Harvey Weinstein: Why is it about so much more than Harvey Weinstein?

[Altherion]

12 minutes ago, Risto said:

It is just horrifying to what extent this went.

This is a variant of a relatively standard practice that has been documented in a variety of fictional and non-fictional accounts. For example, if you're read the later editions of The Princess Bride, the author (who worked as a screenwriter) jokingly documents an attempt at such at trade in one of the introductions. From what I've read, Weinstein simply went further than is usually acceptable.

[Yukle]

1 hour ago, Darth Richard II said:

Big Bang Theory is blackface for nerds/people with autism.

Ouch! But meticulously accurate.

I think that The Big Bang Theory is a huge contributing factor to misogyny because it normalises abhorrent behaviour. It acts as though it's the norm for all men - even those not seen as traditionally "masculine" - to treat women as sexual conquests, with little intelligence and whose lives are beneath contempt.

[Xray the Enforcer]

1 hour ago, Darth Richard II said:

Big Bang Theory is blackface for nerds/people with autism.

THANK YOU. 

[Darth Richard II]

Ha. That quote is not from me but from a friend in real life, just to properly give credit where credit is due. But yeah I uh, don't like BBT.

[mormont]

20 hours ago, Ormond said:

I hate to break this to you, but very few moviegoers are film buffs who pay any attention to the credits. Whenever I go to a movie theater, the majority of viewers leave the theater when the credits start to roll, and though I myself often stay for them, I'm looking for the names of the actors and pay no attention to the producers. The average person doesn't pay attention to the names of Hollywood producers any more than he or she pays attention to the names of the CEOs of automobile companies or any other business.

I'm no film buff but Weinstein is so ubiquitous over such a long period that yeah, I'm with Kay: it's honestly surprising to me to hear people say they've never heard of him. I would struggle to name any other film producer (who was not already famous as an actor or director), but then I'd struggle to name an architect other than Frank Lloyd Wright. I'd still be surprised if someone told me they'd never heard of Wright.

Making this relevant to the topic, I think that does play a big part in why this has had so much media coverage. Any other film producer and this would not be such a big deal. That's not to say that the coverage is unwarranted: I prefer to think it has helped to get the issue the coverage it  deserves.

12 hours ago, Dr. Pepper said:

OMG yes!  I couldn't believe it.  Ok, I guess I could but I had this weird idea that she was intelligent and so much have been decent.  Nope.  

Mayim Bialik has form for saying stupid shit. Smart people can believe awful foolish things.

(Don't even get me started on why that programme is trash.)

 

[SeanF]

On ‎10‎/‎21‎/‎2017 at 4:44 PM, Datepalm said:

We don't seem to have a thread on this, which makes this, as far as I can tell, the single quietest corner of the internet with regard to the whole thing. This isn't to suggest that Weinstein doesn't appear to have been the perpetrator of a really long list of acts ranging from the heinous and criminal to the garden variety creep, or to minimize that, but why is this one such a big deal?

Apparently, this is a watershed moment for feminism and equality, a point where everything will change and sexual harassment, objectification and belittling officially become a thing of the past, AND, also, somehow a staggering revelation with regard to deep fault lines in the very concept of liberalism and alltogether the dawn of a new age. (for example, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/21/harvey-weinstein-liberal-world?CMP=fb_gu)

What am I missing? Why is this particular guy - whose name, I swear, I had never heard in my life before this month - front page news around the world for weeks on end? Is it because of the hollywood associations and famous names involved? The tittilation? A distraction from Trump? I just don't understand what makes this particular scandal weathervane for all of politics, feminism and culture, apparently.

1. Weinstein is a very big name.

2.  It's clear that he's widely hated. His power was based upon fear and bribery.  But, his influence was beginning to wane, and people lost their fear of him. 

3. The Left hate him for being a total hypocrite in his attitudes towards women.  The Right hate him for being a prominent liberal, and are full of glee at this scandal.

4.  When a powerful tyrant falls, it frequently happens very suddenly.

[lessthanluke]

On 22/10/2017 at 6:35 AM, Kelli Fury said:

I don't know how any of you managed not to know who Harvey Weinstein was. He made basically every movie in the 90s and early 2000s. Every credits roll had his production company called by his last name or Miramax, which he founded with his brother. Basically every movie you ever loved.

Never watch credits. Never heard of this guy/or recognise his face

[Relic]

On 10/22/2017 at 6:35 AM, Kelli Fury said:

I don't know how any of you managed not to know who Harvey Weinstein was. He made basically every movie in the 90s and early 2000s. Every credits roll had his production company called by his last name or Miramax, which he founded with his brother. Basically every movie you ever loved.

I'm surprised by your surprise. Not everything in the world revolves around Americana, and entertainment. I know a ton of people who have never heard of this sack of shit. 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

59 minutes ago, Triskan said:

You know, I just can't resist:  note the difference in the reaction to the Weinstein allegations and the Trump sexual harassment allegations.  When Harvey's stuff broke he was done.  Yes, a lot of people knew and could have done more, but as has been pointed out, Harvey did wield a lot of power and intimidated people.  When Trump's allegations broke, not only was he not done, but the American right made him President.  That's a pretty stark contrast.

Indeed.  People still defend Trump the groper in chief.

[Morpheus]

23 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Indeed.  People still defend Trump the groper in chief.

FOX has been having a field day with this despite their support for Trump and their own in house problems. And Don Jr went crazy on twitter after this broke as if he never met his dad.

[Darth Richard II]

Well, FOX.

[Kalbear]

Biggest reason for the difference is that Trump was accused by a bunch of people that no one knew about or cared about.

Weinstein was accused by fairly popular actresses.

[Darth Richard II]

17 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Biggest reason for the difference is that Trump was accused by a bunch of people that no one knew about or cared about.

Weinstein was accused by fairly popular actresses.

Eh, I'm probably mis-remembering, but didn't a few models and an actress accuse him? Or was that post election?

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

6 hours ago, Relic said:

I'm surprised by your surprise. Not everything in the world revolves around Americana, and entertainment. I know a ton of people who have never heard of this sack of shit. 

Yeah, I've got a lot of family members who work in the industry and talk about it all the time and all I knew is that he was a very powerful person in Hollyweird, but I couldn't have picked him out of a crowd or told you anything about him. 

11 hours ago, mormont said:

(Don't even get me started on why that programme is trash.)

Lol, I had no idea there was so much hate for that show until I started posting here. And that hate is strong! 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

2 minutes ago, Darth Richard II said:

Eh, I'm probably mis-remembering, but didn't a few models and an actress accuse him? Or was that post election?

Kal has the right of it. Trump accusers were largely nameless faceless women. Weinstein's accusers are major household names that fans have developed a deep attachment to. It's a different dynamic. And as it was said up thread, this one didn't break along political lines. The right, left and middle all had reasons for hating on this monster's guts. 

[DMC]

17 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Weinstein was accused by fairly popular actresses.

Right, this goes back to the "did you know who Harvey was before" discussion earlier and the OP's question.  I can understand non-film buffs not knowing beforehand, but pretty much everyone knows who Angelina Jolie and Gwyneth Paltrow are.  Much more so even than the accusers in the FOX News story(ies) like Gretchen Carlson (whose name was misstated in this thread), Andrea Tantaros, or, to keep it current, Juliet Huddy.

[Guest]

On 10/21/2017 at 11:16 PM, Dr. Pepper said:

Also, can we just talk about the male response for a second?  Like, there was a lot of silence, and those who weren't silence typically had plenty of video evidence that they've been nasty fucks in the past, too.  So much condemnation from men who needed to also be condemning themselves or else complete silence from others.  Not to mention the #mentoo, which was an offshoot of #metoo.  It's as bad as #notallmen.  I'm definitely all for discussing harassment or assault men have faced, but this was a moment in which women were trying to show how prevalent this shit is and how we're harmed by it everyday, and instead of something like #holdmeaccountable or #illdobetter, they had to insert themselves into the stories.  Ugh.  Nothing changes.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding something here, but why would men who are describing their own experiences being sexually harassed and abused in the industry identify with #holdmeaccountable or #illdobetter?

[Kalbear]

2 hours ago, Darth Richard II said:

Eh, I'm probably mis-remembering, but didn't a few models and an actress accuse him? Or was that post election?

A few models did - mostly Miss Universe contestants - and maybe one randomly low Q-value actress. 

But it wasn't people that everyone knew. 

Another aspect is that he is a liberal name that goes with other liberal names, and when this sort of thing happens liberals are absolutely thrilled to throw one of their own to the wolves - whereas conservatives tend to rally around them as long as they didn't do something insanely horrible. The result is that everyone gangs up on a liberal pariah, whereas only liberals gang up on conservative ones. There aren't a whole lot of people defending Anthony Weiner, but there STILL are people that defend Hastert or hold him up in high esteem. 

[IamMe90]

8 minutes ago, The Great Unwashed said:

Maybe I'm misunderstanding something here, but why would men who are describing their own experiences being sexually harassed and abused in the industry identify with #holdmeaccountable or #illdobetter?

I'm presuming the assumption is here is that they help propagate rape culture, even if unwittingly or unconsciously. That would be what they would be accountable for. Still, I think it'd be a lot to ask males who have been sexually assaulted to hashtag their accountability when it comes to sexual assault. Maybe the best course of action would be for men to not hashtag at all when the subject is pervasive assault of women by powerful men.

[DanteGabriel]

25 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Another aspect is that he is a liberal name that goes with other liberal names, and when this sort of thing happens liberals are absolutely thrilled to throw one of their own to the wolves - whereas conservatives tend to rally around them as long as they didn't do something insanely horrible. The result is that everyone gangs up on a liberal pariah, whereas only liberals gang up on conservative ones. There aren't a whole lot of people defending Anthony Weiner, but there STILL are people that defend Hastert or hold him up in high esteem. 

And Elliot Spitzer's political career ended after it was revealed that he'd been seeing escorts, but David Vitter got re-elected by the hypoChristians that are the Southern base of the GOP.

Convincing America's most sanctimonious Christianists that you're one of them is the greatest grift going.