I'd like to point out that prison vs not continuing a movie career are very different things...
Last edited:
The #BelieveWomen thing seems to be a backlash to decades of history (especially in the entertainment industry) where accusations against powerful people like Weinstein or Cosby or even someone like Franco would be shrugged off because of how much power, or clout, or powerful friends, that person could have. There was a time not too long ago where, depending on the person, the default was to ignore accusations against the wealthy and powerful, and label the women (and sometimes men) as crazy, or gold diggers or angry/jealous. What I take "#BelieveWomen" to mean is simply to take the accusations of a potential victim seriously. Don't brush them aside because the accused is a famous actor you like, or seems like a nice guy on tv.
You must've missed this part:
"She told the Times that Franco pressured her into performing oral sex in a car, and described the incident: "I was talking to him, all of a sudden his penis was out. I got really nervous, and I said, 'Can we do this later?' He was kind of nudging my head down, and I just didn't want him to hate me, so I did it." To get out of the situation, she says she told Franco she could see someone near the car."
"Kind of nudging" isn't a forceful act, and she said she did it willingly because she didn't want him to hate her. That isn't the same thing as grabbing a girl by the back of the head and forcing your penis into her mouth while she repeatedly says no.
I understand where you're going with this, but you shouldn't phrase it like that.
What the fuck, man.This is a thread about woman being abused/ harassed, not about guys that have been assualted
as bad as sexual assault is I feel even worse for these women if they learnt to act from james franco
It's not two different thing when allegations have led to real world consequences (JAIL) while some are advocating that no matter the circumstances (circumstances that sometimes involve JAIL) a woman should be always believed. Believe women always doesn't just mean only when it comes to celebrities and whether you should support their work or not.I don't know why people are saying "innocent until proven guilty"
For starters, court of law and public opinion are two different things.
And more importantly, it seems like we should "wait for the facts" because we don't know these women. So what if it was your sister, mother, wife, female friend who was the victim? Would you tell them "I'm sorry, but I have to wait for all the facts"?
The #BelieveWomen thing seems to be a backlash to decades of history (especially in the entertainment industry) where accusations against powerful people like Weinstein or Cosby or even someone like Franco would be shrugged off because of how much power, or clout, or powerful friends, that person could have. There was a time not too long ago where, depending on the person, the default was to ignore accusations against the wealthy and powerful, and label the women (and sometimes men) as crazy, or gold diggers or angry/jealous. What I take "#BelieveWomen" to mean is simply to take the accusations of a potential victim seriously. Don't brush them aside because the accused is a famous actor you like, or seems like a nice guy on tv.
look at this garbage response peeps. bask in it. this is what women face. daily. this kind of bullshit."Kind of nudging" isn't a forceful act, and she said she did it willingly because she didn't want him to hate her. That isn't the same thing as grabbing a girl by the back of the head and forcing your penis into her mouth while she repeatedly says no.
Evilore had multiple incidents. A bad response. A questionable history. He actively hushed conversation on it. Banned those who asked questions.
Multiple points of information to look at. And most waited for his response which turned out to be terribad.
If it was one accuser and one accused, with no further information than a short description of the incident or a vague remark that implies something happened, I'm not sure the same thing would have happened. So quickly at least.
Look, we need to support the accusers/victims. But until we have more to go on, why should we persecute the accused? no other crime works that way.
See you lose me here. You are asking for a change to guilty unless proven innocent. This doesn't fly for any other crime, it's not going to fly for this. Opening admitting you are just going to throw the innocent under the bus for your cause ultimately defeats it, as you're literally creating the very people that fight against this change, as they have been "wronged" by the system.
I'm not going to accept any system that will knowing convict any innocent person, regardless of gender, all for the greater good. The justice system is broken. No one is going to argue that. Switch to guilty first isn't going to fix it.
Women need to be taken seriously each and every time an accusation is placed. But there should always be, even if it's just a formality given the weight and evidence behind the accusation, a chance for the accused to make some sort of statement or defend themselves.
James Franco is not doing a good job defending himself. His career, and life, will likely suffer the consequences because of it. But at least he'll have a chance, no matter how foolhardy or dishonest it is, to defend himself. That's all I ask.
The current system throws victims (who are 84% women) under the bus.
Good to know you think this is cool.
Supporting a system that is knowingly exponentially more damaging to women and minorities because those few innocent (most likely men) will be hurt. fuck that. I will not turn a blind eye to the 1000s of innocent victims being assaulted and have no recourse to see their abusers brought to justice.
What jebusman wrote is actually reasonable.
I hate when these sort of word play argument where you try to write shit like "good to know you think this is cool" to try and win an argument. No he doesn't think that stat you decided to throw in there for whatever reason is cool. You're putting words in his mouth. Your words
Then there's the throwing out of random stats and angry hyperbole
It's innocent until proven guilty. That's the legal system. Yes, make the accusations, if it's proven to be true. Then sure the prep should pay the price. Jail time if need be.
It also makes me uncomfortable to read that according to you - it's alright if those "few" innocent men will be hurt. I'm sorry but that's just ridiculous.
look at this garbage response peeps. bask in it. this is what women face. daily. this kind of bullshit.
Well said my gee.The #BelieveWomen thing seems to be a backlash to decades of history (especially in the entertainment industry) where accusations against powerful people like Weinstein or Cosby or even someone like Franco would be shrugged off because of how much power, or clout, or powerful friends, that person could have. There was a time not too long ago where, depending on the person, the default was to ignore accusations against the wealthy and powerful, and label the women (and sometimes men) as crazy, or gold diggers or angry/jealous. What I take "#BelieveWomen" to mean is simply to take the accusations of a potential victim seriously. Don't brush them aside because the accused is a famous actor you like, or seems like a nice guy on tv.
Look up the definition of "nudge" and tell me he "forced" a girl to perform oral sex on him.
That poster came into this thread using combative language and looking for a fight. There's a reason their post has been quoted and responded to multiple times over in this thread, to the point that their post has derailed the thread from James Franco being an asshole more than my response did.
I responded in a way to try and get that poster to think about how they try to launch discussions. I've only responded to you and another person and have tried to do so in a civil manner. You can say I'm twisting things and I understand this is an emotional subject. But you also have to understand that if a person launches into a thread using confrontational language and wanting a rumble to happen, some people are going to respond to it.
That's all I'm going to say on the subject.
As for James Franco, I really hope that Dave Franco isn't a POS like his brother. I always liked him better anyway. I think I'll gonna throw away my copy of Pineapple Express now too. I think that's the only Franco movie I own.
Close thread, its over.
"Kind of nudging" isn't a forceful act, and she said she did it willingly because she didn't want him to hate her. That isn't the same thing as grabbing a girl by the back of the head and forcing your penis into her mouth while she repeatedly says no.
he won't stop cuz he gets away with it every time.
I'm aware of the source of this joke.
The system doesn't work. As someone just said Weinsten hasn't gone to court, he hasn't been found guilty. Do you think he's innocent because of that?
I'm aware of the source of this joke.
In what way do you think Franco saves?
Do you really think this is an appropriate joke to make at this time, in this thread?
A lot of people in this thread seem to be making a pretty basic mistake when it comes to accusation and assumption of guilt. The court of public opinion is not the court of law, and cannot impose legal punitive measures. Therefore, seeing accusations and believing them is in no way tantamount to jailing people without evidence. People in this thread up on their high horse about how believing women is unfair to the accused should interrogate their own beliefs about sexual assault, women, and lying. We rarely have these sorts of debates over accusations of pedophilia, arson, or various other crimes with similar rates of false accusation. It always comes back to a fundamental disbelief of women's control and autonomy over their own bodies.
I fully believe that James Franco is a creepy asshole who committed sex crimes against women who he held positions of power over. I am not a member of a jury, and I cannot sentence him to anything for my personal belief. For the people acting bewildered that a man accused of these things would publicly associate himself with the #MeToo movement: Abusers are hypocrites who will use anything to deny their wrongdoing. I have known abusers in my life and it's overwhelmingly likely that you have too. They fundamentally do not believe they are doing anything wrong, and when caught they will twist everything - societal perceptions, the legal system, structures of power - to their advantage. Remember that Harvey Weinstein still hasn't been charged with anything, and nothing has been proved against him, yet it's obvious that he's a monster. The only way abusers are able to operate is by plugging themselves into a vast network of deniability that supports their image and silences victims.
James Franco was in a perfect position to operate as an abuser, and while there is not enough evidence yet to convict him in a court of law, he has a history of predation which leads me to believe that there is no reason to think he wouldn't do something like this. I understand that this is a reversal of criminal court's requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, that if I were a judge handing down a verdict I would be violating the rights of the accused. But I am not a judge, and neither is anyone in this thread I suspect. The purpose of believing victims is not to tear the constitution in half or to rewrite legal rights of the accused to fit some kind of unthinking all-believing agenda wherein an accusation is as good as a sentence, it's to recognize that victims of sexual abuse live in the shadows and for too long have been trusted by no one. I refuse to pretend that I'm impartial when it comes to these sorts of cases. To assume neutrality is to still take a side. Believe women. Question the powerful. Refuse to accept the status quo.
Unfortunately, the chances of him facing consequences are basically 0. If he gets an Oscar I'm going to scream.
The mods have already said focus on the Franco.allegations. What's that got to do with this? Want to discuss what you think should happen to Harvey Weinstein start a new topic. Harvey goes to court if someone takes him to court. No one has (I don't know if anyone has filed documents) or its in the process and I don't know what's happening. Do your research/ start a thread if you care so much.
And...you find that concern over a movie is a good addition to a thread about abuse of power?I was referring to the fact that James Franco is attached to a Multiple Man (X-Men) movie at FOX. That studio is having just the worst luck with a bunch of men (Ratner, Singer, TJ Miller and now Franco) who have been accused of sexual assault being linked to their huge franchise.
It's because there is a lot of people who do not want to be painted as a villain for essentially being a white male. Which is not what blacklivesmatter or believewomen does but the phrasing makes people feel uncomfortable and part of the problem when they aren't.
Even if Franco's movie career is over which I doubt, he is still a millionaire and can live his lifeJust curious, but why do you say that? It seems like there have indeed been consequences for a great many of the accused harassers, and in this case it isn't like there's only one very tenuous story or anything. Definite pattern.
And...you find that concern over a movie is a good addition to a thread about abuse of power?
"Kind of nudging" isn't a forceful act, and she said she did it willingly because she didn't want him to hate her. That isn't the same thing as grabbing a girl by the back of the head and forcing your penis into her mouth while she repeatedly says no.
look at this garbage response peeps. bask in it. this is what women face. daily. this kind of bullshit.
he won't stop cuz he gets away with it every time.expect a slap on the wrist at best.
edit:
I stand corrected.
I disagree. You are born a man or a woman. You are born black, white or whatever other race you are. You choose to be a cop, a cop is something completely else.That's not actually true, though. If it were, the same people would be freaking out over #bluelivesmatter. They know what the movements represent, and that's what they oppose.
lol echo chamberSo, this 'Klean' character got banned because of this conversation and for "downplaying sexual assault"?
While I do NOT agree with his assessment, I fear that an echo chamber is being created here where those of us who don't like the opinions of other posters -- no matter how wrong or despicable they may be -- are calling for sanctions against those posters.
Why?
Call that poster out for being an asshole. Have a conversation with that poster. Try to get that poster to see your point of view, especially if you think he or she is WRONG.
But to just outright ban someone for expressing an opinion is wrong. Sorry.
So, this 'Klean' character got banned because of this conversation and for "downplaying sexual assault"?
While I do NOT agree with his assessment, I fear that an echo chamber is being created here where those of us who don't like the opinions of other posters -- no matter how wrong or despicable they may be -- are calling for sanctions against those posters.
Why?
Call that poster out for being an asshole. Have a conversation with that poster. Try to get that poster to see your point of view, especially if you think he or she is WRONG.
But to just outright ban someone for expressing an opinion is wrong. Sorry.
indeedIf downplaying sexual assault is a banworthy "opinion" I'm okay with that.
So, this 'Klean' character got banned because of this conversation and for "downplaying sexual assault"?
While I do NOT agree with his assessment, I fear that an echo chamber is being created here where those of us who don't like the opinions of other posters -- no matter how wrong or despicable they may be -- are calling for sanctions against those posters.
Why?
Call that poster out for being an asshole. Have a conversation with that poster. Try to get that poster to see your point of view, especially if you think he or she is WRONG.
But to just outright ban someone for expressing an opinion is wrong. Sorry.
Sure. A couple of dozen out of thousands have been caught out as creepy shitheads. That doesn't mean that A) all actors are creepy shitheads or even B) that there are more creepy shitheads in Hollywood than elsewhere. The world has a bunch of creepy shitheads, in all sorts of industries, using the good behavior of other men as a cover for their misdeeds. Blaming everyone for the actions of a few lets off the ones who are actually guilty.
So, this 'Klean' character got banned because of this conversation and for "downplaying sexual assault"?
While I do NOT agree with his assessment, I fear that an echo chamber is being created here where those of us who don't like the opinions of other posters -- no matter how wrong or despicable they may be -- are calling for sanctions against those posters.
Why?
Call that poster out for being an asshole. Have a conversation with that poster. Try to get that poster to see your point of view, especially if you think he or she is WRONG.
But to just outright ban someone for expressing an opinion is wrong. Sorry.
Laughable too as Klean isn't changing his mind.Consider it from the other side. How statements like his look to people who have gone through sexual assault.