to do with the rest of them?

    Harvey opened the floodgates,” said one male Academy member. “Now the Academy’s drowning in a tide of s—t. They don’t know what hit them.”

    What hit, of course, were more alleged horror stories about so many other members: Kevin Spacey assaulting multiple young men, Dustin Hoffman sticking his hands in women’s pants, director Brett Ratner forcing himself on actresses. Ben Affleck seen on video groping a female host on “Total Request Live.” Screenwriter James Toback accused of sexual misdeeds by nearly 40 women. (As of this past Tuesday, the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office said it is considering criminal charges in five cases against Toback. He, Spacey, Hoffman and Ratner, deny the claims against them.)

    “[We] can’t regret [kicking out Harvey] because [we] didn’t really have a choice,” said one male member of AMPAS’ board of governors. “Some members were quite vehement. But [we] didn’t have time to really weigh out the repercussions.”

    The emergency meeting to deal with Weinstein was conducted by the 54-member board of governors — which includes Steven Spielberg, Tom Hanks, Whoopi Goldberg and Laura Dern — after it received a Change.org petition with 100,000 signatures calling for his ouster.

    “But they didn’t give themselves time to plot out how to deal with this going forward,” said one prominent female AMPAS member. “Kathleen Kennedy [producer of the ‘Star Wars’ series] and some other female governors panicked and felt compelled to act. They thought [Weinstein] could hurt AMPAS’ cred. Some of them did admit this was a slippery slope. But I don’t think they imagined how slippery. It’s definitely caused some problems and fights among the board members.”
    And it’s not just new allegations that are haunting the Academy. What to do about two of the most notorious accused sexual predators in Hollywood, Bill Cosby and Roman Polanski, who were charged years before the Weinstein stories broke? Or, for that matter, Casey Affleck — who last year won the Best Actor Oscar — and the two settled cases of sexual-harassment against him? (Cosby and Affleck deny the accusations.)

    Now, a barrage of petitions, complaints and letters are hitting Academy CEO Dawn Hudson and newly elected president John Bailey about these other men.

    Hudson had no comment, but her office reissued her original statement on the matter, which read in part: “[A] task force will finalize procedures for handling allegations of misconduct, assuring that we can address them fairly and expeditiously. This process will ultimately guide the board of governors in assessing if certain allegations warrant action regarding membership. Those procedures will be sent to you in the new year.”

    Mused another AMPAS member, “Dawn may not know what they’re going to do next. That’s why the statement’s so vague. The board says they’re going to take action, but what action? It will have to be case by case. They must revisit and reinvent the rules of membership — and it’s gonna get nasty.”

    What they really wish is they had listened to NYT before it was ever released (you can bet your behind NYT gave them a heads-up) and offered to give the fake news organization a lot of money to stay afloat if they wouldn't run with the story. You know they would have paid and NYT accepted if the offer had been there.

    They all knew Weinstein is what he is. Almost all of the rest of them, too. Most of the adult "victims" were eager participants because it got them what they wanted. Most of the #MeToo clan couldn't wait to cozy up with the people they now claim abused them AFTER they were supposedly abused.

    There are exceptions. There's no excuse or forgiveness for kids being abused. Some of the people attacked made mention of it at the time, told others, complained, quit the business over it, etc. But in the case of the adults, most of them made known what happened to others in the industry. And the industry kept right on covering it up and honoring the predators.


    _________________
    One of the most important reasons for studying history is that
    virtually every stupid idea that is in vogue today has been tried
    before and proved disastrous before, time and again.
    --  Thomas Sowell
    avatar
    sinister_midget
    Admin

    Posts : 2553
    Join date : 2016-08-26
    Age : 65
    Location : Home

    Re: "Sure wish we coulda kept this swept under the rug!"

    Post  sinister_midget on Sun Jan 07, 2018 1:13 pm

    Now the people who cheered the mess on are wanting it to go away. At least partially.

    Witch hunts are always good to the left. Until they start affecting the left too much. In this instance, "feminists" who normally like playing "strong woman" and victim in the same breath are starting to find it's going to be a lot of trouble to play both sides when the allies they can usually count on start hitting back against the "strong woman" claims.

    NYT Op-Ed: #MeToo Moment Could Be Coming Off The Hinges

    While the Me Too movement has brought down creepers in various industries, some feminists are feeling that this whole moment could be coming off the hinges. It’s devolved from rooting out legitimate predators via shared stories of sexual harassment to an inquisition-like mentality where some accusations are unproven. No, this is not to marginalize the women who came forward and torched Hollywood heavyweight Harvey Weinstein, Matt Lauer, Mark Halperin, Louis C.K. and Charlie Rose. C.K. admitted to his misdeeds, as did Halperin and Rose. C.K’s latest movie has been shelved, while Rose and Halperin were fired from CBS News and NBC News respectively. Matt Lauer was fired from the Today Show for gross sexual misconduct as well.

    Yet, in an op-ed for The New York Times, Daphne Merkin wrote how there are multiple ways the Me Too movement coul fray. She says that we seem to be going back and viewing women as frail “Victorian housewives.” She cited a pair of Manhattan feminists, who tried to remove a Balthus painting of a young girl in a sexually provocative pose. That’s censorship, and luckily the campaign ended in failure. She also noted the lack of due process when it comes to these accusations, the absence of clarity between sexual harassment/assault and “inappropriate conduct,” and the “re-moralization” of sex based on a corporate and legalistic consensus. Merkin added that some of her feminist friends are criticizing some of the recent allegations, telling fellow women to suck it up, asking whether female predators are getting a pass, and lamenting how flirting has become an inappropriate activity:

    …privately, I suspect, many of us, including many longstanding feminists, will be rolling our eyes, having had it with the reflexive and unnuanced sense of outrage that has accompanied this cause from its inception, turning a bona fide moment of moral accountability into a series of ad hoc and sometimes unproven accusations.

    […]

    The women I know — of all ages — have responded by and large with a mixture of slightly horrified excitement (bordering on titillation) as to who will be the next man accused and overt disbelief.

    Publicly, they say the right things, expressing approval and joining in the chorus of voices that applaud the takedown of maleficent characters who prey on vulnerable women in the workplace.

    In private it’s a different story. “Grow up, this is real life,” I hear these same feminist friends say. “What ever happened to flirting?” and “What about the women who are the predators?” Some women, including random people I talk to in supermarket lines, have gone so far as to call it an outright witch hunt.

    […]

    I think this confusion reflects a deeper ambivalence about how we want and expect people to behave. Expressing sexual interest is inherently messy and, frankly, nonconsensual — one person, typically the man, bites the bullet by expressing interest in the other, typically the woman — whether it happens at work or at a bar. Some are now suggesting that come-ons need to be constricted to a repressive degree. Asking for oral consent before proceeding with a sexual advance seems both innately clumsy and retrograde, like going back to the childhood game of “Mother, May I?” We are witnessing the re-moralization of sex, not via the Judeo-Christian ethos but via a legalistic, corporate consensus.

    Stripping sex of eros isn’t the solution. Nor is calling out individual offenders, one by one. We need a broader and more thoroughgoing overhaul, one that begins with the way we bring up our sons and daughters.

    These are scary times, for women as well as men. There is an inquisitorial whiff in the air, and my particular fear is that in true American fashion, all subtlety and reflection is being lost. Next we’ll be torching people for the content of their fantasies.

    It’s certainly worth a read; a grounded critique about if we’re rushing to judgment, coupled with uncertainty about whether we're on the right path to finding solutions.

    Worth a read maybe. But not worth putting too much stock in it. She was OK with it right up until it started making things inconvenient for the anti-male crowd.

    People like her knew all of these things when this mess began. They knew men and women flirt, some people lie, some women egg on the guys to make comments and maybe even cop a feel. Even so, that knowledge didn't interfere with the pressing agenda of making all men look like scoundrels. But now it's interfering because you can only say women need to be protected from aggressive men for so long before that becomes a liability and makes the "I am woman, hear me roar" thing nothing more than a slogan that tells men they should pat the little ladies on the head and let them enjoy their fun.

    Now she's saying women shouldn't have to hide who they are in public so they can play the victim, then be themselves in private. The way it had to be for this whole mess to work like they wanted it to.

    I suppose now we'll go back to the way "feminism" was operating just before all this. You know, play victim publicly when needed, then yell out loud about how strong you are in some other public place. Like, say, Hitlery loved to do.


    Once again, "feminists" are trying to have it both ways. This article suggests we should entertain that.

    #MeToo did some good. I won't say the person who started it (Alyssa Milano) had the best of intentions. If anything, she wanted it to turn into what it did. But it did some good, it got some useless people outed (particularly a couple of pedophiles that should be publicly executed, not worshiped). However, like everything the left touches, it got completely out of control. Almost from the beginning. The good that was done was IN SPITE of #MeToo, not because of it.

    Her solution is also a throwback. We need to feminize our boys and teach them to not be the males they were born. That's something the fems have been working on since wave 2 feminism. One result of that is one study shows 27% of California kids don't know what sex they are. (Except I'd imagine most of the girls in that number know they're girls, which is the goal for all 27% of them. What they probably don't know is what kind of girls: zer/zim, ze/she/ve, them/they, etc.)


    _________________
    One of the most important reasons for studying history is that
    virtually every stupid idea that is in vogue today has been tried
    before and proved disastrous before, time and again.
    --  Thomas Sowell

      Current date/time is Sun Feb 25, 2018 9:50 pm