It's truly remarkable that anybody would even consider tiptoing around possibly defending Harvey Weinstein in any social context, on this forum or in real life.
-
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.
Harvey Weinstein Turned Up At An Event For Young Actors. A Woman Confronted Him And Was Thrown Out.
- Thread starter It’s Time To Go
- Start date
Bring critical critical of cancel culture doesn't mean people shouldn't be cancelled.
Someone who made shitty comments in their past and apologized? Case by case.
Rapists? Cancel every fucker.
See, this is why you shouldn't leave your laptop while still logged in.
Imagine being such a clout-chasing starfucker desperate for fame that you'd lick the boot of Harvey Weinstein like those people kissing his ass at the show were.
So how long until this for this monster?
The confused/anxious look on Nic Cage's face always gets me.
If he wants that, he should go drink at a different bar...not at an event for young actors, the kind of people he preyed on for years.
Knowing you and many others are asking "how can people defend this man or anyone else" in bad faith, I'll answer this with simplicity. They have sympathy for others. They believe in not criminalizing every individual with no chance of rehabilitation. Not everyone has to have this trait as it's an individual decision either way, but it also does not define them as a person, as much as you may want it to.
This feels awfully generous in the era of supreme court justice brett kavanaugh
User Banned (2 weeks): concern trolling
there will always be crime from minor to murder. I'm not saying that we are not living in a different era compared to earlier times, we have changed more public opinions than I could list. what I'm arguing is that the stigma society puts on criminals is counterproductive if we want actual systemic change regarding how we deal and prevent these type of crimes. if all people want to do is argue who's good and bad, then go ahead, but then do not try to claim you want actual change in these broken system because they do not, they want to adjust the system to inflict more harm on those they do not like.
Typically people are arguing about people who are born into desperate situations where crime is one of the few viable options they have to survive and how the system is designed to have high conviction rates of these individuals and to produce high recidivism rates and fully suppress these individuals who serve their time so that when they reenter society, they are completely & utterly fucked. Nobody cares about Harvey Weinstein's "rehabilitation". He is exempt from all thoughts of fixing "the system". He cannot, and will not, ever be a victim of "the system". So while I understand where you're coming from, his situation simply does not apply.
Bro, gotta change your handle to Joker because this is clown posting.
Hi.
This post is garbage. I'm glad that what I said bothered you. I'm gonna do it more and hope that you notice. You don't have to admit that it bothered you, I know it did.
Weinstein didn't opt for rehabilitation, he instead doubled down on not being guilty and paid off his possible jail time. Like where is the remorse and change needed for the criminal here that is being prevented by people wanting to see him face punitive justice? Weinstein ain't just some person people dislike like it's just an opinion on his personality when there has been actual damage caused.
He never deserve peace while he´s out of jail
MAKE EVERY SINGLE MOMENT OF HIS PUBLIC LIFE A LIVING HELL
You can be sympathetic towards others who deserve it and... not towards people that dont, it's as simple as that.
We should all endeavour to be good people who care and sympathise for others but its foolish and stupid to have sympathy for EVERYONE. There is no need to defend scum just because it's the nice thing to do
If you think conservatives are defending Weinstein, a big time so called liberal hollywood tycoon, then i got a bridge to sell you, no one likes this guy.
Eh you say that but for whatever ideological difference they might have with Weinstein as a result of his profession, he has a lot more in common with those guys -- they're all rich and enjoy subjugating women.
Sure, but i just don't remember anyone defending Harvey, Kavanaugh they obviously did though.
What a prime example of the sad state we're currently living in. Im glad you're contributing fully.
First, I appreciate the genuine response. I understand your point. I still however am going to politely disagree that offenders should be exempt from this systems problem. If we want to look at this from a general POV, we can acknowledge that people who are convicted for sex offenses have the lowest rate of reoffenders. While Weinstein's story is more troubling than some, it is still important to acknowledge there are many others who fall under this same category that are actual victims to this flawed system. I can admit that this discussion may have begun to veer away from Weinstein and into more a generalized argument, but I still will argue that both discussions are important to have.
Whether measured as rearrest, reconviction, or return to prison, BJS found that people whose most serious commitment offense was rape or sexual assault were much less likely to reoffend after release than those who served time for other offense types. The BJS report shows that within 9 years after release:
- Less than 67% of those who served time for rape or sexual assault were rearrested for any offense, making rearrest 20% less likely for this group than all other offense categories combined (84%). Only those who served time for homicide had a lower rate of rearrest (60%).
- People who served sentences for sex offenses were much less likely to be rearrested for another sex offense (7.7%) than for a property (24%), drug (18.5%), or public order (59%) offense (a category which includes probation and parole violations).
- Only half of those who served sentences for rape or sexual assault had a new arrest that led to a conviction (for any offense), compared to 69% of everyone released in 2005 (in the 29 states with data).
Ironic that he's one of the ones clapping. At the end behind Scorsese.So how long until this for this monster?
The trial hasn't even started yet so maybe slow down a little?
"Some people have sympathy for others" in reference to Harvey Weinstein is fucking appalling. Have some sympathy for his many victims who continue to suffer because he insists he's innocent and will drag them through the trauma of trials if they dare to report. You can't rehabilitate when you never admit guilt, and you don't get forgiveness if you never attempt to atone. He's a rich, serial rapist that will likely get away with everything because of his privilege but at least all decent people can shun him. And this was at a young actors' event--why don't you defend a credibly accused serial pedophile going to a school play, ffs. Unless you believe Weinstein is innocent??
Goddam, 'some people have sympathy".... you have to be a real piece of work to throw that out there in this thread.
Goddam, 'some people have sympathy".... you have to be a real piece of work to throw that out there in this thread.
Have we seriously arrived at the "Let's have some sympathy guys" and "Second chances though!" bullshit for Harry motherfucking Weinstein?
What. The. Fuck.
What. The. Fuck.
I feel I'm being disrespectful if I don't reply but everyone's thirst for being funny by being rude and insulting has made me tired so this is my last reply to everyone.
Anyway, I'm not going to reply to everyone anymore. I'll reply to posts that are not misunderstanding my viewpoint. If you want clarification on something I said because my communication skills are bad then I'll clarify. However, if you're going to put words in my mouth, or take the way you inferred something and present is as the way I said it then I'm going to ignore that.
I didn't say they should feel comfortable. Everyone else is focusing on and discussing the rape accusations and that's fine, please discuss it with them. I wanted to focus the fact that the people in attendance have a right to voice their objection when they feel uncomfortable. If someone wants to tell me why they feel they don't have that right, I'm all ears.
See reply above.
Didn't say you should be concerned about them. Just that whether you're on the right side or wrong side of history, your voice should be heard.
Okay.
What?
Okay.
Admittedly, I don't listen to podcasts but the interviews with the comedians I listen to have talked about engaging and "destroying" hecklers. I'm sure everyone has a different view on hecklers which is something I already stated.
Not calling her out at all. I said she was in the right to do what she did. I also didn't say she deserved to be heckled, I just said the people in attendance are not wrong for doing so. I think people often twist words and when you engage someone after they twist your words it turns into an argument. If you're mad because I said the people there can boo an act after feeling uncomfortable then let's talk about that.
I think they were booing and telling her to shut up because they felt uncomfortable. You can simplify it to "booing is bad. pointing out rapists is good. Therefore they are bad." and that does indeed work in your favor but there are usually feelings behind words that I think shouldn't be ignored. Her experience and feelings shouldn't be ignored either which is why I'm saying she wasn't wrong at all to use her comedy set to voice her opinion. They hired her to make people laugh and have a good time. She didn't do that, she made people uncomfortable, got mad after someone ELSE'S set, and went to start a confrontation with Weinstein on her own accord and was escorted out. Again, she was right in doing so, and I still believe she shouldn't have been escorted out but at the same time I don't appreciate people insulting the people that boo'd when they were also in their right to do so.
But... then I'd have to log in every time... :/
Lol that was pretty funny.
Anyway, I'm not going to reply to everyone anymore. I'll reply to posts that are not misunderstanding my viewpoint. If you want clarification on something I said because my communication skills are bad then I'll clarify. However, if you're going to put words in my mouth, or take the way you inferred something and present is as the way I said it then I'm going to ignore that.
no, pretty much all comedians fucking hate them. the amount who don't are about the same as the amount of scientists who don't believe in global warming
This is some he's said she said she said she said she said she said she said... shit. This dude does not deserve the befit of the doubt and I don't think recidivism is even worth talking about when you've been acquiring power and people to victimize on the level he has