Harvey Weinstein.

Just watching Loose Women, which opened with an article about Weinstein, saying how good it is that these women have secured convictions against him. Fully agree with that.

They went on to discuss divorce parties. Janet Street Porter commented about her four divorces, and went on to say she has previously had two male lodgers, one of whom stayed rent free, on the condition (or understanding) that he had sex with her, whenever she wanted it. They all laughed at the hilarity of this.

Can you imagine if a male landlord went on TV bragging that he allows women to stay with him for free on the condition that he can have sex with them? There would be outrage! Not least from Janet Street Porter and her Loose Women.

I commented to the wife about this, and she said the Weinstein case is very different. I'm not fully clued up with his case, but was there an element of no sex = no part in my movie?

I find it hypocritical that these women can laugh and joke about a woman's sexual habits, but if a man does the same, he would be strongly castigated.
Please don’t tell us you’re offended at that.
 
Just watching Loose Women, which opened with an article about Weinstein, saying how good it is that these women have secured convictions against him. Fully agree with that.

They went on to discuss divorce parties. Janet Street Porter commented about her four divorces, and went on to say she has previously had two male lodgers, one of whom stayed rent free, on the condition (or understanding) that he had sex with her, whenever she wanted it. They all laughed at the hilarity of this.

Can you imagine if a male landlord went on TV bragging that he allows women to stay with him for free on the condition that he can have sex with them? There would be outrage! Not least from Janet Street Porter and her Loose Women.

I commented to the wife about this, and she said the Weinstein case is very different. I'm not fully clued up with his case, but was there an element of no sex = no part in my movie?

I find it hypocritical that these women can laugh and joke about a woman's sexual habits, but if a man does the same, he would be strongly castigated.
That is not strictly true,it was a different subject to weinstein and they were at pains to stress that it was a mutual friends with benefits sort of arrangement,nothing in the slightest to warrant being tagged into this thread
 
Rose Mcgowan(sp)was the most high profile accuser but she can't file a claim because it's longer than 4yrs since the attack,that doesn't seem long enough to me bearing in mind a case like this which is dependant on safety in numbers to bring a prosecution
 
I can blame every single one of them. By not reporting a crime they put other women at risk.

Do you know for certain than none of these women made reports at the time ? I don't know enough about the case to know but as we have seen with other well known "powerful" abusers these things have a way of being swept under the carpet until many victims come forward together.
 
That is not strictly true,it was a different subject to weinstein and they were at pains to stress that it was a mutual friends with benefits sort of arrangement,nothing in the slightest to warrant being tagged into this thread
I didn't mean to imply it was the same article. I'm not sure they were friends though. Surely she, or a good number of people would let a friend stay for nothing.

But she definitely let him off paying rent in exchange for sex though, and it is this that causes a conflict in my view. There were four women laughing and joking that she was using this man for her own gratification. As I said previously, can you imagine the response if a man had said on a TV chat show that he lets women stay in his house for free, just as long as they have sex with him? I wouldn't consider that to be acceptable or appropriate behaviour, and I don't think it is a suitable topic for discussion on daytime TV.

Do you think it would be an acceptable matter to be discussed? How would you feel if four men discussed this in a light hearted manner on TV, laughing and joking about the man's achievements?

I wanted to highlight the hypocrisy of these women, rightly condemning the actions of Weinstein, but in the same broadcast they celebrated the questionable sexual morals of one of their panelists.
 
Do you know for certain than none of these women made reports at the time ? I don't know enough about the case to know but as we have seen with other well known "powerful" abusers these things have a way of being swept under the carpet until many victims come forward together.
I believe there were issues as some people had signed NDAs under duress and weren’t sure that this cunts lawyers weren’t going to destroy them.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.