Both are a concern and deserve outrage. It’s not an either/or.
Nope. Only one is a concern in this case. The crime committed.
Your opinion of course. Many others and I are of a different opinion. We have the bandwidth for outrage on both counts. It’s entirely possible and correct to express dislike for 2 things at the same time. It doesn’t diminish outrage for one. Good thing humans can handle complexity.
Most of us can, but some edit it out to support their biases.
Her image looked much better when she was only trying to bring down HW, rather than trying to milk the situation to escape arrest for a felony drug possession charge.
I think the warrant sounds a bit suspicious. It stems from 8 moths ago when she left possessions on a flight which tested positive for drugs – so sounds like no drugs but traces of drugs. They say they were trying to locate her for the 8 months she says the whole thing “is a bunch horseexpletive”.
Could be retaliation.
My H did commercials, etc. as a young boy, up to about the age of 15. He told me years ago about a casting guy who kept telling him that he should let him take him to the beach, alone. My MIL thought there was nothing wrong with that as it could further his career. H, who was pretty much the adult in his nuclear family, declined and declined and declined. Then, he got zits and his career ended anyway. So, I do believe that there are predators out there.
Are you suggesting that the feds knew 8 months ago that Rose was about to spill the beans on HW, and so pre-emptively put up a charge that they could use against her? And furthermore, that the feds in this administration are supporters of HW to such an extent that they would go through the trouble?
I think they let it go 8 months ago, as they should have. Who knows what the chain of custody was with that bag or whatever it was they found on what was left behind on that plane. How often do they press charges for traces of drugs on someone’s left behind or discarded possessions?
I surmise they may have resurrected it. Who might have helped that along I don’t know.
I think it’s irresponsible to brush aside any potential for foul play whenever these stories come out. When these victims (male or female) have the power to ruin someone’s career and personal life at the mere mention of sexual assault/harassment, the accuser’s motives and criminal background need to be looked at in depth.
I get very suspicious whenever large settlements or lawsuits are involved. And even if no money is involved, it’s always possible people could use these situations to take down a person in power whom they don’t like for other non-related reasons.
None of this is to diminish the movement to expose sexual harassers, but rather we need to be sure to look at the whole picture and not rely solely on the “honor system” to sort these cases out.
These women are simply speaking their truth as I assume they believe it to be. They are not firing these men nor requiring people to distance themselves from them. Those are decisions made by the corporations and people themselves who have decided not to wait for any judicial resolution of these matters that may or may not ever take place. Many of these men have all but admitted some of the allegations and many have issued apologies. Those who refute them have a cause of action for defamation which they are free to pursue.
Maybe one of the lawyers with more knowledge of criminal law and workplace harassment could comment on whether a previous drug charge would be admissible in such a case. I see little connection and am not sure what might be admissible as far as “character” is concerned.
And in McGowan’s case who knows who might have had access to whatever it was she left behind or discarded.
Yesterday it was announced that several women came forward against producer Brett Ratner (creep). Today, charges against Dustin Hoffman (sigh). Rumors have been circulating about John Travolta for years and I suspect people will come forward about him (quick search on twitter and you will see). The proverbial floodgates have opened. Any politician, Hollywood type, media person, etc., who has had inappropriate behavior in the past couple of decades and thought it was water under the bridge by now, ought to be really nervous, because it’s not clear their secrets will remain hidden. Women are suddenly saying “ok, I’m going to speak up about this now.”
To be clear, most of what I have read makes me sick. While I have never been a victim of a true sexual assault, I have been on the receiving end (in my lifetime), as most women have been, of a lot of inappropriate talk to the point I have been made to feel extremely uncomfortable. I remember graduating from college and starting a new job in a professional capacity, earning a large salary, at a Fortune 100 company. I truly felt like I was a contributor and had something to offer based on the merits of my qualifications. But alas, the VP of my department made lewd, very suggestive comments to me on an almost daily basis. Not even in private either – within earshot of other employees, often to their laughter. I learned how to avoid him, not be alone in private with him, laugh the comments off in awkwardness, but it never crossed my mind to report him. I, too, had fears of not being taken seriously, going up against what I perceived as a giant, and also goals of just continuing to advance within the corporation. So I understand how this sort of thing happens. But on the other hand … I don’t think that was sexual assault. Harassment, yes. Painful, yes. Wrong, YES. So it really bothers me when some women label everything assault (not that that’s been done here – just a general observation), because that diminishes what actual assault victims have endured.
Sexual assault is a broad term and includes unwanted touching as well as rape. When I hear it used, I wonder what the specific assault was and don’t assume anything about where it would be on that spectrum. It doesn’t cover verbal assault, which would be sexual harassment.
It doesn’t bother me at all when someone uses the term sexual assault for a “minor” offense like unwanted touching. I also wonder if some women use the term to remain a bit more private about exactly what happened to them, for their own reasons. That’s fine.
This is pretty amazing - contestants for Miss Peru recite statistics about violence against women in their country or district, instead of saying their measurements:
There is a difference between ephebophilia and pedophilia. One really should not lump them together.
A person who has sexual interest in post-pubescent 15 yr olds is not the same as a person who has sexual interest in 5 yr olds.
Well, to be technically correct, as Anthony Rapp was 14, the term is hebephilia.
Regardless, none of those disorders conflates with homosexuality, and no 26-year-old should be dry-humping a 14-year old.
Apparently the Advocate knew about this back in 2001 but decided not to name Spacey.
https://www.advocate.com/media/2017/10/31/why-did-advocate-redact-kevin-spaceys-name-2001
And more Spacey news:
http://www.vulture.com/2017/11/kevin-spacey-alleged-sexual-relationship.html
“Kevin Spacey made the set of Netflix’s “House of Cards” into a “toxic” work environment through a pattern of sexual harassment…”
http://money.cnn.com/2017/11/02/media/house-of-cards-kevin-spacey-harassment/index.html
Not looking good for Kevin Spacey.
As I said up the thread, I had doubts that his firing was over a single allegation from an incident that happened many years ago…