Weinsteins step down as Miramax CEOs

The question isn't "Why are Democrats acquiescing?" It's "Let's pulverize the GOP over this in the next year."

How are you not still banned? xp

posters have "forcibly tried" to ban me, it's true

xp Same thing. Dems can, and should, pulverize the GOP without Al fucking Franken. It's up for grabs. There's a GOP monkey in the white house. It's on a silver platter, for the taking. You don't need a harasser to accomplish this great feat. A better monkey should suffice.

I wish he would cling for his political life and fite

― Lyudmila Pavlichenko (dandydonweiner), Wednesday, December 6, 2017 5:05 PM (two hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

why

― Listen to my homeboy Fantano (D-40), Wednesday, December 6, 2017 5:51 PM (one hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Sarcasm, sorry to disappoint.

He needs to go, but others have said it better than me.

This was quite good on these 'confusing' times.

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2017/12/where_is_the_line_between_office_flirtation_and_sexual_harassment.html

― xyzzzz__, Wednesday, December 6, 2017 5:57 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

"Several women have written recently that they fear a coming backlash—that one false allegation against a famous man will bring this whole new reality crashing down, or that in the understandable urge to name names, women will be seen as the aggressors, out to tar every man’s reputation. I have those fears too, but I also fear the consequences of overcorrection, of the concept of harassment ballooning to include perfectly legitimate attempts at seduction—the initial touch, the scooting closer in the booth, the drunken sloppy first kiss, the occasional bad call or failed pass."

I worry about the combination of these things turning the whole movement into a tightrope walk. If just one major accusation comes out as verifiably false for some reason, or if too many accusations fall into that slippery slope overcorrection NBD category she mentions, it will give something that general management/HR/board members etc can point to when there is pressure to fire an accused member of their team. A lot of the accused are very important to their organizations in one way or another, but the current public pressure to cut ties is so great that it outweighs other options they have to deal with the situation that they might have preferred for the sake of their business. I feel like if just one major story was shown to be false all organizations would be able to say that it shows that going forward all the facts need to be internally investigated thoroughly before any rash decision is made. Then it just goes away and nothing happens. Companies are able to damage control by expressing concern and then letting it just fizzle out.

If just one major accusation comes out as verifiably false for some reason

If? The cultural right already keeps bringing up Duke lacrosse and the Rolling Stone frat thing as magical trump cards that should necessarily cause any legit accusation to fizzle, because if some people got it sorta wrong once then it's all suspect.

also too soon for hellscape projection imo

xp Same thing. Dems can, and should, pulverize the GOP without Al fucking Franken. It's up for grabs. There's a GOP monkey in the white house. It's on a silver platter, for the taking. You don't need a harasser to accomplish this great feat. A better monkey should suffice.

I really wish you had used almost any other word aside from "monkey" here.

I guess I'm thinking more about the accusations against a major figure in this case. Because those are the ones that companies/brands are more incentivized to protect or deflect.

also too soon for hellscape projection imo

― weird woman in a bar (La Lechera), Thursday, December 7, 2017 11:39 AM (two minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

The article got me thinking about it

My mom just called to wobble on about all this being Democrats’ fault. I have 10 days of this shit coming up, heeeeellllp meeeeeeeee

If? The cultural right already keeps bringing up Duke lacrosse and the Rolling Stone frat thing as magical trump cards that should necessarily cause any legit accusation to fizzle, because if some people got it sorta wrong once then it's all suspect.

I can see the Breitbart/Cernovich/O'Keefe crowd trying to fabricate something, it's kind of a win/win for them - either they take down a political enemy or they cast doubt on all such accusations

I predict within hours of Franken's (possible?) resignation the Moore campaign will run ads in Alabama to the effect of "we need people like Roy Moore in the senate to protect our women and children from confessed serial predators like Al Franken."

I can see the Breitbart/Cernovich/O'Keefe crowd trying to fabricate something

They're way ahead of you on that task, of course. Just because they just got caught doing it badly doesn't mean they're going to stop trying. They will doubtless eventually get another serviceable zing-factory case study, and then drag everything to its level of tawdriness, whatever that level may be.

all organizations would be able to say that it shows that going forward all the facts need to be internally investigated thoroughly before any rash decision is made.

Well, they should be?

But so far all cases seem to have been clear cut or have overwhelming weight of numbers, or not have been disputed.

The stage where disputed accounts start to be countered, be that in courts (hard to see too many going this far, which is where the build-up of accusations comes from) or via media sympathetic to the side of those accused is where the slow and careful grind of cautious process might kick in.

It's hard to see things going back to how they were prior but it's also impossible to evaluate what might have actually changed until that's occurred I think.

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/ex-dj-sends-1-sacagawea-coin-payment-taylor-swift-article-1.3681861

Mueller previously told the AP he intended the coin featuring a prominent Native American woman as a final jab at the singer in a case her side called a win for all women

Maybe he thought Taylor Swift was Elizabeth Warren?

you can't spend em anywhere!

The vending machine at work gives dollar coins as change and accepts them, so I use them a lot.

#changewecanbelievein

all organizations would be able to say that it shows that going forward all the facts need to be internally investigated thoroughly before any rash decision is made.

Well, they should be?

― remember the lmao (darraghmac), Thursday, December 7, 2017 11:57 AM (four minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Of course it makes sense for them to verify, but I'm implying that they'd lean on this reasoning (even more) to delay action in the hopes it will fade away entirely. A citable example of a comparable false accusation would give them a window to now require more "hard" evidence than most accusers might be able to provide.

In the meantime the media would be flooded with jerks smugly saying "see this is why we say innocent until proven guilty told ya so" bringing the public consensus back the other direction, and the current pressure companies feel to take action swiftly would be a bit diminished at the very least.

id think (perhaps too optimistically) that in this new environment such a delay in action made in hopes that such matters would "fade away" could make organizations more susceptible to lawsuits

Yeah what Marcos said... the thing that will make companies take this more seriously is the fact that victims are feeling more emboldened to come forward opens these companies up to a much greater degree of liability

I can see the Breitbart/Cernovich/O'Keefe crowd trying to fabricate something

Not the same thing, but I doubt Cernovich's campaign against Sam Seder would have succeeded if not for the current climate

i don't think it minimizes the gravity or truth of the moment to suggest that the ratfuckers are almost certainly actively engaged in COINTELPRO style bullshit of this variety already

btw Sam Seder has been rehired by MSNBC

Harold Ford, Jr.: https://www.yahoo.com/news/former-congressman-harold-ford-jr-173325565.html

I don't know why I thought Ford Jr was run out of Congress for sexual misconduct. Maybe I am remembering third-hand rumors funneled through my wife's friends from high school.

The hackiest of hacks – the one dude who couldn't win in a historic Democratic year because he thought it was 1996 and he could get away with opposing gay marriage and supporting intercession in the Terri Schiavo case.

"Several women have written recently that they fear a coming backlash—that one false allegation against a famous man will bring this whole new reality crashing down, or that in the understandable urge to name names, women will be seen as the aggressors, out to tar every man’s reputation. I have those fears too, but I also fear the consequences of overcorrection, of the concept of harassment ballooning to include perfectly legitimate attempts at seduction—the initial touch, the scooting closer in the booth, the drunken sloppy first kiss, the occasional bad call or failed pass."

I worry about the combination of these things turning the whole movement into a tightrope walk. If just one major accusation comes out as verifiably false for some reason, or if too many accusations fall into that slippery slope overcorrection NBD category she mentions, it will give something that general management/HR/board members etc can point to when there is pressure to fire an accused member of their team. A lot of the accused are very important to their organizations in one way or another, but the current public pressure to cut ties is so great that it outweighs other options they have to deal with the situation that they might have preferred for the sake of their business. I feel like if just one major story was shown to be false all organizations would be able to say that it shows that going forward all the facts need to be internally investigated thoroughly before any rash decision is made. Then it just goes away and nothing happens. Companies are able to damage control by expressing concern and then letting it just fizzle out.

― Evan, Thursday, 7 December 2017 Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Its inevitable there will be a counter reaction/pushback of some sort.

This is a response to that piece:

https://newrepublic.com/article/146145/married-flirty-boss-what

Nhex said that the slate piece was "long-winded", which is very much true and is what The New Republic picks up on, effectively. It does labour on her own history. It does start with what's happening at The Paris Review which is quite a different case. The man at the centre of that has clearly abused his position with a variety of women whereas Allison's now husband didn't in the sense they married, had kids and he didn't go on to play around with others, nor abuse his position in anyway. In the Slate piece there are a couple of further anecdotes from friends depicting the overall atmosphere and multi-faceted interactions. Ultimately both writers found themselves in what could be seen as relationships that were inappropriate -- one with a happy outcome, one not. Both agree (in a roundabout way) that while places of work and study bring people together this isn't a site to exercise power over a person. The point in the end is to protect the powerless.

It does start with what's happening at The Paris Review which is quite a different case. The man at the centre of that has clearly abused his position with a variety of women whereas Allison's now husband didn't in the sense they married, had kids and he didn't go on to play around with others, nor abuse his position in anyway.

wtf is this distinction??? being promiscuous, adulterous.... these are not crimes iirc????????

Op-Ed Dylan Farrow: Why has the #MeToo revolution spared Woody Allen?

It isn’t just power that allows men accused of sexual abuse to keep their careers and their secrets. It is also our collective choice to see simple situations as complicated and obvious conclusions as a matter of “who can say”? The system worked for Harvey Weinstein for decades. It works for Woody Allen still.

wtf is this distinction??? being promiscuous, adulterous.... these are not crimes iirc????????

This needs more exclamation marks, son.

possible reasons:

one (family) accuser, based on the testimony of a then-child (and two of whose siblings have expressed doubt of her account)

the inability of most of us to hire an investigative team to determine if ***** or *** is crazier

xp

Yada yada yada have you read the piece?

Hrm, as YMP mentioned earlier they are extremely certainly engaged in this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/womans-effort-to-infiltrate-the-washington-post-dates-back-months/2017/11/29/ce95e01a-d51e-11e7-b62d-d9345ced896d_story.html

i can't buy the "Mia is crazy, so the kid is lying" defense. also even if you can force yourself to ignore the child molestation allegations, Allen's a fucking creep ten times over.

Allen's a fucking creep ten times over.

I agree!

I never said "the kid is lying." This take from 2 years ago is fairly close to mine:

http://enchantedmitten.blogspot.com/2015/07/on-woody-allen-ignorance-and-degrees-of.html

Another?

http://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/arizonas-trent-franks-expected-resign

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/12/07/mike-flynn-signs-his-name-with-a-smiley-face/

Many of the female senators who called on him to resign visibly emotional as they hugged him

— Eliza Collins (@elizacollins1) December 7, 2017

I know John wouldn’t have punished me at work had I not been interested in his advances; if he had, that would have been harassment, and not OK.

*scribbles furiously*

I didn't think much of the Slate article, but the New Republic article is very good at articulating why - thanks, xyzzzz__

Charles Pierce: http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a14381583/al-franken-resign-moral-high-ground/

That grates

Interesting how he doesn’t trot out his Thesaurus Rex defending a fellow funny old guy

in short, the Republicans are awful so why should we even try to be decent human beings

i get the sense that pierce is trying to say that he thinks many of the accusations against franken are fishy without actually saying it, what w/ bringing up the "political hijacking" of the paul wellstone funeral and praising franken for not confessing.