-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Michael Douglas accused of sexual harrasment
- Thread starter hansel
- Start date
OP
OP
Yeah, I CONSTANTLY see that popup on twitter. I guess it really is common for women to come forward with false allegations.
Gotta add in #NotAllMen and #InnocentUntilGuilty for good measure
No no, I wasn't saying that it was bad for her to go to the big publications — i was just clarifying that the other scenario you came up with (that she was going to many publications because some are shittier than others) wasn't accurate.
There are tons of other positive interpretations:
1. She was trying to find the reputable publication that would treat her story with the most respect
2. She was trying to find the journalist she could most trust
3. She was worried about her story getting rejected by some of them and she wanted to assure it would get out in at least one reputable publication, etc.
Personally i think that going through a reputable publication is the right way to go.
At the same time, the reason I'm taking a wait and see approach on this one is because there is also the (low) chance that she may have been shopping an embellished story around to the highest bidder. So, I'm waiting for confirmation in the form of, for example, other accusers coming forward, or friends or family that corroborate that she told them about this way back then, etc.
Its really not. I had to click the link then another link to get to the actual article describing the incident. Can we not just link directly to articles and pull relevant quotes?
Yeah this is another one I am gonna wait for more to come out. If he did it then fuck him, but I am gonna need a bit more than that.
You are not wrong that false accusations happen but the deck is so stacked against women historically and false accusations are generally rare from everything I have heard, so I personally tend to accept what the initial woman says until proven otherwise.
You two don't even need to make one up.
Another lawyer already made one for your, #WhatAboutMe
https://www.resetera.com/threads/lawyer-compares-me-too-movement-to-japanese-internment-camps.15758/
"She alleged he masturbated in front of her during a one-on-one script meeting in his apartment in 1989 and that she rushed out, feeling humiliated.
"I realised he thought he could do anything he wanted because he was so much more powerful than I was," she said, adding that she ran home and vowed to never be alone with him again. She finished working for him later that year."
Alright, sorry. That's my bad for not understanding.
Member warned: Needlessly accusing another member of being disingenuous.
BBC isn't the source of the news, they're merely reporting on HR's story. OP was being disingenuous from the start.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/f...alleged-harassment-media-metoo-moment-1075609
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/f...alleged-harassment-media-metoo-moment-1075609
OP
OP
User was Warned: Derailing. A random twitter user has nothing to do with the Douglas allegations. (Please do not quote/respond to this post any further.)
i read a bunch of her quotes about what happened and it sounds believable, also sounds like something michael douglas would have done back then too. what is sad is you have people like this who hurt the movement with comments like this
right, that is a summary. Here is the full story
from the actual article https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/f...alleged-harassment-media-metoo-moment-1075609 that should be in the OP so people don't have to find links in a news post about a article.
With the full quote you can tell its not a "walked in on him in his apartment" story.
My view on this hinges on the masturbation allegation really. Both parties have confirmed the language angle - with slight difference Douglas takes view none of it was directed at her and she notes some of it was in terms of comments on her looks. TBH at that time swearing, etc. was commonplace in offices and unless she can show she asked for him (and others) to tone it down because it offended her and they didn't and deliberately continued I don't see that going anywhere or amounting to squat. Even today as a manager my direction from HR is that while people should avoid language that could offend staff are allowed a warning and the person who feels offended has to register this either directly or with HR when it comes to language not directed at them.
Now the masturbation accusation would represent clear harassment and abuse - while we drank, smoked and swore back then that's clearly never okay or acceptable.
Now the masturbation accusation would represent clear harassment and abuse - while we drank, smoked and swore back then that's clearly never okay or acceptable.
Is it possible that the BBC article is just what the OP saw? I don't see how that's disingenuous. Hollywood Reporter is a pretty reputable publication. The article you've linked to goes in-depth on their vetting process. This might be worth posting in the OP:
How is it that this story is like days old and already people are saying the woman could be lying with no proof? Would it kill ya'll to just be quiet for a little while until you know? The odds of an accusation being true are much higher, so why would you immediately jump to the guy's defense? Just chill, fam.
That quote's incredibly shitty, but it's also months old. What's it got to do with this?
That quote's incredibly shitty, but it's also months old. What's it got to do with this?
I think in he said she said cases like this, one should try to be sympathetic to both sides, without jumping straight to calling one side garbage...
Statistically low chance of false allegations but I'm sure that tweet riled up the MRAs
They also say in the very same article that they also found Douglas' denial worth publishing through the same vetting process.
He was treated for sex addiction a while back if I recall correctly, so yeah probably one of the ways he got his rocks off.
How can people believe Douglas " story" straight out the gate. Just because he dismissed them doesn't mean they aren't true
because it throws out the idea that there are some women out there who think it's okay to take down innocent men for the greater good, which gives credence to anyone sympathizing with the accused in these cases that the accusers might not always be telling the truth, thus somewhat discrediting anyone who comes out. it's not directly related to this specific instance but it does encompass the whole #metoo #timesup etc. movements
That tweet is from November. I'm pretty sure the movement survived it.
LOL, if there was ever a quote for "Men's Rights Activists" to use it'll be that one. It's like that and the terrible story of Brian Banks.
That's a terrible response. A smart person would say it is terrible if anyone is to be falsely accused of anything. It is that type of mentality that is going to result in a hard push back the other way. We absolutely need to weed out this type of behavior amongst men but when it begins to appear okay for false accusations to exist it will hurt the movement which will then enable men like this to continue doing what they do. I wish people would realize that when you demand fairness, you must also demonstrate the same behavior.
That's incorrect. They do not say that they utilize the same vetting process for Douglas's denial. Just that PART of their process is to also reach out to the accused for a denial, and they felt that both were important to publish.
It means that it's literally a "he said, she said" situation and people waiting to see if a second accuser comes out, which would make the initial claims gain further weight, aren't really doing anything wrong.
I said earlier in the thread that I was taking a "wait and see" approach because I was looking for more accusers or other people that she told at the time. Thanks for sharing the vetting quote -- that pretty much does it for me, to the point where I would bet a decent amount of money that he did what she said he did.
....No that's not what that statement said at all. It's callous as fuck, but it's actually her saying the odds are so low that if it does happen to one or two dudes out of millions, well...so what? It's not saying there are women who are angling to make it happen.
The problem with that statement is that it's sort of okaying the idea of just going full steam ahead on the outrage machine.
Facts. Something I have been saying and telling people. People act like no one ever went to jail or worst ended up dead over false accusations. Plenty of stories of people coming out jail doing years over false accusations.
yeah, which is why it's a lot easier to believe the women in this case as opposed to someone with no history. i do err on the side of caution when trying to determine who is telling the truth and who isn't, but here it seems rather cut and dry given the low rates of fake accusations
check out this tidbit regarding his biography in relation to his "sexual demons":
also says he was caught sleeping with a women which was never confirmed nor denied.
src: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/18/michael-douglas-biography-excerpt_n_1891335.html
That's a little different. That's usually murder, and the police cover it up or fuck up. Not people throwing accusations.
So you have stats or numbers about all these false sexual harassment claims that killed people?
I don't buy the scenario that someone who did it as casually as she describes and got away with it for 30 years would have done it just once.
It's almost like it's hard to come forward or something. Weird.
Why though?
Exactly. We are not a court, we are not judges, we are not held to their standards because we don't have the power to inflict the kind of punishments they can, so it's absolutely fine to stand by her in this case.
Also, maybe review your work's sexual harassment policies because sexual language doesn't need to be "directed" to be harassment.
What comes to mind is the actor Merlin Santana who got murder because a teenage girl said she was sexally assaulted . And I should have mentioned it was pertaining to rape not assault when it comes to Jail. My bad.
Sometimes, yes. If there's no physical evidence, witnesses, admission of any kind, or other victims to establish a pattern, there's not really anything for a neutral third party to go on.
I find it interesting that this question often gets brushed aside/ignored. Is it just a complete, temporary lapse of judgment? Do they believe their targets will be more likely to join them if they make that first move? How sex deprived can these celebrities really be?
I don't know, someone I use to know had an experience at a gas station with a guy in a van behind her started jerking it while she was pumping gas. Like... WTF?
So he rubbed it out in pants? O_o Did he think not whipping it out would make it fine? Too difficult to go to the bathroom or his bedroom for a couple minutes?