It doesn't necessarily play on my mind, but i'm certainly more hyper-sensitive to my vulnerability if I am alone.
But tbh, I couldn't even tell you the last time I was alone at night purely because I avoid being in that situation as often as I can.
Celebrity Allegations, #MeToo etc
- Thread starter Buchan
- Start date
It doesn't necessarily play on my mind, but i'm certainly more hyper-sensitive to my vulnerability if I am alone.
But tbh, I couldn't even tell you the last time I was alone at night purely because I avoid being in that situation as often as I can.
Feels like you're nit picking a bit, I thought everyone would understand the gist of the story.
I'm sure they do, I provided an alternative analysis from my perspective.
It was hardly alternative though, it was pretty much the exact point Chapelle made. He's a comedian so he isn't going to provide a full on explanation, a lot of what you said is implied I think. Of course I hope you have seen his version too as I'm sure I absolutely butchered it and my version wouldn't be ideal for any kind of analysis.
Edit: I'm pretty sure he poses the idea that what if everyone knew he had the money too, like everyone would recognize a woman
It certainly affects men who become disabled as adults. Often they feel vulnerable or fearful in situations (like empty multi-storey carparks) in a way they never felt before.
I think that's the crunch, it's there and it's in the back of the mind. The majority of the time it gets ignored, as a statistical improbability (which of course it is) and as too restrictive a way to live, but it becomes part of the psyche.
I agree with you in that I do think it's a fair illustration, which most men can relate to, and is valuable because of it.
What it misses is the sensation of what it means that you can't switch that sense of vulnerability off, instead it becomes part of your character and it does affect people's behaviour. Even down to them maybe responding in what looks like an accepting or passive way, when it sounds easy to tell them that there was no actual physical threat and they should have just been more assertive.
Last edited:
Cant really imagine living like that.
I'm a real night owl, regularly bring dog for walk around a pitch black park at 10 / 11 +,
occasionally occurs to me that its somewhat dodgy (and is dismissed more or less immediately)
Used to go for a walks around Dublin City in the middle of the night after parties just to unwind.
I'd look behind me and realise the street i just walked down has a junkie shooting up in the doorway back there which i was completely oblivious to.
I didn’t say he should provide a full explanation though, I said on a surface level it does the job that he was going for but I would stop short at saying it’s comparable to ‘feeling like a woman’ which is why I said it’s more comparable to feeling vulnerable.
I’m not sure why you take such an issue with that.
Precisely, because it’s in the subconcious it’s not actively thought about and even when you are in the position, you react more out of habit because you’ve been conditioned to do so.
Oh see I love walking out at night, especially when it’s still and quiet - but I definitely wouldn’t do it alone, I would just hate to be in the position of *if* something happens you know?
It’s unlikely, but it’s still possible so if I can avoid it I definitely will.
Humans are really shitty at qualitatively evaluating risk.
Yeah, i get it.
I'm quite blase about it, i should probably be more careful really.
I think i'd be a bit reluctant to admit it and let it get to me if i did feel threatened, maybe a bit of that mixed in to my experience.
Christ you are hard work
I think he nails it there, and to be honest, that's a quite brave position for him to take considering the political standing of both him and his audience.
I can see that, I think men are expected to be fearless in a lot of ways - so even if you may be apprehensive, your fight or flight kicks in subconsciously and you may brush off any fear of threat you may have had.
Oh I know
I’m a lawyer by trade, plus I enjoy playing devils advocate/bad guy (hence calling myself villain) - but I mean, what I said is still valid
You're a lawyer. It adds up now.
Thanks for the explanation and as well going further about what I was trying to explain. And yes, having a vagina is a oversimplyfication
And for @Vidic_In_Moscow (no need to be so defensive) and @GBBQ as I said in my first comment about the comparison
Because the guy has a a point in the analogy, but in my opinion falls very short to compare
Great read. It does make you wonder how many people are wearing Times Up badges or rounding on Weinstein et al. because its the popular thing to do rather than being the right thing to do. I am sure morals in Hollywood are quite fluid.
To be fair it is not just Tarantino who had this opinion. Many in Hollywood, have defended Polanski over the years including people like Streep. Even now they have refused to outright criticise him when other women have also accused him of rape. He has not even been thrown out of academy like Weinstien.
The shit that’s come out between Uma Thurman and Tarantino in the New York Times confirms all your worst prejudices about his character.
Yeah, seems so. The lines have been blurred however, and now scumbags like Weinstein and Spacey (and all the other despicable characters that have allegedly committed sexual assault) are being grouped with Tarantino. Now I’m not defending Tarantino, he’s clearly a reprehensible character, however it’s in a different stratosphere to the deplorable actions committed by others. For example, this thread is about sexual abuse: has Tarantino been accused of that? Apologies if I have genuinely missed part of the story.
He has not. But he has already admitted to knowing about some of the Weinstein accusations and not done anything. His own GF at one point, Mira Sorivano, was harasshed by Weinstein and he did nothing.
The main bone of contention seems to be around using a convertible car for a shot in Kill Bill film . She felt the car was not safe and wanted a stand-in to do the shot. Tarantino exerted a lot of pressure on her, potentially using Weinstein's tactic of threatening to blacklist her etc. So she did the shot, the car crashed and she was injured. She has never worked for him since that film and the publicity shots for Kill Bill show her looking very uncomfortable around Tarantino and Weinstein.
This story is an interesting one for me as it moves the story away from just sexual politics into general behaviour. I've never understood why some men are just so pig ignorant and persistent with their creepy approaches to women.....but there we have it. Our society still rewards "tenacity" and persistence over manners and sensitivity. We create role models of men who have achieved through persistence rather than diplomacy.
Maybe we as men need to stop listening to those men that preach this doctrine of how to "trick" women into bed etc. Increasingly these men are shown to nothing more than predators. Predators have an excuse in the natural world, a lion sees a prey animal running it will start chasing it and the animal is locked into an attack mode and will chase it down and go for a kill even when it's own safety is under threat.
We are not predators however, we have a functioning higher brain and can sense other factors. We can go back to a flat, have drinks, fool around, and make a pass at the woman, but if at any stage the woman says no or clearly becomes uncomfortable or not engaged, we can walk away.
We don't need to pressure, cajole, ply with drink and wait it out or threaten, badmouth or doxx some woman for expressing herself.
Tarantino responded in detail here - http://deadline.com/2018/02/quentin...ill-bill-car-crash-new-york-times-1202278988/
His defense for the car thing was that he basically fecked up. Found the other stuff more interesting. He was supposed to be interviewed and included in the NYT article; made it sound like him and Thurman were on the same team almost. Also made it sound like the author of the original NYT article created her own narrative against him without actual quotes from Thurman or asking for a comment from Tarantino. That NYT article is definitely terribly written and leaves it open to these sort of attacks.
His defense for the car thing was that he basically fecked up. Found the other stuff more interesting. He was supposed to be interviewed and included in the NYT article; made it sound like him and Thurman were on the same team almost. Also made it sound like the author of the original NYT article created her own narrative against him without actual quotes from Thurman or asking for a comment from Tarantino. That NYT article is definitely terribly written and leaves it open to these sort of attacks.
Not just in Hollywood. Society is changing and it's taken years to get to the point where child abuse is taken seriously. Saville's conduct wasn't just ignored by his bosses at the BBC or by those whose livelihoods depended on him - workers in care homes and hospitals turned a blind eye. Barry Bennell and others in football were known about or suspected, and some clubs stopped working with him, but didn't throw up warnings. The same with some of the stories about priests, or teachers, or even Scout troop leaders. Not celebs but those with a position of power or influence over the young.
Part of it is simply a feeling of helplessness - a knowledge that what we may "know" is only hearsay or rumour or an odd feeling on witnessing some behaviour, not proof just a suspicion that something is wrong. We don't like to assume the worst of others, and an accusation of paedophilia is as "worse" as it gets for most of us. No one wants to believe an adult co-worker, someone who might otherwise appear to be a good guy is capable of it.
Hence Polanski gets defended by suggesting that the girl was already sexually aware and willing. Some of Saville's victims traded cigarettes, treats, rides in his Rolls Royce and would have told even concerned observers that they were having fun. Somehow blame gets transferred to the child and the adult gets if not excused then at least "explained" - particularly in an environment that sexualises young teens as an especially pert, pure and perfect woman. But again, it's not about Hollywood or celebrities, it's about society. The victims of the grooming rings in Rochdale and Rotherham were often dismissed by the authorities as witting victims, or accepting payments, or not virgins, or troubled - as if was the kids fault rather than the adults.
I'm a hypocrite, certainly, because while I admire cultural figures like Wilde (a pederast) and Caravaggio (a murderer), the proffered defence of Polanski - 'he is a great artist' - seems awful to me. It weakens my point somewhat that I don't consider him great, admittedly, but this is a shameful defence, I think. This hypocrisy troubles me, tbh, even though I have what I believe are good reasons (unconnected with artistic greatness)...but are they good?
Jill Messick has committed suicide and her family has put out a statement condemning Harvey Weinstein and Rose McGowan.
Sick. And irrelevent. Despite what this thing says, him defending it is saying what? If he had have been the guy that did it- he would have? Hollywood is a screwed up place that uses its medium to screw others up with it.
Yeah just read that this morning.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...einstein-rose-mcgowan/?utm_term=.5045e0116d73
Do you know anything about this? I read it on the beeb, a bit ago, and I can't say I really understand.
It just broke, but at first glance it seems to be Schneiderman's attempt to nail Weinstein and his (former) company of "egregious violations of the state's civil rights, human rights and business laws". They are essentially saying that any profits from the sale of the company must contain a set amount to compensate Weinstein's victims.
Okay. Thanks.
NY attorney general files suit against Weinstein. Not for sexual assault, but for violating state laws.
https://www.theguardian.com/film/20...les-suit-against-harvey-weinstein-and-company
https://www.theguardian.com/film/20...les-suit-against-harvey-weinstein-and-company
Allegations of violent abuse - Fassbender
http://www.indiewire.com/2018/02/mi...allegations-sunawin-leasi-andrews-1201927946/
http://www.indiewire.com/2018/02/mi...allegations-sunawin-leasi-andrews-1201927946/
Noooo not Fassbender
Not good.
Not that it’s alright or anything but those accusations don’t really relate to a sexual abuse thread.
Those allegations were made seven years ago. What happened since? By which I mean they must have either been dismissed or dropped to still be "allegations".