Lupita on Weinstein

[MARAQ DIGAAG]

The actor said she “didn’t know how to proceed without jeopardizing my future”, and invited Weinstein to see a production at Yale School of Drama. He could not make it but instead invited Nyong’o to a Broadway production. Nothing happened on that occasion but the next time they met – at a dinner in TriBeCa, New York – Weinstein propositioned her, the actor said.

“If I wanted to be an actress, then I had to be willing to do this sort of thing,” she wrote. “He said he had dated Famous Actress X and Y and look where that had gotten them.

https://www.theguardian.com/film/20...ein-i-have-felt-sick-in-the-pit-of-my-stomach

 

[MARAQ DIGAAG]

Are we really suppose to feel sorry for some of these people ?She invited him to her event even though he had tried to sexually harass her at his house . She had be to be " willing to do this " if she wanted to be become a good actor -she says .

 

[Rorschach]

And now they crawl out of the woodwork; right on cue.

Hollywood is literally Satan' asshole, so abusive men in power taking advantage of actors/models is probably even written into their contracts.

Weinstein was dumped by his fellow degenerates, and I want to know why. These men are never exposed by their victims, who only come out once they get the nod from generic powerful pedo/pervert no.23 who probably sexually assaulted them too.

Smoke and mirrors - they all deserve each other.

 

[jugjugwacwac]

And now they crawl out of the woodwork; right on cue.

Hollywood is literally Satan' asshole, so abusive men in power taking advantage of actors/models is probably even written into their contracts.

Weinstein was dumped by his fellow degenerates, and I want to know why. These men are never exposed by their victims, who only come out once they get the nod from generic powerful pedo/pervert no.23 who probably sexually assaulted them too.

Smoke and mirrors - they all deserve each other.

Bingo! Right on the money sxb.

 

[bluebird]

Right we all know about the casting couch. The question is will any of these brave ladies stepping forward expose the sick pedophiles getting protection in hollywood ? And they wonder why no one believes them

And now they crawl out of the woodwork; right on cue.

Hollywood is literally Satan' asshole, so abusive men in power taking advantage of actors/models is probably even written into their contracts.

Weinstein was dumped by his fellow degenerates, and I want to know why. These men are never exposed by their victims, who only come out once they get the nod from generic powerful pedo/pervert no.23 who probably sexually assaulted them too.

Smoke and mirrors - they all deserve each other.

 

[jugjugwacwac]

Situations like this put forth a dilemma for feminists. Do women have agency? If they do, like feminists argue they do, then these women willingly used their agency to exchange sex for success. This means Weinstien and men like him are at no fault whatsoever, since they merely took part in a mutually beneficial transaction involving two consenting adults. If they don't possess agency and are delicate little flowers that can be very easily coerced into doing things they don't want to, then feminism falls flat on its face, because it has liberated and gave equal rights to a gender that does not possess agency like men do.

By going after Weinstien they are basically making a case for patriarchy, because patriarchal societies understand that women can be taken advantage of and must be protected and be under the authority of the men in their family. If women have agency, then Weintsein is innocent. If they don't have agency in the same sense men do, then feminism is preposterous and patriarchy is the only sane option.

 

[Naissur]

Situations like this put forth a dilemma for feminists. Do women have agency? If they do, like feminists argue they do, then these women willingly used their agency to exchange sex for success. This means Weinstien and men like him are at no fault whatsoever, since they merely took part in a mutually beneficial transaction involving two consenting adults. If they don't possess agency and are delicate little flowers that can be very easily coerced into doing things they don't want to, then feminism falls flat on its face, because it has liberated and gave equal rights to a gender that does not possess agency like men do.

By going after Weinstien they are basically making a case for patriarchy, because patriarchal societies understand that women can be taken advantage of and must be protected and be under the authority of the men in their family. If women have agency, then Weintsein is innocent. If they don't have agency in the same sense men do, then feminism is preposterous and patriarchy is the only sane option.

Your argument perhaps applies to this particular case, but not to all the women who accuse him. He didn't always use a proposition of this sort. He'd just grab them unexpectedly, and not always in contexts where they were working for him.

 

[jugjugwacwac]

Your argument perhaps applies to this particular case, but not to all the women who accuse him. He didn't always use a proposition of this sort. Sometimes he'd just grab them unexpectedly, and not always in contexts where they were working for him.

Of course any instance where it wasn't consensual is wrong. I'm talking about the women coming forward saying they did this or that with him so they could get ahead in their career.

 

[Naissur]

Of course any instance where it wasn't consensual is wrong. I'm talking about the women coming forward saying they did this or that with him so they could get ahead in their career.

Makes sense.

 

[Gibiin-Udug]

He pissed off someone who's more powerful in Hollywood just like how Bill Cosby pissed someone off before all the shitstorm happened to him.

 

[Sophisticate]

Many individuals prostitute themselves for fame. It's kind of embedded in Hollyweirds toxic culture. There's a reason so many of them are strung out on drugs or have dissociative identity disorder. It's often a coping mechanism for dealing with trauma. Just look at Britney Spears and Amanda Bynes (products of Disney and Nickelodeon). Weinstein is the tip of the iceberg. Dirtier things are afoot in tinsel town and much of it deeply entrenched and suppressed.

 

[Keo]

It's weird that they are all talking now.

 

[showme7]

I've ready 10+ accounts of the Weinstein allegations, and honestly the most shocking thing to me was how bad his game was. Zero game. His approach was extremely crude and unimaginative, it's like he managed to bang a few A stars using the "massage" technique and thought it was the holy grail.

 

[TooMacaan]

Situations like this put forth a dilemma for feminists. Do women have agency? If they do, like feminists argue they do, then these women willingly used their agency to exchange sex for success. This means Weinstien and men like him are at no fault whatsoever, since they merely took part in a mutually beneficial transaction involving two consenting adults. If they don't possess agency and are delicate little flowers that can be very easily coerced into doing things they don't want to, then feminism falls flat on its face, because it has liberated and gave equal rights to a gender that does not possess agency like men do.

By going after Weinstien they are basically making a case for patriarchy, because patriarchal societies understand that women can be taken advantage of and must be protected and be under the authority of the men in their family. If women have agency, then Weintsein is innocent. If they don't have agency in the same sense men do, then feminism is preposterous and patriarchy is the only sane option.

Women do have agency, but you're also missing a significant point-- the nature of the Hollywood industry and its abuse of power (something that we should never dismissively allow to be normalized).

To be propositioned in such a manner where one is basically told: 'your livelihood will come to a dead end, if you don't agree to...' by an individual who weilds a lot of connections in their line of profession...is not much of a choice. It's a coercive threat, straight up.

Ofc some of those women could've said no (and, morally, should've said no)-- but the fact that they were even asked to make that choice in the first place..is a serious injustice IN ITSELF.

Addressing (and fixing) this exploitative "systematic" issue, along with questioning why his peers have now suddenly turned against him, should be the true focus of our curiousity and resolve. If we claim to care about virtue, that is.

 

[jugjugwacwac]

Women do have agency, but you're also missing a significant point-- the nature of the Hollywood industry and its abuse of power (something that we should never dismissively allow to be normalized).

To be propositioned in such a manner where one is basically told: 'your livelihood will come to a dead end, if you don't agree to...' by an individual who weilds a lot of connections in their line of profession...is not much of a choice. It's a coercive threat, straight up.

Ofc some of those women could've said no (and, morally, should've said no)-- but the fact that they were even asked to make that choice in the first place..is a serious injustice IN ITSELF.

Addressing (and fixing) this exploitative "systematic" issue, along with questioning why his peers have now suddenly turned against him, should be the true focus of our curiousity and resolve. If we claim to care about virtue, that is.

Are any of them claiming that Weinstein said he would get them black-listed if they didn't give in? Lupita claims he let it go when she refused and even told her that he hoped to work with her in the future.

 

[TooMacaan]

Are any of them claiming the Weinstein said he would get them black-listed if they didn't give in? I don't think so. Lupita claims he let it go when she refused and even told her that he hoped to work with her in the future.

Rose McGowan and Robert Lindsay claim to have been blacklisted, after stopping Weinstein's advances; it also wouldn't be a leap of logic for us to assume many more have gone through this as well.

Regardless, the behavior is still predatory and worthy of condemnation.

 

[jugjugwacwac]

Rose McGowan and Robert Lindsay claim to have been blacklisted, after stopping Weinstein's advances; it also wouldn't be a leap of logic for us to assume many more have gone through this as well.

Regardless, the behavior is still predatory and worthy of condemnation.

I see ur point. But one thing is for sure, such a sleazy old bastard could never do this in a patriarchal society where the men guide and protect their women and exact revenge on any man who hurts them. Young women coming to LA alone, in the hopes of becoming a star, are inevitably gonna be put in situations where they feel like offering themselves up will get them ahead. Some will do it gladly and some will be taken advantage of. If their dads and brothers weren't cucks and Western society wasn't ruined by liberalism/feminism these sleazy men would never have the balls to do this.

 

[TooMacaan]

I see ur point. But one thing is for sure, such a sleazy old bastard could never do this in a patriarchal society where the men guide and protect their women and exact revenge on any man who hurts them. Young women coming to LA alone, in the hopes of becoming a star, are inevitably gonna be put in situations where they feel like offering themselves up will get them ahead. Some will do it gladly and some will be taken advantage of. If their dads and brothers weren't cucks and Western society wasn't ruined by liberalism/feminism these sleazy men would never have the balls to do this.

Trade one shackle for another?? LolPlus, this Hollywood business is still a byproduct of "patriarchy". The core issue is men in unfettered positions of power. Sleazy men are able to get away with what they do...precisely because Hollywood is a male dominated industry.

What you suggest may appear to be the lesser evil, but it's still far from ideal-- and regression should never be our goal. Why should the choice be between traditional patriarchy and the modern byproduct anyways??? The way I see it, the modern age is an in-between phase: there's only moving forward from now on, no time for old chains.

Women shouldn't have to be dependent on male guardians in order to feel safe or pursue their careers. It's sad that females being taken advantage of (when not at the mercy of another man's protection) is seen as an "inevitable" outcome. Why settle for the bare minimum instead of expecting more out of humanity?? Lets challenge such notions instead of being complacent.

 

[ExcessFame]

What a (((coincidence))) that it's only being revealed (((now)))

 

[embarassing]

Women do have agency, but you're also missing a significant point-- the nature of the Hollywood industry and its abuse of power (something that we should never dismissively allow to be normalized).

To be propositioned in such a manner where one is basically told: 'your livelihood will come to a dead end, if you don't agree to...' by an individual who weilds a lot of connections in their line of profession...is not much of a choice. It's a coercive threat, straight up.

Ofc some of those women could've said no (and, morally, should've said no)-- but the fact that they were even asked to make that choice in the first place..is a serious injustice IN ITSELF.

Addressing (and fixing) this exploitative "systematic" issue, along with questioning why his peers have now suddenly turned against him, should be the true focus of our curiousity and resolve. If we claim to care about virtue, that is.

It's not just a Hollywood issue. Situations like this will always exist because it's about power. If it were a woman in this position of power she could exploit a man just the same. Same way a government can exploit its people, an employer it's employee, a parent it's child. It sucks but it's life, that's why morals are important. She still had a choice (based on what I've read above).

These things have improved and can be in other parts of the world with certain security measures and laws put in place. But it'll never fully go away, as long as you're at the mercy of someone else.

Trade one shackle for another?? LolPlus, this Hollywood business is still a byproduct of "patriarchy". The core issue is men in unfettered positions of power. Sleazy men are able to get away with what they do...precisely because Hollywood is a male dominated industry.

What you suggest may appear to be the lesser evil, but it's still far from ideal-- and regression should never be our goal. Why should the choice be between traditional patriarchy and the modern byproduct anyways??? The way I see it, the modern age is an in-between phase: there's only moving forward from now on, no time for old chains.

Women shouldn't have to be dependent on male guardians in order to feel safe or pursue their careers. It's sad that females being taken advantage of (when not at the mercy of another man's protection) is seen as an "inevitable" outcome. Why settle for the bare minimum instead of expecting more out of humanity?? Lets challenge such notions instead of being complacent.

When it comes to physical power we are dependent on men (when it comes to other men) and that's not a shackle of patriarchy it's just biology. Wouldn't you be glad to have your dad, brothers, or male relatives around if you were being attacked by a man? Or glad that having them around would act as a deterrent in keeping predators away.

Not everything can be blamed on patriarchy. There are definitely still a lot of huge issues out there but I think those things you mentioned are just part of life, the way it is.