Liam Neeson says harassment allegations are now 'a witch-hunt'

[StuBurns]

For better or worse is kind of the point here and why I think Liam would make a statement like this. You see the posters I've been quoting and numerous others instantly taking allegations as truthful or proven once they've spread, much like would happen in a witch hunt. Whether the person is actually a witch or not is irrelevant.

Click to shrink...

It's tough because this is nothing new. How many people actually refuse to watch Polanski films? I know I still watch them.

A few days after Tarantino was outed as knowing and doing nothing about Weinstein there was a bidding war for his next film, following that he got a gig directing the next Star Trek with an R-rating. Nothing has happened to him whatsoever, because he's money in the bank, and everyone knows that his associate with creepers is not going to impact the performance of his films.

I would be more concerned about 'false-positives' or whatever if we'd seen any repercussions for these people, but we haven't. The people who have been ostracised, yes, weren't convicted or anything, but have basically admitted to some shady shit, and have had tons of people talk about instances of their behaviour.

If one or two people claim minor things about someone, and they're not true, even if we believe them, it's not going to cripple that person's career. The chance of dozens of women lying about a specific person seems so unlikely that I just don't believe it'll happen.

Only the 'witches' are going to be destroyed. And even then, destroyed is extreme. Even if Franco never works again, he's rich, and is not going to jail or anything. It's hardly a punishment.

 

[ourghostsofwar]

Just gonna cherry pick one thing he's accused of, huh?

Click to shrink...

Beefy said, 5 women. 4 of them have the abuse of power accusations. 1 of them is an issue of consent. The abuse of power accusations veers into witch-hunt territory for people because, in their eyes, it's a business dispute. The consent issue was addressed here. Franco was sleazy but potentially because Franco reasonably believed she never withheld consent, it's arguable whether he committed an assault or not. That would be up to a court of law to decide. The "cherry-picking" was intended to add context to Beefy's vague statement. Not to supplant it.

That doesn't mean Franco wasn't a shit head. But if the argument is that Franco's career in Hollywood should be over, there's going to be pushback from Neeson and others in the industry. Perhaps they've been in the industry so long that they've become numb to things like this. You can have a different interpretation but it's a conversation I've already had in the Franco thread and I don't feel like repeating so again, I'll see my way out.

As a former federal prosecutor, I generally only chime in to say this: the legal definition of consent (and mistakes as to whether consent existed) are jurisdiction specific and honestly have NO bearing on what's at issue here.

The "I didn't say no because I felt like I had to do it, and then I did it, but I never really wanted to" probably is grounds for a mistake of fact defense as to consent. (That is, Franco reasonably believed she never withheld consent.)

Click to shrink...

 

[Futuro]

HA HA! HE NEXT!
What did you oogle at, Mr. Neeson? Jar Jar's ass?

 

[Speevy]

In my experience of almost never being falsely accused of anything, sexual or otherwise, people are generally unmotivated to ever do that. Now, this exists when you're talking about unwarranted suspicion of people who are "different", this arises since people fear what they do not understand. This however doesn't apply when you're talking about men because (I think) people would rather famous actors keep acting. If there was a movement to falsely accuse famous actors of something, it should have happened when its impact was most felt. For example, why not attack Daniel Day-Lewis, who is considered the greatest actor at all? It's because he (as of now) didn't do anything. It would hit the biggest actors instead of random ones. Second, a wave of false accusations would have a scary or demoralizing effect on the entire industry. As far as I'm aware, they aren't cancelling hundreds or even a dozen movies, TV shows, or whatever because of women speaking out. Third, false accusations would benefit the accused, either monetarily or otherwise. As far as I'm aware, this hasn't happened once. If anything, people are inclined to forget the accuser even if they believe the accusation.

So yes, the goal of the witch trials would have been to root out evil and purify the community, removing all traces of Satan's influence. Those in power (men) would have also sought to blame their problems on the women of the community. Since women don't have the power or motivation in the current situation, there cannot exist a witch hunt.

 

[Kyuur]

It's tough because this is nothing new. How many people actually refuse to watch Polanski films? I know I still watch them.

A few days after Tarantino was outed as knowing and doing nothing about Weinstein there was a bidding war for his next film, following that he got a gig directing the next Star Trek with an R-rating. Nothing has happened to him whatsoever, because he's money in the bank, and everyone knows that his associate with creepers is not going to impact the performance of his films.

I would be more concerned about 'false-positives' or whatever if we'd seen any repercussions for these people, but we haven't. The people who have been ostracised, yes, weren't convicted or anything, but have basically admitted to some shady shit, and have had tons of people talk about instances of their behaviour.

If one or two people claim minor things about someone, and they're not true, even if we believe them, it's not going to cripple that person's career. The chance of dozens of women lying about a specific person seems so unlikely that I just don't believe it'll happen.

Only the 'witches' are going to be destroyed. And even then, destroyed is extreme. Even if Franco never works again, he's rich, and is not going to jail or anything. It's hardly a punishment.

Click to shrink...

This is kind of where some disillusionment occurs between the celebrities themselves and the public. The only impact many people will consider is financial/career/judicial/etc. These people have families and feelings too, and it's easier for someone like Liam Neeson who actually interacts with them on a personal level to understand that and what implications there might be when a close friend or family member is accused of something.

Of course, cue 'wiping tears with money' gifs etc etc. because we all know excessive money buys happiness and health.

 

[Deleted member 835]

No doubt there are problems with how individual women are treated when they come forward. Multiple women coming forward does make things start to smell. It does not, as you originally stated, mean that allegations are 100% true.

Click to shrink...

I said basically 0%. If 5 women come foward against one guy all saying how he abused them etc. The chances that all 5 are lying is basically 0%, because even with just one woman coming forward the chances she is lying is very very small

 

[scotdar]

I have no issue with what he says. Context is everything, he is not saying anything negative about the movement of women coming forward. He is more talking about the process of how the allegations are handled in some cases. He clearly says that talking about it is good. Not every person is going to know the details of every situation. All I had seen about Hoffman was a picture of him holding a girls boob that did not appear to have malice. Clearly from the thread there is more to the story. This if you say anything your against us or believe everything mentality is not ideal. There needs to be open dialog.

 

[Speevy]

This is kind of where some disillusionment occurs between the celebrities themselves and the public. The only impact many people will consider is financial/career/judicial/etc. These people have families and feelings too, and it's easier for someone like Liam Neeson who actually interacts with them on a personal level to understand that and what implications there might be when a close friend or family member is accused of something.

Of course, cue 'wiping tears with money' gifs etc etc. because we all know excessive money buys happiness and health.

Click to shrink...

Actors are super friendly people, but they work for months at a time without interacting face-to-face with each other.

I imagine it's pretty easy to form a relationship in which you regard someone as a stand-up guy, and then get blindsided when they're accused of something. I wouldn't want to believe something like that either, but it happened.

 

[Bakercat]

I can't believe the United States has such a witch problem./s

 

[StuBurns]

This is kind of where some disillusionment occurs between the celebrities themselves and the public. The only impact many people will consider is financial/career/judicial/etc. These people have families and feelings too, and it's easier for someone like Liam Neeson who actually interacts with them on a personal level to understand that and what implications there might be when a close friend or family member is accused of something.

Of course, cue 'wiping tears with money' gifs etc etc. because we all know excessive money buys happiness and health.

Click to shrink...

That's certainly true, but I also feel like those people are less likely to believe it because they know the person directly, and they know that making accusations against them could be driven by hoping to gain money or whatever.

I don't think "well, fuck them, they're rich", not at all. But I also think that their friends and family are going to be a lot more likely to disbelieve claims than people online who don't know them are. Especially right now where the level of trust within the industry seems at an all time low.

This could result in innocent people being ruined, families could be destroyed where no wrong doing has happened, that would be horrible, of course.

I don't know the answer, if you're a celebrity, your job is to be liked by the public, and completely baseless things can destroy that. But I don't think innocent till proven guilty in terms of public opinion works in these instances, because they're so difficult to prove, and they're so after the fact. It feels like the accusers should be given the benefit of the doubt, despite the obvious potential flaws in that logic.

I truly don't know.

 

[AlexCampy89]

Yeah....no. There isn't some secret cabal of women that plan attacks on men. Also like people say "Well why didn't all these women come out and speak up years ago?!" and the answer to that is right in your own post people hand wring about "proof" so much that nobody bothers to believe women when they do speak up. So why would they especially since the women who have spoken out against their attackers will continue to be victims of harassment for having the "audacity" to speak out. Fuck that shit. I'd rather believe the women every time.

Click to shrink...

But why every reply I got begins with "The Women..."?

This alone makes it wrong, and contradictory, on so many, many levels.

Yes, many of the accusers are women, but who tells you that behind those accusations (wether they are real or not) there is no man? That wouldn't be a first time either.

Secondly, "The Women" doesn't mean shit.
With women you mean several hundreds, if not thousands, of persons that accused someone else/pressed charges against someone else.

Most of them are right, and have unjustly being denied protection, both legal, public and private. But among them there is a tiny minority who is just riding the lighting, taking their chance with celebrities, because they are easy money to make.

Thirdly, I simply find absurd that a nation proud of being the so called beacon of democracy, freedom and hope, the lives and careers of innocent men or women could be destroyed just on the word of any accuser with various degrees of credibility (to use an euphemism).

With that am I saying that all accusations are false?
No, absolutely.
But among them a minority of false accusations, even just a 1％ has to be there, even for sheer numbers.

The simple fact that I've read posts where people wrote "the movement needs to go on, despite a few innocent victims" is what it makes this the new McCarthyism or a Witch Hunt.

Witches do not exist.
I agree.
Rapists/Abusers do.
I agree with this too.
But, please, use your brain, not all the accused people have to be guilty.

Truth is something that must be pursued by Judges and Tribunals, every one has the right to an attourney and legal representation, and every person on Earth is innocent until proven wrong.
It's unacceptable that internet is the new Executioner just for sympathy, gossip or proofless assumptions.

 

[Spongebob]

I wonder if he has skeletons in his closet.

 

[Raww Le Klueze]

The chance of dozens of women lying about a specific person seems so unlikely that I just don't believe it'll happen.

Click to shrink...

People had similair beliefs about the events of the McMartin preschool trial.

 

[Speevy]

But among them there is a tiny minority who is just riding the lighting, taking their chance with celebrities, because they are easy money to make..

Click to shrink...

Is this really something that happens in 2017-2018?

 

[Burrman]

I agree somewhat. Look at the Adam sandler thing. What a joke that was

 

[RPGam3r]

Ah the if you're not 100% with us than you are against us. A lot of what I see online now comes off like this.

 

[AlexCampy89]

Is this really something that happens in 2017-2018?

Click to shrink...

Yes, if you are a Mr. or Mrs. Nobody who's taking their chances with famous and rich people who have a career and reputation on the line.

 

[cyba89]

*sigh* Alright...what are you hiding Liam?

Click to shrink...

Good job proving his point.

 

[Beartruck]

Good job proving his point.

Click to shrink...

Ever heard the phrase "the lady doth protest too much"? This is a scandal ripping apart Hollywood, why in God's name would you stick your head in that beehive? You wouldn't unless you were an idiot or had something to hide.

 

[Mahonay]

Jeeeeesus Liam.

Can't say I'm surprised. This attitude seems pretty common amongst old rich white men.

 

[labx]

First of all, I would like to express my deepest apologies to whole Era community and especially to: excelsiorlef, SweetNicole Cerium and PlanetSmasher


I do not want to blame my limitations with English for the post I wrote. Unfortunately, I did not know how to express myself and because of the urgency of posting the text and the lack of editing and revision I failed in an unacceptable way. I must accept the faults and accept my mistakes. I want to reiterate again that what I wrote was a mixture of haste, bad editing and linguistic limitations. What hurts me most about this mistake is that I have been abused throughout my life and I have lived with this stigma for a long time.

Thank you for your time, patience and understanding

good bye

Labx.

 

[pewpewtora]

How is this not a bad opinion?

"Discussing the allegations against Hoffman, Neeson said, "when you're doing a play and you're with your family – other actors, technicians – you do silly things ... and it becomes kind of superstitious, if you don't do it every night you think it's going to jinx the show".

Shit like this makes it a very bad opinion

Click to shrink...

This. I honestly understood what he was trying to say, but he lost me when he said that.

 

[pewpewtora]

Oh darling, no. Just stop talking.

 

[Lurcharound]

I wonder if he has skeletons in his closet.

Click to shrink...

You're actually giving credence to his point: jumping to this conclusion is what drives genuine "witch hunts". "Oh let's check him out next".

I'm not convinced there is a full on "witch hunt" going on (and I guess he does say "a bit of" himself) but certainly the fact (as in this thread) that some think a verbal accusation is proof and that's it done deal we've got one shows the propensity is there for one.

I get his point (which is valid) personally although I think he voices it fairly badly and I think he makes mistake of giving some vague examples of whats okay/not that don't help. Ultimately anyone making an accusation should be taken seriously but that doesn't mean there should be deviation from innocent until proven guilty and being wary of innocent people getting falsely harmed.

I wouldn't remotely take away from that he's got any skeletons in his closet (which he might have nonetheless or he might not) nor would I see him as in any way being opposed to equality and flushing out those who have abused and hurt others: he's voicing the fair concern that in situations like this in some cases things will be taken too far. Not tat well as noted at least in my view. Funnily enough the more he paused to try and decide how best to voice his thoughts the more I thought he fumbled the delivery.

The Hoffman stuff and some of his examples show he's not really "getting it" in terms of what needs to be the actual status quo vs current norms.

 

[nemoral]

Reeks of someone trying to get ahead of an incoming accusation.

 

[Spongebob]

You're actually giving credence to his point: jumping to this conclusion is what drives genuine "witch hunts". "Oh let's check him out next".

I'm not convinced there is a full on "witch hunt" going on (and I guess he does say "a bit of" himself) but certainly the fact (as in this thread) that some think a verbal accusation is proof and that's it done deal we've got one shows the propensity is there for one.

I get his point (which is valid) personally although I think he voices it fairly badly and I think he makes mistake of giving some vague examples of whats okay/not that don't help. Ultimately anyone making an accusation should be taken seriously but that doesn't mean there should be deviation from innocent until proven guilty and being wary of innocent people getting falsely harmed.

I wouldn't remotely take away from that he's got any skeletons in his closet (which he might have nonetheless or he might not) nor would I see him as in any way being opposed to equality and flushing out those who have abused and hurt others: he's voicing the fair concern that in situations like this in some cases things will be taken too far. Not tat well as noted at least in my view. Funnily enough the more he paused to try and decide how best to voice his thoughts the more I thought he fumbled the delivery.

The Hoffman stuff and some of his examples show he's not really "getting it" in terms of what needs to be the actual status quo vs current norms.

Click to shrink...

Interesting points that I hadn't considered, thanks.

 

[Aselith]

Oh no, baby, what is you doin

 

[Heisenberg726]

If y'all actually watch the video, it shows that he doesn't like it when people who are falsely accused or accused without evidence and suddenly have their projects and lives ruined. These instances are what he refers to as a "witch-hunt." The title is honestly somewhat clickbait.

 

[Mr. Snuffleupagus]

This reminds me of how uncomfortable his interview was with Colbert, what he said and the dodge that followed made me raise an eyebrow.

Starts around 0:55
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqQ8_jbPw2s

 

[plagiarize]

Any legal system that aims for 0 false convictions is going to by its very nature ensure that huge numbers of guilty people get away with their crimes. I appreciate that as an innocent person, you may fear coming against false accusations, but if we rebalance the legal system to ensure no one is ever wrongly convicted, then innocent women will have to fear rape and sexual abuse to a much higher degree than they do, or than they should.

Which actor's life and career has been ruined as of right now? That's not a rhetorical either. There's probably an example or two I'm not aware of.

I'll remind everyone that Hollywood is an industry okay with an admitted pedophile continuing to work. That you don't even know from that which *one* I'm specifically talking about, should tell you something about Hollywood. Jeremy Piven's TV show is still on the air, despite multiple accusations against him. If he's been falsely accused I'm sure that he'll end up doing a lot better than Rose McGowan did after being a victim of sexual assault.

Innocent until proven guilty is a legal standard. Not everything in America operates on this standard. The police don't. Journalists don't. And we wouldn't want either of those groups to.

Calling what's happening to Jeremy Piven 'Execution' is exaggeration of the highest order.

 

[Gwenpoolshark]

Witch Hunt is an exaggeration...but new McCarthism?

Nobody is denying that Hollywood is a bad place full of bad people.

The problem is that accusations alone are enough to destroy innocent lives and careers.

Look, he's a commie! Let's ruin his career and life! But we have no proof! Who fucking cares, this will scare the real commies too.

Look, he's a rapist! Let's ruin his career and life! But we have no proof! But this will scare the real rapists too...

Click to shrink...

 

[Just_a_Mouse]

There was a systemic suppression of rape and sex assault that went on for decades, this is not a witch hunt, this is the culprits finally being dragged into the light to face the consequences. I used to like you, Liam.

 

[Aselith]

If y'all actually watch the video, it shows that he doesn't like it when people who are falsely accused or accused without evidence and suddenly have their projects and lives ruined. These instances are what he refers to as a "witch-hunt." The title is honestly somewhat clickbait.

Click to shrink...

Who's he talking about that got falsely accused?

 

[scotdar]

But why every reply I got begins with "The Women..."?

This alone makes it wrong, and contradictory, on so many, many levels.

Yes, many of the accusers are women, but who tells you that behind those accusations (wether they are real or not) there is no man? That wouldn't be a first time either.

Secondly, "The Women" doesn't mean shit.
With women you mean several hundreds, if not thousands, of persons that accused someone else/pressed charges against someone else.

Most of them are right, and have unjustly being denied protection, both legal, public and private. But among them there is a tiny minority who is just riding the lighting, taking their chance with celebrities, because they are easy money to make.

Thirdly, I simply find absurd that a nation proud of being the so called beacon of democracy, freedom and hope, the lives and careers of innocent men or women could be destroyed just on the word of any accuser with various degrees of credibility (to use an euphemism).

With that am I saying that all accusations are false?
No, absolutely.
But among them a minority of false accusations, even just a 1％ has to be there, even for sheer numbers.

The simple fact that I've read posts where people wrote "the movement needs to go on, despite a few innocent victims" is what it makes this the new McCarthyism or a Witch Hunt.

Witches do not exist.
I agree.
Rapists/Abusers do.
I agree with this too.
But, please, use your brain, not all the accused people have to be guilty.

Truth is something that must be pursued by Judges and Tribunals, every one has the right to an attourney and legal representation, and every person on Earth is innocent until proven wrong.
It's unacceptable that internet is the new Executioner just for sympathy, gossip or proofless assumptions.

Click to shrink...

What's this I see an open coherent dialog, a person sharing their view and opinion in a civilized manner. The big red warning, basically is saying this is a witch hunt get in line or shut up. LOL

 

[Starlight Glimmer]

What a stupid thing to say.

 

[KonradLaw]

Well, it does seem to be getting overboard. It started as well researched journalistic investigation into heinous shit, but now we're seeing really petty stuff coupled with it and nobody does make any effort to verify anything anymore. Which is a damn shame, because all this will do is bellittle the more serious allegations, which there are plenty off.

 

[AlexCampy89]

What's this I see an open coherent dialog, a person sharing their view and opinion in a civilized manner. The big red warning, basically is saying this is a witch hunt get in line or shut up. LOL

Click to shrink...

Thanks for helping me out, but now you're in danger too.

 

[Deleted member 197]

guy: there is a witch-hunt going on
(some) people: no it isn't, i wonder if he is hiding something and that is why he is saying it

 

[scotdar]

Thanks for helping me out, but now you're in danger too.

Click to shrink...

Too often people attack the voice of one. The irony of this is not lost on me I just can't avoid it.

 

[plagiarize]

What's this I see an open coherent dialog, a person sharing their view and opinion in a civilized manner. The big red warning, basically is saying this is a witch hunt get in line or shut up. LOL

Click to shrink...

What it's saying is, please respond to the points people have raised against your argument, instead of ignoring them and instead taking issue with how people responding were saying 'The women' to describe a group that are predominantly women. Comparing this to McCarthyism or witch hunting is exaggerated to put it kindly. Ignoring all the reasonable responses and jumping on a phrase people used, is disingenuous.

If people's lives have been destroyed by false accusations lets hear the examples. Because we can certainly point to the lives destroyed by rapes and sexual assaults that have been in part allowed to go on because people are so quick to try and shut down a campaign like #MeToo incase an innocent gets hurt by it. Never mind all the innocents that are hurt by the status quo. We can't change the status quo because someone else might get caught in the cross fire? Is that what we're supposed to get from this?

Because when you call something McCarthyism or a Witchhunt that's the inference. That it does more harm than the thing it's trying to root out. And I've seen zero evidence of that.

 

[scotdar]

What it's saying is, please respond to the points people have raised against your argument, instead of ignoring them and instead taking issue with how people responding were saying 'The women' to describe a group that are predominantly women. Comparing this to McCarthyism or witch hunting is exaggerated to put it kindly. Ignoring all the reasonable responses and jumping on a phrase people used, is disingenuous.

If people's lives have been destroyed by false accusations lets hear the examples. Because we can certainly point to the lives destroyed by rapes and sexual assaults that have been in part allowed to go on because people are so quick to try and shut down a campaign like #MeToo incase an innocent gets hurt by it. Never mind all the innocents that are hurt by the status quo. We can't change the status quo because someone else might get caught in the cross fire? Is that what we're supposed to get from this?

Because when you call something McCarthyism or a Witchhunt that's the inference. That it does more harm than the thing it's trying to root out. And I've seen zero evidence of that.

Click to shrink...

First my point was if you put in the effort to try to explain your view it should not be labeled or censored by the administration. There are plenty of cases the first one that comes to mind is Jian Ghomeshi but this is not the time to open that mess. I'm not here to speak for or against anyone or any movement. I'm not a your with us or against type of guy. I think most people are trying to do the right thing and this mob mentality makes it very difficult. This mob mentality is a big part of why this has happened to women for so long. It's time for dialog not pitchforks.

 

[Deleted member 197]

Because when you call something McCarthyism or a Witchhunt that's the inference. That it does more harm than the thing it's trying to root out. And I've seen zero evidence of that.

Click to shrink...

How can people adress something like this? The problem is that the people doing the witch-hunts truly believe what they are doing is for a better society, "that it does more good than harm" we are right we can do whatever we want, surely, i believe in the law but not when talking about witch/communists/rapists!

 

[Sloth Guevara]

Lol, what an idiot.

 

[FeistyBoots]

more of a Witch-pursuit thing...

Click to shrink...

Damn, that's good

 

[AlexCampy89]

What it's saying is, please respond to the points people have raised against your argument, instead of ignoring them and instead taking issue with how people responding were saying 'The women' to describe a group that are predominantly women.

Click to shrink...

I did. On specifically two points made and my messages had no real counter arguments, if not the immature gifs.
I sent you a PM, please answer.

Comparing this to McCarthyism or witch hunting is exaggerated to put it kindly. Ignoring all the reasonable responses and jumping on a phrase people used, is disingenuous.

Click to shrink...

Taken straight from Wikipedia:
The primary targets of such suspicions were government employees, those in the entertainment industry, educators and labor union activists. Suspicions were often given credence despite inconclusive or questionable evidence, and the level of threat posed by a person's real or supposed leftist associations or beliefs was sometimes exaggerated. Many people suffered loss of employment or destruction of their careers; some even suffered imprisonment. Most of these punishments came about through trial verdicts later overturned,[2] laws that were later declared unconstitutional,[3] dismissals for reasons later declared illegal[4] or actionable,[5] or extra-legal procedures that would come into general disrepute.

I just added the bolded. Don't you see any similarity? So, the word McCarthyism was not exaggeration.

If people's lives have been destroyed by false accusations lets hear the examples.

Click to shrink...

Only on this forum there are tons of examples of common people being unjustly being blamed of something they didn't. We are not talking about celebrities ONLY.

A famous example is John Leslie in the USA.
In Italy there a couple of other examples, I'm no american, but italian director Fausto Brizzi is another example.

But also Michael Douglas had to make a step forward in order to save himself.

Because we can certainly point to the lives destroyed by rapes and sexual assaults that have been in part allowed to go on because people are so quick to try and shut down a campaign like #MeToo incase an innocent gets hurt by it.

Click to shrink...

I don't want to stop the Metoo movement.
I'm just saying that every person must be evaluated on a case by case basis, you can't accuse someone just for sonething written on the internet.

Never mind all the innocents that are hurt by the status quo.

Click to shrink...

With all due respect, I mind. And every one who cares about justice, should care too.

We can't change the status quo because someone else might get caught in the cross fire? Is that what we're supposed to get from this?

Click to shrink...

No, I'm just saying, allow Justice to do its course. Don't judge/accuse on the basis of things written on the internet.

Because when you call something McCarthyism or a Witchhunt that's the inference. That it does more harm than the thing it's trying to root out. And I've seen zero evidence of that.

Click to shrink...

The reason why I used those words was explained above in the Wikipedia extract.

 

[THE GUY]

This reminds me of how uncomfortable his interview was with Colbert, what he said and the dodge that followed made me raise an eyebrow.

Starts around 0:55
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqQ8_jbPw2s

Click to shrink...

I just watched all 9 minutes after 0:55; have you linked the wrong interview of his? What part is uncomfortable or eyebrow raising?

At 0:55 he's talking about the fact that he's 65 and an action movie star and how things are still going well for him, despite it clearly seeming a bit silly to him due to his age. Then the rest of the interview is about making a GPS voice, the Kindle, and his movie.

I JUST WASTED 9 MINUTES! I DESERVE JUSTICE!

 

[excelsiorlef]

Was the nudity agreed to between both parties in their contract? If not, it's pretty bad. If it was, the only thing we have is the abuse of power culture argument. Franco's argument seemed to be that Tither-Kaplan had agreed via contract and had taken the money to do the nude scenes.

Click to shrink...

Nude scenes with plastic covering

Because nude scenes in movies aren't porn.

Removing the plastic covering means his genitals would actually be touching theirs.... That's why the plastic exists because nude scenes aren't porn.

 

[Messofanego]

Eh... witch hunt has been a blanket term for any unsubstantiated attack on (a group of) individuals for a long time. It has very little to do with gender.

Click to shrink...

Eh...witch hunt has misogynistic roots of women seen as untrustworthy witches and right now it's women bringing up accusations against men while men don't see these women as trustworthy/don't believe women, so it's a bit gender related.

 

[Cryptosporidium]

The only problem I can forsee with metoo is that, as if this was possible, I presume the more monstrous abusers will go out first. After that, there may just be slim pickings, again highly doubtful considering how large hollywood is, and the wave of metoo may try to self preserve when it comes to the point that it should be moving onto the next step of establishing new social institutions that stop this thing from happening.

Like, theres steps, get the big ones out and then make sure new ones dont sprout up. Because its a decentralized mass movement theres no clear cut way to begin focus on the second step.

But thats just theory in my head when i know that this problem is deeply ingrained and large abusers will continuously and thankfully be brought out rather than be extinguished as a finite problem..


Either way, bro why would u ever say this shit on tv. Baka

 

[Mr. Snuffleupagus]

I just watched all 9 minutes after 0:55; have you linked the wrong interview of his? What part is uncomfortable or eyebrow raising?

At 0:55 he's talking about the fact that he's 65 and an action movie star and how things are still going well for him, despite it clearly seeming a bit silly to him due to his age. Then the rest of the interview is about making a GPS voice, the Kindle, and his movie.

I JUST WASTED 9 MINUTES! I DESERVE JUSTICE!

Click to shrink...

Haha sorry, nope - didn't link the wrong interview. What I meant was that on that night, Colbert also interviewed Franco and then Neeson opens his interview with "I haven't been found out yet" - Colbert shifts visibly, not knowing how to take it and the only thing that came to my mind was that he was making some shitty joke about how everyone's dirty secrets are coming out. The 'I'm old and can't believe they pay me to do this' seemed (to me) to be a quickly thought up excuse.